WT/TPR/S/434 /Rev.1  
12 May 2023  
(23-3333) Page: 1/299 
Trade Policy Review Body   
 
TRADE POLICY REVIEW  
REPORT BY THE SECRETARIAT  
UNITED STATES 
Revision  
This report, prepared for the fifteenth  Trade Policy Review of the United  States , has been drawn up 
by the WTO Secretariat on its own responsibility. The Secretariat has, as required by the Agreement 
establishing the Trade Policy Review Mechanism (Annex  3 of the Marrakesh Agreement Establishing 
the World Trade Organization), sought clarification from the United  States  on its trade policies and 
practices.  
 
Any technical questions arising from this report may be addressed to Angelo  Silvy 
(tel. 022 739 5249), Cato  Adrian, Denby  Probst (tel.  022 739 5847), and Cristi an Ugarte . 
 
Document WT/TPR/G/434 contains the policy statement submitted by the United  States . 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Note: This report was drafted in English.  
  WT/TPR/S/434 /Rev.1  • United States  
 
- 2 - 
 
  CONTENTS  
SUMMARY  ................................ ................................ ................................ ......................  11 
1   ECONOMIC ENVIRONMENT  ................................ ................................ ........................  17 
1.1   Main Features of the Economy  ................................ ................................ ..................... 17 
1.2   Recent Economic Developments  ................................ ................................ ................... 19 
1.2.1    GDP and employment  ................................ ................................ ............................... 19 
1.2.2    Fiscal policy  ................................ ................................ ................................ ............ 21 
1.2.3    Monetary policy  ................................ ................................ ................................ .......28 
1.2.4    Balance of payments  ................................ ................................ ................................ 31 
1.3   Developments in Trade and Investment  ................................ ................................ ........ 32 
1.3.1    Trends and patterns in merchandise and services trade  ................................ ................ 32 
1.3.1.1    Merchandise trade  ................................ ................................ ................................ .32 
1.3.1.2    Services trade  ................................ ................................ ................................ ......35 
1.3.2    Trends and patterns in FDI  ................................ ................................ ....................... 36 
2   TRADE AND INVESTMENT REGIMES ................................ ................................ ...........  38 
2.1   General Framework  ................................ ................................ ................................ ....38 
2.2   Trade Policy Formulation and Objectives  ................................ ................................ ........ 38 
2.2.1    Trade policy formulation  ................................ ................................ ........................... 38 
2.2.2    Trade policy objectives and direction  ................................ ................................ .......... 39 
2.2.2.1    New directions  ................................ ................................ ................................ ......41 
2.3   Trade Agreements and Arrangements  ................................ ................................ ........... 41 
2.3.1    WTO ................................ ................................ ................................ ...................... 41 
2.3.2    Regional and preferential agreements  ................................ ................................ ........ 42 
2.3.2.1    Reciprocal agreements  ................................ ................................ .......................... 42 
2.3.2.1.1    United  States -Mexico -Canada Agreement (USMCA)  ................................ ................ 43 
2.3.2.1.2    Amendments to the FTAs with the Republic of Korea an d with Morocco  ..................... 44 
2.3.2.2    Unilateral preferences  ................................ ................................ ............................ 45 
2.3.3    Other agreements and arrangements  ................................ ................................ ......... 49 
2.4   Investment Regime  ................................ ................................ ................................ ....51 
2.4.1    Investment framework  ................................ ................................ ............................. 51 
2.4.2    Investment promotion  ................................ ................................ .............................. 53 
2.4.3    Investment screening and restrictions  ................................ ................................ ........ 53 
2.4.3.1    Investment screening  ................................ ................................ ............................ 53 
2.4.3.1.1    Committee on Foreign Investment in the United  States (CFIUS) ............................... 53 
2.4.3.2    Investment restrictions  ................................ ................................ .......................... 55 
3   TRADE POLICIES AND PRACTICES BY MEASURE  ................................ ........................  57 
3.1   Measures Directly Affecting Imports  ................................ ................................ .............. 57 
3.1.1    Customs procedures, valuation, and requirements  ................................ ....................... 57 
3.1.1.1    Customs procedures and operations  ................................ ................................ ........ 57 
3.1.1.2    Import procedures and formalities  ................................ ................................ .......... 58 WT/TPR/S/434 /Rev.1  • United States  
 
- 3 - 
 
  3.1.1.3    Policy and strategies  ................................ ................................ ............................. 59 
3.1.1.4    Foreign Trade Zones (FTZs) and bonded warehouses  ................................ ................ 60 
3.1.1.5    Violations and enforcement  ................................ ................................ .................... 62 
3.1.1.6    Trade facilitation  ................................ ................................ ................................ ...63 
3.1.1.6.1    Single window  ................................ ................................ ................................ ...64 
3.1.1.6.2    Advance rulings  ................................ ................................ ................................ .64 
3.1.1.6.3    Trusted trader/Authorized economic operator/Advance security programs  ................. 65 
3.1.1.6.4    Expedited shipments  ................................ ................................ .......................... 66 
3.1.1.7    Customs valuation  ................................ ................................ ................................ 66 
3.1.2    Rules of origin  ................................ ................................ ................................ ......... 67 
3.1.2.1    Non-preferential rules of origin  ................................ ................................ ............... 67 
3.1.2.2    Preferential rules of origin  ................................ ................................ ...................... 67 
3.1.2.3    Country of origin marking requirements  ................................ ................................ ...68 
3.1.3    Tariffs  ................................ ................................ ................................ .................... 69 
3.1.3.1    Nomenclature and HTSUS changes  ................................ ................................ .......... 69 
3.1.3.2    Applied rates  ................................ ................................ ................................ ........ 70 
3.1.3.3   Bound rates  ................................ ................................ ................................ ......... 71 
3.1.3.4    Duty suspensions  ................................ ................................ ................................ ..71 
3.1.3.5    Tariff-rate quotas (TRQs)  ................................ ................................ ....................... 73 
3.1.3.6    Preferential tariffs  ................................ ................................ ................................ .74 
3.1.4    Other charges affecting imports  ................................ ................................ ................. 75 
3.1.4.1    Fees for processing merchandise ................................ ................................ ............. 75 
3.1.4.1.1    Merchandise Processing Fee  ................................ ................................ ................ 75 
3.1.4.1.2    COBRA fees  ................................ ................................ ................................ .......75 
3.1.4. 2   Harbor Maintenance Tax  ................................ ................................ ........................ 75 
3.1.4.3    Excise taxes  ................................ ................................ ................................ ......... 76 
3.1.5    Import prohibitions, restrictions, and licensing  ................................ ............................ 79 
3.1.5.1 Prohibitions, restrictions, and quantitative measures  ................................ ................... 79 
3.1.5.2 Import licensing  ................................ ................................ ................................ ......80 
3.1.5.3 Other restrictions on imports  ................................ ................................ .................... 81 
3.1.6    Anti-dumping, countervailing and safeguard measures  ................................ ................. 81 
3.1.6.1    Anti-dumping and countervailing measures  ................................ .............................. 81 
3.1.6.1.1    Legal and administrative framework  ................................ ................................ .....81 
3.1.6.1.1.1    Main laws and regulations  ................................ ................................ ................ 81 
3.1.6.1.1.2    Administrative procedures  ................................ ................................ ................ 82 
3.1.6.1.1.3    New Regulations on Administration and Enforcement of AD and CVD Laws  ............. 84 
3.1.6.1.1.4    Suspension agreements  ................................ ................................ ................... 87 
3.1.6.1.1.5    Administrative reviews  ................................ ................................ ..................... 87 
3.1.6.1.1.6    Sunset reviews ................................ ................................ ................................ 88 
3.1.6.1.1.7    Circumvention rulings  ................................ ................................ ...................... 89 WT/TPR/S/434 /Rev.1  • United States  
 
- 4 - 
 
  3.1.6.1.1.8    Scope rulings  ................................ ................................ ................................ ..91 
3.1.6.1.1.9    Determination of evasion of AD/CVD orders  ................................ ........................ 91 
3.1.6.1.2    Anti-dumping measures  ................................ ................................ ...................... 94 
3.1.6.1.3    Countervailing measures  ................................ ................................ ..................... 97 
3.1.6.1.4    EAPA investigations  ................................ ................................ ............................ 98 
3.1.6.2    Safeguards  ................................ ................................ ................................ ........... 99 
3.1.6.2.1    Main laws and regulations  ................................ ................................ ................... 99 
3.1.6.2.2    Safeguard investigations 2018 -21 ................................ ................................ ...... 100 
3.1.6.2.2.1    Crystalline silicon photovoltaic cells  ................................ ................................ . 100 
3.1.6.2.2.2    Large residential washers  ................................ ................................ ...............  102 
3.1.6.2.2.3    Fresh, chilled, or frozen blueberries  ................................ ................................ . 104 
3.1.7    Other measures affecting imports  ................................ ................................ ............  104 
3.1.7.1    Section  232 investigations  ................................ ................................ ...................  104 
3.1.7.1.1    Legal and administrative framework  ................................ ................................ ... 104 
3.1.7.1.2    Steel investigation  ................................ ................................ ............................  105 
3.1.7.1.3    Aluminium investigation  ................................ ................................ ....................  109 
3.1.7.1.4    Investigation into auto imports  ................................ ................................ ..........  110 
3.1.7.1.5    Investigation into uranium imports  ................................ ................................ ..... 110 
3.1.7.2    Section  301 of the Trade Act of 1974  ................................ ................................ ..... 111 
3.1.7.2.1    Section  301 regulatory framework, procedures a nd determinations  ........................  111 
3.1.7.2.2    Section  301 cases  ................................ ................................ ............................  113 
3.1.7.2.2.1    China technology transfer regime  ................................ ................................ .... 113 
3.1.7.2.2.2    EU beef trade  ................................ ................................ ................................  115 
3.1.7.2.2.3    EU Civil Aircraft  ................................ ................................ .............................  115 
3.1.7.2.2.4    France's Digital Services Tax (DST)  ................................ ................................ . 117 
3.1.7.2.2.5    DSTs in 10 economies  ................................ ................................ ....................  118 
3.1.7.2.2.6    Viet Nam currency  ................................ ................................ .........................  119 
3.1.7.2.2.7    Viet Nam timber  ................................ ................................ ............................  120 
3.2   Measures Directly Affecting Exports  ................................ ................................ ............  121 
3.2.1    Customs procedures and requirements  ................................ ................................ ..... 121 
3.2.2    Taxes, charges, and levies  ................................ ................................ ......................  121 
3.2.3    Export prohibitions, restrictions, and licensing  ................................ ...........................  121 
3.2.4    Export support and promotion  ................................ ................................ .................  124 
3.2.4.1    Drawback regime  ................................ ................................ ................................  125 
3.2.5    Export finance, insurance, and guarantees  ................................ ................................  125 
3.2.5.1    Export -Import Bank (EXIM)  ................................ ................................ ..................  125 
3.2.5.2    Small Business Administration (SBA) export loan programs  ................................ ...... 127 
3.2.5.3    The U.S. International Development Finance Corporation (DFC)  ................................  128 
3.2.5.4    Private Export Funding Corporation (PEFCO)  ................................ ..........................  129 
3.3   Measures Affecting Production and Trade  ................................ ................................ ..... 130 WT/TPR/S/434 /Rev.1  • United States  
 
- 5 - 
 
  3.3.1    Incentives  ................................ ................................ ................................ .............  130 
3.3.2    Standards and other technical requirements  ................................ .............................  133 
3.3.3    Sanitary and phytosanitary requirements  ................................ ................................ .. 137 
3.3.4    Competition policy  ................................ ................................ ................................ . 141 
3.3.5    State trading, state -owned enterprises , and privatization  ................................ ...........  147 
3.3.6    Government procurement  ................................ ................................ .......................  148 
3.3.6.1    Institutional framework and general policies  ................................ ...........................  148 
3.3.6.2    Legal and regulatory framework  ................................ ................................ ...........  152 
3.3.6.3    Transparency  ................................ ................................ ................................ ..... 156 
3.3.6.4    U.S. government procurement market  ................................ ................................ ... 157 
3.3.6.5    Market access conditions for trading partners  ................................ .........................  158 
3.3.6.6    Set-asides and preferences  ................................ ................................ ..................  160 
3.3.6.7    Enforcement  ................................ ................................ ................................ ....... 162 
3.3.7    Intellectual property rights  ................................ ................................ ......................  163 
3.3.7.1    Overview  ................................ ................................ ................................ ...........  163 
3.3.7.2    General regulatory framework  ................................ ................................ ..............  164 
3.3.7.3    Patents  ................................ ................................ ................................ ..............  166 
3.3.7.4    Industrial designs  ................................ ................................ ...............................  171 
3.3.7.5    Trademarks  ................................ ................................ ................................ ........  171 
3.3.7. 6   Geographical indications  ................................ ................................ ......................  175 
3.3.7.7    Trade secret protection  ................................ ................................ ........................  176 
3.3.7.8    Copyright  ................................ ................................ ................................ ...........  177 
3.3.7.9    Enforcement  ................................ ................................ ................................ ....... 183 
3.3.7.9.1    Main provisions, institutions, and actions  ................................ ............................  183 
3.3.7.9.2    Special 301  ................................ ................................ ................................ ..... 185 
3.3.7.9.3    Section  337 investigations  ................................ ................................ .................  186 
4   TRADE POLICIES BY SECTOR  ................................ ................................ ...................  188  
4.1   Agriculture, Forestry, and Fisheries  ................................ ................................ .............  188 
4.1.1    Main features  ................................ ................................ ................................ ........  188 
4.1.1.1    Major support programs ................................ ................................ .......................  191 
4.1.1.1.1    General legal framework  ................................ ................................ ...................  191 
4.1.1.1.2    Price Loss Coverage (PLC)  ................................ ................................ .................  192 
4.1.1.1.3    Agriculture Risk Coverage (ARC)  ................................ ................................ ........  192 
4.1.1.1.4    Marketing assistance loans  ................................ ................................ ................  193 
4.1.1.1.5    Crop insurance ................................ ................................ ................................ . 194 
4.1.1.1.6    Dairy sector  ................................ ................................ ................................ ..... 195 
4.1.1.1.7    Sugar  ................................ ................................ ................................ .............  197 
4.1.1.1.8    Other Farm Act and disaster programs  ................................ ................................  198 
4.1.1.1.9    Ad hoc  assistance for loss of traditional export markets  ................................ ........  199 
4.1.1.1.10    COVID -19 measures  ................................ ................................ .......................  201 WT/TPR/S/434 /Rev.1  • United States  
 
- 6 - 
 
  4.1.1.2    Trade measures  ................................ ................................ ................................ .. 202 
4.1.1.2.1    Imports  ................................ ................................ ................................ ..........  202 
4.1.1.2. 2   Exports  ................................ ................................ ................................ ...........  203 
4.1.1.2.3    Food aid  ................................ ................................ ................................ ..........  204 
4.1.1.3    Levels of support  ................................ ................................ ................................  204 
4.1.2    Forestry  ................................ ................................ ................................ ................  207 
4.1.2.1    Production, trade, and border measures  ................................ ................................  208 
4.1.2.2    Framework, policy, and forest management  ................................ ...........................  211 
4.1.2.3    Support measures and pandemic -related matters  ................................ ...................  212 
4.1.2.4    International cooperation and agreements  ................................ .............................  214 
4.1.3    Fisheries  ................................ ................................ ................................ ...............  214 
4.1.3.1    Production and trade  ................................ ................................ ...........................  215 
4.1.3.2    Import, export, and investment provisions  ................................ .............................  217 
4.1.3.3    Policy, fisheries management, and support measures  ................................ ..............  219 
4.1.3.4    International agreements and cooperation  ................................ .............................  222 
4.2   Energy  ................................ ................................ ................................ ....................  223 
4.2.1    General  ................................ ................................ ................................ ................  223 
4.2.2    Crude oil  ................................ ................................ ................................ ...............  224 
4.2.3    Natural gas  ................................ ................................ ................................ ...........  225 
4.2.4    Coal ................................ ................................ ................................ .....................  225 
4.2.5    Renewable energy  ................................ ................................ ................................ . 225 
4.2.6    Nuclear energy  ................................ ................................ ................................ ...... 226 
4.2.7    Electricity  ................................ ................................ ................................ .............  226 
4.3   Manufacturing  ................................ ................................ ................................ ..........  228 
4.3.1    Border measures  ................................ ................................ ................................ ... 229 
4.3.2    Main policy developments  ................................ ................................ .......................  230 
4.3.3    COVID -related measures and other support  ................................ ..............................  231 
4.3.4    Small businesses  ................................ ................................ ................................ ... 233 
4.4   Services  ................................ ................................ ................................ ..................  235 
4.4.1    Financial services  ................................ ................................ ................................ ... 235 
4.4.1.1    Overview  ................................ ................................ ................................ ...........  235 
4.4.1.2    Legislation and regulation  ................................ ................................ ....................  236 
4.4.1.3    Consolidated financial sector regulation  ................................ ................................ . 240 
4.4.1.4    Banking services  ................................ ................................ ................................ . 240 
4.4.1.5    Insurance services  ................................ ................................ ..............................  242 
4.4.1.6    Securities services  ................................ ................................ ..............................  246 
4.4.2    Telecommunications  ................................ ................................ ...............................  249 
4.4.3    Transport  ................................ ................................ ................................ ..............  253 
4.4.3.1    Air transport and airports  ................................ ................................ .....................  253 
4.4.3.1.1    Air transport  ................................ ................................ ................................ .... 253 WT/TPR/S/434 /Rev.1  • United States  
 
- 7 - 
 
  4.4.3.1.2    Airports ................................ ................................ ................................ ...........  257 
4.4.3.2    Maritime transport, port services, and shipbuilding  ................................ ..................  258 
4.4.3.2.1    Maritime transport  ................................ ................................ ...........................  258 
4.4.3.2.2    Port services  ................................ ................................ ................................ .... 264 
4.4.3.2.3    Shipbuilding and ship repairs  ................................ ................................ .............  265 
4.4.4    Medical professional and health services  ................................ ................................ ... 267 
4.4.4.1    Overview  ................................ ................................ ................................ ...........  267 
4.4.4.2    Regulatory framework  ................................ ................................ .........................  268 
4.4.4.2.1    Recent developments and issues  ................................ ................................ ........  270 
4.4.4.2.2    Trade  ................................ ................................ ................................ ..............  272 
4.4.4.3    GATS commitments  ................................ ................................ .............................  273 
4.4.4.4    Provisions in FTAs  ................................ ................................ ...............................  273 
4.4.5    E-commerce  ................................ ................................ ................................ ..........  274 
5   APPE NDIX TABLES  ................................ ................................ ................................ .. 278  
 
CHARTS  
 
Chart  1.1 Merchandise trade by main HS section, 2018 and 2021  ................................ ............ 34 
Chart  1.2 Merchandise trade by main origin and destination, 2018 and 2021  ............................. 35 
Chart  1.3 Direct investment position on a historical -cost basis, by selected  partner,  2018  
and 2020  ................................ ................................ ................................ .......................... 37 
Chart  3.1 Frequency distribution of MFN tariff rates, 2021  ................................ ....................... 70 
Chart  4.1 Exports and imports of agricultural products, 2000 -20 ................................ ............  190 
Chart  4.2 Farm sector income, 2000 -22 ................................ ................................ ..............  191 
Chart  4.3 Green Box support in the United  States, 2001 -02 - 2019-20 ................................ ... 206 
Chart  4.4 Amber Box support in the United  States, 2001 -02 – 2019-20 ................................ .. 206 
Chart  4.5 U.S. electricity net generation by major sources, 1950 -2021 ................................ ... 227 
 
TABLES  
 
Table  1.1 Selected economic indicators, 2017 -21 ................................ ................................ ...17 
Table  1.2 Gross domestic product by expenditure, 2017 -21 ................................ .................... 19 
Table  1.3 CBO forecasts, FY2022 -25................................ ................................ ..................... 21 
Table  1.4 Federal government revenue and expenditure, 2017 -21 ................................ ........... 26 
Table  1.5 OMB budget totals and estimates, FY2020 -26 ................................ .......................... 27 
Table  1.6 Main monetary and price indica tors, 2017 -21 ................................ .......................... 30 
Table  1.7 Current and capital accounts, 2017 -21 ................................ ................................ ...31 
Table  2.1 Trade under FTAs, 2021  ................................ ................................ ........................ 43 
Table  2.2 Imports under unilateral trade preferences, 2018 -21 ................................ ................ 45 
Table  2.3 Summary of changes to GSP beneficiaries and eligibility, July  2018-February  2022 ......46 
Table  2.4 Summary of changes to AGOA beneficiaries, July 2018 -February 2 022 ....................... 47 WT/TPR/S/434 /Rev.1  • United States  
 
- 8 - 
 
  Table  2.5 U.S. International investment agreements, 2022  ................................ ..................... 52 
Table  2.6 Overview of regulations to implement the FIRRMA, 2018 -22 ................................ .....54 
Table  2.7 Foreign investment restrictions, 2022  ................................ ................................ .....56 
Table  3.1 Key figures for customs operations, FY2018 -21 ................................ ....................... 58 
Table  3.2 Overview of FTZs, 2018 -20 ................................ ................................ ................... 61 
Table  3.3 CBP enforcement statistics, FY2018 -21 ................................ ................................ ...63 
Table  3.4 CTPAT key figures, FY2019 -21 ................................ ................................ ............... 65 
Table  3.5 Overview of changes to the HTSUS, 2017 -21................................ ........................... 70 
Table  3.6 Structure of the tariff schedules, selected years  ................................ ....................... 71 
Table  3.7 Summary of duty suspension petit ions and enactments, 2016 and 2019  ..................... 72 
Table  3.8 Tariff -rate quotas and fill rates, other products, 2018 -20 ................................ .......... 74 
Table  3.9 Summary analysis of tariffs according to FTA agreements, 2021  ................................ 74 
Table  3.10 COBRA fees, FY2022  ................................ ................................ ........................... 75 
Table  3.11 Excise ta xes, 2022  ................................ ................................ ............................. 78 
Table  3.12 Final Regulations to Improve Administration and Enforcement of  
Anti-dumping and Countervailing Duty Laws, 2021  ................................ ................................ 85 
Table  3.13 Anti -circumvention determinations made 1  January  2018-31 January  2022 ............... 90 
Table  3.14 Timeline for an EAPA investigation  ................................ ................................ .......92 
Table  3.15 Timetable for administrative review under the EAPA  ................................ ............... 94 
Table  3.16 Anti -dumping measures in force, by trading partner (including suspension  
agreements), 2018 -2021 (31 December)  ................................ ................................ .............. 95 
Table 3.17 Anti -dumping investigations terminated by negative determinations, 2018 -21 ........... 96 
Table  3.18 Anti -dumping orders revoked 2018 -21 ................................ ................................ ..97 
Table  3.19 EAPA investigations (eligible for public disclosure), 2016 -February 2022  ................... 98 
Table  3.20 Safeguard measures applied on imports of CSPV cells, 2018 -26 .............................  101 
Table  3.21 Safeguard measures applied on large residential washers, 2018 -23 ........................  103 
Table  3.22 Proposed measures to counter the effect DST application, following Section  301 
investigations  ................................ ................................ ................................ ..................  118 
Table  3.23 Items subject to export controls, including licensing  ................................ .............  122 
Table  3.24 EXIM authorizations, FY2017 -21 ................................ ................................ ........  126 
Table  3.25 Approved applications and loan amounts under SBA export loan programs,  
FY2017 -20 ................................ ................................ ................................ ......................  128 
Table  3.26 Federal subsidy programs (non -agriculture), FY2018 -20 ................................ ....... 131 
Table  3.27 D OJ actions against anti -competitive practices, FY2018 -21 ................................ .... 144 
Table  3.28 Sherman Act violations yielding a corporate fine of USD  10 million or more in  
FY2018 -21 ................................ ................................ ................................ ......................  145 
Table  3.29 FTC actions against anti -competitive practices, FY2018 -21 ................................ .... 146 
Table  3.30 Government corporations and independent establishments, 2022  ..........................  147 
Table  3.31 Government -sponsored enterprises  ................................ ................................ .... 148 
Table  3.32 Government spending by main agency, FY2018 -21 ................................ ..............  157 
Table  3.33 U.S. thresholds in Appendix  I to the GPA, in SDR and in USD, 2020 -21 and  
2022-23 ................................ ................................ ................................ .........................  158 WT/TPR/S/434 /Rev.1  • United States  
 
- 9 - 
 
  Table  3.34 Procurement thresholds for trade agreements, 2020 -21 and 2022 -23 .....................  158 
Table  3.35 Socio -economic procurement small business procurement programs  ......................  161 
Table  3.36 Government -wide small business procurement goals and results, FY2017 -20 ...........  162 
Table  3.37 Private fixed investment in IP products by type, 2017 -20 ................................ ...... 163 
Table  3.38 Patent applications, grants, and pendencies, FY2017 -21 ................................ ....... 169 
Table  3.39 Patents issued by the United  States to residents of foreign countries and  
territories, FY2017 -21 ................................ ................................ ................................ ...... 170 
Table  3.40 Percentage of utility patents issued to micro, small, and large entities,  
FY2017 -21 ................................ ................................ ................................ ......................  170 
Table  3.41 Trademarks registered, renewed, and publi shed, FY2015 -21 ................................ . 174 
Table  3.42 Trademarks issued by the United  States to residents of foreign countries and  
territories, FY2017 -21 ................................ ................................ ................................ ...... 175 
Table  3.43 Main amendments to the Copyright Act since 2018  ................................ ...............  178 
Table  3.44 Rules made by the Copyright Office to implement the Music Modernization Act,  
as of January 2022  ................................ ................................ ................................ ...........  181 
Table  4.1 Value of production, 2016 -20 ................................ ................................ ..............  188 
Table  4.2 U.S. and world production and trade of selected commodities, FY2017 -18-2021-22 ... 189 
Table  4.3 Commodity Loan Rates, 2018 and 2021  ................................ ................................  193 
Table  4.4 DMC schedule of premiums  ................................ ................................ .................  195 
Table  4.5 Total PSE and single commodity transfer values for selected commodities,  
2016-20 ................................ ................................ ................................ .........................  205 
Table  4.6 Forestry production volumes, 2018 -21 ................................ ................................ . 208 
Table  4.7 Wood and wood product trade, 2018 -21 ................................ ...............................  208 
Table  4.8 Legal framework, main laws and regulations, 2022  ................................ ................  211 
Table  4.9 Forestry support measures, FY2021  ................................ ................................ ..... 213 
Table  4.10 U.S. Production of fish and aquaculture, 2017 -20 ................................ .................  215 
Table  4.11 Imports and exports of fish and fish products, 2018 -21 ................................ ........  216 
Table  4.12 Key fisheries leg islation, 2022 ................................ ................................ ............  221 
Table  4.13 Fisheries subsidies notified to the WTO  ................................ ...............................  222 
Table  4.14 Evolution of the manufacturing sector, 2015 -21 ................................ ...................  228 
Table  4.15 L&H insurance: U.S. life and annuities subsector direct premiums written  ...............  243 
Table  4.16 U .S. primary and secondary equity markets, FY2020 and FY2021 ...........................  246 
Table  4.17 Selected telecommunications indicators, 2015 -20 ................................ ................  249 
Table  4.18 Trade in health services, 2015 -20 ................................ ................................ ...... 273 
 
BOXES  
 
Box 1.1 The CARES Act  ................................ ................................ ................................ .......22 
Box 1.2 American Rescue Plan Act of 2021: summary  ................................ ............................ 25 
Box 2.1 Overview of Unilateral Preference Programs, 2022a ................................ .................... 46 
Box 2.2 Overview of other new agreements or ar rangements  ................................ .................. 50 
Box 3.1 CBP's Office of Trade "Strategy 2020 -2025" Primary Goals  ................................ .......... 59 WT/TPR/S/434 /Rev.1  • United States  
 
- 10 - 
 
  Box 3.2 U.S. -EU joint statement on steel and aluminum, 31  October  2021 ..............................  107 
Box 3.3 E.O.  14005 of 25  January  2021 ................................ ................................ ..............  150 
Box 3.4 The Trademark Modernization Act of 2020  ................................ ...............................  173 
Box 4.1 Key healthcare facts, 2020  ................................ ................................ ....................  268 
Box 4.2 Selected HHS federal waivers and policy changes due to COVID -19 impacting  
supply of medical services  ................................ ................................ ................................ . 271 
 
APPENDIX TABLES  
 
Table  A1.1 Merchandise exports by HS section and main chapter, 2017 -21 .............................  278 
Table  A1.2 Merchandise imports by HS section and main chapter, 2017 -21 .............................  279 
Table  A1.3 Merchandise exports and by trading partner, 2017 -21 ................................ ..........  280 
Table  A1.4 Merchandise imports by trading partner, 2017 -21 ................................ ................  281 
Table  A1.5 U.S. trade in services by  type of service (Modes 1, 2, and 4), 2017 -21 ...................  282 
Table  A2.1 Activity in WTO dispute settlement disputes to which the United  States is  
a Party, August  2018-March  2022 ................................ ................................ ......................  285 
Table  A2.2 Sel ected U.S. notifications to the WTO, August 2018 -March 2022  ..........................  286 
Table  A3.1 Summary analysis of United  States MFN tariff, 2021  ................................ ............  289 
Table  A3.2 Tariff -rate quotas and fill rates, agricultural products, 2018 -20 ..............................  290 
Table  A3.3 Import prohibitions, restrictions, and other measures 2022  ................................ ... 292 
Table  A3.4 Products subject to import licensing, 2022  ................................ ..........................  293 
Table  A3.5 Final changes in U.S. export controls, August 2018 -January 2022  ..........................  295 
Table  A3.6 Summary of IP  protection, December 2021  ................................ .........................  299 
  WT/TPR/S/434 /Rev.1  • United States  
 
- 11 - 
 
  SUMMARY  
1. The United  States has a large economy that is highly integrated with the rest of the world. 
After a period of stable economic growth in 2018 and 2019, when real GDP expanded by 2.9% and 
2.3%, respectively, the U.S. economy suffered the effects of the COVID -19 pandemic. Real GDP 
contracted by 3.4% in 2020 after 11 consecutive years of expansion. The economy experie nced a 
rapid rebound in 2021, aided by the support packages put in place by the Government and by an 
easing of monetary conditions. This led to a real GDP growth rate of 5.7% in 2021.  
2. During most of the review period (mid -2018 to early 2022), fiscal policy  continued to be 
expansionary. Despite solid economic growth, the federal government deficit rose from 2.8% of GDP 
in calendar year 2017 to 5.4% of GDP in 2019. As a response to the COVID -19 pandemic, the 
authorities put in place several support packages, including the Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and 
Economic Security Act (CARES Act), the Coronavirus Preparedness and Response Supplemental 
Appropriations Act of 2020, the American Rescue Plan Act of 2021 (ARP Act), the Infrastructure 
Investment and Jobs Act of 2 021, and some parts of the Consolidated Appropriations Act of 2021, 
which together provided an estimated USD  8.3 billion in emergency funding for federal agencies to 
respond to the COVID -19 outbreak. As a result, the federal government deficit rose to 14.9 % of 
GDP in FY2020 and to 13.9% of GDP in FY2021. Reflecting the higher deficits, public debt as a share 
of GDP continued to rise, to some 100%.  
3. The Federal Reserve continued to conduct an expansionary monetary policy during the period 
under review. In res ponse to the effects of the pandemic, the Federal Reserve committed to using 
its full range of policy tools to support the U.S. economy, promoting its maximum -employment and 
price-stability goals. In this respect, it introduced facilities to support the fl ow of credit, in some 
cases backed by the Treasury , using funds appropriated under the CARES Act. After slightly 
exceeding the longer -run 2% goal at times in 2018, 12 -month personal consumption expenditures 
(PCE) inflation remained below 2% throughout 2019  and 2020 (1.3% in 2020), allowing the Federal 
Reserve space for a more accommodative policy. In 2021, the PCE index rose rapidly, by 5.8%, 
reflecting in part a sharp increase in energy prices, as well as supply shortages linked to the 
pandemic. Inflation accelerated in early 2022, to a year -on-year rate of 6.6% in March, driven by 
higher energy and food prices.  
4. The U.S. current account deficit continued increasing during the period under review, moving 
from 2.1% to 2.9% of GDP in 2020 and 3.6% in 2021. The  increase in the deficit partly reflects the 
disruption in trade flows due to the pandemic. U.S. imports and exports of goods declined during 
the initial part of the review period, but exports declined more significantly, by 14.1%, while imports 
declined b y about half that level, by 7.9%. Thereafter, in 2021, both imports and exports recovered 
significantly, reaching their highest level during the period. The merchandise trade deficit, at 
USD 946 billion  in 2018, increased to USD  1.18 trillion in 2021, its highest level during the period 
due to a large surge in imports. The main products traded, as well as the main sources and 
destinations for U.S. trade, did not change significantly during the period. Despite significant declines 
during the review period, t he United  States maintained a surplus in cross -border services trade, 
although it fell to USD  230 billion in 2021, the lowest level since 2012. Travel and transport were in 
particular negatively impacted by the COVID -19 pandemic. The European  Union and the  
United  Kingdom were the United  States' main services trading partners during the period.  
5. In 2021 the U.S. Administration put in place its "Build Back Better" agenda, which includes, 
inter alia, putting workers at the center  of trade policy, tackling the C OVID -19 pandemic, promoting 
a sustainable environment and climate path, promoting equitable economic growth around the 
world, and addressing main trading partners' economic trade practices through a comprehensive 
strategy. Recent legislation and initiative s have included the ARP Act that provided funding for 
COVID -19 vaccines and addressed medical supply chains, and several other initiatives that address 
supply chains more generally as well as critical infrastructure. In the WTO, the United  States 
continues  to push a robust reform agenda that has focused on reinforcing the WTO's negotiating 
function and on systemic issues. The United  States has been active in making proposals in the 
fisheries subsidies and agriculture negotiations, as well as in its particip ation in the Joint Statement 
Initiatives and in the different WTO committees.  
6. The United  States is a party to 14 free trade agreements (FTAs) covering trade with 
20 countries. The main development during the review period was the conclusion and 
implementat ion of the revised agreement with Canada and Mexico, the WT/TPR/S/434 /Rev.1  • United States  
 
- 12 - 
 
  United  States -Mexico -Canada Agreement (USMCA), which entered into force in July  2020. There 
were also some amendments to the FTAs with the Republic of Korea and Morocco. In terms of 
unilateral prefer ences, the GSP program  expired in December  2020 and as of March  2022 had not 
been renewed; the renewal of preferences under the Caribbean Basin Trade Partnership Act (CBTPA) 
was extended until 2030. Other agreements involving trade issues were concluded du ring the review 
period, with Japan, China, and the European  Union, covering a range of products or subjects.  
7. During the review period, the U.S. investment regime underwent a number of significant 
changes, including passing a new law and rules expanding the  types of foreign investment subject 
to examination, the introduction of new reporting requirements for certain types of foreign direct 
investment, and the formalization and streamlining of the committee for the assessment of foreign 
investment in the tele communications sector. A number of these changes have moved the 
U.S. policy direction towards greater scrutiny of foreign investment transactions on national security 
grounds. In terms of investment restrictions, there remain 14 main categories of long -standing 
requirements or restrictions on foreign investment.  
8. The U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) pursued new ways to modernize its customs 
procedures during the period under review. Several pilot projects were launched to facilitate the 
movement of l egitimate trade securely, specific customs -related COVID -19 matters were addressed, 
and further developments were made to its single window application. Initiatives were also 
undertaken to reduce intellectual property rights violations at the border. Reven ues collected by CBP 
nearly doubled over the period, from USD  40 billion in FY2017 to USD  79 billion in FY2019, mainly 
due to the collection of the special additional duties.  
9. The U.S. tariff regime did not change significantly during the review period and tariff levels 
remained nearly the same as in 2018. The simple average rate remains low at 4.8% overall in 2021. 
Tariffs on agricultural products (WTO definition) averaged 9.2%, more than double the average for 
non-agricultural products (4.0%). High tariffs  were mainly concentrated in the dairy and tobacco 
sectors. The Miscellaneous Tariff Bill Act of 2018 provided for duty reductions or suspensions on 
1,655 tariff lines. U.S. preferential tariffs did not change significantly during the period. The 
United  States continued to apply the Merchandise Processing Fee (MPF), COBRA fees, the Harbor 
Maintenance Tax (HMT), and excise taxes on imports; several changes were made to excise taxes, 
the thresholds of the MPF, and the way HMT revenues were disbursed.  
10. Most of the products subject to import prohibitions, restrictions, or licensing remained 
unchanged during the review period. However, the American Innovation and Manufacturing (AIM) 
Act of 2020 set up an allowance and trading program  for importers of certain hydro fluorocarbons 
and new rules were put in place to implement amendments to the Lacey Act for the importation of 
certain plant and plant products. Amendments to the Marine Mammal Protection Act also imposed 
new prohibitions on shrimp and other fish and fish p roducts caught in the Upper Gulf of California.  
11. The United  States continues to be an active user of anti -dumping (AD) duties. Between 2018 
and 2021, 178 AD investigations were initiated. There were 489 AD orders on imports from 
58 trading partners in place  as of end -2021 – up from 340 on 30  June 2018, 48.0% of which were 
applied on iron and steel products. The average duration of an AD measure at the end of 2021 was 
10.4 years, down from 11 years in 2017. Of the 169 countervailing duty (CVD) measures in pla ce 
as of end -2021, some 46% were applied on iron and steel products. There were 316 sunset review 
initiations of AD and CVD orders and suspension agreements during the period from 1  January  2018 
to 31 December  2021; 250 were reviews of AD duties orders. Of  the 186 orders for which the review 
had been concluded as of end -2021, 173 were continued, 9 were revoked, and 4 suspension 
agreements were renewed. In September  2021, Final Regulations to Improve Administration and 
Enforcement of Anti -dumping  and Counter vailing Duty Laws were issued and notified to the WTO; 
they seek to strengthen the administration and enforcement of U.S.  AD/CVD laws by establishing 
new procedures for scope, circumvention, and covered merchandise inquiries, and making 
substantive and tec hnical revisions with respect to other areas, such as new shipper reviews.  
12. The Enforce and Protect Act (EAPA), allows CBP to investigate whether there has been evasion 
of AD/CVD duties. Between August  2016, when EAPA came into effect, and October  2021, CBP  
initiated 56  investigations eligible for public disclosure. As of February  2022, CBP had made a final 
determination in 51 cases, 45 of which were affirmative determinations of evasion. Final measures 
include suspending liquidation of unliquidated entries,  adjusting and changing duty rates, and 
requiring single transaction bonds. The products for which evasion was found were, to a large extent, WT/TPR/S/434 /Rev.1  • United States  
 
- 13 - 
 
  steel products, but also include aluminum  products, plywood, furniture, glycine, and paper. 
U.S. legislation allow s the Department of Commerce (USDOC) to conduct investigations to determine 
if changes to an imported product or the place where the imported product is assembled constitute 
circumvention of an AD/CVD order. When such issues arise, USDOC issues ''scope rul ings'' that 
clarify the scope of an order or suspended investigation with respect to particular products. Between 
1 January  2018 and 31  January  2022, 169 final scope rulings were made. About half of the rulings 
were linked to steel, iron, and aluminum  products. USDOC also made 27 anti -circumvention 
determinations between 1  January  2018 and 31  January  2022, linked mostly to investigations on 
steel products, as well as chemical, wood, and paper products.  
13. The two safeguard measures (on crystalline silicon phot ovoltaic cells, and large residential 
washers) in force before 2018 were renewed during the period under review, but no new measures 
were applied. Five new Section  232 (national security) investigations were initiated and completed  
during the review period : on automobiles and auto parts (February  2019); uranium (April  2019); 
titanium sponge (November  2019); lamination for stacked cores (October  2020); and vanadium 
(February  2021). Additional tariffs applied on steel and aluminum  imports resulting from Secti on 232 
investigations initiated in 2018 remain in place; however, the United  States reached an agreement 
with the European  Union in October  2021 to suspend the additional tariffs and replace them by tariff 
quotas. More recently, similar agreements were rea ched with Japan and the United  Kingdom. Under 
Section  301 of the Trade Act of 1974, trade measures may be imposed on foreign countries that 
maintain an act, policy, or practice that violates or denies U.S.  rights or benefits under trade 
agreements, or burd ens or restricts U.S. commerce. During the review period, there were seven 
Section  301 cases active; they all resulted in an agreement, but in one case additional duties remain 
in force (China technology transfer regime), although exclusions apply.  
14. U.S. ex port controls are guided by national security and the pursuit of foreign policy 
objectives. The United  States cooperates with other countries in many instances to restrict exports 
of defense  articles and dual -use goods and technologies or to deter the proliferation of nuclear, 
chemical, and biological weapons and related technologies. The Export Control Reform Act of 2018 
constitutes the principal legal instrument for controls on dual -use and less sensitive military items. 
Export controls also apply to countries subject to economic sanctions by the United  States. 
Numerous modifications to the export control regime took place during the period under review, 
relating, for example, to changes in controls of munitions, dual -use goods and technologies, and 
missile technology, as well as sanctions or embargoes towards specific countries or entities. 
Temporary export restrictions applied to certain scarce critical health and medical resources between 
April 2020 and June  2021 in response to the COVID -19 pandemic.  
15. Created in 2018, the U.S. International Development Finance Corporation (DFC) is the 
successor agency to the Overseas Private Investment Corporation by statute. Its stated purpose is 
to mobilize and facilitate the participation of private sector capital a nd skills in the economic 
development of less developed countries and countries in transition. Its five -year strategy (Roadmap 
for Impact) foresees the DFC's own commitment of USD  25 billion to generate an additional 
USD 50 billion in private investment in  key sectors. The Export -Import Bank (EXIM), the official 
export credit agency, has been reauthorized through 2026. EXIM's Congressional mandates include 
mandates addressing small businesses, sub -Saharan Africa, environmentally beneficial goods and 
service s, and China and transformational exports. As a long -standing impasse restricting EXIM's 
ability to engage in long -term finance was resolved in 2019, EXIM still has more than USD  90 billion 
of available lending authority.  
16. Federal government agencies and de partments may provide businesses with grants, loans, 
insurance, property, counselling, and other assistance, and support is also available from state, 
territorial, and local authorities and agencies. Subsidy program s are notified to the WTO on a regular 
basis. The disruption of economic activity caused by the COVID -19 pandemic prompted additional 
assistance on an unprecedented scale. Nearly USD  1 trillion, including forgivable loans, was 
channeled  through the Small Business Administration, notably through t he Paycheck Protection 
Program and COVID -19 Economic Injury Disaster Loans.  
17. As regards competition policy, the United  States recently adopted a "whole -of-government" 
approach to fostering competition in U.S. markets and to vigorously enforcing antitrust la ws. Some 
recent legislative developments included the permanent extension of incentives for corporations to 
self-report their involvement in criminal antitrust conspiracies and the enhancement of protections 
for employees denouncing criminal antitrust viol ations. Mergers in the healthcare and WT/TPR/S/434 /Rev.1  • United States  
 
- 14 - 
 
  pharmaceutical industry drew significant activity for enforcement agencies during the review period. 
Savings to U.S. consumers related to merger and non -merger enforcement activities by antitrust 
agencies were estimate d at USD  12.9 billion in FY2019 and FY2020.  
18. During the review period, the United  States continued to actively notify its proposed and 
adopted technical barriers to trade (TBT) and sanitary and phytosanitary (SPS) measures in the 
respective WTO Committees. The private sector leads the development of voluntary consensus 
standards (VCS), which are based on needs or concerns identified by industry, government, and 
consumers. Technical regulations can be established at the federal or sub -federal level and rely 
heavily on VCS developed by the private sector making them mandatory by reference. When 
developing technical regulations, government agencies are requested to ensure that imported goods 
are treated no less favorably  than like domestic products. Regarding SP S requirements, the adoption 
of equivalence determinations for food products, the issuance of a regulation regarding laboratory 
accreditation, and a further digitalization of procedures, including the exchange of electronic 
phytosanitary certificates, were  the main developments during the review period.  
19. The United  States is a party to the Agreement on Government Procurement (GPA). 
Government procurement at the federal and state levels is decentralized. A number of "Made in 
America Laws" are in place for pro curement not covered by the GPA or other trade agreements. 
Regulatory changes were introduced in January  2021, which put in place the new Made in America 
initiative and established the Made in America Office (MIAO) within the Office of Management and 
Budge t (OMB). The new policy aims at increasing procurement from domestic sources and reducing 
the number of waivers to Buy American provisions by making them subject to review. Also in 
January  2021, a Final Rule was published that modified the implementation o f the Buy American Act 
(BAA) by increasing the domestic content requirements to 55%, and the margin of price preference 
for domestic end products and construction material contained in the BAA from 6% to 20% for large 
businesses, and from 12% to 30% for sm all businesses. Also, foreign iron and steel products must 
be less than 5% of the cost of all components in the product. U.S. procurement policy makes use of 
set-aside program s to foster the participation of small businesses, veteran -owned small businesses , 
small disadvantaged businesses, HUBZone businesses, and women -owned small businesses in the 
procurement process. Under the Small Business Act, government purchases with an anticipated 
value above the micro -purchase threshold of USD  10,000, and up to USD  250,000, are to be 
automatically and exclusively set aside for small businesses, provided there are at least two or more 
small business concerns that are competitive in terms of market prices, quality, and delivery. The 
same applies for construction contra cts with a value of USD  1.5 million or more.  
20. The United  States is a top producer and exporter of goods and services that embody 
intellectual property (IP). It is estimated that IP is present in some 60% of U.S. goods exports and 
that IP -intensive industrie s account for over one  third of U.S. GDP. During the period under review, 
amendments to IP legislation were introduced and notified to the WTO, including changes aimed at 
modernizing copyright -related issues for music and audio recordings due to new forms of technology 
like digital streaming; the implementation of the Marrakesh Treaty, which modifies the copyright 
exceptions for blind or print disabled persons; modifications to the U.S. Plant Variety Protection Act; 
and the implementation of the Trademark M odernization Act of 2020, which modified a number of 
aspects of trademark law, including to provide for third -party submission of evidence during 
examination, flexible response periods, ex parte  expungement and re -examination, and new 
grounds for cancellat ion. 
21. The United  States is the world's largest agricultural exporter. The Agriculture Improvement 
Act of 2018 reauthorized the key revenue support program s (Agriculture Risk Coverage and Price 
Loss Coverage) through FY2023 with minor changes. Crop insurance, whi ch has permanent 
authorization, continues with some expansion in livestock insurance options. Overall, mandatory 
conservation spending is projected to increase by 2% compared with the previous five -year cycle. 
The United  States Department of Agriculture (U SDA) assists producers in reducing greenhouse gas 
(GHG) emissions, enhancing carbon sequestration, and adapting to a changing climate. Considerable 
ad hoc support was also made available to agricultural producers during the period under review. 
The trade m itigation package, announced in July  2018 to assist farmers experiencing difficulties as 
a result of foreign retaliatory action, included payments to eligible farmers under the Market 
Facilitation Program (MFP), purchases of commodities for domestic nutrit ion assistance program s 
under the Food Purchase and Distribution Program (FPDP), and an Agricultural Trade Promotion 
Program (ATP) for the development of alternative foreign markets. Payments under the MFP totaled  
nearly USD  27 billion between 2018 and 202 0, when the program  was phased out. Estimated outlays WT/TPR/S/434 /Rev.1  • United States  
 
- 15 - 
 
  under the FPDP were USD  1,144  million in FY2019 and USD  1,203  million in FY2020. The ATP 
allocated USD  300 million to 59 organizations in 2019. USDA received funding for measures to 
mitigate or prevent the effects of the COVID -19 pandemic in FY2020 to which nearly USD  87 billion 
of supplementary appropriations were added in FY2021. Almost USD  50 billion of the 
USD 78.5 billion in total COVID -19 outlays in FY2021 were spent to boost the Supplemental Nutri tion 
Assistance Program. The initial Coronavirus Food Assistance Program (CFAP) announced in 
April 2020 comprised USD  16 billion in direct support to eligible farmers and ranchers and 
USD 3 billion for food purchases. As additional funding became available  through the 
USDA  Commodity Credit Corporation (CCC), CFAP 2 was launched in summer 2020. CFAP (1 and 2) 
payments totaled  USD 23.5 billion in 2020 and USD  9.3 billion in 2021 (projected); CCC -funded 
payments, some USD  12 billion, were mostly paid in FY2021 . 
22. The forestry sector accounts for between 2% and 3% of U.S. merchandise trade, while trade 
in fish and fish products is slightly above 1% of the total. While the United  States is a major producer 
and exporter of roundwood, it has an overall trade deficit in wood and wood -related products. 
Overall, the sector does not have high tariffs except for AD and CVD duties on certain products but 
maintains certain import/export prohibitions or controls. During the review period, the United  States 
undertook a number of forest -related initiatives related to the environment such as launching its 
Plan to Conserve Global Forests. As the largest importer and second -largest consumer of fish and 
fish products in 2018, the United  States maintained a trade deficit over the per iod although 
remaining a significant producer of marine, inland, and aquaculture fish. The United  States maintains 
verification or monitoring program s that require additional procedures upon importation, such as the 
Seafood Import Monitoring Program (SIMP) . 
23. Fossil fuels constitute nearly 80% of the domestic supply of primary energy as rising output 
of crude oil and natural gas has outstripped declining production of coal. The United  States became 
the world's largest producer of crude oil in July  2018 and ha s consistently been the world's 
number -one producer of natural gas since 2011. It became a net energy exporter during 2019. In 
April 2021, the administration announced a new target for U.S. economy -wide net GHG pollution: 
it should equal 50% to 52% of the 2005 level by 2030, and net -zero emissions should be reached 
no later than 2050. A National Climate Task Force has been formed to mobilize action on climate 
change by all federal agencies. Regarding electricity generation, natural gas and renewable energy 
sources are gradually replacing coal -fired power plants. Federal tax credit program s play a key role 
in the construction of new generation capacity in renewables.  
24. Despite a shrinking contribution to GDP, manufacturing remains the main exporting sector of 
the U.S. economy, accounting for nearly 55% of all exports. Petroleum gases, electronic integrated 
circuits, and immunological products were the fastest -growing manufacturing exports during the 
review period. The manufacturing of durable goods was notably h it by the outbreak of the COVID -19 
pandemic, but so were other industries. Pharmaceutical manufacturers developing COVID -19 
vaccines and related goods received government assistance, as the authorities aimed at accelerating 
the domestic production of medic ines, personal protective equipment, critical inputs, finished drugs, 
and other finished devices. SMEs in manufacturing, an important source of employment 
opportunities, benefited also from assistance to counter the impact of the pandemic.  
25. The financial se rvices sector is a substantial contributor to the U.S. economy, accounting for 
some 8.5% of GDP in 2021. The United  States continued to run a significant surplus in trade in 
financial services during the period under review. As of end -2021, there were 2,12 9 "large" 
commercial banks in the United  States, each with consolidated assets of USD  300 million or more. 
At the same date, total banking system assets were USD  21.6 trillion. The United  States is the 
largest insurance market in the world, with net insura nce premiums that amounted to 
USD 1.28 trillion in 2020. U.S. financial markets were strongly impacted by the onset of the 
COVID -19 pandemic. The Federal Reserve responded by adopting temporary measures such as the 
reduction of the primary credit rate by 1 50 basis points to 0.25%, and a reduction of the reserve 
requirement ratios to 0% effective in March  2020. It also encouraged banks to use their capital and 
liquidity buffers. Measures to support credit allocation were also put in place.  
26. In telecommunicati ons, the steady increase of broadband subscriptions was matched by 
significant decreases of mobile and fixed phone subscriptions. A consolidation of 
U.S. telecommunication providers and the deployment of the 5G commercial networks, including the 
spectrum r eallocation, were among the salient market developments during the review period. On 
the policy side, efforts seeking to reduce the digital divide in services, the establishment of the WT/TPR/S/434 /Rev.1  • United States  
 
- 16 - 
 
  Committee for the Assessment of Foreign Participation in the United  States Telecommunications 
Services Sector, and a growing interest among policymakers in the security and protection of 
telecommunications infrastructure shaped the main regulatory changes.  
27. The air transport sector was severely hit by the travel restrictions a nd quarantine requirements 
related to the COVID -19 pandemic and although a strong recovery took place in the second half of 
2021, airline travel has not yet recovered to levels observed in 2019. To counter the impact of 
COVID -19-related lockdowns, several assistance program s to passenger air carriers, cargo air 
carriers, aviation contractors, and airports were authorized. The Government continues to implement 
support program s to ensure essential air service to small communities, with a particular focus on 
Alaska. The recently enacted Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act foresees investment in airport 
infrastructure up to USD  20 billion in next five years.  
28. Waterborne shipping carries more tonnage in U.S. international trade than any other mode of 
transporta tion. The size of the U.S. -flagged, privately owned fleet of self -propelled, cargo -carrying 
vessels of 1,000 gross tons and above continued to decline over the period under review: as of 
October  2021, there were 180 privately owned vessels with a capacity of 8.2  million dead weight 
tons, 1 less than in 2018. The United  States maintains restrictions to cabotage services of both cargo 
and passengers under the coastwise laws, as the Jones Act reserves cargo service between two 
points in the United  States (incl uding its territories and possessions), either directly or via a foreign 
port, for ships that are registered and built (or repaired) in the United  States and that are at least 
75% owned by a U.S. corporation, and on which 100% of the officers and 75% of th e crew are 
U.S. citizens. In general, the same requirements apply to the domestic passenger service under the 
Passenger Vessel Services Act of 1886. Waivers to the Jones Act and other coastwise laws are 
granted under limited circumstances.  
29. The U.S. healthc are sector is one of the largest in the world and an important employer. 
During the review period, there was an initial decline in revenues and employment, followed by 
rising costs and medical supply chain issues. The Government responded to the pandemic w ith a 
number of appropriation measures that supported the sector in many ways, including through 
emergency funding. There was also unprecedented use of telehealth in 2020, with temporary 
measures put in place to waive existing regulations. Trade in healthc are services is relatively limited 
but growing, and potential exists for future expansion, in part driven by technological developments 
and measures taken during the COVID -19 pandemic.  
30. E-commerce accounts for 12.5% of the U.S. trade in physical goods, an e ver-increasing share. 
Online platforms, which have evolved towards digital marketplaces, have diversified their offering 
and provision of services reflecting the digitalization of new economic sectors. The United  States 
keeps a decentralized, market -driven  approach to regulate digital services on specific issues and/or 
sectors while simultaneously supporting the digital transformation. Combating cross -border fraud 
and other deceptive practices remains a sustained effort by the U.S. authorities. Recent conce rns 
regarding cybersecurity and privacy led to the establishment of the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure 
Security Agency. The United  States opposes the establishment of digital services taxes, seeks to 
ensure market access for digital services through trad e agreements, and participates in the ongoing 
plurilateral negotiation on e -commerce at the WTO.  
 
 WT/TPR/S/ 434/Rev.1  • United States  
 
- 17 - 
 
  1  ECONOMIC ENVIRONMENT  
1.1  Main Features of the Economy  
1.1.  The United  States has a large economy that is highly integrated into the global economy. 
U.S. GDP is the largest in the world. During the review period, most economic sectors were 
negatively affected by the COVID -19 pandemic; however, a strong recovery has been underway 
since 2021, partly as a response to th e different economic packages put in place in 2020 and 2021 
to bolster the economy, equivalent to some 25% of GDP.  
1.2.  The U.S. economy is dominated by the services sector; the share of services in GDP has risen 
from some 68.1% in 2017 to 68.7% in 2020 and 202 1, excluding government services. If 
government services are taken into account, the share of services in GDP is about 80%. Among 
services, the most significant are real estate and rental and leasing (12.8% of GDP); finance and 
insurance (8.5%); profession al, scientific, and technical services (7.7%); and health care and social 
assistance (7.3%). The share of manufacturing, on the other hand, has continued declining, from 
11.3% of GDP in 2017, to 11.1% in 2021. Agriculture's contribution to GDP is small, ab out 0.9% of 
GDP in 2021, while mining accounted for 1.2% of GDP and construction for 4.2% in the same year 
(Table  1.1). Government accounted for 12.1% of GDP in 2021, slightly less than in 2017 (12.6%); 
the Federal Government accounted for 3.9% of GDP, whi le state and local governments have an 
8.3% share of GDP.1 
Table  1.1 Selected economic indicators, 2017 -21 
 
2017  2018  2019  2020  2021  
GDP (current USD  billion)  19,480  20,527  21,373  20,894  22,996  
Real GDP (chained 2012 USD  billion)  18,079  18,607  19,033  18,385  19,427  
Real GDP growth (%)  2.3 2.9 2.3 -3.4 5.7 
GDP per capita (current USD)  59,596  62,432  64,665  62,978  69,221  
GDP by industry (% of current GDP)       
Private industries  87.4 87.6 87.7 87.2 87.9 
 Agriculture, forestry, fishing, and hunting  0.9 0.9 0.8 0.8 1.1 
 Farmsa 0.7 0.7 0.6 0.6 0.9 
 Forestry, fishing, and related activities  0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 
 Mining  1.4 1.6 1.4 0.9 1.2 
 Oil and gas extraction  0.9 1.0 0.9 0.5 0.8 
 Mining, except oil and gas  0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 
 Support activities for mining  0.2 0.3 0.3 0.1 0.1 
 Utilities  1.6 1.6 1.6 1.6 1.6 
 Construction  4.1 4.1 4.2 4.3 4.2 
 Manufacturing  11.3 11.4 11.1 10.9 11.1 
 Durable goods  6.3 6.3 6.2 6.1 6.0 
 Of which:       
 Computer and electronic products  1.4 1.5 1.4 1.5 1.5 
 Machinery  0.8 0.8 0.8 0.8 0.7 
 Motor vehicles, bodies, and parts  0.8 0.8 0.7 0.7 0.8 
 Fabricated metal products  0.8 0.8 0.8 0.7 0.7 
 Other transportation equipment  0.8 0.8 0.8 0.6 0.6 
 Non-durable goods  4.9 5.0 4.9 4.8 5.1 
 Of which:       
 Chemical products  1.9 1.8 1.8 1.9 1.9 
 Food, beverage and tobacco products  1.4 1.3 1.3 1.4 1.4 
 Petroleum and coal products  0.7 0.9 0.8 0.5 0.9 
 Services  68.1 68.1 68.7 68.7 68.7 
 Wholesale trade  6.0 5.9 6.0 6.0 6.0 
 Retail trade  5.6 5.5 5.5 5.8 6.0 
 Transportation and warehousing  3.1 3.2 3.2 2.7 2.8 
 Information  5.2 5.2 5.3 5.6 5.7 
 Finance, insurance, real estate, rental, and leasing  20.6 20.7 20.8 22.0 21.2 
 Finance and insurance  7.8 7.9 7.9 8.6 8.5 
 Real estate and rental and leasing  12.9 12.8 13.0 13.4 12.8 
 Professional and business services  12.5 12.6 12.8 12.9 12.9 
 Professional, scientific, and technical services  7.5 7.6 7.7 7.8 7.7 
 Management of companies and enterprises  1.9 1.9 1.9 2.0 1.9 
 Administrative and waste management services  3.1 3.1 3.2 3.1 3.3 
 Educational services, health care, and social  assistance  8.8 8.7 8.8 8.6 8.4 
 Educational services  1.3 1.3 1.3 1.2 1.1 
 Health care and social assistance  7.5 7.4 7.5 7.4 7.3 
 Arts, entertainment, recreation, accommodation, and 
food  4.3 4.2 4.3 3.2 3.7 
 Arts, entertainment, and recreation  1.1 1.1 1.1 0.8 0.9 
 
1 These figures are in terms of value added; the ratio of current government spending to GDP is 3:1.  WT/TPR/S/ 434/Rev.1  • United States  
 
- 18 - 
 
   
2017  2018  2019  2020  2021  
 Accommodation and food services  3.1 3.1 3.1 2.4 2.8 
 Other services, except government  2.1 2.1 2.1 2.0 1.9 
Government  12.6 12.4 12.3 12.8 12.1 
 Federal  3.9 3.8 3.8 4.1 3.9 
General government  3.6 3.5 3.5 3.7 3.6 
 National defense  2.1 2.0 2.0 2.1 2.0 
 Nondefense  1.5 1.5 1.5 1.6 1.5 
 Government enterprises  0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 
 State and local  8.7 8.6 8.5 8.7 8.2 
 General government  7.9 7.8 7.7 8.1 7.6 
 Government enterprises  0.7 0.7 0.7 0.6 0.6 
Employment       
Total employmentb (thousands)  152,179  154,673  156,872  147,564  .. 
Employment by industry (% of total employment)       
Private industries  83.8 83.9 84.0 83.4 .. 
 Agriculture, forestry, fishing, and hunting  0.9 0.9 0.9 0.9 .. 
 Farmsb 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 .. 
 Forestry, fishing, and related activities  0.4 0.4 0.4 0.4 .. 
 Mining  0.4 0.4 0.4 0.4 .. 
 Oil and gas extraction  0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 .. 
 Mining, except oil and gas  0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 .. 
 Support activities for mining  0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 .. 
 Utilities  0.4 0.4 0.3 0.4 .. 
 Construction  4.7 4.8 4.9 5.0 .. 
 Manufacturing  8.2 8.2 8.2 8.2 .. 
 Durable goods  5.1 5.1 5.1 5.1 .. 
 Of which:       
 Fabricated metal products  0.9 0.9 0.9 0.9 .. 
 Computer and electronic products  0.7 0.7 0.7 0.7 .. 
 Machinery  0.7 0.7 0.7 0.7 .. 
 Motor vehicles, bodies and trailers, and parts  0.6 0.6 0.6 0.6 .. 
 Other transportation equipment  0.4 0.5 0.5 0.5 .. 
 Non-durable goods  3.1 3.1 3.0 3.1 .. 
 Of which:       
 Food and beverage and tobacco products  1.2 1.2 1.2 1.3 .. 
 Chemical products  0.5 0.5 0.5 0.6 .. 
 Plastics and rubber products  0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 .. 
 Services  69.2 69.2 69.3 68.5 .. 
 Wholesale trade  3.9 3.8 3.8 3.8 .. 
 Retail trade  10.5 10.3 10.0 10.1 .. 
 Transportation and warehousing  3.4 3.5 3.7 3.9 .. 
 Information  1.8 1.8 1.8 1.8 .. 
 Finance and insurance  4.1 4.1 4.1 4.4 .. 
 Real estate and rental and leasing  1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 .. 
 Professional, scientific, and technical services  6.0 6.1 6.1 6.5 .. 
 Management of companies and enterprises  1.5 1.5 1.5 1.6 .. 
 Administrative and waste management services  6.0 6.0 6.0 5.8 .. 
 Educational services  2.4 2.4 2.4 2.4 .. 
 Health care and social assistance  12.9 12.9 13.0 13.4 .. 
 Arts, entertainment, and recreation  1.5 1.6 1.6 1.2 .. 
 Accommodation and food services  9.0 9.0 9.0 7.6 .. 
 Other services, except government  4.6 4.7 4.7 4.5 .. 
Government  16.2 16.1 16.0 16.6 .. 
 Federal  3.3 3.3 3.3 3.5 .. 
 General government  2.9 2.8 2.8 3.1 .. 
 Government enterprises  0.5 0.4 0.4 0.5 .. 
 State and local  12.9 12.8 12.7 13.0 .. 
 General government  12.1 12.0 11.9 12.3 .. 
 Government enterprises  0.8 0.8 0.8 0.8 .. 
Unemployment rate (%)  4.4 3.9 3.7 8.1 5.4 
Goods trade to GDP ratio  20.3 20.8 20 18.4 20.4 
.. Not available.  
a NAICS crops and animal production.  
b Domestic full -time and part -time employees.  
Source:  WTO Secretariat, based on Bureau of Economic Analysis (BEA). Viewed at: http://www.bea.gov/ ; 
and Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS). Viewed at: http://www.bls.gov/ . 
1.3.  In terms of employmen t, the private services sector accounted for 68.5% of the total in 2020, 
followed by health care and social assistance at 13.4%; retail trade at 10.1%; accommodation and 
food services at 7.6%; and professional, scientific, and technical services at 6.5%. E mployment in 
manufacturing accounted for 8.2% of total employment in 2020, while that in construction 
represented 5.0% and that in agriculture 0.9%. Government employment (public services) 
accounted for 16.6% of total employment in 2020.  WT/TPR/S/ 434/Rev.1  • United States  
 
- 19 - 
 
  1.2  Recent Economic De velopments  
1.2.1   GDP and employment  
1.4.  After a period of stable economic growth in 2018 and 2019, when real GDP expanded by 2.9% 
and 2.3%, respectively, the U.S. economy, like that of the rest of the world, entered a recession, as 
it was considerably affected by th e COVID -19 pandemic. Real GDP contracted by 3.4% in 2020 after 
11 consecutive years of expansion. The economy experienced a swift rebound in 2021, aided by the 
support packages put in place by the Government and by an easing of monetary conditions. This le d 
to a real GDP growth rate of 5.7% in 2021 (Table  1.2). 
Table  1.2 Gross domestic product by expenditure, 2017 -21 
 
2017  2018  2019  2020  2021  
Percentage of current GDP       
Personal consumption expenditures  68.0 67.8 67.5 67.2 68.5 
 Goods  21.3 21.2 21.0 22.3 23.8 
 Durable goods  7.2 7.2 7.1 7.7 8.8 
 Non-durable goods  14.2 14.1 13.9 14.5 15.0 
 Services  46.6 46.6 46.6 45.0 44.6 
Gross private domestic investment  17.4 17.7 17.9 17.4 17.9 
 Fixed investment  17.2 17.4 17.6 17.7 18.0 
 Non-residential  13.3 13.5 13.7 13.4 13.3 
 Residential  3.9 3.9 3.8 4.3 4.7 
 Change in private inventories  0.2 0.3 0.3 -0.3 -0.1 
Net exports of goods and services  -2.8 -2.9 -2.8 -3.1 -4.0 
 Exports  12.2 12.3 11.8 10.2 10.8 
 Goods  7.9 8.1 7.7 6.8 7.6 
 Services  4.3 4.2 4.1 3.4 3.2 
 Imports  15.0 15.2 14.6 13.3 14.8 
 Goods  12.2 12.5 11.8 11.1 12.4 
 Services  2.8 2.8 2.8 2.2 2.4 
Government consumption expenditures and gross investment  17.4 17.4 17.4 18.5 17.6 
 Federal  6.5 6.5 6.6 7.2 6.8 
 State and local  11.0 10.9 10.8 11.3 10.8 
Real growth rates, %       
GDP  2.3 2.9 2.3 -3.4 5.7 
Personal consumption expenditures  2.4 2.9 2.2 -3.8 7.9 
 Goods  3.9 4.0 3.4 4.6 12.2 
 Durable goods  6.3 7.0 4.3 7.7 18.1 
 Non-durable goods  2.7 2.4 2.9 3.1 9.1 
 Services  1.8 2.4 1.7 -7.5 5.8 
Gross private domestic investment  4.0 5.7 3.4 -5.5 9.8 
 Fixed investment  4.1 4.8 3.2 -2.7 7.8 
 Non-residential  4.1 6.4 4.3 -5.3 7.4 
 Residential  4.0 -0.6 -0.9 6.8 9.2 
 Change in private inventories  -5.9 95.5 14.3 -156.3  -22.9 
Net exports of goods and services  5.6 8.1 4.8 4.1 36.2 
 Exports  4.1 2.8 -0.1 -13.6 4.5 
 Goods  4.1 4.2 -0.1 -10.2 7.6 
 Services  4.0 0.2 -0.1 -19.8 -1.5 
 Imports  4.4 4.1 1.1 -8.9 14.0 
 Goods  4.5 5.1 0.5 -5.6 14.6 
 Services  4.3 0.0 3.9 -22.6 11.4 
Government consumption expenditures and gross investment  0.5 1.4 2.2 2.5 0.5 
 Federal  0.4 3.0 3.8 5.0 0.6 
 State and local  0.6 0.4 1.3 0.9 0.4 
Source:  WTO Secretariat, based on BEA. Viewed at: http://www.bea.gov/ . 
1.5.  Personal consumption expenditures accounted for 68.5% of GDP in 2021 and were the main 
source of growth, expanding by 7.9% in real terms, after the devastati ng effect of the pandemic in 
2020, which led to a 3.8% real contraction. Growth was particularly strong for durable goods, which 
expanded by 18%. Consumer spending contributed 5.27  percentage points to GDP growth (5.7%) 
in 2021, evenly distributed among go ods and services (some 2.69  percentage points for goods and 
2.58 percentage points for services). Consumption of non -durable goods contributed 
1.39 percentage points to growth, while consumption of durable goods contributed 1.31  percentage 
points to annual  GDP growth. Household consumption expenditures (for services including health 
care and housing and utilities) contributed 2.92  percentage points to GDP growth. The main 
categories of c onsumption spending in 2021 were: food services and accommodation 
(0.88  percentage points), health care (0.79  percentage points), other nondurables (0.48  percentage 
points), clothing and footwear (0.45  percentage points), recreational goods (0.43  percentage WT/TPR/S/ 434/Rev.1  • United States  
 
- 20 - 
 
  points), motor vehicles and parts (0.37  percentage points), recreatio nal services (0.33  percentage 
points), and furnishings and household equipment (0.27  percentage points).2 
1.6.  Gross private domestic investment contributed 1.72  percentage points to growth in 2021; the 
contribution of fixed investment to growth was 1.37  perce ntage points, of which  the contribution of 
non-residential fixed investment was 0.97  percentage points. Of that, intellectual property products 
contributed 0.51  percentage points to growth in 2021. The contribution of residential investment 
was 0.39  percen tage points. The contribution of government consumption and gross investment was 
slightly positive (0.09  percentage points), and net exports made a negative contribution of 
1.40 percentage points to real GDP growth. Non -residential fixed investment grew by  7.4% in 2021, 
compared with a decline of 5.3% in 2020. The increase in non -residential fixed investment reflected 
increases in equipment, led by information processing equipment. Growth in overall private fixed 
investment (residential and non -residential)  was 7.7% in 2021, compared with a contraction of 2.7% 
in 2020; growth in overall investment was 9.8%, compared to -5.5% in 2020.  
1.7.  The acceleration of growth in 2021 reflected increases in all major subcomponents, led by 
personal consumption expenditure in both goods and services, non -residential fixed investment, 
exports, residential fixed investment, and private inventory investment. Imports increased by 14%, 
after having contracted by 8.9% in 2020. The 4.6% increase in exports, after a 13.6% decline 
in 2020, reflected an increase in exports of goods, mainly non -automotive capital goods, partly offset 
by a decrease in exports of services, led by travel. Current -dollar GDP increased by 10% in 2021 to 
USD 22.99  trillion, in contrast to a 2.2% decrease in 2020 . The price index for gross domestic 
purchases rose 3.9% in 2021, compared with a 1.2% increase in 2020.3 
1.8.  Labor productivity growth averaged 1.5% in 2018 and 2019, and increased to 2.4% in both 
2020 and 2021, partly due to an increase in unemployment (202 0) and the strong economic recovery 
(2021). A decline in productivity growth is expected for 2022 and beyond, as the labor market 
recovers. In 2018, the OECD noted that contributing factors to slowing productivity included the 
slow pace of non -residential investment, weak rates of business entry and exit, tighter regulations, 
and the lack of knowledge spillovers across firms.4 In its 2020 Survey, the OECD suggests that 
reforms are essential to lift productivity growth and ensure that all benefit from futur e growth. 
Productivity has been sluggish for a variety of reasons, and policies are needed to support labor 
mobility and competition to help workers and businesses avoid scarring effects and fully recover 
from the crisis.5 
1.9.  The Office of Management and Bud get's (OMB) FY2022 Budget forecasts real GDP growth of 
3.3% in 2022, 2.2% in 2023, 1.8% in 2024 and 2025, and 1.9% in the following two years, with 
consumer price index (CPI) increases of around 2.3% -2.5%, and an unemployment rate stabilizing 
at around 3.8 %.6 These forecasts now seem a bit optimistic with respect to inflation.  
1.10.   The OECD forecasts real GDP growth of 3.7% in 2022 and 2.4% in 2023, driven by strong 
private consumption and a recovery of gross fixed capital formation (3.8% and 3.6% growth in 2022 
and 2023, respectively). Net exports are expected to make a negative contribution to GDP growth. 
The GDP deflator is expected to be 3.7% and 2.4% in 2022 and 2023, respectively, while an 
unemployment rate of 3.8% is expected in 2022, falling to 3.4% i n 2023.7 The IMF, on the other 
hand, expects real GDP growth of 4% in 2022.8 The IMF considers that the policy program proposed 
by the Administration to deal with the effect of the pandemic may be viewed as an opportunity to 
 
2 Bureau of Economic Analysis (BEA) (2022), "Gross Domestic Product (Third Estimate), Corporate 
Profits, and GDP by Industry, Fourth Quarter and Year 2021",  30 March. Viewed at: 
https://www.bea.gov/sites/default/files/2022 -03/gdp4q21_3rd.pdf . 
3 BEA (2022), "Gross Domestic Product (Third Estimate), Corporate Profits, and GDP by Industry, Fourth 
Quarter and Year 2021",  30 March.  
4 OECD (2018), OECD Economic Surveys: United  States, Overview , June. Viewed at: 
http://www.oecd.org/eco/surveys/Overview -United -States -2018-OECD.pdf . 
5 OECD (2020), OECD Economic Surveys: United  States, Overvi ew, July. Viewed at: 
https://www.oecd.org/economy/surveys/United -States -Economic -Survey -Overview.pdf . 
6 OMB (2021), Mid-Session Review. Budget of the U.S. Gover nment. Fiscal Year 2022 , August. 
Viewed  at: https://www.whitehouse.gov/wp -content/uploads/2021/08/msr_fy22.pdf . 
7 OECD (2022), United  States Economic Snapshot: Economic Fore cast Summary (December  2021) . 
Viewed at: https://www.oecd.org/economy/united -states -economic -snapshot/.  
8 IMF (2022), Country Data: United  States . Viewed at: 
https://www.imf.org/en/Countries/USA#countrydata . WT/TPR/S/ 434/Rev.1  • United States  
 
- 21 - 
 
  remake the economy with highe r productivity, increased labor force participation, and a less 
polarized distribution of income and wealth.9 
1.11.   The Congressional Budget Office (CBO) forecasts for FY2022 to FY2025 project real GDP 
growth of 6.1% in FY2022, slowing to 2.0 in FY2023, and to just above 1% in the following two  years 
(Table  1.3). Real potential GDP growth, which increased from 1.9% in FY2020 and 2021 to 2.1% in 
FY2022, reflects the effect of the economic packages implemented to recover from COVID -19; 
however, according to CBO es timates, the effect will be temporary and potential growth will return 
to 1.9% by FY2025.  
Table  1.3 CBO forecasts, FY2022 -25 
 
Units  2022  2023  2024  2025  
Output       
GDP USD billion  24,323  25,356  26,191  27,077   
% change  8.6 4.2 3.3 3.4 
Real GDP  USD billion  20,480  20,899  21,125  21,380   
% change  6.1 2.0 1.1 1.2 
Potential GDP   
        
Real potential GDP  % change  2.1 2.1 2.0 1.9 
Noncyclical rate of unemployment  % 4.4 4.4 4.4 4.4 
Output gap  % potential GDP  2.1 2.1 1.1 0.5 
Potential total factor productivity  % change  1.1 1.1 1.1 1.1 
Potential labor productivity  % change  1.9 2.0 1.8 1.7 
Prices   
        
Consumer price index, all urban consumers (CPI -U) % change  2.7 2.3 2.3 2.4 
CPI-U, excluding food and energy  % change  2.6 2.5 2.5 2.5 
Nominal exchange rate index (export weighted)  1970Q1=100  186.8  186.4  186.6  186.6  
Labor   
        
Unemployment rate, civilian, 16 years or older  % 4.1 3.7 3.9 4.2 
Labor  productivity (non -farm business sector)  % change  1.9 0.7 1.5 2.0 
Interest rates   
        
10-year Treasury Note  % 1.9 2.0 2.2 2.5 
3-month Treasury Bill  % 0.1 0.1 0.4 0.8 
Federal funds rate  % 0.1 0.1 0.5 1.0 
Components of GDP (real)   
        
Personal consumption expenditures  % change  5.1 2.8 1.7 1.4 
Gross private domestic investment  % change  10.5 -0.3 -1.2 0.7 
Government consumption and gross investment  % change  2.1 0.0 0.2 0.5 
Exports  % change  9.9 4.9 1.6 1.2 
Imports  % change  5.5 2.3 0.4 0.9 
Source:  CBO. Viewed at: https://www.cbo.gov/ . 
1.2.2   Fiscal policy  
1.12.   During most of the review period, fiscal policy continued to be expansionary. As was noted in 
the previous Review, in 2018 fiscal policy turned pro-cyclical, with the enactment of the Tax Cuts 
and Jobs Act of 2017 (TCJA), the Bipartisan Budget Act of 2018, and the Consolidated Appropriations 
Act of 2018. The TCJA cut personal and business taxes significantly. On the other hand, discretionary 
expen diture limits were increased every year with respect to their original goal.10 The Bipartisan 
Budget Act of 2018 (P.L.  115-123) increased the defense  limit by USD  80 billion (to USD  629 billion) 
and the non -defense  limit by USD  63 billion (to USD  579 billion) in FY2018 and by USD  85 billion (to 
USD 647 billion) and USD  68 billion (to USD  597 billion), respectively, in FY2019. The Bipartisan 
Budget Act of 2019 (P.L.  116-37) increased the discretionary defense  cap by USD  90 billion (to 
USD 667 billion) and th e non -defense  cap by USD  78 billion (to USD  622 billion) in FY2020, and by 
USD 81 billion (to USD  672 billion) and USD  72 billion (to USD  627 billion), respectively, in FY2021. 
 
9 IMF (2021), United  States: Staff Report for the 2021 Article  IV Consultation , IMF Country Report 
No. 21/162. Viewed at: https://www.imf.org/en/Publications/CR/Issues/2021/07/22/United -States -2021-
Article -IV-Consultation -Press -Release -Staff-Report -and-Statement -by-the-462540 . 
10 The Budget Control Act of 2011 (BCA) ( P.L. 112-25) established legal limits on the amount of 
discretionary spending that could be provided each fiscal year. Similar limits on discretionary spending had 
previously been  in effect between FY1991 and FY2002, and the BCA reinstituted limits for FY2012 -21. Under 
the BCA, two separate spending limits have been in effect: one for defense  discretionary spending and one for 
non-defense  discretionary spending. The caps were inten ded to contribute to reducing the fiscal deficit over the 
FY2012 -21 period. The increases in the limits or caps in the different Budget Acts refer to the initial cap fixed 
in 2011 for that fiscal year. Congressional Research Service (CRS) (2021), Expiratio n of the Discretionary 
Spending Limits: Frequently Asked Questions , 8 April. Viewed at: 
https://crsreports.congress.gov/product/pdf/R/R46752#:~:text=The%20Bipartisan%20Budget%20Act%20of,
billion%20(to%20%24622%20billion) . WT/TPR/S/ 434/Rev.1  • United States  
 
- 22 - 
 
  The discretionary expenditure caps expired in FY2021; unless the limits are ext ended by law, there 
are no similar statutory limits for FY2022 or beyond.11 
1.13.   The COVID -19 pandemic and the ensuing emergency measures put in place to combat it, 
including lockdowns, had a strongly negative effect on the U.S. economy and hit certain activiti es 
particularly hard. As an initial response to the pandemic, the authorities put in place the Coronavirus 
Preparedness and Response Supplemental Appropriations Act of 6  March  2020 (P.L.  116-123), which 
provided USD  8.3 billion in emergency funding for fed eral agencies to respond to the COVID -19 
outbreak.12 The Act funded program s that addressed issues such as: (i)  the development, 
manufacturing, and procuring of vaccines and other medical supplies; (ii)  grants for state, local, and 
tribal public health age ncies and organizations; (iii)  loans for affected small businesses; and 
(iv) humanitarian assistance and support for health systems in the affected countries.  
1.14.   The Families First Coronavirus Response Act of 18  March  2020 ( P.L. 116-127) provid ed paid 
sick le ave, tax credits, and free COVID -19 testing; expanding food assistance and unemployment 
benefits; and increas ed Medicaid funding, all for an estimated USD  192 billion. Division A of the Act, 
the Second Coronavirus Preparedness and Response Supplemental App ropriations Act of 2020 
provided FY2020 supplemental emergency spending appropriations (exempt from discretionary 
spending limits) for federal agencies to respond to the COVID -19 outbreak and allowed the 
Department of Agriculture (USDA) to approve state pl ans to provide emergency support under the 
Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP). Division D, the Emergency Unemployment 
Insurance Stabilization and Access Act of 2020, funds emergency grants for FY2020 to administer 
unemployment program s in sta tes meeting certain requirements. Division G, Tax Credits for Paid 
Sick and Paid Family and Medical Leave, allows a credit against payroll taxes for 100% of employer -
paid qualified sick leave wages. Transfers from the general fund of the Treasury are autho rized to 
cover reductions in revenue resulting from this credit.13 
1.15.   The Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security Act (CARES Act) ( P.L. 116-136), enacted 
on 27  March  2020, put in place a number of measures and program s to deal with the emergency 
situat ion created by the COVID -19 pandemic and counter some of its negative effects in the short 
term. The CARES Act provided a broad range of emergency funding benefits, totaling  some 
USD 2.3 trillion (some 11% of GDP), including a USD  349 billion Paycheck Prot ection Program (PPP), 
administered by the Small Business Administration (SBA) (Box  1.1). Under the PPP, eligible 
businesses could receive guaranteed loans during a prescribed period that, under certain 
circumstances, could be forgiven and become grants. An other important feature of the CARES Act 
was the USD  500 billion authorization for the Department of the Treasury (through the Federal 
Reserve) to support loans and guarantees and provide other financial support to eligible businesses 
and non -profits, as w ell as state and local governments. The Act also provided USD  293 billion as 
one-time tax rebates to individuals; USD  268 billion to expand unemployment benefits; 
USD 150 billion in transfers to state and local governments; and USD  100 billion for hospital s. The 
main provisions are listed in Box  1.1, many of which lapsed at the end of December  2020, but some 
were prolonged by the American Rescue Plan Act of 2021 (ARP  Act) (Box  1.2). 
Box 1.1 The CARES Act  
Title I —Keeping American Workers Paid and Employed Act  
Paycheck Protection Program : Provided increased loan amounts for eligible small businesses for payroll 
obligations, emergency grants to cover immediate operating costs, and loan forgiveness. Provided U SD 349 billion 
for relief from 15  February to 30  June 2020 through changes to the SBA loan program s. 
Loan amounts are a maximum USD  10 million per eligible borrower, with an interest rate above 4%. The CARES Act 
permits complete deferment of loan payments for up to one year and eliminates any guaranty requirement.  
Economic Injury Disaster Loans (EIDLs):  The Act expands the SBA's EIDL program  for small businesses located 
in declared disaster areas that have suffered substantial economic injury. EIDL amounts are generally limited to 
USD 2 million. The CARES Act made available, up to 31  December  2020, grants of up to USD  10,000 per beneficiary 
to cover immediate operating costs of eligible businesses. These grants do not need to be repaid.  
 
11 CRS (2021), Expiration of the Discretionary Spending Limits: Frequently Asked Questions , 8 April. 
12 Coronavirus Preparedness and Response Supplemental Appropriations Act of 6  March  2020 
(P.L. 116-123). Viewed at: https://www.congress.gov/bill/116th -congress/house -bill/6074 . 
13 Families First Coronavirus Response Act of 18  March  2020 ( P.L. 116-127). Viewed at: 
https://www.congress.gov/bill/116th -congress/house -bill/6201 . WT/TPR/S/ 434/Rev.1  • United States  
 
- 23 - 
 
  Title II —Assistance for American Workers, Families, and Businesses  
Provides relief to individuals and businesses economically impacted by COVID -19 through expanded unemployment 
benefits and individual cash recovery rebates, and establishes an employee retention credit for employers subject to 
closure.  
Unemployment benefits: The Act provides for the payment of USD  600 per week (Federal Pandemic Unempl oyment 
Compensation) from the Federal Government in addition to the amount a worker receives from the state.  
Recovery rebates:  The CARES Act provides for individual recovery rebates. Individuals earning less than 
USD 75,000 in adjusted gross income receive d a one -time cash payment of USD  1,200 and families received 
USD 500 per minor child.  
Employee retention credit:  Payroll tax credit for 50% of wages paid for employers whose operations were fully or 
partially suspended due to COVID -19, or gross receipts de clined by more than 50%. The credit was provided from 
13 March  2020 through 31  December  2020, and generally was limited to up to USD  10,000 of eligible wages per 
employee.  
Net operating loss (NOL) deduction:  The Act eliminated the 80% taxable income limita tion for NOLs utilized in 
taxable years beginning in 2018, 2019, or 2020.  
Business interest expense deduction:  The Act increased this deduction's threshold from 30% of adjusted taxable 
income to 50% for taxable years 2019 and 2020.  
Tax-free student loan re payments:  The Act permits employers to provide up to USD  5,250 per employee in tax -
free payment of student loan obligations or other educational assistance benefits.  
Title III —Supporting America's Health Care System in the Fight Against the Coronavirus  
Coverage and Pricing of Diagnostic Testing for COVID -19 
Telehealth : Expands coverage and payment for telehealth services and provides USD  29 million for each of fiscal 
years FY2021 through 2025 for Health Resources and Services Administration (HRSA) grant pr ograms that promote 
telehealth technologies.  
Medicare payment provisions : The Act eases a variety of Medicare requirements during the COVID -19 emergency.  
Medicare sequestration relief : The Act paused the 2% across -the-board sequestration reduction requirement on 
Medicare provider and plan payments during the period from 1  May through 31  December  2020 but extended it 
through FY2030.  
Title IV —Economic Stabilization and Assistance to Seve rely Distressed Sectors of the United  States 
Economy  
Title IV set aside roughly USD  500 billion to support loans, apart from SBA loans. Loans may not be forgiven, and 
recipients are subject to a prohibition on stock repurchases and payment of dividends whe n the loan is outstanding 
and for one year thereafter; there are also restrictions on executive compensation.  
Airline assistance : The Act provided USD  25 billion in funds to provide payroll support to passenger airlines and 
related businesses. The term of the loan may be no longer than five years; eligible airlines were subject to restrictions 
on stock repurchases, dividends, and pay mentioned above for 12 months and could not reduce employment levels 
by more than 10%.  
Community bank assistance:  The Act req uired federal banking agencies by interim final rule to temporarily reduce 
the Community Bank Leverage Ratio (CBLR) for qualifying community banks to 8%.  
Relief for financial institutions : Provided USD  454 billion to support loans, loan guarantees, and inv estments 
offered through facilities established by the Federal Reserve to provide liquidity to the financial system that supports 
lending to eligible businesses, states, and municipalities. Authorized the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation to 
guarantee obligations of solvent insured depository institutions and depository institution holding companies until 
31 December  2020. The Act temporarily authorized (until 31  December  2020) the Comptroller of the Currency to 
exempt any transaction from its lending l imits.  
Title V —Coronavirus Relief Funds  
Title V of the CARES Act appropriated USD  150 billion in FY2020 for states, territories, Indian tribes, and local 
governments to respond to the COVID -19 emergency. There was also a USD  100 billion to reimburse elig ible health 
care providers for health -care-related expenses or lost revenues attributable to COVID -19.  
Source:  CARES Act of 27  March  2020 (P.L.  116-136). Viewed at: 
https://www.congress.gov/116/plaws/publ136/PLAW -116publ136.pdf . 
1.16.   Some of the most significant financial provisions of the CARES Act were in Title IV, including 
Treasury loans to specified industries and investments in Federal Reserve program s, authorized until 
the end of 2020. According to Congressional Research Service  (CRS) information, total assistance 
pledged under Title  IV (almost USD  22 billion in loans to industry and USD  195 billion to Federal 
Reserve program s, of which only USD  41 billion were actual disbursements) were significantly less 
than the USD  500 billion authorized, and the Consolidated Appropriations Act of  2021 ( P.L. 116-260) 
rescinded the unobligated funds. The CRS report advances two possible explanations for the lack of 
uptake: (i)  financial conditions, which were unstable early in the pandemic, wer e normalized shortly 
after the CARES Act was enacted; and (ii)  the terms and conditions of the Federal  Reserve's 
program s were not intended to be as attractive as comparable sources of private credit, including 
required restrictions on executive compensati on and on share buybacks and dividends.14 
 
14 CRS (2021), CARES Act Title IV F inancial Assistance Ends , 8 January. Viewed at: 
https://crsreports.congress.gov/product/pdf/IN/IN11567 . WT/TPR/S/ 434/Rev.1  • United States  
 
- 24 - 
 
  1.17.   The USD  483 billion package contained in the Paycheck Protection Program and Health Care 
Enhancement Act of 24  April 2020 ( P.L. 116-139) responded to COVID -19-related needs by 
providing additional funding for small  business loans, health care providers, and COVID -19 testing. 
The Act provided additional lending authority for the Paycheck Protection Program, under which the 
SBA may guarantee certain loans to small businesses during the COVID -19 pandemic, and expanded 
eligibility for Economic Injury Disaster Loans (EIDLs) and advances to include agricultural 
enterprises. Funds provided under this Act include: (i)  USD 321 billion for additional forgivable SBA 
loans and guarantees to help retain workers; (ii)  USD 62.1 billion for the SBA to provide grants and 
loans to assist small businesses (EIDL loans and grants); (iii)  USD 75 billion for hospitals; and 
(iv) USD 25 billion for expanding testing.15 
1.18.   On 8  August  2020, an Executive Order was issued to address the expiration of certain 
Coronavirus relief measures provided by previous legislation, including the provision of additional 
extra unemployment benefits (using USD  44 billion from the Disaster Relief Fund), continuing 
student loan payment relief, and deferring collectio ns of employee social security payroll taxes.16 
1.19.   Division M, Coronavirus Response and Relief Supplemental Appropriations Act of 2021 , and 
Division N, Additional Coronavirus Response and Relief of the Consolidated Appropriations Act 
of 2021 ( P.L. 116-260), e nacted on 27  December  2020, contain further COVID -19 relief measures 
for an estimated USD  868 billion (about 4.1% of GDP).17 These measures include: (i)  enhanced 
unemployment benefits of USD  300 weekly through 14  March  2021(USD  119 billion); (ii)  one-time 
direct stimulus payments of USD  600 to individuals (USD  169 billion); (iii)  another round of SBA PPP 
loans (including providing certain protections from liability for lenders that extended loans under the 
program) and other support to small businesses (for  some USD  302 billion); (iv)  resources for 
vaccines, testing, and tracing (USD  79 billion); (v)  funding for K -12 and other education 
(USD  82 billion); and (vi)  other payments (food assistance, transportation, broadband, and banking) 
(USD  117 billion). The Act extended the period during which businesses must expend loans. Other 
changes included establishing a grant program to support live venues, performing arts organizations, 
and related entities in response to the COVID -19 pandemic, and providing additiona l funding for the 
EIDL program.  
1.20.   In March  2021, Congress passed the ARP  Act, signed by the President on 11  March  2021, to 
continue some of the benefits provided for in the CARES Act and grant some new ones. The ARP  Act 
provides some USD  1.9 trillion (8.8% o f 2020 GDP) in additional relief to respond to the COVID -19 
pandemic, following nearly USD  4 trillion in COVID relief in 2020. The ARP  Act, inter alia, includes 
provisions on aid to state and local governments, hard -hit industries and communities, and tax 
changes; sends direct stimulus payments of USD  1,400 to eligible individuals; extends the 
unemployment benefit programs; provides direct aid to state and local governments; adds resources 
to the vaccination program; and increases funding for school reopeni ng. Most notably, the ARP  Act 
provides USD  350 billion for fiscal relief under the Coronavirus State and Local Fiscal Recovery 
Funds, 57% of which is allocated to states and 35% to local governments; it also provides over 
USD 165 billion for education (Box  1.2). 
 
15 Paycheck Protection Program and Health Care Enhancement Act of 24  April 2020 ( P.L. 116-139). 
Viewed at: https://www.congress.gov/bill/116th -congress/house -bill/266 . 
16 Executive Order 13945 of 8  August  2020, Fighting the Spread of COVID –19 by Providing Assista nce to 
Renters and Homeowner,  Federal Register  (2020), Vol. 85, No.  158, pp.  49935 -49937. Viewed at: 
https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR -2020-08-14/pdf/2020 -18015.pdf . 
17 House of Representatives, H.R. 133 Division -By-Division Summary of COVID -19 Relief Provisions . 
Viewed at: 
https://appropriations.house.gov/sites/democrats.appropriations.house.gov/files/Summary%20of%20H.R.%20
133%20Coronavirus%20Relief%20Provisions.pdf ; and IMF (2021), United  States:  Staff Report for the 2021 
Article  IV Consultation , IMF Country R eport No.  21/162. Viewed at: 
https://www.imf.org/en/Publications/CR/Issues/2021/07/22 /United -States -2021-Article -IV-Consultation -Press -
Release -Staff-Report -and-Statement -by-the-462540 ; and IMF, Policy Responses to COVID -19: United  States . 
Viewed at: https://www.imf.org/en/Topics/imf -and-covid19/Policy -Responses -to-COVID -19#U . WT/TPR/S/ 434/Rev.1  • United States  
 
- 25 - 
 
  Box 1.2 American Rescue Plan Act of 2021: summary  
Main provisions of the ARP Act  
Agriculture  
- Provides USD  4 billion for the USDA to purchase and distribute food agricultural commodities; provides for grants 
and loans for small or mid -sized food processors or distributors to improve food and agricultural supply chain 
resiliency.  
- USD 500 million to establish an emergency pilot program  to increase vaccine distribution to support rural healthcare 
facilitie s. 
- Provides for the USDA to make payments of up to 120% of the outstanding debt of each socially disadvantaged 
farmer or rancher as of 1  January  2021, to pay off loans; and USD  1.01 billion in assistance for socially 
disadvantaged farmers and ranchers.  
- Provides USD  800 million for the Commodity Credit Corporation  to acquire and make available commodities.  
- Provides USD  2.25 billion for nutrition assistance, and USD  880 million to invest in innovation and improve access 
to fruits and vegetables under the Spec ial Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants, and Children.  
Education  
- USD 122 billion for the K -12 General Stabilization Fund; USD  2.6 billion for State Special Education Grants under 
the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA); USD  800 million to help children experiencing homelessness.  
- USD 40 billion through the Higher Education Emergency Relief Fund), through 30  September  2023.  
Child care  
- USD 40 billion for childcare agencies and aid to providers affected by the pandemic.  
Water and utility assistance  
- USD 4.5 billion for utility assistance, and USD  500 million for water assistance grants to states to assist low -income 
households.  
Health care  
- USD 47.8 billion to fund COVID -19 testing, contact tracing, and mitigation activities; USD  7.5 billion for COVID -19 
vaccines; USD  6.05 billion for R&D, manufacturing, production, and purchase of vaccines, therapeutics, and 
ancillary medical products; USD  7.66 billion to maintain and expand the U.S. public health workforce; and some 
USD 15 billion i n other program s. 
Defense Production Act  
- Provides USD  10 billion for medical supplies and equipment.  
Housing and emergency rental assistance  
- USD 27.4 billion provided for rental assistance, through 30  September  2025; USD  5 billion for emergency housing 
vouchers through 30  September  2030, for households at risk of experiencing homelessness; USD  5 billion for rental 
assistance.  
- The Homeowner Assistance Fund provides USD  9.961  billion in funding to be distributed to states through the 
Treasury.  
Public transpor tation  
- USD 30.5 billion for Federal Transit Administration Grants.  
Disaster relief  
- Provides USD  570 million to establish the Emergency Federal Employee Leave Fund, through 30  September  2022; 
and USD  760 million to the Federal Emergency Management Agency.  
Cybersecurity and technology  
- USD 1.85 billion to mitigate cybersecurity risks, provide IT support to federal agencies, and upgrade their 
IT systems.  
Paycheck Protection Program (PPP)  
- Expands PPP eligibility, and appropriates an additional USD  7.25 billion f or the PPP, which ended on 31  May 2021.  
Economic Injury Disaster Loans (EIDLs)  
- Appropriates USD  15 billion for the SBA to provide EIDLs to small eligible businesses affected by COVID -19. 
Restaurants  
- Appropriates USD  28.6 billion for the SBA to administer a grant program to restaurants through a new Restaurant 
Revitalization Fund. The maximum grant amount is USD  10 million per eligible entity and any affiliated businesses.  
Air Transportation Payroll Support Program Extension  
- Provides USD  14 billion to extend Payroll Support Program funding for eligible air carriers and contractors, through 
30 September  2021; extends the restrictions on stock buybacks, dividends, and capital distributions through 
30 September  2022, and restrictions on executive com pensation to 1  April 2023.  
Relief for airports  
- USD 8 billion for airports.  
Broadband  
- USD 7.2 billion to create an Emergency Connectivity Fund to reimburse schools and libraries for Internet access; 
USD 10 billion for states, territories, and tribal governm ents for education and health monitoring projects, including 
remote options.  
Unemployment  
- Extends enhanced unemployment insurance until 6  September  2021; extends benefits to 53 weeks, from 24 weeks.  
Tax 
- Provides an additional USD  1,400 per qualifying individual in direct stimulus payments. Temporary enhancement 
of the value of the Child Tax Credit to USD  3,000 for children older than six and to USD  3,600 for children younger 
than six. Temporarily increases the value of the Earned Income Tax Credit, from USD  1,050 per child or dependent 
to USD  4,000.  
State and local assistance  
- USD 350 billion for fiscal relief under the Coronavirus State and Local Fiscal Recovery Funds, of which 57% is 
allocated to states and 35% to local governments. Funds ar e administered by the Treasury; the deadline to spend 
funds is 31  December  2024.  WT/TPR/S/ 434/Rev.1  • United States  
 
- 26 - 
 
  State Small Business Credit Initiative  
- USD 10 billion for the fund, administered by the Department of the Treasury.  
Tribal, Indian and Native American Provisions  
- Provides USD  20 billion for tribal governments; funds can be used until 31  December  2024; USD  6.094  billion to 
the Indian Health Service; USD  900 million to the Bureau of Indian Affairs; USD  750 million until 
30 September  2025, for tribal housing.  
Source:  ARP Act of 2021 ( P.L. 117-2), 11  March  2021.  
1.21.   The Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act ( P.L. 117-58), enacted on 15  November  2021, 
contains appropriations for USD  1.2 trillion, of which some USD  550 billion is new spending. The new 
spending includes USD 100 billion for roads and bridges; USD  66 billion for railroads; USD  65 billion 
for the power grid; USD  65 billion for broadband in rural areas and in low -income communities; 
USD 55 billion for water infrastructure; over USD  50 billion for cybersecurity an d climate change (to 
protect infrastructure from cybersecurity attacks and address flooding, wildfires, and droughts and 
other extreme weather events); USD  39 billion for public transit; USD  25 billion for airports 
(upgrades and expansions); USD  21 billion  for the environment; USD  17 billion for ports; 
USD 11 billion for safety (highway, pedestrian, pipeline, and other safety areas); USD  8 billion for 
western water infrastructure (water treatment, storage, and reuse facilities); USD  7.5 billion for 
electric  vehicle charging stations; and USD  7.5 billion for electric school buses.18 
1.22.   Despite economic growth and the resulting increase in current receipts, the federal 
government deficit rose from 2.8% of GDP in calendar year 2017 to 5.4% of GDP in 2019. The 
economic rescue packages put in place between March  2020 and March  2021 to counter the effects 
of COVID -19 amounted overall to some USD  5.8 billion, or 28% of GDP, and consequently led to a 
substantial increase of the deficit to 14.9% of GDP for FY2020 and 15. 4% for calendar year 2020, 
and 13.9% of GDP in FY2021 and 13.0% for calendar year 2021 (Tables  1.4 and 1.5). Current 
expenditures increased by some 43% in 2020, while receipts declined. The increase of expenditure 
was more moderate in 2021 (3.3%), but expe nditure levels were almost 50% higher than in 2019. 
Reflecting the higher deficits, public debt as a share of GDP continued to rise, to 100%, and is 
expected to exceed 110% of GDP in FY2022 (Table  1.4). The overall government deficit (including 
sub-federal  entities) reached an estimated 15.3% of GDP in 2020 and 13.0% in 2021.19 
Table  1.4 Federal government revenue and expenditure, 2017 -21 
(USD billion)   
2017  2018  2019  2020  2021  
Current receipts  3,525  3,569  3,714  3,685  4,233  
Current tax receipts  2,016  2,015  2,128  2,058  2,464  
 Personal current taxes  1,614  1,617  1,709  1,680  1,987  
 Taxes on production and imports  132 164 175 158 174 
 Excise taxes  92 109 96 88 86 
 Customs duties  39 53 78 69 87 
 Other  1 1 1 1 1 
 Taxes on corporate income  245 209 217 193 272 
 Taxes from the rest of the world  25 26 27 27 30 
Contributions for government social insurance  1,284  1,345  1,406  1,445  1,575  
 From persons  1,279  1,340  1,401  1,440  1,569  
 From the rest of the worlda 5 5 5 5 6 
Income receipts on assets  140 123 110 120 138 
 Interest receipts  30 36 38 24 21 
 Dividends  104 79 64 91 112 
 Federal Reserve banks  81 65 55 91 111 
 Other  23 14 9 0 0 
 Rents and royaltiesb 6 8 8 6 6 
Current transfer receipts  85 86 73 63 58 
 From business  48 49 38 39 34 
 From persons  27 28 27 21 21 
 From the rest of the world  10 10 7 3 3 
Current surplus of government enterprises  1 -1 -3 -1 -1 
Current expenditures  4,246  4,497  4,761  6,795  7,021  
Consumption expenditures  983 1,039  1,097  1,161  1,205  
Current transfer payments  2,727  2,853  3,008  4,338  4,812  
 Government social benefits  2,121  2,219  2,348  3,406  3,659  
 To persons  2,099  2,196  2,324  3,373  3,629  
 
18 Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act of 15  November  2021 ( P.L. 117-58). Viewed at: 
https://www.congress.gov/117/plaws/publ58/PLAW -117publ58.pdf . 
19 BEA, National Income and Product Accounts . Viewed at: 
https://apps.bea.gov/iTable/iTable.cfm?reqid=19&step=3&isuri=1&1921=survey&1903=86 . WT/TPR/S/ 434/Rev.1  • United States  
 
- 27 - 
 
   
2017  2018  2019  2020  2021  
 To the rest of the world  22 23 24 33 31 
 Other current transfer payments  607 634 660 932 1,152  
 Grants -in-aid to state and local governments  561 583 609 881 1,094  
 To the rest of the world  46 52 50 51 59 
Interest payments  477 542 584 534 515 
 To persons and business  360 404 438 412 385 
 To the rest of the world  117 137 145 122 130 
Subsidies  59 63 72 761 490 
Net federal government saving  -721 -928 -1,048  -3,110  -2,789  
Social insurance funds  -330 -358 -410 -977 -685 
Other  -390 -570 -638 -2,133  -2,103  
Addenda:       
 Total receipts  3,798  3,592  3,730  3,704  4,255  
 Current receipts  3,525  3,569  3,714  3,685  4,233  
 Capital transfer receipts  273 23 16 19 23 
 Total expenditures  4,339  4,593  4,877  6,920  7,197  
 Current expenditures  4,246  4,497  4,761  6,795  7,021  
 Gross government investment  280 300 318 340 360 
 Capital transfer payments  91 82 94 92 145 
 Net purchases of non -produced assets  -2 -1 -3 -3 -9 
 Less: Consumption of fixed capital  276 285 293 304 320 
 Net lending or net borrowing ( -) -541 -1,002  -1,147  -3,217  -2,942  
 Net lending or borrowing ( -) (% of current GDP)  -2.8 -4.9 -5.4 -15.4 -13.0 
Public debt (USD  billion)  14,665  15,750  16,801  21,017  22,287  
Public debt (% of current GDP)  76.2 77.6 79.4 100.3  99.7 
a Consists primarily of contributions by residents of the U.S. territories and the Commonwealths of 
Puerto  Rico and Northern Mariana Islands.  
b Rents and royalties are receipts from the leasing of federally owned lands and mineral deposits. 
These values do not include bonus payme nts made to secure such leases.  
Source:  WTO Secretariat, based on BEA. Viewed at: http://www.bea.gov/ ; Department of the Treasury; and 
Office of Management and Budget.  
1.23.   As a result of the implementation of the above -menti oned Acts, the CBO projects budget 
deficits to continue at high, albeit decreasing, levels after FY2021, reaching 4.7% of GDP in FY2022 
and 3.1% in FY2023. Deficits are expected to continue to decline to 2.9% of GDP in 2024, but, in 
the medium term, even a s spending provided in response to the pandemic wanes and the economy 
continues to improve, deficits are expected to rise again, reaching 5.5% of GDP by 2031. The 
projected annual average budget deficit over the FY2022 -26 period is 3.6% of GDP, and 4.2% ov er 
the FY2022 -31 period. As a result of rising deficits, the CBO estimates that public debt will hover 
around 100% of GDP during the FY2022 -26 period.20 The OMB  projects a deficit of 7.8% of GDP in 
FY2022, and subsequent deficits above 5% of GDP for the FY 2023-26 period (Table  1.5). 
Table  1.5 OMB budget totals and estimates, FY2020 -26 
(USD billion and % of GDP)  
 2020  2021  2022  2023  2024  2025  2026  
Budget totals in USD  billion         
Receipts  3,421  3,581  4,174  4,641  4,828  5,038  5,332  
Outlays  6,550  7,249  6,011  6,013  6,187  6,508  6,746  
Deficit  3,129  3,669  1,837  1,372  1,359  1,470  1,414  
Debt held by the public   21,017  24,167  26,265  27,683  29,062  30,539  31,958  
Debt held by the  public net  of financial  
assets   18,024  21,684  23,520  24,892  26,250  27,720  29,134  
Gross domestic product (GDP)  21,000  22,030  23,500  24,563  25,537  26,516  27,533  
Budget  totals  as a % of GDP        
Receipts   16.3 16.3 17.8 18.9 18.9 19.0 19.4 
Outlays  31.2 32.9 25.6 24.5 24.2 24.5 24.5 
Deficit   14.9 16.7 7.8 5.6 5.3 5.5 5.1 
Debt held by the public  100.1  109.7  111.8  112.7  113.8  115.2  116.1  
Debt held by the  public net  of financial  
assets  85.8 98.4 100.1  101.3  102.8  104.5  105.8  
 
20 CBO (2021), Additional Information About the Updated Budget and Economic Outlook: 2021 to 2031 , 
July. Viewed at: https://www.cbo.gov/system/files/2021 -07/57263 -outlook.pdf . WT/TPR/S/ 434/Rev.1  • United States  
 
- 28 - 
 
   2020  2021  2022  2023  2024  2025  2026  
Memorandum, real net interest         
Real net interest (USD billion ) 134 -53 -139 -189 -186 -136 -86 
Real net interest as a % of GDP   0.6 -0.2 -0.6 -0.8 -0.7 -0.5 -0.3 
Note:  The estimated deficit  for 2021 is  based on  partial year actual  data, generally  through  March.  
Source:  OMB, Budget of the U.S. Government. Fiscal Year 2022.  Viewed at: 
https://www.whitehouse.gov/wp -content/uploads/2021/05/budget_fy22.pdf . 
A recent study by the CBO shows that th e cumulative effect on the deficit of the major program s 
adopted to counter the effects of the COVID -19 pandemic was USD  2,637  billion, while the 
cumulative effect on GDP was 58.2% of that figure, USD  1,535  billion.21 
1.24.   The proposed Build Back Better Act (H. R. 5376), passed by the House of Representatives on 
18 November  2021 but not enacted by the Senate, put together an economic package of about 
USD 2.2 trillion to increase spending on education, childcare, and the climate; provide tax cuts for 
low and middl e-income families; create jobs; reduce health care premiums; deliver health care 
coverage to uninsured people; expand Medicare; and invest in housing. The proposed Act is intended 
to reduce the deficit  by increasing some taxes and closing tax loopholes.22 It included provisions to 
impose a 15% minimum tax on the profits of large corporations (based on the agreement with 
136 countries), that is, those with over USD  1 billion in profits, and a 1% surcharge on corporate 
stock buybacks. It also contained provis ions to create a new surtax of 5% for income above 
USD 10 million, and an additional 3% surtax on income above USD  25 million.23 
1.25.   In its 2021 Article  IV Consultations Report, the IMF notes that investing in power, 
transportation, telecommunications, and water will help remove bottlenecks and increase 
productivity; it is of the view, however, that spending to support domestic manufacturing, invest in 
advanced semiconductors, and incentivize the onshoring of supply chains could be re cast as 
investments to encourage innovation or improve productivity. Reorienting spending in this way 
would do more to relieve supply constraints, and reduce the risks posed by a sustained upswing in 
inflation.24 In the authorities' view, the plans set in the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act and 
the proposed Build Back Better Act are transformational investments to rebuild the U.S. economy. 
The policies would also help reverse the pandemic's impact on labor force participation. The cost of 
the additio nal federal spending is expected to be partially offset by raising taxes on corporations and 
high-income households and closing loopholes that allow high -income individuals to recharacterize 
labor income and escape tax on capital gains.  
1.2.3   Monetary policy  
1.26.   The Federal Reserve is responsible for monetary policy in the United  States. Legislation 
specifies that, in conducting monetary policy, the Federal Reserve System and the Federal Open 
Market Committee (FOMC) should seek "to promote effectively the goals of ma ximum employment, 
stable prices, and moderate long -term interest rates".25 The Federal Reserve adjusts the key tools 
of monetary policy – open market operations, the discount rate, and interest on reserves – to 
influence demand and supply conditions in the  federal funds market, and keep the federal funds rate 
within the target range established by the FOMC and to influence longer -term interest rates. The 
FOMC specifies a longer -run average goal for inflation, rather than an annual target defined over a 
 
21 Of which USD  628 billion (USD  226 billion cumulative effect on GDP) corresponded to the Paycheck 
Protection Program and related provisions; USD 442 billion (USD  297 billion) to the Enhanced Unemployment 
Compensation scheme; USD  297 billion (USD  175 billion) to Recovery Rebates for Individuals; USD  150 billion 
(USD 132 billion) to Direct Assistance for State and Local Governments; USD  700 billion (USD  548 billion) to 
Other Spending Provisions; and USD  425 billion (USD  157 billion) to Other Revenue Provisions. CBO (2022), 
The Effects of Recent Legislation on the Economy and the Budget , 7 January. Presentation at the American 
Economic Association Annual Meeting. Viewed at: https://www.cbo.gov/system/files/2022 -01/57698 -AEA.pdf . 
22 The Act contains total investments of USD 1.75 trillion on, inter alia, child care and preschool 
(USD 400 million); home care (USD  150 million); child tax and earned income tax credits (USD  200 million); 
clean energy and climate investments (USD  555 million). Offsets total USD  1,995  billion. The White House 
(2021), "President Biden Announces the Build Ba ck Better Framework", 28  October. Viewed at: 
https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing -room/statements -releases/202 1/10/28/president -biden -announces -the-
build-back-better -framework/ . 
23 Congressional Record – House, Build Back Better Act (H.R. 5376), 18  November  2021, p.  H6375. 
Viewed at: https://www.congress.gov/117/crec/2021/11/18/167/201/CREC -2021-11-18-pt1-PgH6375 -4.pdf. 
24 IMF Country Report No.  21/162.  
25 Federal Reserve Act, Section  2A. Viewed at: 
https://www.federalreserve.gov/aboutthefed/section2a.htm . WT/TPR/S/ 434/Rev.1  • United States  
 
- 29 - 
 
  shorter horizon. In 2020, 2021, and 2022, the FOMC reaffirmed its judgment that inflation at the 
rate of 2%, as measured by the annual change in the price index for personal consumption 
expenditures, is most consistent over the longer term with the Federal Res erve's statutory mandate. 
The FOMC judges that longer -term inflation expectations that are well anchored at 2% foster price 
stability and moderate long -term interest rates and enhance the FOMC's ability to promote maximum 
employment in the face of signific ant economic disturbances. To anchor longer -term inflation 
expectations at this level, the FOMC seeks to achieve inflation that averages 2% over time (as 
measured as the variation of the Personal Consumption Expenditures (PCE) Price Index).26 
1.27.   The Federal R eserve continued to conduct a monetary policy with an expansionary bias during 
the period under review. In August  2020, the Federal Reserve announced changes to its policy 
framework. The announcement that the FOMC would seek to achieve inflation that avera ges 2% 
over time implied a move to a more flexible average inflation targeting framework. Following periods 
when inflation was running persistently below target, as was the case in the years immediately 
preceding the announcement, the Federal Reserve may a llow inflation moderately above that level 
for some time. The IMF notes that, as a result of these changes, policy is intended to be more 
accommodative for a longer period after a negative shock as a means to get the economy back to 
full employment more qu ickly and ensure the federal funds rate is further away from its effective 
lower bound.27 
1.28.   The Federal Reserve also undertook a number of other actions and committed to using its full 
range of policy tools to support the U.S. economy, promoting its maximum -employment and 
price-stability goals. The Federal Reserve continued to expand its holdings of Treasury securities by 
USD 80 billion per month and its holdings of agency mortgage -backed securities (MBS) by 
USD 40 billion per month, to help foster accommodat ive financial conditions and smooth market 
functioning thereby supporting the flow of credit to households and businesses.28 The Federal 
Reserve also rolled over at auction all principal payments from its holdings of Treasury securities 
and principal payme nts received from agency MBS, and agency debts were reinvested into agency 
MBS. Reflecting its accommodative policy, the size of the Federal Reserve's balance sheet grew from 
USD 4.24 trillion in March  2020, at the beginning of the pandemic, to USD  8.88 trillion in 
February  2022.29 In addition, the Federal Reserve expanded overnight and term repos, lowered the 
cost of discount window lending and the cost of swap lines with major central banks, extended the 
maturity of foreign exchange operations, and broade ned U.S. dollar swap lines with other central 
banks.  
1.29.   Also in response to the crisis, the Federal Reserve introduced facilities to support the flow of 
credit, in some cases backed by the Treasury using funds appropriated under the CARES Act 
(Section  4.4.1).  The Federal Reserve and the other two federal banking supervisors encouraged 
depository institutions to use their capital and liquidity buffers to lend and relaxed some accounting 
rules so that COVID -19-related loan modifications would not be classified a s troubled debt 
restructurings. This was implemented together with other regulatory reporting relief and relaxation 
of accounting standards to allow credit institutions more room to maneuver . Furthermore, holdings 
of U.S.  Treasury securities and deposits a t the Federal Reserve Banks were temporarily excluded 
from the calculation of the supplementary leverage ratio for holding companies. The C ommunity 
Bank Leverage Ratio was temporarily lowered to 8%. 
 
26 Federal Reserve Board (2022), Statement on Longer -Run Goals and Monetary Policy Strategy, 
Adopted Effective 24  January  2012; as Reaffirmed Effective 25  January  2022. Viewed at: 
https://www.federalreserve.gov/monetarypolicy/files/FOMC_LongerRunGoals.pdf . 
27 In its assessment, the IMF notes that the benefits of the new framework were that: (i)  it would 
"provide more accommodation over a longer horizon in response to a negative shock"; (ii)  it allowed the 
Federal Reserve "to not react pre -emptively based on policymakers' forecasts of inflation and, instead, to place 
more weight on inflation expectat ions and realized inflation in its policy calculus"; (iii)  it adopted an 
"outcomes -based forward guidance around the future path of policy rates"; and (iv)  "the more accommodative 
framework should help repair some of the damage to the income distribution" caused by the pandemic. 
IMF Country Report No.  21/162, p.  15. 
28 Federal Reserve, Monetary Policy Report  – February  2021, Part  2. Viewed at: 
https://www.federalreserve.gov/m onetarypolicy/2021 -02-mpr-part2.htm . 
29 Federal Reserve, Recent Balance Sheet Trends , February  2022. Viewed at: 
https://www.federalreserve.gov/monetarypolicy/bst_recenttrends .htm. WT/TPR/S/ 434/Rev.1  • United States  
 
- 30 - 
 
  Table  1.6 Main monetary and price indicators, 2017 -21 
 
2017  2018  2019  2020  2021  
Prices (annual average, all urban consumers, seasonally adjusted, % change)  
CPI, total  2.1 2.4 1.8 1.2 4.7 
 All less food and energy  1.8 2.1 2.2 1.7 3.6 
 Energy  8.0 7.4 -2.1 -8.4 20.8 
 Food 0.9 1.4 1.9 3.4 3.9 
 Medical care services  2.4 2.2 3.5 4.9 1.9 
 Shelter  3.3 3.3 3.4 2.5 2.7 
 Gasoline  13.1 13.4 -3.6 -16.0 35.5 
Personal Consumption Expenditures (PCE) Price Index  1.9 1.8 1.7 1.3 5.8 
Monetary indicators       
Monetary base (not seasonally adjusted, % of GDP)a 19.6 17.7 15.4 22.1 26.3 
Monetary base (not seasonally adjusted, annual % change)a 1.3 -4.4 -9.3 39.8 31.1 
Monetary base; currency in circulation (not seasonally adjusted,  
% of GDP)b 8.0 8.1 8.2 9.3 9.4 
Monetary base; currency in circulation (not seasonally adjusted, annual 
% change)b 6.7 6.8 5.0 11.7 11.2 
M1 (seasonally adjusted, % of GDP)c 18.1 17.9 18.0 61.2 84.3 
M1 (seasonally adjusted, annual % change)c 8.5 4.4 4.5 232.8  51.5 
M2 (seasonally adjusted, % of GDP)d 69.8 68.8 69.4 84.6 89.4 
M2 (seasonally adjusted, annual % change)d 5.7 3.9 5.1 19.1 16.3 
Currency (seasonally adjusted, % of GDP)  7.6 7.7 7.8 8.9 9.0 
Currency (seasonally adjusted, annual % change)  6.9 7.0 5.2 11.3 11.7 
Interest rates (%)       
Federal funds rate, effective  1.00 1.83 2.16 0.38 0.08 
30-Day AA Financial Commercial Paper interest rate  1.04 1.93 2.16 0.46 0.08 
90-Day AA Financial Commercial Paper interest rate  1.15 2.19 2.21 0.53 0.11 
Market yield on U.S. Treasury securities at 1 year  1.20 2.33 2.05 0.38 0.10 
Market yield on U.S. Treasury securities at 5 years  1.91 2.75 1.96 0.54 0.86 
Market yield on U.S. Treasury securities at 10 years  2.33 2.91 2.14 0.89 1.44 
Treasury long -term average (over 10 years)  0.78 0.97 0.73 -0.15 -0.31 
Exchange rate       
Nominal effective exchange rate (annual % growth)  -0.2 -1.0 3.2 1.7 -4.0 
Real effective exchange rate (based on CPI, annual % growth)  -0.3 -0.9 2.9 1.4 -2.1 
a Monetary base equals currency in circulation plus reserve balances.  
b Currency in circulation consists of Federal Reserve notes and coin outside the U.S. Treasury and 
Federal Reserve Banks.  
c M1 consists of (i)  currency outside the U.S. Treasury, Federal Reserve Banks, and the vaults of 
depository institutions; (ii)  demand deposits at c ommercial banks less cash items in the process of 
collection and Federal Reserve float; and (iii)  other liquid deposits, consisting of other checkable 
deposits and savings deposits (including money market deposit accounts).  
d M2 consists of M1 plus (i)  time deposits in amounts of less than USD  100,000 less individual 
retirement account (IRA) and Keogh balances at depository institutions; and (ii)  balances in retail 
money market funds (MMFs) less IRA and Keogh balances in MMFs.  
Source:  WTO Secretariat, based  on BLS. Viewed at: http://www.bls.gov/ ; Board of Governors of the Federal 
Reserve System, Money Stock Measures . Viewed at: 
https://www.feder alreserve.gov/releases/h6/current/default.htm ; and IMF eLibrary Data, 
International Financial Statistics. Viewed at: https://data.imf.org/?sk=388DFA60 -1D26 -4ADE -B505-
A05A558D9A42&sId=1479329132316 . 
1.30.   After slightly exceeding the longer -run 2% goal at times in 2017 and 2018, 12 -month PCE 
inflation remained below 2% throughout 2019 and 2020. The recessionary effect of the pandemic 
resulted in the CPI rising just 1.2%  and PCE price inflation of 1.3% in 2020, allowing the Federal 
Reserve space for a more accommodative policy. In 2021, the CPI rose rapidly, by 4.7%, reflecting 
in part a 20.8% increase in energy prices, but also supply shortages linked to the pandemic inc reased 
demand, while the PCE Price Index rose by 5.8% (Table  1.6). 
1.31.   Price inflation accelerated in the second half of 2021 and in early 2022, encompassing price 
increases in areas other than energy. The CPI increased 1.2% at a monthly rate in March  2022; over 
the 12 months ending March  2022, CPI inflation was 8.5%. Increases in prices of food, electricity, 
and shelter were the largest contributors to higher inflation. Core inflation (CPI excluding food and 
energy) rose 6.5% in the 12 months ending March  2022, the largest 12 -month change since the 
period ending August  1982; over the same 12 -month period, the energy index rose 32.0%, and the 
food index increased 8.8%.30 
 
30 Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS), Economic News Release, Consumer Price Index  Summary – 
January  2022. Viewed at: https://www.bls.gov/news.release/cpi.nr0.htm . WT/TPR/S/ 434/Rev.1  • United States  
 
- 31 - 
 
  1.2.4   Balance of payments  
1.32.   The U.S. current account deficit continued increasing during the perio d under review, rising 
from USD  438.2  billion in 2018 (2.1% of GDP) to USD  616.1  billion (2.9% of GDP) in 2020 and 
USD 821.6  billion (3.6% of GDP) in 2021, as the gap between gross national savings and gross 
investment continued widening (Table  1.7). The i ncrease in the deficit in 2020 and 2021 also reflects 
the disruption in trade flows due to the pandemic.  
Table  1.7 Current and capital accounts, 2017 -21 
(USD billion, seasonally adjusted)   
2017  2018  2019   2020  2021  
Current account       
Exports of goods and services and income receipts (credits)  3,548.3  3,793.6  3,812.5  3,258.6  3,793.7  
 Exports of goods and services  2,390.8  2,538.6  2,528.4  2,134.4  2,533.0  
 Goods  1,557.0  1,676.9  1,652.1  1,428.8  1,761.7  
 General merchandise  1,535.2  1,654.6  1,632.2  1,403.8  1,729.3  
 Net exports of goods under merchanting  0.2 0.3 0.5 1.0 1.0 
 Non-monetary gold  21.5 21.9 19.4 24.0 31.4 
 Services  833.8  861.7  876.3  705.6  771.2  
 Primary income receipts  997.0  1,106.4  1,124.9  957.9  1,090.8  
 Investment income  990.7  1,099.5  1,117.8  951.4  1,084.1  
 Direct investment income  561.3  585.3  569.1  495.7  613.9  
 Income on equity  534.7  559.4  545.0  477.5  598.9  
 Interest  26.6 25.8 24.1 18.3 15.0 
 U.S. parents' receipts  18.3 16.9 14.4 10.3 8.2 
 U.S. affiliates' receipts  8.3 9.0 9.7 7.9 6.8 
 Portfolio investment income  355.3  412.5  424.4  383.3  412.7  
 Income on equity and investment fund shares  236.3  273.5  286.7  255.8  273.3  
 Interest on debt securities  119.0  139.0  137.7  127.4  139.5  
 Other investment income  73.7 101.1  123.4  72.1 57.5 
 Interest  61.9 91.3 112.0  59.4 45.2 
 Income attributable to insurance policyholders  11.8 9.8 11.4 12.8 12.3 
 Reserve asset income  0.4 0.6 0.9 0.3 -0.1 
 Compensation of employees  6.3 6.9 7.2 6.5 6.7 
 Secondary income (current transfer) receipts  160.5  148.6  159.2  166.3  170.0  
 General government transfer receipts  34.8 37.3 35.8 30.9 34.3 
 Private transfer receipts  125.7  111.3  123.4  135.4  135.7  
Imports of goods and services and income payments 
(debits)  3,910.1  4,231.9  4,284.6  3,874.7  4,615.4  
 Imports of goods and services  2,903.5  3,119.6  3,104.7  2,811.1  3,394.3  
 Goods  2,356.3  2,555.7  2,513.6  2,350.8  2,853.1  
 General merchandise  2,343.7  2,544.5  2,501.6  2,289.2  2,827.3  
 Non-monetary gold  12.7 11.2 12.0 61.7 25.7 
 Services  547.2  563.9  591.1  460.3  541.2  
 Primary income payments  737.5  847.3  893.0  769.4  915.9  
 Investment income  720.5  830.1  874.1  755.0  900.0  
 Direct investment income  209.5  235.3  232.9  179.2  304.3  
 Income on equity  160.5  185.0  183.3  137.9  267.4  
 Interest  49.0 50.3 49.5 41.3 36.9 
 U.S. affiliates' payments  40.6 40.4 39.2 35.4 31.8 
 U.S. parents' payments  8.4 9.9 10.3 5.9 5.2 
 Portfolio investment income  445.9  488.2  506.8  489.2  525.7  
 Income on equity and investment fund shares  144.6  159.3  167.8  173.0  187.7  
 Interest on debt securities  301.3  328.9  339.0  316.1  338.0  
 Other investment income  65.2 106.5  134.5  86.6 70.0 
 Interest  62.3 103.7  131.5  83.1 66.6 
 Income attributable to insurance policyholders  2.9 2.8 3.0 3.5 3.4 
 Compensation of employees  17.0 17.2 18.9 14.4 15.9 
 Secondary income (current transfer) payments  269.0  265.0  286.9  294.2  305.1  
 General government transfer payments  45.3 48.7 48.5 50.8 57.1 
 Private transfer payments  223.8  216.3  238.4  243.4  248.0  
Capital account      
  
Capital transfer receipts and other credits  19.2 3.3 0.1 0.4 3.9 
Capital transfer payments and other debits  6.8 7.5 6.5 5.9 6.3 
Financial account      
  
Net U.S. acquisition of financial assets excluding financial 
derivatives  1,190.6  383.8  317.0  809.3  1,213.3  
 Direct investment assets  409.4  -130.0  122.2  311.7  501.3  
 Equity  392.5  -218.6  156.7  330.9  460.5  
 Debt instruments  16.9 88.6 -34.5 -19.2 40.8 
 Portfolio investment assets  569.4  335.3  -13.5 220.0  604.1  
 Equity and investment fund shares  139.9  171.3  -163.4  241.8  153.9  
 Debt securities  429.4  164.0  149.9  -21.8 450.3  
 Other investment assets  213.5  173.6  203.6  268.6  -6.1 
 Other equity  1.5 1.3 1.4 1.8 1.2 
 Currency and deposits  170.9  106.1  132.4  92.9 -75.3 WT/TPR/S/ 434/Rev.1  • United States  
 
- 32 - 
 
   
2017  2018  2019   2020  2021  
 Loans  35.7 64.9 68.7 182.2  66.1 
 Trade credit and advances  5.4 1.2 1.2 -8.3 1.9 
 Reserve assets  -1.7 5.0 4.7 9.0 114.0  
 Special drawing rights  0.1 0.2 0.2 0.1 113.7  
 Reserve position in the International Monetary Fund  -1.8 4.8 4.3 8.8 0.5 
 Other reserve assets  0.0 0.0 0.2 0.1 -0.2 
Net U.S. incurrence of liabilities excluding financial 
derivatives  1,559.2  711.8  755.7  1,456.5  1,858.8  
 Direct investment liabilities  380.8  214.3  302.2  211.3  449.6  
 Equity  392.5  -218.6  156.7  330.9  460.5  
 Debt instruments  16.9 88.6 -34.5 -19.2 40.8 
 Portfolio investment liabilities  790.8  303.1  177.2  710.2  583.2  
 Equity and investment fund shares  139.9  171.3  -163.4  241.8  153.9  
 Debt securities  429.4  164.0  149.9  -21.8 450.3  
 Short  term 191.7  14.3 135.6  -53.8 43.7 
 Long term  237.8  149.7  14.3 32.0 406.6  
 Other investment liabilities  387.6  194.4  276.4  535.1  825.9  
 Other equity  1.5 1.3 1.4 1.8 1.2 
 Currency and deposits  170.9  106.1  132.4  92.9 -75.3 
 Loans  35.7 64.9 68.7 182.2  66.1 
 Trade credit and advances  5.4 1.2 1.2 -8.3 1.9 
Financial derivatives other than reserves, net transactions  24.0 -20.4 -41.7 -5.8 -41.7 
Statistical discrepancy  4.7 94.1 -1.8 -31.4 137.0  
Balances      
  
Balance on current account  -361.7  -438.2  -472.1  -616.1  -821.6  
 Balance on goods and services  -512.7  -581.0  -576.3  -676.7  -861.4  
 Balance on goods  -799.3  -878.7  -861.5  -922.0  -1,091.4  
 Balance on services  286.6  297.8  285.2  245.3  230.0  
 Balance on primary income  259.5  259.1  231.9  188.5  174.9  
 Balance on secondary income  -108.5  -116.4  -127.7  -127.9  -135.2  
Balance on capital account  12.4 -4.3 -6.4 -5.5 -2.4 
Net lending (+) or net borrowing ( -) from current - and 
capital -account transactions  -349.3  -442.5  -478.6  -621.6  -824.1  
Net lending (+) or net borrowing ( -) from financial -account 
transactions  -344.6  -348.4  -480.4  -653.0  -687.1  
Source:  WTO Secretariat, based on BEA. Viewed at: http://www.bea.gov/ . 
1.33.   Exports of goods and services and income receipts declined from USD  3.79 trillion in 2018 to 
USD 3.26 trillion in 2020, reflecting the contraction caused by the pandemic. They increased in 2021, 
to USD  3.79 trillion, recovering to pre -pandemic levels. Imports of goods and services and income 
payments also declined, but less so, from USD  4.23 trillion in 2018 to USD  3.87 trillion in 2020, and 
increased to USD  4.28 trillion in 2021. The balance on goods and services deteriorated from 
USD 581 billion (3.0% of GDP) in 2018 to USD  676.7  billion (3.1% of GDP) in 2020, and 
USD 861.4  billion (3.7% of GDP) in 2021. The trade deficit in goods rose from USD  878.7  billion in 
2018 to USD  922 billion in 2020, and USD  1.09 trillion in 2021, and its ratio to GDP rose from 4.3% 
in 2018 to 4.4% in 2020 and 4.7% in 2021. The surplus in services trade contracted, from 
USD 297.8  billion (1.5% of GDP) in 2018 to USD  245.3  billion (1. 1% of GDP) in 2020 and 
USD 230 billion (1.0% of GDP) in 2021. The surplus in primary income also shrank, from 
USD 259.1  billion (1.3% of GDP) in 2018 to USD  188.5  billion (0.9% of GDP) in 2020, and 
USD 174.9  billion (0.8% of GDP) in 2021.  
1.34.   The U.S. net inte rnational investment position, the difference between U.S. residents' foreign 
financial assets and liabilities, stood in 2021Q3 at a deficit of USD  16.1 trillion (70.0% of GDP), a 
deterioration from the USD  14.0 trillion (67.0% of GDP) recorded at end -2020. The value of 
U.S.-owned foreign assets was USD  34.5 trillion (some 150% of GDP), while the value of 
foreign -owned U.S. assets stood at USD  50.5 trillion (some 220% of GDP).31 
1.3  Developments in Trade and Investment  
1.3.1   Trends and patterns in merchandise and ser vices trade  
1.3.1.1   Merchandise trade  
1.35.   U.S. imports and exports of goods declined during the initial part of the review period, but 
exports declined more significantly by 14.1%, while imports declined by about half that level, by 
 
31 BEA (2021), U.S. Internati onal Investment Position, Third Quarter 2021 . Viewed at: 
https://www.bea.gov/sites/default/files/2021 -12/intinv321.pdf . WT/TPR/S/ 434/Rev.1  • United States  
 
- 33 - 
 
  7.9%. Thereafter, in 2021, both imp orts and exports recovered significantly, reaching their highest 
level during the period. The merchandise trade deficit, at USD  946 million in 2018, increased to 
USD 1.18 trillion in 2021, its highest level during the period due to a larger surge in import s.32 
1.36.   The initial decline in trade is primarily attributable to supply and demand factors associated 
with the COVID -19 pandemic.33 Nominal U.S. merchandise exports declined to USD  1.43 trillion 
in 2020, the lowest level since 2010 but then reached USD  1.75 trillion in 2021, the highest level on 
record, reflecting the recovery. The decline in U.S. imports in the initial part of the pe riod was mainly 
due to a significantly lower value of energy imports, notably crude petroleum, which fell by 47% 
between 2018 and 2020, and in transportation equipment, which declined by 17%, mainly due to 
lower imports of passenger cars and parts. In 2021 , most product categories recovered, in particular 
mineral products, although machinery and equipment and vehicles recovered to a lesser degree than 
other categories. Both imports and exports remained quite diversified in terms of products, with the 
top 15  imports (HS 6 -digit) accounting for 25% of total imports, and the top 15 exports (HS 6 -digit) 
accounting for 26% of total exports.  
1.37.   Machinery and equipment rema ined the leading category of products exported, followed by 
mineral products, and chemicals (Cha rt 1.1 and Table  A1.1). There was a slight increase in exports 
of chemical and pharmaceutical products during the period. This growth was driven both by 
continuing responses to the pandemic and by increasing demand from worldwide economies 
recovering from pandemic closures. The single largest export (HS 6 -digit) remained civil aircraft and 
parts, but the value exported declined, from USD  130.8  billion in 2018 to USD  71.6 billion in 2020, 
and thereafter slightly increased to USD  79.5 billion in 2021.34 Machi nery and equipment (28.8% of 
the total) and vehicles and transport equipment remained the two leading categories, followed by 
chemicals (Chart  1.1 and Table  A1.2). There was a slight decline in the share of imports of vehicles 
and transport equipment, from  13.1% to 10.7% of total imports, and a slight increase of the share 
of chemicals, from 9% to 10% of total imports. This increase was across all sub -sectors including 
pharmaceuticals, while the decrease for vehicles was mainly in passenger vehicles.  
1.38.   There have not been any major changes in terms of the destination of exports. Canada, the 
European  Union, and Mexico remain the three largest export markets for U.S. goods; together they 
accounted for 49% of 2021 exports. Exports remain relatively concentrated i n these major markets. 
Exports to China increased, from 7.2% to 8.6% of total exports during 2018 -21 (Chart  1.2 and 
Table  A1.3). In 2020, U.S. exports to all major markets declined, with the exception of China, where 
exports increased by about 17% from 201 9 levels, on account of increases in agricultural products, 
particularly soybeans, which more than tripled from 2018 levels. In 2021, there were no major shifts 
with respect to export destinations, except that exports to Canada and the European  Union 
accou nted for a slightly lower percentage compared to the previous year.  
 
32 There is a discrepancy with balance of payments data, as  the methodological standard for the 
compilation of BOP statistics is the IMF's 6th edition of the Balance of Payments and International Investment 
Position Manual (BPM6), while international trade in goods statistics (ITGS) focus on the cross -border trade  in 
goods.  
33 United  States International Trade Commission (USITC) (2021), Shifts in U.S. Merchandise Trade, 
2020, Publication No.  5239, November. Viewed at: 
https://www .usitc.gov/research_and_analysis/tradeshifts/2020/index.html .  
34 USITC (2021), The Year in Trade 2020 , Publication No.  5228, September. Viewed at: 
https://www.usitc.gov/publications/332/pub5228.pdf ; and BEA, Table  2.1: U.S. International Trade in Goods. 
Viewed at: https://apps.bea.gov/iTable/iTa ble.cfm?ReqID=62&step=1#reqid=62&step=9&isuri=1&6210=4 .  WT/TPR/S/ 434/Rev.1  • United States  
 
- 34 - 
 
  Chart  1.1 Merchandise trade by main HS section, 2018 and 2021  
 
Source:  WTO Secretariat calculations, based on UN Comtrade database.  
1.39.   China, the European  Union, and Mexico were the main sources of U.S. imports during the 
period 2018 -21 (Chart  1.2). Even with a decline in imports over the period and a fall in its percentage 
share, China remained the United  States' largest single source of imports in 2021. The 
European  Union accounted for a slightly higher share of imports in 2021 compared to 2018 
(Chart  1.2 and Table  A1.4). There were some significant increases in imports from mi d-sized Asian 
economies, most notably Viet  Nam, the Republic  of Korea, and Chinese  Taipei, particularly for 
electronics, semiconductors, and telecommunication products.  
Chart 1.1
Merchandise trade by main HS sections, 2018 and 2021
2018 2021
(a)    Exports
Total: USD 1,665 billion
(b)    Imports
Total: USD 2,611 billion Total: USD 2,933 billion
Source:   WTO Secretariat calculations, based on UN Comtrade database.Total: USD 1,753 billionOther
27.3%
Precision 
instruments
5.5%Other
23.3%
Chemical 
products
9.0%
Base metals
5.8%Machinery & electrical 
equipment
22.5%
Base metals
5.6%Mineral 
products
9.6%
Misc. manuf.
4.3%
Machinery & 
electrical equipment
28.8%Other
21.5% Chemical 
products
10.0%
Misc. manuf.
4.8%
Machinery & 
electrical equipment
28.8%Other
23.4%
Textiles
4.6%Mineral 
products
7.9%
Textiles
4.4%Mineral 
products
12.2% Mineral products
14.3%
Machinery & electrical 
equipment
23.4%Chemical 
products
1.1%
Plastics &
rubber
5.0%Chemical 
products
10.3%
Precision 
instruments
5.4% Plastics & 
rubber
4.8%
Vehicles & 
transport 
equipment
7.8%Vehicles & 
transport 
equipment
8.7%
Vehicles & 
transport 
equipment
13.1%Vehicles & 
transport 
equipment
10.7%Vegetable 
products
4.0%Vegetable 
products
5.0%
Precious metals
4.6%Precious metals
3.8%
Plastics & 
rubber
4.2%Plastics & rubber
3.5%WT/TPR/S/ 434/Rev.1  • United States  
 
- 35 - 
 
  Chart  1.2 Merchandise trade by main orig in and destination, 2018 and 2021  
 
Source:  WTO Secretariat calculations, based on UN Comtrade database.  
1.3.1.2   Services trade  
1.40.   Despite significant declines in imports and exports of services  (cross -border services trade, 
i.e. GATS modes 1, 2, and 4)  during the pe riod 2018 -21, there was a slight recovery in 2021 and 
the United  States upheld its leadership position as the single largest trader in services.35 The 
United  States maintained its positive trade balance in cross -border services trade, although it 
declined to USD  230 billion, its lowest level since 2012 (Table  A1.5). Imports and exports of travel 
 
35 WTO (2021), World Trade Statistical Review 2021 . Viewed at: 
https://www.wto.org/english/res_e/statis_e/wts2021_e /wts21_toc_e.htm .  
Chart 1.2
Merchandise trade by main origin and destination, 2018 and 2021
2018 2021
(a)    Exports
Total: USD 1,665 billion
(b)    Imports
Total: USD 2,611 billion Total: USD 2,933 billion
Source:   WTO Secretariat calculations, based on UN Comtrade database.Total: USD 1,753 billionBrazil
2.4%Others
5.9%Canada
18.0%
EU-27
15.5%Other 
Americas
7.4%Japan
4.5%
Mexico
13.4%Americas
43.2%Canada
17.5%
Other 
Americas
7.3%China
8.6%Others
5.0%
Other Asia
17.4%
Americas
43.8%Other Asia
16.9%
Canada
12.5%
Other Americas
3.6%Japan
5.6%
EU-27
16.7%Viet Nam
2.0%
China
21.6%Other Asia
13.6%Others
5.1%
Canada
12.4%Mexico
13.2%
Other 
Americas
3.2%
EU-27
17.1%Japan
4.8%
China
18.5%Other Asia
16.7%Others
4.2%
Americas
30.7%Americas
30.0%
Other 
Europe
2.4%Other 
Europe
3.1%Asia
42.7%Asia
43.6%Viet Nam
3.7%Other Europe
2.6%Japan
4.3%
EU-27
15.2%Brazil
2.7%
Brazil
1.2%Mexico
15.9%Mexico
15.8%
Brazil
1.1%China
7.2%
Other Europe
2.5%Europe
21.7%Asia
28.6%
Europe
21.5%Asia
30.3%
Europe
22.2%Europe
21.5%United 
Kingdom
4.0%United 
Kingdom
3.5%
United 
Kingdom
2.4%United 
Kingdom
1.9%WT/TPR/S/ 434/Rev.1  • United States  
 
- 36 - 
 
  and transportation services were particularly impacted due to the COVID -19 pandemic, and only 
slightly improved in 2021. The 2021 recovery in services exports was l ed by other business services, 
financial services, and charges for the use of intellectual property.36 
1.41.   In recent years, U.S. exports of services have been dominated by travel, business, and 
financial services, as well as charges for the use of intellectual  property. These categories continued 
to be dominant during the period under review, except for travel services, which declined by 64% 
from 2018 to 2020 due to restrictions on non -essential travel of foreign citizens into the 
United  States in response to t he COVID -19 pandemic. On the other hand, there was a slight increase 
in exports of financial services, mainly financial management services, and other business services, 
especially professional and management consulting services (Table  A1.5).  
1.42.   Imports of se rvices were particularly negatively affected by the decline in travel and transport 
services due to the COVID -19 pandemic, which were the first - and third -ranked import categories 
in 2018. However, in 2020 other business services was the predominant servic es import category, 
followed by transport and insurance services (Table  A1.5). Growth in business services was due to 
an increase in legal, accounting, business management consulting, and public relations services.  
1.43.   The main destinations of U.S. cross -borde r services exports in 2020 were the European  Union 
(24.5%), followed by the United  Kingdom (8.9%), and Canada (7.6%); the main sources of imports 
were the European  Union (24.2%), the United  Kingdom (11.4%), and Japan (6.7%).37 U.S. services 
trade contains a significant amount of foreign affiliate sales, i.e.  GATS mode 3. There remains a 
large and consistent trade surplus in mode 3 trade since U.S. foreign affiliate sales exceed the 
purchases of domestic affiliates of foreign firms. In 2019 (the latest year available), U.S.  foreign 
affiliate sales were USD  1.77 trillion, while domestic affiliate purchases were USD  1.23 trillion, 
resulting in sales of U.S. -owned foreign affiliates exceeding purchases from foreign -owned affiliates 
in the United  States by USD  534 billion. Most of the U.S. foreign affiliate trade is in distribution and 
electronic services, with the United  Kingdom being the major source and destination.38 
1.3.2   Trends and patterns in FDI  
1.44.   The United  States remained the top destination of foreign direct investment in 2020 despite 
the global downturn in foreign investment and the significant decline in FDI inflows . In 2020, inflows 
were USD  151 billion, the lowest value in the past four years . The decline since 2019 has been 
mainly attributable to a decline in reinvested earnings by foreign affiliates associated with the 
economic downturn.39 U.S. direct investment abroad sustained a significant drop in 2018 due to a 
decline in reinvested earni ngs attributable to the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act of 2017 (TCJA). The TCJA 
lowered or eliminated taxes on dividends or foreign earnings of U.S. companies' repatriated earnings. 
This led to a record repatriation of USD  853 billion  in 2018. This level stabilized  at USD  281 billion  
in 2020. Preliminary estimates for 2021 indicate a slight upturn, as corporate profits recover.  
1.45.   U.S. FDI inflows accounted for 15% of total world inflows in 2020, a decline from 22% in 
2016. In terms of outflows, the United  States  ranke d fifth in the world in 2020, with USD  93 billion , 
essentially unchanged from 2019 (USD  94 billion ). U.S. investment inflows and outflows were both 
concentrated in the manufacturing sector, followed by financial services, although U.S . investment 
positions  abroad often take the form of holding companies.  
1.46.   In terms of global FDI stock, the United  States  accounted for 26% of global inward stock and 
21% of global outward stock in 2020. There were no significant changes during the review period in 
the ranking of  major FDI partners. FDI remained concentrated. The European  Union remained the 
top source and destination for U.S. FDI, with 45% of the total inward stock and 41% of the total 
outward stock in 2020 (Chart  1.3).40 The other major partners for inward FDI we re Japan (14%), 
 
36 BEA (2022), "U.S. International Transactions, Fourth Quarter and Year 2021". Viewed at: 
https://www.bea.gov/news/2022/us -internati onal-transactions -fourth -quarter -and-year-2021.  
37 BEA, Table  2.3: U.S. Trade in Services, by Country or Affiliation and by Type of Service. Viewed at: 
https://apps.bea.g ov/iTable/iTable.cfm?reqid=62&step=9&isuri=1&6210=4 .  
38 USITC (2021), Recent Trends in U.S. Services Trade: 2021 Annual Report , Publication No.  5192, 
April. Viewed at: https://www.usitc.gov /publications/332/pub5192.pdf .  
39 UNCTAD (2021), World Investment Report 2021 . Viewed at: https://unctad.org/system/files/official -
document/wir2021_en.pdf .  
40 Within the European  Union, FDI flows were most significant with the Netherlands, Luxembourg, 
Germany, and Ireland. BEA (2021), Direct Investment by Country and Industry for 2020 , Vol. 101, No.  8.  WT/TPR/S/ 434/Rev.1  • United States  
 
- 37 - 
 
  Canada (10.6%), and the United  Kingdom (10.5%). In terms of outward stock, the United  Kingdom 
(14.5%) was the most important partner after the European  Union, followed by Canada (6.9%).  
Chart  1.3 Direct investment position on a historical -cost basis, by selected partner, 2018 
and 2020  
 
Source:  WTO Secretariat, based on BEA. Viewed at: http://www.bea.gov . 
 
Chart 1.8
Direct investment position on a historical -cost basis, by selected 
partners, 2018 and 2020
Inward
2018
Total: USD 4,180 billion
Total: USD 4,627 billion2020
Total: USD 6,152 billion
Source:    WTO Secretariat, based on Bureau of Economic Analysis online information. Viewed at: 
http://www.bea.gov.Total: USD 5,792 billionAustralia
1.8%
Australia
2.9%
Japan
12.3%EU-27
41.5%
Canada
6.5%Bermuda
5.9%
United Kingdom 
Islands, Caribbean
5.3%Japan
1.9%
Switzerland
6.5%Australia
2.1%
Canada
10.6%
Japan
14.0%EU-27
45.4%China
2.0%
Canada
6.9%EU-27
40.9%
Bermuda
4.5%
United Kingdom 
Islands, Caribbean
5.0%Australia
2.7%
Switzerland
3.4%EU-27
46.6%Switzerland
7.0%
Canada
10.7%Others
6.4%
Switzerland
3.6%Others
13.6%
Others
7.1%
Others
13.7%(% of total investment)
Singapore
4.0%
Singapore
4.4%United Kingdom 
Islands, Caribbean
2.2%
United Kingdom 
Islands, Caribbean
2.4%
Japan
2.1%China
1.9%Outward
United 
Kingdom
11.7%Korea, 
Rep. of
1.4%
United Kingdom
13.0%
United 
Kingdom
10.5%
United Kingdom
14.5%Korea, 
Rep. of
1.4%WT/TPR/S/434 /Rev.1  • United States  
 
- 38 - 
 
  2  TRADE AND INVESTMENT REGIMES  
2.1  General Framework  
2.1.  The United  States' institutional framework governing trade and trade policy did not change 
during the review period. The U.S. Constitution, as the highest law of the United  States, sets out the 
powers, and in particular the balance of powers, bet ween the three branches of government – the 
executive (President), legislative (Congress), and the judicial. Article  I, Section  8 of the Constitution 
gives the U.S.  Congress the authority to regulate international trade, in particular "to lay and collect 
taxes, duties, imposts and excises  … [and] to regulate commerce with foreign nations, and among 
the several states". Within Congress, the House Ways and Means Committee in the House of 
Representatives and the Senate Finance Committee in the Senate have the main jurisdictional 
responsibilities for trade matters.  
2.2.  The U.S. executive branch, as headed by the President, is empowered by the Constitution to 
enter the United  States into treaties, conditioned upon the approval of a two -thirds vote in the 
Senate, and is also given the power to approve or veto laws. However, in terms of trade policy, the 
executive mainly operates through delegated authority from Congress. Since the passage of the 
Reciprocal Trade Agreements Act in 1934, the U.S. Congress has been able t o formally delegate 
authority to the President to negotiate international trade agreements, a power that has been used 
rather consistently for the past 85 years except during lapses of the legislation. Within the executive, 
the United  States Trade Represen tative (the USTR) has key responsibilities for trade matters by 
statute. Since its establishment in 1962, the USTR is the President's principal advisor on trade policy, 
chief U.S. trade negotiator, and head of the interagency trade policy coordinating proc ess. The USTR 
heads the Office of the United  States Trade Representative (USTR). In addition to USTR, a number 
of other federal agencies have certain roles in respect of trade policy.  
2.3.  In most cases traders can seek judicial review of trade matters related to customs, importation, 
exportation, and trade remedies in U.S. federal courts. Certain laws or statutes may prevent 
recourse to U.S. courts, such as the case of matters involving the WTO and free trade agreements 
(FTAs). The U.S. Court of International T rade (USCIT) is the U.S. federal court with jurisdiction over 
a number of trade matters, in particular issues related to customs.1 USCIT has geographical 
jurisdiction throughout the United  States. Decisions of the USCIT may be appealed to the U .S. Court 
of Appeals for the Federal Circuit and, if necessary, to the U.S.  Supreme Court.  
2.2  Trade Policy Formulation and Objectives  
2.2.1   Trade policy formulation  
2.4.  The U.S. Administration, through USTR, plays a key role in trade policy formation with input 
and coordination f rom other executive agencies and public stakeholders while Congress maintains 
legislative powers and oversight authority, and may provide advice to the Administration on trade 
through its Congressional Oversight Group. The USTR has primary responsibility f or developing 
U.S. trade policy, and for coordinating its implementation. As part of its functions and responsibility, 
USTR  outlines key annual trade policy objectives in the Trade Policy Agenda along with an Annual 
Report of the President's Trade Agreemen ts Program, which it submits to Congress. USTR oversees 
and chairs the Trade Policy Committee (TPC), which advises USTR as it develops and coordinates 
U.S. Government positions on international trade and trade -related investment issues at the Cabinet 
level. Its subsidiary bodies, the Trade Policy Review Group (TPRG) and the Trade Policy Staff 
Committee (TPSC) coordinate at the Deputy Secretary/Under Secretary and senior civil service 
levels, respectively.  
2.5.  U.S. trade policy formulation also benefits from con tributions from the private sector and civil 
society through various advisory bodies, and also from outreach of the TPSC though public hearings 
and requests for input through the Federal Register . USTR, through its Office of Intergovernmental 
Affairs and P ublic Engagement, has the main oversight and coordination of 26 advisory bodies. These 
bodies function pursuant to the Trade Act of 1974 and are organized on sectoral or policy themes, 
e.g. agriculture, industry, environment, labor, and Africa.2 In 2020, USTR held 11 public hearings 
 
1 USCIT, About the Court . Viewed at: https://www.cit.uscourts.gov/about -
court#JURISDICTION%20OF%20THE%20COURT .  
2 USTR, Advisory Committees . Viewed at: https://ustr.gov/about -us/advisory -committees .  WT/TPR/S/434 /Rev.1  • United States  
 
- 39 - 
 
  and issued 115  Federal Register  notices seeking public comment or input.3 Regarding investment 
policy, the U.S.  Investment Advisory Council advises the Secretary of Commerce on the 
development and implementation of strategies and program s to attract foreign direct investment.  
2.6.  The President has the authority to negotiate interna tional agreements, including FTAs, but the 
Constitution gives Congress sole authority to lay tariffs and regulate foreign commerce. In this 
respect, when intending to conduct trade negotiations, Congress has traditionally granted the 
Executive negotiating authority through trade legislation known as trade promotion authority (TPA) 
or "fast track", as it allows a simple yes or no vote in Congress without deliberation or amendment 
of the contents.4 TPA is a time -limited authority that Congress uses to establ ish trade negotiating 
objectives, notification, and consultation requirements, and procedures to consider implementing 
legislation for certain reciprocal trade agreements provided that they meet certain statutory 
requirements. This authority has been provi ded several times to coincide with major multilateral 
negotiations of the GATT and the WTO, and more recently for bilateral/plurilateral FTAs. TPA has 
also been described as a compact between Congress and the Administration, whereby there is close 
discussi on and dialogue by the Administration and a set outline or parameters for the negotiations, 
which are set by Congress. However, despite the rationale behind TPA for an expedited and unedited 
version of an agreement passing through Congress, there have been  recent cases where Congress 
has intervened, in particular in the recent USMCA, whereby negotiations were necessary between 
the Administration and Congress to amend certain provisions on labor, environment, intellectual 
property rights (IPRs), and enforcem ent.5 Also, under TPA there are two separate options for 
Congress to deny expedited consideration of an implementing bill for inadequate consultation or 
progress towards achieving negotiating objectives.6 
2.7.  The latest TPA legislation to have been approved was th e Bipartisan Congressional Trade 
Priorities and Accountability Act of 2015 (P.L.  114-26) (Trade Priorities Act), which remained in force 
until it expired in July  2021. It was enacted with a view to negotiate the Trans -Pacific Partnership 
(TPP)7 and an FTA  with the European  Union and set out 21  specific negotiating objectives on a variety 
of subjects.8 As at December  2021, the Administration had not asked Congress to renew TPA.  
2.2.2   Trade policy objectives and direction  
2.8.  U.S. trade policy is currently undergoing  a shift, and 2021 was a year of transition as the 
Administration pursues its Build Back Better agenda (Section  2.2.2.1).9 In the first outline of its 
trade policy agenda in March  2021, the Administration highlighted the following nine main themes: 
(i) tackling the COVID -19 pandemic and restoring the economy; (ii)  putting workers at the center  
of trade policy; (iii)  putting the world on a sustainable environment and climate path; (iv)  advancing 
racial equity and supporting underserved communities; (v)  addressing China's economic trade 
practices through a comprehensive strategy; (vi)  partnering with friends and allies; (vii)  standing 
 
3 USTR (2021), 2021 Trade Policy Agenda and 2020 Annual Report of the President of the United  States 
on the Trade Agreements Program , March. Viewed at: 
https://ustr.gov/sites/default/files/files/reports/2021/2021%20Trade%20Agenda /Online%20PDF%202021%20
Trade%20Policy%20Agenda%20and%202020%20Annual%20Report.pdf . 
4 However, Congress determines the scope, outline, objectives, and parameters of the authority.  
5 The FTAs with Panama, Peru, Colombia, and the Republic of Korea also requir ed amendments after 
disagreement between the Executive branch and Congress.  
6 Congressional Research Service (CRS), Trade Promotion Authority (TPA) . Updated 14  December  2020. 
Viewed at: https://crsreports.congress.gov/product/pdf/IF/IF10038 .  
7 The United  States withdrew from the TPP in January  2017.  
8 Trade Priorities Act. Viewed at: https://www.congress.gov/11 4/plaws/publ26/PLAW -114publ26.pdf .  
9 Among trade policy measures of the previous Administration that still remained in place one year after 
the new Administration took over, are: (i)  additional tariffs on a group of goods originating in China; (ii)  the 
impasse in the WTO DSB regarding appointment of Appellate  Body judges; and (iii)  Section  232 measures on 
aluminum  and steel (although renegotiated with the European  Union). Trade issues raised by Congress such as 
"Censorship as a Non -tariff Barrier" also rem ain relevant and fact -finding investigations continue on this 
subject. Letter dated 7  April 2021 from the Chair of the Senate Finance Committee to USITC on investigation 
and survey pursuant to Section  332(g) of the Tariff Act of 1930 regarding foreign cens orship and its impact on 
trade and investment. Viewed at: 
https://usitc.gov/research_and_analysis/censorship_revised_request_letter_st amped_edis_739288 -
1625985.pdf .  WT/TPR/S/434 /Rev.1  • United States  
 
- 40 - 
 
  up for U.S. farmers, ranchers, food manufacturers, and fishers; (viii)  promoting equitable economic 
growth around the world; a nd (ix)  making the rules count.10 
2.9.  In 2021, the Administration launched its American Rescue Plan, which was signed into law in 
March, with the American Rescue Plan Act of 2021 (P.L.  117-2). While the impetus of the American 
Rescue Plan was a massive stimulu s package focused on the pandemic, it also addressed supply 
chain resilience, provided funding for COVID -19 vaccines, and more broadly tackled medical supply 
chain issues. The Administration continued to address the issue of critical supply chains through its 
100-day assessment for four critical products in particular: semiconductor manufacturing and 
advanced packaging, large -capacity batteries, critical minerals and materials, and pharmaceuticals 
and active pharmaceutical ingredients.11 As part of this ass essment, recommendations were made 
on strengthening international trade rules through trade enforcement mechanisms, 
i.e. establishment of a trade strike force, and pursuing a Section  232 investigation on neodymium 
magnets, and also working with allies to d ecrease vulnerabilities in global supply chains. Thereafter, 
in response, USTR established the interagency Supply Chain Trade Task Force12, a Section  232 
investigation on neodymium was launched, and discussions were held with trading partners on 
addressing  supply chain vulnerabilities. Modifications to Buy American provisions were introduced 
by the Build America, Buy America Act, Subtitle A – Build America, Buy America of Title IX of 
Division  G of the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act of 15  November  2021 (P.L.  117-58) 
(Section  3.3.6).  
2.10.   The United  States has been involved and engaged in the negotiations taking place in the WTO, 
or under its auspices in a plurilateral form, i.e.  fisheries subsidies, agriculture, e -commerce, and 
domestic regulation. In her opening speech for the 12th Ministerial Conference (MC12), the USTR 
stressed the United  States ' commitment to the WTO. Noting that the WTO rules had contributed to 
maintaining the flow of global trade and fostered transparency on measures taken by countrie s to 
respond to the (COVID -19) crisis, she encouraged Members to be clear -eyed about the challenges 
we face today and rise to meet this moment. She urged the WTO Members with the capabilities to 
commit at MC12 to exempt their donations to the World Food Pr ogram from any export restrictions. 
She encouraged Members to engage in conversations about the role of the WTO in development, 
the risks of widening inequality, fundamental worker rights and employment, and the role of trade 
to be part of the solution in addressing climate change, and to send a clear message to the world 
that a reform effort that is open and inclusive, that repositions the WTO to deliver on its foundational 
goals, and enables the organization to adapt to changing global realities, would be  undertaken.13 
2.11.   U.S. trade policy towards China has been an important feature in recent years, not only due 
to their direct bilateral relationship but also because the situation between the world's two largest 
traders has an important impact or often spill-over effect on third countries. In 2018, following the 
inaugural meeting of the U.S. -China Comprehensive Economic Dialogue (CED), the 
U.S. Administration indicated that it would pursue a new approach to the United  States' engagement 
with China. One m anifestation of this new approach was USTR's investigation of acts, policies, and 
practices of China relating to technology transfer, intellectual property (IP), and innovation under 
Section  301 of the Trade Act of 1974, which led to the United  States' imp osition of tariffs on Chinese 
imports beginning in June  2018.14 The United  States and China subsequently entered into an 
economic and trade agreement in January  2020 that became known as the Phase One Economic and 
Trade Agreement (Phase One Agreement). In October  2021, USTR outlined its new approach to or 
strategic vision for the U.S. -China trade relationship. The main elements include discussing with 
 
10 USTR (2021), 2021 Trade Policy Agenda and 2020 Annual Report of the President of the United  States 
on the Trade Agreements Program , March.  
11 The White House (2021), Building Resilient Supply Chains, Revitalizing American Manufacturing, and 
Fostering Broad -Based Growth , June. Viewed at: https://www.whitehouse.gov/wp -
content/uploads/2021/06/100 -day-supply -chain -review -report.pdf .  
12 The Whi te House (2021), Fact Sheet: Biden -⁠Harris Administration Announces Supply Chain 
Disruptions Task Force to Address Short -Term Supply Chain Discontinuities , June  2021. Viewed at: 
https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefi ng-room/statements -releases/2021/06/08/fact -sheet -biden -harris -
administration -announces -supply -chain -disruptions -task-force-to-address -short-term-supply -chain -
discontinuities/ . 
13 USTR (202 2), Remarks by Ambassador Katherine Tai During the Opening Session o f the WTO 12th 
Ministerial Conference , June . Viewed at: https://ustr .gov/about -us/policy -offices/press -office/speeches -and-
remarks/2022/june/remarks -ambassador -katherine -tai-during -opening -session -wto-12th-ministerial -
conferenc . 
14 USTR (2021), 2020 Report to Congress on China's WTO Compliance , January. Viewed at: 
https://ustr.gov/sites/default/files/files/reports/2020/2020USTRReportCongressChinaWTOCompliance.pdf .  WT/TPR/S/434 /Rev.1  • United States  
 
- 41 - 
 
  China its performance under the Phase One Agreement, beginning a targeted tariff exclusion 
process, raising  state-centered  and non -market trade practice policy concerns, using the full range 
of tools to address those concerns, and continuing to work with allies to define new and fair trade 
rules for the 21st century.15 
2.12.   As part of its trade policy towards Africa , the United  States is beginning to consider the future 
of the African Growth and Opportunity Act (AGOA), which is slated to expire in 2025. The 
U.S. Government has numerous ongoing trade capacity -building initiatives and has stated that it is 
looking to d eepen its trade and economic relationship through the Prosper Africa initiative, which 
was launched in 2019 and renewed by the current Administration. The Administration has also stated 
that it is seeking to use trade policy tools with African partners to promote investment, equitable 
and inclusive development, and sustainable trade. In addition, it is working to support the 
negotiation and implementation of the African Continental Free Trade Area.  
2.2.2.1   New directions  
2.13.   The current Administration placed equity and  inclusivity among its core policy priorities, and 
this is also expected to influence future U.S. trade and investment policy. A number of Presidential 
directives and initiatives regarding a "whole -of-government" effort to advance racial and gender 
equity,  equality, and justice led to many concrete measures already being taken and others outlined 
in the President's FY2022 Budget. To inform the development of inclusive, worker -centered  trade 
and trade policy, USTR requested that the USITC investigate the pot ential distributional effects of 
goods and services trade and trade policy on U.S. workers by skill, wage and salary level, gender, 
race/ethnicity, age, and income level, especially as they affect underrepresented and underserved 
communities. In the Octobe r 2021 letter requesting this two -part USITC investigation, USTR noted 
the Administration's equity initiatives and Congressional requests for U.S. trade policy to have a 
positive and equitable impact on underserved and marginalized communities.16 
2.14.   In Januar y 2021, the Administration launched its initiative on Buy American policies with an 
Executive Order outlining a government -wide proposal to use government procurement as one 
method to strengthen American manufacturing. It provides for a number of measures including 
review of agency actions inconsistent with administration policy, updating the Made in America 
waiver process, and promoting transparency in federal procurement. Thereafter, in April  2021, the 
Made in America Office was established under the Offi ce of Management and Budget to provide 
centralized, strategic, and holistic management of domestic sourcing activities across Federal 
procurement. Following on these initiatives, a new proposed Rule was announced in July  2021 that 
would make the most signi ficant changes to the Buy American Act in many years. One of the key 
proposed changes  would raise the domestic content threshold from 55% to 60% immediately, and 
then gradually increase it to 75% (Section  3.3.6). Procurement covered under the WTO  Agreement  
on Government Procurement (GPA) continues to be waived from these requirements.  
2.15.   The United  States and the European  Union announced their intention to negotiate the world's 
first carbon -based sectoral arrangement on steel and aluminum  trade by October  2023. As a first 
step, the two parties reached an interim agreement on aluminum  and steel tariffs, and agreed to 
further cooperation on non -market excess capacity, trade enforcement, and customs issues).17 
2.3  Trade Agreements and Arrangements  
2.3.1   WTO  
2.16.   As an original WTO Member and largest single trading country18, the United  States has always 
played a key role in the operation of the WTO and participates in all of its major functions, 
 
15 USTR (2021), Remarks as Prepared for Delive ry of Ambassador Katherine Tai Outlining the Biden -
Harris Administration's "New Approach to the U.S. -China Trade Relationship , October.  
16 The full text of the letter may be viewed at: 
https://ustr.gov/sites/default/files/files/RL_ITC_Distributional_Effects.pdf .  
17 USTR (2021), Steel & Aluminum, U.S. -EU Joint Statement , 31 October. Viewed at: 
https://ustr.gov/sites/default/files/files/Statements/US -EU%20Joint%20Deal%20Statement.pdf . 
18 The United  States ranks first in services trade and second i n merchandise trade. WTO (2021), World 
Trade Statistical Review 2021 . Viewed at: 
https://www.wto.org/english/res_e/statis_e/wts2021_e/wts2021_e.pdf .  WT/TPR/S/434 /Rev.1  • United States  
 
- 42 - 
 
  i.e. disputes, committee work, and negotiations. It is also involved in tec hnical assistance and 
capacity -building measures (contributions to the Global Trust Fund, Aid -for-Trade, and Standards 
and Trade Development Facility (STDF)). The United  States is a party to a number of plurilateral 
initiatives or agreements under the WTO (including the GPA, the Agreement on Trade in Civil Aircraft, 
the Information Technology Agreement (ITA), and the ITA Expansion) and more recently has joined 
a number of the Joint Statement Initiatives (domestic regulation, e -commerce, and trade and 
enviro nmental stability). The United  States is also  a party to the Joint Ministerial Declaration on the 
Advancement of Gender Equality and Women's Economic Empowerment within Trade.  
2.17.   In terms of the regular work of the WTO, the United  States regularly participate s in various 
committees by raising trade concerns, submitting notifications and technical analysis, making 
proposals, and participating in discussions. Regarding negotiations, the United  States has made 
numerous proposals in many of the ongoing negotiation s, e.g. on the use of forced labor on fishing 
vessels in fisheries subsidies negotiations, and on transparency and notification requirements in the 
agricultural negotiations.  
2.18.   In the area of dispute settlement, the United  States' participation, as measured by the number 
of cases it has filed as a complainant, declined significantly during the review period compared to 
previous periods. The United  States raised 2 complaints, was a respondent in 8 cases, was involved 
in 2 active arbitrations, appealed 6 cases to the Appellate  Body, and exercised third party rights in 
29 cases (Table  A2.1). In the DSB, the United  States continued to raise its systemic concerns with 
Appellate  Body overreach.  
2.19.   The notification record of the United  States under various bodies was ex emplary during the 
review period. The United  States made notifications in the areas of, inter alia, agriculture, GATS, 
trade remedies, SPS, TBT, trade facilitation, rules of origin, subsidies, state trading, IPRs, import 
licensing, the enabling clause, qua ntitative restrictions, and government procurement (Table  A2.2). 
The largest numbers of notifications were made on SPS, TBT, and trade remedy matters.  U.S. trade 
policies have been reviewed 14 times at the WTO; the last one was in December  2018.  
2.20.   In a state ment in October  2021 about the WTO, the USTR confirmed the United  States' 
continued commitment to the WTO and recognized its importance.19 Emphasis was placed on the 
core values of the WTO as noted in the Marrakesh Declaration, achieving meaningful outcome s at 
MC12, engaging in productive conversations on WTO reform, and revitalizing the WTO's negotiating 
function. The USTR also stated that reforming the three pillars of the WTO – monitoring, 
negotiations, and dispute settlement – required a commitment to t ransparency, and encouraged 
Members to work together to find acceptable solutions to increasingly difficult global issues.  
2.3.2   Regional and preferential agreements  
2.21.   The United  States continues to conduct the majority of its trade through MFN trade, although 
it has a long tradition of offering unilateral preferences to developing and least developed countries 
and more recently through an increasing number of bilateral or regional reciprocal FTAs, some of 
which were recently amended. In 202 1, 49.9% of total U.S. imports entered duty -free where MFN 
tariffs were zero. Reciprocal trade agreements contributed to additional reductions or duty -free entry 
on 14.8% of imports and unilateral preferences, about 0.9%. 
2.3.2.1   Reciprocal agreements  
2.22.   The United  States has14 FTAs w ith 20  countries.20 The main development during the review 
period was the conclusion and implementation of the revised agreement with Canada and Mexico, 
replacing the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA), now known as the United  States -
Mexico -Canada  Agreement (USMCA). It was the first time the United  States has comprehensively 
amended or updated an existing FTA. The FTAs with the Republic of Korea and Morocco also 
underwent some modifications during the period. There were no changes to other agreemen ts, 
 
19 USTR (2021), "Ambassa dor Katherine Tai's Remarks as Prepared for Delivery on the World Trade 
Organization", 14  October. Viewed at: https://ustr.gov/about -us/policy -offices/press -office/speeches -and-
remarks/2021/october/ambassador -katherine -tais-remarks -prepared -delivery -world -trade-organization .  
20 These are with Australia, the Kingdom of Bahrain, Ca nada, Chile, Colombia, Costa  Rica, 
Dominican  Republic, El  Salvador, Guatemala, Honduras, Israel, Jordan, Republic of Korea, Mexico, Morocco, 
Nicaragua, Oman, Panama, Peru, and Singapore.  WT/TPR/S/434 /Rev.1  • United States  
 
- 43 - 
 
  although the United  States continued to have ongoing dialogues with FTA partners on 
implementation matters, labor and environment provisions, and other matters relating to the smooth 
functioning of the agreements. Negotiations towards new FTAs were ann ounced or launched in 
recent years with the European  Union, the United  Kingdom, and Kenya, but have not been completed 
to date  (July 2022) . In mid -2022, t he Administration was reviewing the objectives of the 
negotiations with the United  Kingdom begun under  the prior Administration ; active negotiations are 
paused while the review is being conducted. USTR is also reviewing with the Kenyan government 
the path forward for deepening the U.S. -Kenya trade and investment relationship. The current 
Administration is not pursuing negotiations on an FTA with the European  Union.  
2.23.    Trade under the 14 FTAs accounted for USD  417 billion of duty -free21 imports in 2021, and 
an additional USD  426 billion entered without duties due to MFN duty -free status, thus in total about 
USD 843 billion, i.e. 29% of total U.S. merchandise imports (Table  2.1). Canada and Mexico 
continued as the dominant main trading partners under FTAs, while the Republic of Korea was ranked 
a distant third, albeit with growing levels of trade over the period . The United  States maintained 
trade  surpluses  with a majority of FTA partners , but significant deficits with the largest FTA partners . 
As a result , thus the United  States had a n overall  trade deficit of USD  148 billion with FTA partners.  
Table  2.1 Trade under FTAs, 2021  
(USD million)  Trading 
partner  
Imports 
under FTA 
preferences  
Other 
duty-free 
imports (MFN 
duty-free, 
etc.)a 
% of imports 
entering 
duty-free or 
at reduced 
FTA rates  
Total imports 
from FTA 
partner(s)  
Total exports 
to FTA 
partner(s)  
Trade 
balance  
Australia  4,270.1  7,850.3  96.6 12,468.6  26,433.5  13,964.9  
Bahrain, Kingdom of  500.2  139.2  58.3 1,157.0  936.2  -220.8  
Chile  9,228.5  5,598.6  98.2 15,045.5  17,340.3  2,294.8  
Colombia  5,085.2  5,278.8  78.7 13,152.0  16,451.4  3,299.4  
Israel  3,201.5  15,158.8  96.5 18,650.3  12,820.4  -5,829.9  
Jordan  2,040.2  677.9  98.5 2,745.1  1,233.9  -1,511.2  
Korea, Rep. of  42,394.3  45,464.4  92.5 94,954.5  65,771.8  -29,182.7  
Morocco  386.3  489.8  73.9 1,270.5  2,759.9  1,489.4  
Oman  1,039.9  510.4  84.0 1,855.4  1,399.5  -455.9  
Panama  47.7 678.9  96.3 756.3  8,273.0  7,516.7  
Peru  4,178.9  2,300.9  94.0 6,886.8  10,242.5  3,355.6  
Singapore  6,661.8  21,099.5  93.9 29,433.9  35,762.6  6,328.8  
NAFTA/USMCA  322,057.6  309,163.1  85.2 741,865.3  583,459.6  -158,405.7  
Canada  123,832.1  156,863.3  78.5 357,159.8  307,000.7  -50,159.1  
Mexico  198,225.5  152,299.8  91.4 384,705.5  276,458.9  -108,246.6  
CAFTA -DR 15,932.7  11,660.2  92.4 29,936.2  38,495.7  8,559.6  
Costa Rica 1,634.8  4,657.7  96.2 6,537.3  7,311.6  774.3  
Dominican Rep.  3,658.1  2,379.7  95.5 6,346.9  10,444.4  4,097.5  
El Salvador  1,824.2  401.4  88.5 2,517.2  4,127.5  1,610.3  
Guatemala  2,485.0  1,820.1  92.2 4,666.2  7,997.1  3,330.9  
Honduras  3,579.0  1,223.5  92.5 5,217.3  6,512.3  1,295.0  
Nicaragua  2,751.7  1,177.8  84.8 4,651.3  2,102.9  -2,548.4  
a MFN and other duty -free included other duty -free provisions such as government imports and where 
there was no duty reported.  
Source:  Compiled by the WTO Secretariat from the USITC Data Web and UN Comtrade; and information 
provided by the authorities.  
2.3.2.1.1   United  States -Mexico -Canada Agreement (USMCA)  
2.24.   The USMCA  entered into force between the United  States, Mexico, and Canada on 1  July 2020, 
replacing NAFTA. The USMCA maintains the zero tariffs between the three countries that were in 
place under NAFTA. The United  States implemented the USMCA through the enactmen t of the 
United  States -Mexico -Canada Agreement Implementation Act (P.L.  116-113), and certain 
subsequent amendments or technical corrections thereafter by the Consolidated Appropriations Act 
of 2021 (P.L.  116-260). The USMCA modernized NAFTA, updated rules  of origin, and included 
provisions to address issues such as digital trade, competitiveness, small - and medium -sized 
enterprises, and good regulatory practices. The USMCA also brought labor and environmental 
obligations into the core of the Agreement, mak ing the provisions fully enforceable and subject to 
 
21 Also including tariff reductions below the MFN rate.  WT/TPR/S/434 /Rev.1  • United States  
 
- 44 - 
 
  updated dispute resolution mechanisms. The USMCA is composed of 34 chapters along with 12 side 
letters. The main elements of the Agreement include: (i)  maintaining the same zero duties that were 
in NAFTA;  (ii) strengthening the rules of origin criteria for the automobile sector from 62.5% to 75% 
North  American content for most items; (iii)  requiring that 70% of aluminum  and steel used in autos 
originate in North  America and that steel be melted and poured in North  America; (iv)  expanding 
access to the Canadian market for dairy, eggs, and poultry; (v)  extend ing copyright protection from 
50 years to 70 years; and (vi) making new commitments on digital trade, state -owned enterprises 
(SOEs), currency manipulati on, and de minimis  threshold for duty -free treatment.22 
2.25.   Because the USMCA carried over market access provisions under NAFTA, most U.S. tariffs on 
imports from Mexico and Canada already had been eliminated. Nevertheless, the USMCA was 
expected to increase t rade with Canada and Mexico by about 5% and lead to a higher concentration 
of U.S. trade with those two countries.23 The Agreement is expected to have a particular impact on 
the automotive sector due to the significant increase in the regional content necessary to confer 
origin, which in turn is expected to increase U.S. employment in the sector.  
2.3.2.1.2   Amendments to the FTAs with the Republic of Korea and with Morocco  
2.26.   In 2017, the United  States launched discussions with the Republic of Korea to amend or 
modify the FTA that entered into force in 2012. Since the inception of the FTA, the United  States 
has exhibited increasing tr ade deficits with the Republic of Korea; the deficit rose from 
USD 13.2 billion in 2012 to USD  24.1 billion in 2020, thus the United  States sought to amend the 
Agreement so as to secure changes to reduce the trade deficit.24 In March  2018, an agreement was  
reached that entered into force on 1  January  2019. The new agreement includes amendments to 
the original, as well as amendments to side letters, including the following provisions: (i)  extension 
of the agreed tariff elimination period for the United  State s on certain trucks (six  tariff lines) from 
2021, per the original agreement, to 2041, in the U.S. schedule of commitments; (ii)  new 
transparency and due process provisions for WTO trade remedy proceedings; (iii)  clarification of 
national treatment and oth er provisions on investment; (iv)  new provisions for vehicle safety 
standards' compliance in the Korean market; (v)  less stringent  certification of vehicle replacement 
parts; (vi)  clarification of methodologies for testing regarding emissions regulations; (vii) certain 
principles reached with respect to verification of claims of origin and establishment of a Working 
Group on the matter; (viii)  the Republic of Korea's Health Insurance Review and Assessment Service 
to amend its Premium Pricing Policy for Glob al Innovative New Drugs; and (ix)  commencement of a 
review process to examine rules of origin relating to certain textiles and apparel to consider 
amendments per a finding on commercial availability.  
2.27.   A 2019 USITC study to examine the economic effects of am ending certain rules of origin on 
textiles and clothing from the Republic of Korea determined that the change in rules would have 
negligible effect on U.S. imports and no effect on U.S. production of those products, but 
acknowledged qualitative information  that two of the proposed rule changes could have significant 
adverse effects. Due to domestic producers' objections, these two rules were not amended. The 
third proposed rule is in the process of being amended.25 
2.28.   The FTA with Morocco was amended in 2017 t o accommodate changes to the rules of origin 
pertaining to certain apparel in Chapter 62 of the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United  States 
(HTSUS). These changes were proclaimed by the President in December  2018 and entered into force 
 
22 The USMCA wa s notified to the WTO on 16  September  2020. WT/REG407/N/1, S/C/N/1017, 
17 September  2020.  
23 USITC (2019), U.S.-Mexico -Canada Trade Agreement: Likely Impact on the U.S. Economy and on 
Specific Industry Sectors , Publication No.  4889, April. Viewed at: 
https://www.usitc.gov/publications/332/pub4889.pdf .  
24 USTR (2018), New U.S. Trade Policy and National Security Outcomes with the Republic of Korea , 
March. Viewed at: https://ustr.gov/about -us/policy -offices/press -office/fact -sheets/2018/march/new -us-trade -
policy -and-national .  
25 The products cover ed by the RO proposed changes were certain cotton yarns (under HTSUS 
heading  5206) with viscose rayon staple fibers (under HTSUS subheadings 5504.10 or 5507.00); certain 
woven fabrics (under HTSUS  heading 5408) with cuprammonium rayon yarns (under HTSUS su bheading 
5403.39); and certain apparel (under HTSUS heading 6110), accessories, and apparel parts (under HTSUS 
heading 6117) of cashmere yarns (under HTSUS  heading 5108). USITC (2019), U.S.-Korea FTA: Advice on 
Modifications to Certain Textile and Apparel Rules of Origin , Publication No.  4917, July. Viewed at: 
https://www.usitc.gov/publications/tariff_affairs/pub4917.pdf .  WT/TPR/S/434 /Rev.1  • United States  
 
- 45 - 
 
  on 1 April 2019.26 The revised rules of origin allow more apparel to qualify as originating by allowing 
the use of more non -originating fabrics in the exported good. According to a study by the USITC, 
the probable economic effects of this change were expected to be neglig ible in terms of trade, 
i.e. resulting in a change of less than 6%.27 
2.3.2.2   Unilateral preferences  
2.29.   The United  States continued its practice of providing several unilateral preference program s 
to developing and least developed countries during the review period: the AGOA, focused on 
countries in Africa; the Caribbean Basin Initiative (CBI) (Caribbean Basin Economic Recovery Act 
(CBERA), and the Caribbean Basin Trade Partnership Act (CBTPA)), which focus on 
Caribbean/Central American countries; and the Generalized System of Preferences (GSP) for a large 
number of developing and least developed countries throughout the world. The two most significant 
developments during the period were: (i)  the expiry of the GSP program  in December  2020 – to 
date (January  2022), the program  had still not been renewed, although several initiatives were taken 
in that direction (see below); and (ii)  the renewal of preferences under the CBTPA until 2030.  
2.30.   During the review period, the use of unilateral preferences steadily declined from 
USD 36.5 billion in 2018 to USD  21.9 billion in 2020 but then slightly increased to USD  26.8 in 2021 
(Table  2.2). This can be attributed to significant declines in the two largest program s – the AGOA 
and the GSP. AGOA imports declined by about two  thirds, ma inly on account of significantly reduced 
crude petroleum imports (in terms of value) from Nigeria and Angola, in large part due to lower 
prices. In contrast, preferential imports under the CBTPA doubled over the period, albeit from a 
small base. This was a ttributed to increases in crude petroleum imports largely from Guyana and to 
a lesser extent from Trinidad and Tobago, which had previously not supplied such products under 
the CBTPA to the U.S.  market. For many countries benefitting from U.S.  preferences,  exports tend 
to be concentrated in only a few key products.  
Table  2.2 Imports under unilateral trade preferences, 2018 -21 
(USD million)  
 2018  2019  2020  2021  
AGOA  10,816  7,353  3,248  5,971  
CBI 686 239 512 776 
CBTPA  344 553 727 629 
HOPE Actsa 661 737 577 751 
GSP 23,865  20,911  16,811  18,510  
GSP for Least -Developed Beneficiary Countries (LDBCs ) 142 182 92 152 
Nepal Trade Preference Program  3 3 2 4 
 Total 36,518  29,978  21,969  26,793  
a Haitian Hemispheric Opportunity through Partnership Encouragement Act of 2006 (HOPE Act), and 
HOPE II Act of 2008.  
Source:  WTO Secretariat, based on data from USITC Data Web.  
2.31.   The U.S. GSP Program is the United  States' longest -running preference program  and provide s 
the majority of the preferential imports into the United  States; however, it expired on 
31 December  2020. New legislation has been proposed to reinstate the GSP, but to date 
(January  2022) it has not been approved. Prior to the expiry of the GSP, USTR in itiated a new 
process where it assesses each GSP beneficiary country's compliance with the statutory criteria on 
a triennial basis to improve monitoring and enforcement .28 For example, in 2020 there were 
10 country eligibility reviews in progress to examin e, inter alia, workers rights' issues, child labor, 
arbitral awards, market access, IPR protection and enforcement. The main resulting changes during 
this reporting period were the loss of beneficiary status for certain countries, the reduction of the 
scope of benefits for certain beneficiary countries by the removal of certain eligible tariff lines, and 
restored eligibility in certain cases (Table  2.3). There have also been certain changes regarding the 
 
26 Federal Register (2019), Vol.  84, No.  56, 22  March  . Viewed at: 
https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2019/03/22/2019 -05551/eff ective -date-of-modifications -to-rules-
of-origin -of-the-united -states -morocco -free-trade-agreement .  
27 USITC (2017), Probable Economic Effect of Certain Modifications to the U.S. -Morocco FTA Rules of 
Origin . Publication No.  4662, January. Viewed at: https://www.usitc.gov/publications/332/pub4662.pdf .  
28 USTR (2021), 2021 Trade Policy Agenda and 2020 Annual Report of the President of the Unite d States 
on the Trade Agreements Program , March.  WT/TPR/S/434 /Rev.1  • United States  
 
- 46 - 
 
  general coverage of GSP eligible products. In 2020, f resh cut roses were added to the list of eligible 
products and parboiled rice was removed.  
Table  2.3 Summary of changes to GSP  beneficiaries and eligibility, July  2018 -
February  2022  
GSP 
beneficiary(ies)  Date  Change  Reason  Reference  
Indonesia, 
North  Macedonia, 
and Thailand  01/11/2018  Redesignated 3 products (Indonesia 
and Thailand) and removed GSP 
eligibility for 2 products (Indonesia 
and North  Macedonia)  Exceeded the 
competitive need 
limitations  Proclamation 9813 of 
30 October  2018 
Various beneficiaries  01/11/2018  Removed 2 products based on a 
petition ( Türkiye ) and removed 
eligibility for 98 products  Exceeded the 
competitive need 
limitations  Proclamation 9813 of 
30 October  2018 
India 05/06/2019  Removed from GSP eligibility  Market access  Proclamation 9902 of 
31 May 2019 
Thailand  30/12/2020  Removed certain tariff lines from 
GSP eligibility  Market access  Proclamation 10107 
of 30 October  2020 
Thailand  25/04/2020  Removed certain tariff lines from 
GSP eligibility  Worker rights  Proclamation 9955 of 
25 October  2019 
Türkiye  17/05/2019  Removed from GSP eligibility  Economic 
development  Proclamation 9887 of 
16 May 2019 
Ukraine  30/10/2019  Restored certain tariff lines to GSP 
eligibility  IP Proclamation 9955 of 
25 October  2019 
Argentina, Brazil, 
Ecuador, Indonesia  01/11/2020  Removed GSP eligibility for 6 
products  Exceeded the 
competitive need 
limitations  Proclamation 10107 
of 30 October  2020 
Source:  Compiled by the WTO Secretariat from the references mentioned in the table and from USTR (2021), 
2021 Trad e Policy Agenda and 2020 Annual Report of the President of the United  States on the 
Trade Agreements Program , March. Viewed at: 
https://ustr.gov/sites/default/files/files/reports/2021/2021%20Trade%20Agenda/Online%20PDF%2
02021%20Trade%20Policy%20Agenda%20and%202020%20Annual%20Report.pdf . 
2.32.   Box 2.1 presents an overview of the Unilateral Pr eference Programs maintained by the 
United  States in 2022.  
Box 2.1 Overview of Unilateral Preference Programs, 2022a 
AGOA   (1 October  2000-30 September  2025)  GSP and GSP for LDCs  (currently expired)  
Beneficiaries: Angola, Benin, Botswana, 
Burkina  Faso, Ca bo Verde, Central African 
Republic, Chad, Comoros, Republic of Congo, 
Democratic  Republic of Congo, Côte  d'Ivoire, 
Djibouti, Eswatini, Gabon, Gambia, Ghana, 
Guinea -Bissau, Kenya, Lesotho, Liberia, 
Madagascar, Malawi, Mauritius, Mozambique, 
Namibia, Niger, Nigeria, Rwanda, Sao  Tomé and 
Principe, Senegal, Sierra  Leone, South  Africa, 
Tanzania, Togo, Uganda, Zambia  Beneficiaries: Afghanistan, Albania, Algeria, Angola, Argentina, 
Armenia, Azerbaijan, Belize , Benin, Bhutan, the Plurinational State of 
Bolivia, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Botswana, Brazil, Burkina  Faso, 
Burundi, Cabo  Verde, Cambodia, Cameroon, Central African Republic, 
Chad, Comoros, Congo (Brazzaville), Congo (Kinshasa), Côte  d'Ivoire, 
Djibouti, D ominica, East Timor, Ecuador, Egypt, Eritrea, Eswatini, 
Ethiopia, Fiji, Gabon, Gambia, Georgia, Ghana, Grenada, Guinea, 
Guinea  Bissau, Guyana, Haiti, Indonesia, Iraq, Jamaica, Jordan, 
Kazakhstan, Kenya, Kiribati, Kosovob, Kyrgyz  Republic , Lebanon, 
Lesotho,  Liberia, Madagascar, Malawi, Maldives, Mali, Mauritania, 
Mauritius, Republic of Moldova, Mongolia, Montenegro, Mozambique, 
Myanmar, Namibia, Nepal, Niger, Nigeria, North  Macedonia, Pakistan, 
Papua New Guinea, Paraguay, Philippines, Rwanda, Saint  Lucia, 
Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, Samoa, Sao  Tomé and Principe, 
Senegal, Serbia, Sierra  Leone, Solomon  Islands, Somalia, South  Africa, 
South  Sudan, Sri  Lanka, Suriname, Tanzania, Thailand, Togo, Tonga, 
Tunisia, Tuvalu, Uganda , Ukraine, Uzbekistan, Vanuatu, Y emen, Zambia, 
Zimbabwe; non -independent countries and territories: Anguilla, British 
Indian Ocean Territory, Christmas Island, Cocos (Keeling) Islands, 
Cook Islands, Falkland Islands, Heard Island and McDonald Islands, 
Montserrat, Niue, Norfolk Island, Pit cairn Islands, Saint  Helena, Tokelau, 
British Virgin Islands, Wallis and Futuna, West Bank and Gaza Strip, 
Western Sahara; and certain associations of countries.  
Beneficiaries of 3rd Country Fabric Rule for 
LDCs: Benin, Botswana, Burkina  Faso, 
Cabo Verde, Chad, Ghana, Kenya, Lesotho, 
Liberia, Madagascar, Malawi, Mauritius, 
Mozambique, Namibia, Niger, Senegal, 
Sierra  Leone, Tanzania, Uganda, Zambia  GSP least -developed beneficiaries: Afghanistan, Angola, Benin, 
Bhutan, Burkina  Faso, Burundi, Cambodia, Central African Republic, 
Chad, Comoros, Congo, Djibouti, Ethiopia, Gambia, Guinea, 
Guinea -Bissau, Haiti, Kiribati, Lesotho, Liberia, Madagascar, Malawi, Mali, 
Mauritania, Mozambique, Myanmar, Nepal, Niger, Rwanda, Samoa, 
Sao Tomé and Principe, Senegal, Si erra Leone, Solomon  Islands, 
Somalia, South  Sudan, Tanzania, Timor -Leste, Togo, Tuvalu, Uganda, 
Vanuatu, Yemen, Zambia  
Benefits: 5,190 tariff lines (4,922 overlap with 
GSP, GSP+ provisions)  Benefits: 2,456 tariff lines for all beneficiaries and 1,034 wher e at least 
one or more benefit  WT/TPR/S/434 /Rev.1  • United States  
 
- 47 - 
 
  Additional benefits: Third country fabric rule  GSP LDC benefits: An additional 1,481 tariff lines  
WTO notifications:  WT/L/1117 (WT/L/970)  WTO notifications: WT/COMTD/N/1 + addend a 
Main beneficiaries:  Main products:  Main beneficiaries:   Main products:  
South  Africa  
Nigeria  
Kenya  Crude petroleum  
Passenger vehicles  
Men's/boy's trousers  Thailand  
Indonesia  
Brazil  Jewelry  
Container bags, boxes  
Rubber gloves  
Caribbean Basin Initiative (CBI) 
(CBERA/CBTPA)c (1983 -30 Sept. 2030)  Nepal Trade Preference Program (NTPP) (15 Dec. 2016-
31 Dec. 2025)  
Beneficiaries CBERA: Antigua and Barbuda, 
Aruba, Bahamas, Barbados, Belize, Curaçao, 
Dominica, Grenada, Guyana, Haiti, Jamaica, 
Montserrat, Saint  Kitts and Nevis, Saint Lucia, 
Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, Trinidad and 
Tobago, British Virgin Islands  Beneficiaries: Nepal  
Beneficiaries CBTPA: Barbados, Belize, 
Curaçao, Guyana, Haiti, Jamaica, Saint  Lucia, 
Trinidad and Tobago   
Benefits: 5,506 tariff lines (62 wit h reduced 
rates), additional 259 tariff lines CBTPA  Benefits: 77 tariff lines  
Additional benefits: For Haiti on certain textile 
imports under quota pursuant to the HOPE I/II 
and HELP Acts.  Additional benefits: n.a. 
WTO notifications:  WT/L/1115 (WT/L/1070)  WTO notifications: WT/L/1001, WT/L/1099 , WT/COMTD/N/52  
Main beneficiaries:  Main products:  Main beneficiaries:   Main products:  
Haiti 
Trinidad and Tobago  
Guyana  Crude petroleum  
Methanol  
T-shirts  Nepal  Hats, headgear, knitted  
Container bags, boxes  
Carpets  
n.a. Not applicable.  
a Data on main beneficiaries and main products are for 2020.  
b References to Kosovo shall be understood to be in the context of UN Security Council Resolution 
1244 (1999).  
c Includes also special preferences under the Haitian Hemispheric Opportunity through Partnership 
Encouragement Act of 2006 (HOPE Act), the HOPE II Act of 2008, and the Haitian Economic Lift 
Program Act of 2010 (HELP Act); these program s are extended until 2 025. 
Source:  USITC (2021), The 2021 Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United  States (HTS) Item Count . Viewed 
at: https://usitc.gov/tariff_affairs/documents/2021_hts_item_cou nt.pdf . Data compiled by the 
Secretariat from USITC Data Web.  
2.33.   AGOA continues to provide significant tariff preferences on about 5,000 tariff lines and also 
has special rules of origin for apparel, allowing the use of third -country fabric for designated 
beneficiaries. While crude petroleum remains the dominant imported good under AGOA, there have 
been significant gains and expansion of textile imports under AGOA preferences. To help diversify 
exports, 16 AGOA beneficiaries have implemented AGOA utilization s trategies to help identify new 
potential products to export under AGOA preferences. Most of the strategies are concentrated on 
agriculture and textiles and apparel, although others identify jewelry , mining products, handicrafts, 
and light manufacturing.29 In November  2021, there were 39 African countries designated as eligible 
countries for AGOA preferences; however, during the review period, there were a number of changes 
in beneficiary status (Table  2.4). There were five countries that ceased to be benefi ciaries, four that 
lost the special textile and apparel benefits and five that gained such benefits, and one that regained 
AGOA beneficiary status.  
Table  2.4 Summary of changes to AGOA beneficiaries, July  2018 -February  2022  
AGOA 
beneficiary(ies)  Date  Change  Reason  Reference  
Eswatini  03/07/2018  Designated as 
qualifying for textile 
and apparel benefits  Adopted an effective visa system 
and related procedures to prevent 
the unlawful transhipment of 
textile and apparel articles and the Determination under 
AGOA by USTR on 
3 July 2018 
 
29 USTR (2020), 2020 Biennial Report on the Implementation of the African Growth and Opportunity Act , 
June. Viewed at: https://ustr.gov/sites/default/files/assets/agoa/USTR -Biennial -Report -to-Congress -on-AGOA -
062320.pdf . WT/TPR/S/434 /Rev.1  • United States  
 
- 48 - 
 
  AGOA 
beneficiary(ies)  Date  Change  Reason  Reference  
use of counterfeit documents in 
connection with the shipment of 
such articles  
Rwanda  31/07/2018  Suspending 
application of duty -
free provisions on 
apparel  Not making continual progress in 
meeting the requirements 
described in Section  506A(a)(1) 
(progress towards the elimination 
of barriers to U.S. trade and 
investment regarding  apparel)  Presidential 
Proclamation 9771 of 
30 July 2018 
Mauritania  01/01/2019  Termination of 
beneficiary status  Insufficient progress towards 
combating forced  labor Presidential 
Proclamation 9834 of 
21 December  2018 
Cameroon  01/01/2020  Termination of 
beneficiary status  Not making continual progress in 
meeting the requirements 
described in Section  506A(a)(1)  Presidential 
Proclamation 9974 of 
26 December  2019 
Central African 
Republic, Gambia, 
and Niger  01/01/2020  Termination of the 
special "wearing 
apparel" provisions  Failure to meet the transhipment 
provision of Section  113 regarding 
effective visa systems and related 
customs procedures  Presidential 
Proclamation 9974 of 
26 December  2019 
Guinea -Bissau and 
Niger  01/01/2020  Added to the list of 
lesser developed 
beneficiary sub -
Saharan African 
countries . Met the eligibility criteria  Presidential 
Proclamation 9974 of 
26 December  2019 
Mali 04/08/2020  Designated as 
qualifying for textile 
and apparel benefits  Adopted an effective visa system 
and related procedures to prevent 
the unlawful transhipment of 
textile and apparel articles and the 
use of counterfeit documents  Notice by USTR of 
21 July 2020 
Democratic 
Republic of the 
Congo  01/01/2021  Added to the list of 
lesser developed 
beneficiary sub -
Saharan African 
countries . Met the eligibility requirements set 
forth in Section  104 of AGOA and 
in Section  502 of the Trade Act of 
1974; and satisfies the criterion 
under Section  112(c) of AGOA  Presidential 
Proclamation 10128 of 
22 December  2020 
Ethiopia, Guinea, 
and Mali  01/01/2022  Termination of 
beneficiary status  No continual progress in meeting 
the requirements described in 
Section  506A(a)(1)  Presidential 
Proclamation 10326 of 
23 December  2021 
Source:  Compiled by the WTO Secretariat from the references in the table and USTR (2020), 2020 Biennial 
Report on the Implementation of the African Growth and Opportunity Act , June. Viewed at : 
https://ustr.gov/sites/default/files/assets/agoa/USTR -Biennial -Report -to-Congress -on-AGOA -
062320.pdf . 
2.34.   The CBI includes preference program s CBERA30 and CBTPA for designated Caribbean and 
Central American countries. The CBTPA was renewed in October  2020 for a period of 10 years with 
benefits being provided retroactively from 30  September  2020 when the previous provisions 
expired.31 According to a report by the USITC, CBERA "continues to have a negligible effect on 
U.S. imports, producers, and consumers and a small but positive impact on beneficiary countries".32 
The report furthermore notes that CBERA beneficiaries tend to be small economies a nd small 
exporters, often constrained by infrastructure issues, and thus trade under CBERA has remained 
relatively constant with limited export diversification.  
2.35.   The Nepal Trade Preference Program (NTPP), as contained in the Trade Facilitation and Trade 
Enforcement Act of 2015, continues to provide duty ‐free entry to the United  States for certain 
products imported from Nepal for a 10 -year period, until 2025. There have been no changes or 
developments in this preference program  during the review period. The United  States also provides 
special preferences to products from the West Bank, Gaza Strip, and Qualifying Industrial Zones33, 
as well as and the Republic of the Marshall Islands, the Federated States of Micronesia, the 
 
30 Including the Haitian Hemispheric Opportunity through Partnership Encouragement Act of 2006 (HOPE 
Act), the Haitian Hemisphe ric Opportunity through Partnership Encouragement Act of 2008 (HOPE II Act), and 
the Haiti Economic Lift Program Act of 2010 (HELP Act). However, the benefits under these acts are extended 
only until 2025.  
31 Extension of the Caribbean Basin Economic Recove ry Act (P.L.  116-164).  
32 USITC (2021), Caribbean Basin Economic Recovery Act: Impact on U.S. Industries and Consumers 
and on Beneficiary Countries, 25th Report, 2019 -20, September, Publication No.  5231. Viewed at: 
https://usitc.gov/publications/332/pub5231.pdf .  
33 Applies to products with a specified amount of Israeli content and manufactured in Jordan, Egypt, or 
the West Bank and Gaza.  WT/TPR/S/434 /Rev.1  • United States  
 
- 49 - 
 
  Republic  of Palau, and the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands; there were no changes 
to these programs during the review period.  
2.3.3   Other agreements and arrange ments  
2.36.   The United  States has concluded a number of other trade agreements in recent years, mainly 
with significant trade partners, such as Japan, China, and the European  Union. In addition, trade 
and investment agreements (TIFAs) with Brazil and Ecuador wer e expanded to include concessions 
on trade facilitation and regulatory commitments (Section  2.4.1).  
2.37.   In December  2019 pursuant to Section  103(a)(2) of the Trade Priorities Act, a Presidential 
Proclamation was issued announcing modifications to certain dutie s as a result of an arrangement 
concluded between the United  States and Japan, which has been referred to as the U.S. -Japan Trade 
Agreement (USJTA).34 The USJTA, which was signed on 7  October  2019 and entered into force on 
1 January  2020, reduces or elimin ates tariffs on 241 tariffs lines for originating goods of Japan, 
either upon entry into force or during an implementation period up until 2029. The tariff rate quota 
(TRQ) quantity for Japanese beef was eliminated and merged into the general quota allocat ion for 
all other countries (Box  2.2).35 As at July 2022, this arrangement had not been notified to the WTO.  
A similar Presidential Proclamation was issued in December  2020 under the same provisions of the 
Trade Priorities Act in order to announce reductio ns in tariff barriers agreed with the European  Union 
on 20  November  2020.36 This agreement covers MFN duty reductions on six tariff lines that were 
implemented as of 1  August  2020 and a further reduction on five of them on 1  August  2021 
(Box 2.2). Approxim ately USD  192 million of imports of these products entered from the 
European  Union at reduced rates in 2021 compared to USD  132 million in 2020. In return, the 
European  Union agreed to eliminate duties on an MFN  basis on four tariff lines of frozen and liv e 
lobster for a five -year period, from 1  August  2020 to 31  July 2025.37 
2.38.   On 15  January  2020, the United  States and China concluded an Economic and Trade 
Agreement covering a variety of trade and related matters; it entered into force on 
14 February  2020.38 The Agreement includes operational chapters on IP, technology transfer, trade 
in food and agricultural products, financial services, macroeconomic policies and exchange rate 
matters and transparency, expanding trade, and bilateral evalu ation and dispute resolution.39 
Contrary to other trade agreements the United  States has negotiated in the past with other parties, 
this agreement stands out for having few if any liberalizing measures by the United  States, such as 
scheduled reductions in tariffs or services commitments; rather, it is mainly a compilation of specific 
commitments requiring China to issue new or revised measures or take other actions. A number of 
provisions mention or directly cite WTO rules or obligations; many of these have  to do with 
transparency, notification, and compliance matters. The chapter on expanding trade requires China 
to purchase certain categories and subcategories of U.S.  goods and services – manufactured goods, 
 
34 USTR (2019), Fact Sheet on U.S. -Japan Trade Agreement . Viewed at: https://ustr.gov/about -
us/policy -offices/press -office/fact -sheets/2019/september/fact -sheet -us-japan -trade -agreeme nt; Presidential 
Proclamation  9974 of 26  December  2019. Federal Register  (2019), Vol. 84, No.  249, 30  December. Viewed at: 
https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2019/12/30/2019 -28285/to -take-certain -action s-under -the-
african -growth -and-opportunity -act-and-for-other -purposes ; and Presidential Proclamation 10128 of 
22 December  2020. Federal Register  (2020), Vol. 85, No.  249, 29  December. Viewed at: 
https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2020/12/29/2020 -28878/to -take-certain -actions -under -the-
african -growth -and-opportunity -act-and-for-other-purposes .  
35 USTR (2019), Side Letter on Beef , 7 October. Viewed at: 
https://ustr.gov/sites/default/files/files/agreements/japan/Letter_Exchange_on_Be ef.pdf .  
36 Presidential Proclamation 10128 of 22  December  2020, To Take Certain Actions Under the African 
Growth and Opportunity Act and for Other Purposes , Annex  II. Federal Register  (2020), Vol. 85, No.  249, 
9 December.  
37 Regulation EU 2020/2131 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 16  December  2020 on the 
elimination of customs duties on certain goods, Official Journal of the European  Union , 18 December  2020. 
Viewed at: https://eur -lex.europa.eu/legal -content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=CELEX:32020R2131&from=EN .  
38 USTR (2020), Fact Sheet:  Economic and Trade Agreement Between the United  States of America and 
the People's Republic of China,  15 January. Viewed a t: 
https://ustr.gov/sites/default/files/files/agreements/phase%20one%20agreement/US_China_Agreement_Fact_
Sheet.pdf .  
39 Economic and Trade Agreement Between the Government of the United  States of America and the 
Government of the People's Republic of China. Viewed at: 
https://ustr.gov/sites/default/files/files/agreements/phase%20one%20agreement/Economic_And_Trade_Agree
ment_Between_The_United_States_And_China_Text.pdf . WT/TPR/S/434 /Rev.1  • United States  
 
- 50 - 
 
  agriculture, energy, and services – at specified  levels above 2017 baseline amounts in 2020 and 
2021. The total amount of purchases is to exceed the overall 2017 baseline amount by no less than 
USD 200 billion by the end of 2021. According to a 2021 USTR report to Congress on compliance, 
some commitment s were implemented while others were not.40 Data compiled by the Peterson 
Institute for International Economics indicates China's imports of U.S. goods fell short of what was 
agreed in 2020 and 2021; this was the case in all categories of goods.41 
2.39.   A second  agreement with Japan was reached at the same time as the USJTA, covering digital 
trade, known as the United  States -Japan Digital Trade Agreement (USJDTA).42 This Agreement did 
not require any changes in U.S. law, thus it was treated as an Executive Agreem ent. It covers 
customs duties on digital products transmitted electronically, cross -border transfer of data, access 
to computer source code and algorithms, and other provisions (Box  2.2). There is also a side letter 
that governs interactive computer servic es from Japan that clarifies that certain laws of Japan are 
not inconsistent with Article  18 of the USJDTA.43 The USJDTA entered into force on 1  January  2020.  
Box 2.2 Overview of other new agreements or arrangements  
United  States -Japan Trade Agreement (USJTA)  
Entry into force:  
Transition to full implementation:  
Main elements:  
Products/services:  
 
 
 
Trade benefitting from the 
agreement (U.S. imports):  
WTO notification s: 1 January  2020 
1 January  2029 
Duty elimination or reduction on 241 tariff lines; 162 will be duty -free 
Tariff elimination/reduction on mainly machinery and equipment in HS Chapters 84 
and 85 (including specifically machine tools, bicycles, m usical instruments, etc.) from 
Japan; and modification of the Uruguay Round TRQ on beef from Japan of 200 MT by 
incorporating it in the total TRQ allocation for other countries or areas . 
2020: USD  2.77 million  
2021: USD  3.63 million  
None 
Agreement between  the United  States of America and the European  Union Regarding Tariffs on Certain Products  
Entry into force:  
Transition to full implementation:  
Main elements:  
Products/services:  
 
Trade benefitting from the 
agreement (US imports):  
WTO notification s: 1 August  2020 
1 August  2021 
MFN duty reductions on 6 tariff lines in 2020 ; further reductions on 5 of them in 2021  
Cigarette lighters and parts, propellant powders, prepared or preserved fish products, 
lead crystal glassware, and other nonre fractory surfacing preparations for facades  
Aug.-Dec. 2020: USD  67 million  
2021: USD  192 million  
None 
Economic and Trade Agreement between the United  States of America and the People's Republic of China  
Entry into force:  
Main elements:  
 
 
Products/services:  
WTO notifications:  14 February  2020 
Intellectual property; technology transfer; trade in food and agricultural products; 
financial services; macroeconomic policies and exchange rate matters and 
transparency; expanding trade; and dispute resolution  
Food and agricultural products, financial services  
None 
 
40 USTR (2022), 2021 Report to Congress on China's W TO Compliance , February. Viewed at: 
https://ustr.gov/sites/default/files/enforcement/WTO/2021%20USTR%20Report%20 to%20Congress%20on%2
0China's%20WTO%20Compliance.pdf .  
41 The data provided by the Peterson Institute for International Economics show that, from 
January  2020 through December  2021, China's total imports of covered products from the United  States were 
USD 235.3 billion, compared with a two -year commitment of USD  380.5  billion. China's imports of covered 
agricultural products from the United  States were USD  61.4 billion, compared with a target of USD  80.1 billion, 
while for covered manufactured goods, China's imports from the United  States were USD  142.8  billion, 
compared with a commitment level of USD  234.4  billion. Peterson Institute for International Economics (2022), 
US-China Phase One Tracker: China's Purchases of US Goods. With combined goods and services  purchases for 
2020 through 2021 . Viewed at: https://www.piie.com/research/piie -charts/us -china -phase -one-tracker -chinas -
purchases -us-goods . 
42 USTR (2019), Fact Sheet on U.S. -Japan Trade Agreement , September. Viewed at: 
https://ustr.gov/about -us/policy -offices/press -office/fact -sheets/2019/september/fact -sheet -us-japan -trade -
agreement ; and  Agreement Between the United  States of America and Japan Concerning Digital Trade. 
Viewed  at: 
https://ustr.g ov/sites/default/files/files/agreements/japan/Agreement_between_the_United_States_and_Japan
_concerning_Digital_Trade.pdf .  
43 U.S.-Japan Digital Trade Agreement: Side Letter on Interactive Computer Services, 7  October  2019. 
Viewed at: https://ustr.gov/countries -regions/japan -korea -apec/japan/us -japan -trade -agreement -
negotiations/us -japan -digital -trade -agreement -text.  WT/TPR/S/434 /Rev.1  • United States  
 
- 51 - 
 
  United  States -Japan Digital Trade Agreement (USJDTA)  
Entry into force:  
Main elements:  
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
WTO notifications:  1 January  2020  
Commitments on not imposing customs duties on electronic transmissions between 
persons of the Parties;  non-discriminatory treatment of digital products;  cross-border 
data transfers;  not requiring access to or transfer of computer source code or 
algorithms as a condition for the import, distribution, s ale, or use of software or related 
products except pursuant to regulatory or judicial proceedings;  enforceable consumer 
protection laws;  electronic signatures;  requirements relating to encryption 
technologies;  collaboration on cybersecurity;  and public acc ess to government -
generated public data.  
None 
Source:  USTR (2019), Fact Sheet on U.S. -Japan Trade Agreement, September. Viewed at: 
https://ustr.gov/about -us/policy -offices/press -office/fact -sheets/2019/september/fact -sheet -us-
japan -trade -agreement ; Presidential Proclamation 9974 of 26  December  2019, To Take Certain 
Actions Under the African Growth and Opportunity Act and for Other Purposes, Annexes II and III. 
Federal Register (2019), Vol.  84, No.  249, 30  December; Presidential Proclamation 10128 of 
22 December  2020, To Take Certain Actions Under the African Growth and Opportunity Act and for 
Other Purposes, Annex  II. Federal  Register  (2020), Vol. 85, No.  249, 29  December; USTR, 
European  Union . Viewed at: https://ustr.gov/countries -regions/europe -middle -
east/europe/european -union . 
2.4  Inves tment Regime  
2.40.   The United  States maintains an open investment regime and has benefited for decades as 
one of the world's single -largest recipients and suppliers of FDI. The President issued a statement 
on the United  States' commitment to open investment on 8  June 2021. In recent years, the 
United  States has expanded and refined its review of FDI through national security -based screening. 
U.S. investment policy has undergone a number of changes during the review period; due to 
U.S. predominance in world invest ment markets, U.S. policy has an important influence on world 
investment flows.  
2.41.   There have been several developments in the United  States' investment regime during the 
review period, with a new law and rules expanding the types of foreign investment subjec t to 
examination, new reporting requirements for certain types of FDI, and the formalization and 
streamlining of the committee for the assessment of foreign investment in the telecommunications 
sector. Thus, there has been a marked move towards greater scr utiny of foreign investment 
transactions on national security grounds.  
2.4.1   Investment framework  
2.42.   In terms of its investment framework, the United  States has subscribed to trade and 
investment framework agreements (TIFAs)44, bilateral investment treaties ( BITs), and FTAs 
containing investment provisions, all of which provide a stable environment conducive to 
encouraging foreign investment as well as securing important provisions for U.S. investors abroad 
(Table  2.5). Most of these frameworks did not undergo  significant revision since the last Review; 
however, a few new TIFAs came into force, and the USMCA includes a revised chapter on investment.  
2.43.   TIFAs have traditionally been used by the United  States to have a higher degree of 
engagement and dialogue with t rading partners in order to promote their mutual interest on trade 
and investment matters. They have often served as an intermediary step before moving towards a 
deeper relationship in an FTA, and the vast majority are with developing countries. TIFAs crea te 
binding obligations to meet and discuss matters within their scope, but they typically do not create 
substantive obligations with regard to trade and investment, although there are exceptions. No 
changes to U.S. law have been required to implement TIFAs . In essence, most TIFAs establish a 
joint Council where the parties agree to meet and engage in a dialogue or consult on trade and 
investment matters.  
2.44.   During the review period, four new or revised TIFAs were negotiated by the United  States: 
with Brazil, E cuador, Fiji, and Paraguay. The TIFA with Fiji, completed in 2020, marked the 
 
44 The reference to TIFAs has been used throughout although some of these agreements have different 
names, e.g. Trade and Investment Council Agreements (TICs); however , they all have the same common 
objective of improving cooperation and enhancing o pportunities for trade and investment.  WT/TPR/S/434 /Rev.1  • United States  
 
- 52 - 
 
  United  States' first TIFA with a small Pacific island nation. In the case of Brazil and Ecuador, existing 
agreements were amended, both in 2020, to include a Protocol on Trade Ru les and Transparency. 
The Protocols agreed upon by Brazil and Ecuador are exceptional among TIFAs in that they contain 
obligations of the parties similar to that seen in bilateral or multilateral trade agreements. Each 
protocol contains three annexes: (i)  Trade Facilitation and Customs Matters, which is consistent with 
the Agreement on Trade Facilitation (TFA), although the Annex goes beyond the TFA with regard to 
certain obligations; (ii)  Good Regulatory Practices; and (iii)  Anti-Corruption. In addition, t he Protocol 
agreed upon by Ecuador also contains a fourth Annex:  Small and Medium -Sized Enterprises. These 
recent protocols to the TIFAs with Brazil and Ecuador provide a transition period to one or both of 
the parties to implement certain articles of the agreements.45 
2.45.   The USMCA's Chapter 14 on investment replaced NAFTA's investment provisions in 
Chapter  11; both chapters are similar in scope and structure, with the most significant change 
involving investor -state dispute settlement (ISDS). The USMCA provid es for the 
expiration  – three years after NAFTA's termination – of each NAFTA party's consent to the 
submission of claims to ISDS alleging breach of relevant NAFTA obligations with respect to so -called 
legacy investments ( i.e. investments established or ac quired while NAFTA was in force and in 
existence on the date of the USMCA's entry into force). USMCA provisions eliminate the availability 
of ISDS between the United  States and Canada after this three -year period, and between the 
United  States and Mexico.46 The net impact is a more limited future use of ISDS between the parties; 
investors seek ing adjudication and not hav ing qualifying government contracts would have to 
exhaust all avenues through domestic court or judicial processes before potentially rever ting to 
ISDS.  
2.46.   Other USMCA changes on investment include clarification of certain concepts in the sections 
on MFN, national treatment, and minimum standard of treatment. There was also a strengthening 
of the provision on "performance requirements" so as to prohibit a Party from requiring preferences 
to technology of the Party or of a person of the Party or a given rate or amount of royalty under a 
license  contract, or a given duration of the term of a license  contract. The agreement also prohibits 
imposing o r enforcing any requirement, commitment, or undertaking regarding export performance 
(for goods and services), domestic content, domestic purchase preference, import balancing; and 
transfer of technology.47 
2.47.   The United  States maintained BITs with 39 partner s as of December  2021 (Table  2.5). BITs 
remain part of the U.S. investment framework, but there have not been any new BITs negotiated 
since 2008, and most BITs are more than 20 years old. A model BIT was established in 2012 to 
serve as a basis for future B ITs. No BITs have been concluded using this template, but certain 
updated provisions were included in the USMCA investment chapter, such as clarifications to rules 
regarding expropriation, national treatment and most -favored -nation treatment, and the minim um 
standard of treatment. In addition to these, the model BIT contains provisions on transfers, 
performance requirements, and dispute settlement. There has been a policy shift in recent years 
away from expanding the U.S. BIT program  and the United  States i s not currently seeking to 
negotiate any new BITs.  
Table  2.5 U.S. International investment agreements, 2022  
Type  Partners  
Trade and 
investment 
framework 
agreements 
(TIFAs)  Afghanistan, Algeria, Angola, Argentina, Armenia, Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) 
(Brunei  Darussalam, Cambodia, Indonesia, Lao People's Democratic Republic, Malaysia, Myanmar, 
Philippines, Singapore, Thailand, Viet  Nam), Kingdom of Bahrain, Bangladesh, Brazil, 
Brunei  Darussalam, Cambodia, Caribbean Community (CARICOM) (Antigua and Barbuda, Bahamas, 
Barbados, Belize, Dominica, Ecuador, Fiji, Grenada, Guyana, Haiti, Jamaica, Montserrat, Saint  Lucia, 
Saint Kitts and Nevis, Saint  Vincent and the Grenadines, Suriname, Trinidad  and Tobago), Central Asia 
(Kazakhstan, Kyrgyz  Republic, Tajikistan, Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan), Common Market for Eastern and 
Southern Africa (COMESA) (Burundi, Comoros, Democratic Republic of Congo, Djibouti, Egypt, Eritrea, 
Eswatini, Ethiopia, Kenya, Lib ya, Seychelles, Madagascar, Malawi, Mauritius, Myanmar, Rwanda, 
 
45 Protocol to the Agreement on Trade and Economic Cooperation Between the Government of the 
United  States of America and the Government of the Federative Republic of Brazil Relating to Trade Rules and 
Transparency. Vi ewed at: https://ustr.gov/sites/default/files/files/agreements/tifa/ATEC%20US -
Brazil%20Protocol.pdf ; and Protocol to the Trade and Investment Council  Agreement Between the Government 
of the United  States of America and the Government of the Republic of Ecuador Relating to Trade Rules and 
Transparency. Viewed at: https://ustr.gov/sites/default/files/files/agreements/tifa/US -Ecuador_Protocol.pdf .  
46 USMCA, Chapter 14, Annexes C and D.  
47 USMCA, Chapter 14, Articles 14.4, 14.5, and 14.10.  WT/TPR/S/434 /Rev.1  • United States  
 
- 53 - 
 
  Type  Partners  
Sudan, Uganda, Zambia, Zimbabwe), East African Community (Burundi, Kenya, Rwanda, Tanzania, 
and Uganda), Economic Community of West African States (ECOWAS) (Benin, Burkina  Faso, 
Cabo Verde, Cô te d'Ivoire , Gambia, Ghana, Guinea, Guinea -Bissau, Liberia, Mali, Niger, Nigeria, 
Senegal, Sierra  Leone, Togo), Egypt, Gulf Cooperation Council (Kingdom of Bahrain, State of Kuwait, 
Oman, Qatar, Kingdom of Saudi  Arabia, United  Arab Emirates), Georgia, Ghan a, Iceland, Indonesia, 
Islamic Republic of Iraq, State of Kuwait, Laos, Lebanon, Liberia, Libya, Maldives, Malaysia, Mauritius, 
Mongolia, Mozambique, Nepal, New  Zealand, Nigeria, Pakistan, Paraguay, Philippines, Oman, Qatar, 
Rwanda, Kingdom  of Saudi  Arabia , South  Africa, Sri  Lanka, Switzerland, Thailand, Tunisia, Türkiye , 
Ukraine, United  Arab Emirates, West African Economic and Monetary Union (WAEMU) (Benin, 
Burkina  Faso, Côte  d'Ivoire , Guinea -Bissau, Mali, Niger, Senegal, and Togo), Uruguay, Viet  Nam, 
Yeme n. There is also a Trade and Investment Framework Agreement between the American Institute 
in Chinese  Taipei and the Taipei Economic and Cultural Representative Office in the United  States.  
Bilateral 
investment 
treaties (BITs)  Albania, Argentina, Armenia, Azerbaijan, Kingdom of Bahrain, Bangladesh, Bulgaria, Cameroon, 
Congo, Croatia, Czech  Republic, Democratic Republic of Congo, Egypt, Estonia, Georgia, Grenada, 
Honduras, Jamaica, Jordan, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyz  Republic, Latvia, Lithuania, R epublic of Moldova, 
Mongolia, Morocco, Mozambique, Panama, Poland, Romania, Rwanda, Senegal, Slovak  Republic, 
Sri Lanka, Trinidad and Tobago, Tunisia, Türkiye , Ukraine, and Uruguay.  
Free trade 
agreements  Australia, Kingdom of Bahrain, CAFTA -DR (El  Salvador, Honduras, Nicaragua, Guatemala, Costa  Rica, 
Dominican  Republic), Chile, Colombia, Israel (limited investment provisions), Jordan, Republic of 
Korea, Morocco, Oman, Panama, Peru, Singapore, and USMCA (Canada and Mexico)  
Source:  USDOC , Bilateral I nvestment Treaties: Enforcement and Compliance . Viewed at: 
https://tcc.export.gov/Trade_Agreements/Bilateral_Investment_Treaties/index.asp ; and USTR, 
Trade & In vestment Framework Agreements . Viewed at: https://ustr.gov/trade -agreements/trade -
investment -framework -agreements . 
2.4.2   Investment promotion  
2.48.   The United  States maintains Sele ctUSA as its investment promotion agency at the federal 
level. SelectUSA was created in 2011, and is housed in the US Department of Commerce (USDOC)'s 
International Trade Administration  (ITA); it is in charge of attracting into and retaining FDI in the 
United States. SelectUSA also heads the Federal Interagency Investment Working Group (IIWG) 
that brings together about 20  federal agencies that have a role in investment policy and engages in 
coordinating specific activities and bringing together government r esources.48 The Investment 
Advisory Council (IAC) consists of representatives from the private sector that make 
recommendations and advise the Secretary of Commerce on the development and implementation 
of strategies and program s to attract and retain FDI.  
2.49.   The main operations of SelectUSA include connecting businesses with federal resource 
networks, providing direct and personalized introductions to economic development organizations, 
helping businesses navigate regulations and program s, and providing data,  analytics, and strategic 
counselling services. More recently, it has also added a reshoring service, ReSelectUSA, that helps 
U.S. firms return operations to the United  States.  
2.4.3   Investment screening and restrictions  
2.4.3.1   Investment screening  
2.4.3.1.1   Committee on Foreign Investment in the United  States (CFIUS)  
2.50.   CFIUS is an interagency committee of the Government that is authorized to review certain 
transactions involving foreign investment in the United  States and certain real estate transactions 
by foreign persons,  to determine the effect of such transactions on national security. CFIUS operates 
pursuant to statutes, Executive Order, and regulations administered by the Department of the 
Treasury.49 During the review period, there was no change in the composition of CFIUS, and it is 
still composed of nine Cabinet members, two ex officio  members, and several White House offices 
that observe and participate, as appropriate, and other relevant agencies depending on the particular 
transaction under review. However, CFIUS' s underlying review procedures, the type of transactions 
examined, and the laws and regulations governing them underwent significant changes during the 
review period. Among other things, the United  States introduced mandatory filing and review of 
 
48 SelectUSA, The Federal Interagency Investment Working Group . Viewed a t: 
https://www.selectusa.gov/iiwg .  
49 CFIUS operates pursuant to Section  721 of the Defense Production Act of 1950 (50 U.S.C. 4565), as 
amended, and as implemented by Executive Order 11858, as amended, and the  regulations in Chapter VIII of 
Title 31 of the Code of Federal Regulations.  WT/TPR/S/434 /Rev.1  • United States  
 
- 54 - 
 
  certain f oreign investment transactions. The role of CFIUS and U.S. screening of foreign investments 
in general have undergone one of the most important changes since CFIUS's legal authority was last 
amended in 2007 through the Foreign Investment and National Secur ity Act (FINSA). These changes 
were authorized in the Foreign Investment Risk Review Modernization Act of 2018 (FIRRMA ), 
P.L. 115-23, enacted on 13  August  2018. Certain provisions of FIRRMA became effective 
immediately upon enactment of the statute, while others came into effect through implementing 
regulations issued in January  2020 and thereafter.50 Other regulations defining the term "principal 
place of business" as it relates to the definition of U.S.  business and establishing filing fees came 
into forc e in May  2020. In September  2020, Treasury published a final rule requiring transactions to 
be notified to CFIUS under certain circumstances (Table  2.6). 
Table  2.6 Overview of regulations to implement the FIRRMA, 2018 -22 
Federal Register 
publication date  Effective date  Summary  C.F.R. 
Reference  
Federal Register, Vol. 83, 
No. 197, 11 October  2018 11 October  2018 Implements a pilot program covering certain critical 
technologies transactions during 10  Nov. 2018 -12 Feb. 
2020 31 C.F.R. 
Part 801  
Federal Register, Vol. 85, 
No. 12, 17 January  2020 13 February  2020 Implements changes that FIRRMA made to CFIUS's  
jurisdiction and process, including with respect to certain 
non-controlling "covered investments" that afford a 
foreign person certain access, rights, or involvement in 
certain types of U.S. businesses. It also makes 
amendments to the definition of the te rm "substantial 
interest" and a related provision.  31 C.F.R. 
Part 800  
Federal Register, Vol. 85, 
No. 12, 17 January  2020, 
Rules and Regulations  13 February  2020 New regulations governing transactions by foreign 
persons involving real estate in the United  States  31 C.F.R. 
Part 802  
Federal Register, Vol. 85, 
No. 83, 29 April 2020; and 
Federal Register, Vol.  85, 
No. 145, 28 July 2020 1 May 2020 Defines the term the term ''principal place of business''.  
Establishes filing fees  31 C.F.R. 
Parts 800 
and 802  
Federal Register, Vol. 85, 
No. 179, 
15 September  2020 15 October  2020 Modifies the mandatory declaration provision for certain 
foreign investment transactions involving a U.S. 
business that produces, designs, tests, manufactures, 
fabricates, or develops on e or more critical technologies.  31 C.F.R. 
Part 800  
Federal Register, Vol. 87, 
No. 4, 6 January  2022 4 February  2022 Amends the definitions of excepted foreign state and 
excepted foreign real estate foreign state  31 C.F.R. 
Parts 800 
and 802  
Source:  Department of the Treasury, CFIUS Laws and Guidance . Viewed at: 
https://home.treasury.gov/policy -issues/international/the -committee -on-foreign -investment -in-the-
united-states -cfius/cfius -laws-and-guidance . 
2.51.   A significant change introduced by FIRRMA was the expansion of CFIUS's jurisdiction to 
include certain non -controlling, non -passive investments, direct or indirect, by a foreign person 
investing in certain types of U.S. businesses. These include U.S. businesses involved in critical 
technologies, critical infrastructure, or sensitive personal data (referred to as "TID U.S. businesses"). 
With respect to notifying CFIUS of transactions, FIRRMA required that certain tran sactions be notified 
(as opposed to solely a voluntary filing system). Mandatory filing applies to certain foreign 
investment transactions involving "critical technologies" or significant foreign government interest 
in transactions involving TID U.S.  busin esses, as further described in the relevant regulations  
(31 C.F.R. 800.401) . FIRRMA authorized review of certain real estate transactions by foreign persons 
if in or near airports or maritime ports, or in proximity to U.S. government facilities. FIRRMA als o, 
made process changes in terms of the time period for reviews and investigations of transactions, 
introduced a short -form filing process with an expedited timeframe, and authorized filing fees.51 
2.52.   Pursuant to FIRRMA, CFIUS also introduced the concepts of "excepted foreign state", 
"excepted real estate foreign state", "excepted investor", and "excepted real estate investor". 
Qualification as an excepted foreign state requires, inter alia, that the Committee determines that 
the state has established and is e ffectively utilizing a robust process to assess foreign investments 
for national security risks and to facilitate coordination with the United  States on matters relating to 
investment security. As of January  2022, CFIUS has identified Australia, Canada, Ne w Zealand, and 
 
50 Department of the Treasury, The Committee on Foreign Investment in the United  States (CFIUS) . 
Viewed at: https://home.treasury.gov/policy -issues/international/the -committee -on-foreign -investment -in-the-
united -states -cfius. 
51 The fees, which apply only to transactions filed as a notice rather than as a short -form declaration, 
are based on a tiered system and range between 0 and USD  300,000, dependent upon the transaction's value.  WT/TPR/S/434 /Rev.1  • United States  
 
- 55 - 
 
  the United  Kingdom as excepted foreign states.52 To qualify as an excepted investor, a foreign 
investor must have certain ties to an excepted foreign state, as described in the relevant 
regulations.53 Excepted investors and excepted real estate investors are not subject to CFIUS 
jurisdiction over non -controlling investments in TID U.S.  businesses and are exempted from certain 
mandatory filing requirements for investments in U.S.  businesses involving cr itical technologies.  
2.53.   During the period from 10  November  2018 to 12  February  2020, and pursuant to FIRRMA, 
CFIUS put in place a Pilot Program to address "ongoing risks to the national security of the 
United  States resulting from two urgent and compelling ci rcumstances: (1) the ability and 
willingness of some foreign parties to obtain equity interests in U.S. businesses in order to affect 
certain decisions, and (2) the rapid pace of technological change in certain U.S. industries".54 The 
Pilot Program impleme nted the expanded scope of transactions subject to CFIUS jurisdiction, to 
include certain non -controlling investments in U.S. businesses involved in critical technologies in 
certain industries. Pursuant to a FIRRMA provision authorizing CFIUS to require de clarations for 
certain transactions, declarations for transactions under the Pilot Program were mandatory. The 
program ended on 13  February  2020, when the regulations implementing many of the provisions in 
FIRRMA went into effect.55 CFIUS examined 124  declarations under the Pilot Program . A new filing 
format, the short -form declaration, was introduced;  parties may continue to use it for any 
transaction, offering a condensed initial review period of 30 days rather than 45 days. Under both 
the Pilot Program a nd the current regulations, CFIUS is authorized to take one of four actions with 
regard to a declaration: (i)  complete all action with respect to a transaction (i.e.  clear it to proceed); 
(ii) determine that CFIUS is unable to complete action with respect to the transaction on the basis 
of the declaration; (iii)  request that the parties to the transaction file a written notice; or (iv)  initiate 
a unilateral review of the transaction.  
2.54.   During 2017 -19, the number of CFIUS notices filed remained generally stead y, with CFIUS 
clearing a greater percentage of cases in the initial review period. In 2020, the number of notices 
filed decreased as the number of post -FIRRMA declarations increased.56 China had the largest 
percentage of covered notices  during most of the review period (15% of total notices). However, 
China's percentage of covered transactions declined to 9% in 2020, from 24% in 2018. Over the 
same period, Japan accounted for 14.8% of total notices on average. The finance, information, and 
services sector a ccounted for 43% of covered transactions in 2020, followed by manufacturing with 
36%. It is rare that the President, upon the referral of CFIUS, blocks or prohibits a foreign 
investment. During 2017 -20, there were four such presidential decisions. A new de velopment during 
the period was the formal establishment of the Committee for the Assessment of Foreign 
Participation in the United  States Telecommunications Services Sector by Executive Order in 
April 2020.57 This review differs from the one conducted by CFIUS as it is focused on the operation 
purposes of licenses; some transactions may trigger a review by the two bodies . 
2.4.3.2   Investment restrictions  
2.55.   While the United  States encourages foreign investment, there remain 14 categories of 
long-standing requirements and restrictions in a variety of sectors that place special requirements 
on investors or curtail foreign ownership (Table  2.7). These impact sectors such as transport, natural 
 
52 Australia and Canada will remain excepted for eign states indefinitely absent CFIUS action; a 
determination regarding the investment regimes of New  Zealand  and the United  Kingdom is required before 
February  2023 for those jurisdictions to remain excepted foreign states. U.S. Department of the Treasury , 
CFIUS Excepted Foreign States. Viewed at: https://home.treasury.gov/policy -issues/internati onal/the -
committee -on-foreign -investment -in-the-united -states -cfius/cfius -excepted -foreign -states . 
53 In determining which states to include in both categories of excepted foreign states, CFIUS is guided 
by factors such as if the country has legal authority  to review foreign investment transactions regardless of the 
type of entity and if it has arrangements with the U.S. Government on safeguarding national security matters.  
54 Determination and Temporary Provisions Pertaining to a Pilot Program to Review Certain Transactions 
Involving Foreign Persons and Critical Technologies, Federal Register  (2018), Vol.  83, No.  197, 11  October. 
Viewed at: https://home.treasury.gov/system/files/206/FR -2018-22182_1786904.pdf .  
55 CFIUS (2021), Annual Report to Congress . Report Period: CY2020 . Viewed at: 
https://home.treasury.gov/system/files/206/CFIUS -Public -Annual -Report -CY-2020.pdf . 
56 CFIUS (2021), Annual Report to Congress. Report Period: CY 2020 . Viewed at: 
https://home.treasury.gov/system/files/206/CFIUS -Public -Annual -Report -CY-2020.pdf . 
57 Executive Order 13913 of 4  April 2020, Establishing the Committee for the Assessment of Foreign 
Participation in the United  States Telecommunications Services Sector, Federal Register  (2020), Vol.  85, 
No. 68, 8 April. Viewed at: https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2020/04/08/2020 -07530/establishing -
the-committee -for-the-assessment -of-foreign -participation -in-the-united -states .  WT/TPR/S/434 /Rev.1  • United States  
 
- 56 - 
 
  resources, and investment/financial services. According to the OECD 's FDI Regulatory 
Restrictiveness Index, the United  States ranks above the OECD average in terms of restrictiveness.58 
The sectors that were indicated by the OECD as having the highest barriers were the maritime and 
fisheries sectors, and by type of restri ction were mainly in the category of equity restrictions.  
Table  2.7 Foreign investment restrictions, 2022  
Industry/subject  Provision  References  
Investment and 
foreign trade in 
services  Collection of information on investments  International Investment and 
Trade in Services Survey Act of 
1976 
Investment  Exchange of information on investment and financial data  Foreign Direct Investment and 
International Financial Data 
Improvements Act of 1990  
Agricultu re Foreign ownership of agricultural land must be reported to the 
Secretary of Agriculture  Agriculture Foreign Investment 
Disclosure Act of 1978  
Equity investments  Equity in securities requires registration with the SEC and 
requirements to disclose certain information  Domestic and Foreign 
Investment Improved 
Disclosure Act of 1977  
Maritime transport  -Restriction on the foreign ownership of U.S. -registered ships. 
Transport of government cargo tonnage to be carried by 
privately owned U.S. -flagged commercial vessels as well as 
Ex-Im Bank loan guarantee cargo to be carried on U.S. -flagged 
vessels if value over USD  20 million. U.S.  vessels must be 
owned and crewed by U.S. citizens with limited exceptions.  
-Passenger and goods transport cabotage i s limited to 
U.S.-flagged vessels owned by a U.S. citizen and built in the 
United  States. Similar restrictions apply to fishing vessels for the 
catching and transport of fish in U.S.  waters.  46 U.S.C.  
10 U.S.C. 2631  
 
 
 
 
 
46 U.S.C. 289  
19 C.F.R. 4.80  
Land transport  For land transport, cabotage is limited to U.S. persons using 
U.S.-registered and U.S. -built or duty -paid buses and trucks. 
Cross -border bus or truck services require authority from the 
Department of Transportation.  49 C.F.R. Subtitle B, Chapter III  
Air transport  Restriction on foreign investment for U.S. -registered aircraft and 
to engage in domestic air services (cabotage)  49 U.S.C. 44101  
49 U.S.C. 44102  
Mining or mineral 
rights  U.S. citizenship or U.S.  corporation requirements for the 
exploration, leasing, or purchase of land with mineral deposits, 
e.g. oil and coal, as well as similar r estrictions for rights of way 
for oil or gas pipelines on federal landsa 30 U.S.C. 22  
30 U.S.C. 24  
30 U.S.C. 181  
43 U.S.C. 1331  
Energy  -Licenses  for the construction, operation, or maintenance of 
facilities for the transmission and utilization of power on land 
and water of which the Federal Government has control, is 
limited to U.S.  citizens and domestic corporations.a 
-A license  from the Nuclear Regulatory Commission is required 
for commercial nuclear power and atomic energy; this applies to 
interstate commerce, manufacture, production, transfer, use, 
import, or export. Licensing for nuclear use in medical therapy, 
industrial and commercial purpos es, and R&D activities also has 
nearly identical restrictions.  16 U.S.C. 797(e)  
42 U.S.C. 2133(d)  
 
 
 
42 U.S.C. 2011 et seq ., 
42 U.S.C. 2133  
42 U.S.C. 2133(d)  
42 U.S.C. 2134   
Lands  Citizenship requirements to make a claim under the Desert Land 
Act and for a permit to allow grazing on public lands  43 U.S.C. 321  
43 U.S.C. 315(b)  
Communications  Restriction of foreign ownership and operation of mass 
communications media  47 U.S.C. 310(a )(b)(c)  
Banking  Regulations or restrictions on bank holding companies, citizenship 
for directors of national banks, and limitations on foreign banking 
corporations and branches of foreign banks  12 U.S.C. 1841 -1849 
Exporting activities  Restrictions under the Export Trade Company Act  15 U.S.C.  4011-4021 
Investment 
company regulations  Restriction on securities in interstate commerce  15 U.S.C. 80a -1 
15 U.S.C. 77jjj(a)(1)  
a According to the authorities, this does not preclude foreign investors from obtaining mining licenses  
through locally incorporated firms, and thus it does not present a de facto barrier in practice.  
Source:  SelectUSA (2021), FDI Restrictions: Limitations o n Foreign Investment into the United  States . 
Viewed at: https://www.trade.gov/sites/default/files/2021 -05/Chapter%206%20 -
%20FDI%20Restrictions.pdf . 
 
 
 
58 OECD, FDI Regulatory Restrictiveness Index . Viewed at: 
https://stats.oecd.org/Index.aspx?datasetcode=FDIINDEX# .  WT/TPR/S/434 /Rev.1  • United States  
 
- 57 - 
 
  3  TRADE POLICIES AND PRACTICES BY MEASURE  
3.1  Measures Directly Affecting Imports  
3.1.1   Customs procedures, valuation, and requirements  
3.1.1.1   Customs procedures and operations  
3.1.  Customs procedures, facilitation, and related requirements are overseen and carried out by 
U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP), which is the United  States' unified border entity 
operating under the U.S. Department of Homeland  Security (DHS). CBP oversees trade and customs 
operations at 328 ports of entry throughout the country, i.e. points of entry by land, sea, and air, 
as well as operations in 50 foreign countries. CBP is the second -largest revenue collector for 
the Governme nt and is working towards its "21st Century Customs Framework" to stay modern and 
adapt to a challenging new trade landscape.1 
3.2.  CBP has seen its revenue collection nearly double over the review period as it increased from 
USD 52 billion in FY2018 to USD  93.8 billion in FY2021 (the highest on record). Most of this can be 
attributed to the special additional duties2 that were introduced during the review period (Table  3.1). 
CBP's workload increased over the period, in large part due to these special provisio ns and the 
related work in examining exclusions, which have also increased dramatically since 2018, i.e. from 
28,556 to 100,000. Implementation of the United  States -Mexico -Canada Agreement (USMCA) 
provisions have also been an important part of CBP work dur ing the period. However, the number 
of entries processed and the value of entries have not changed significantly (Table  3.1). 
3.3.  During the review period, CBP was active in examining and pursuing new ways to modernize 
its trade systems. As part of this initia tive, it launched several pilot projects using blockchain in order 
to test the feasibility of using it in different scenarios to facilitate the movement of legitimate trade 
securely.3 During FY2018/19, CBP advance -tested blockchain for intellectual proper ty rights and 
certain FTAs (the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) and the Dominican  Republic -
Central  America FTA (CAFTA -DR)). Thereafter, CBP moved towards multi -tech solutions and not 
exclusively blockchain to track supply chains and improve tra nsparency. As of 2022, five projects 
were underway with the Silicon Valley Innovation Program (SVIP) using a mix of technological 
solutions to track goods from origin to delivery on steel, pipeline oil, pipeline natural gas, 
e-commerce, and food safety. CB P has also been active in responding to specific 
COVID -19-pandemic -related matters. A  COVID -19 Cargo Resolution Team (CCRT) was established 
as a coordinating group of experts to help facilitate imports and queries on pandemic -related trade 
matters and a de dicated webpage was set up on these matters.4 Some of the activities of the CCRT  
included facilitating inbound shipments through ports of entry, expediting importation of critical 
medical supplies, and providing responses to inquiries about the importation of personal protective 
equipment, COVID -19 test kits, ventilators, and other me dical supplies. Early in the pandemic there 
was also the possibility to postpone payment of estimated duties, taxes, and fees for 90 days for 
importers experiencing a significant hardship.5 Over 2,600 importers deferred over USD  574 million 
during this pe riod.6 
3.4.  Since raising the de minimis  threshold on informal entries in February  2016 from USD  200 to 
USD 800 for duty -free entries and also due to the growth of e -commerce online purchases, the 
United  States has seen a strong and steady rise in small shipments. These include express 
 
1 CBP, 21st Century Cu stoms Framework . Viewed at: 
https://www.cbp.gov/sites/default/files/assets/documents/2021 -
Jul/21CCF%20Slick%20Sheet%20FINAL_Compli ant.pdf .  
2 Trade Act of 1974, Sections  201 and 301; and Trade Expansion Act of 1962, Section  232. 
3 CBP (2020), CBP Trade and Travel Report, Fiscal Year 2019 , January. Viewed at: 
https://www.cbp.gov/sites/default/files/assets/documents/2020 -
Jan/CBP%20FY2019%20Trade%20and%20Travel%20Report.pdf . 
4 CBP, COVID -19 Relief Imports . Viewed at: https://imports.cbp.gov/s/ .  
5 CBP, CSMS #43324033 - Reminder: COVID ‐19 – Due Dates for Estimated Duties, Taxes, and Fees 
Postponed for 90 Days . Viewed at: https://imports.cbp.gov/s/article/CSMS -43324033 -REMINDER -COVID‐19-
Due-Dates -for-Estimated -Duties -Taxes -and-Fees-Postponed -for-90-days.  
6 CBP (2021), CBP Trade and T ravel Report, Fiscal Year 2020 , February. Viewed at: 
https://www.cbp.gov/sites/default/files/assets/documents/2021 -Feb/CBP -FY2020 -Trade -and-Travel -
Report.pdf . WT/TPR/S/434 /Rev.1  • United States  
 
- 58 - 
 
  consignments and international mail shipments, which  have increased nearly 700% since FY2013. 
As a result of this significant increase in "Section  321" imports (i.e.  goods under a total value of 
USD 800 imported without paying any tax), CBP launched a pilot project on "E -Commerce 
'Section  321' Data Pilot" i n September  2019.7 The pilot aims to test the collection of certain advance 
data related to shipments of these goods eligible under Section  321 so as to reduce CBP's information 
gap on these shipments and reduce high -risk shipments.  
Table  3.1 Key figures for customs operations, FY2018 -21 
 FY2018  FY2019  FY2020  FY2021  
Value of imports processed (USD  trillion)  2.65 2.7 2.4 2.8 
Entries (No.,  million)  35.1 35.5 32.8 36.9 
Advanced electronic data on postal shipments (million)  297.8  304.3  264.0  108.3  
Duties, taxes, other fees collected (USD  billion)  52 80.7 78.8 93.8 
 Of which are duties (USD  billion)  40.6 71.9 74.4 85.5 
 Section  201 duties  527 0.716  0.9 0.96 
 Section  232 aluminum  duties  1.1 1.1 0.5 0.45 
 Section  232 steel duties  3.4 4 1.3 1.6 
 Section  301 China duties  8 29 35.6 44.0 
Section  232 exclusion requests (No. to date)  28,556  83,000  100,000  109,400  
Value of goods subject to AD/CVD (USD  billion)  24.2 19 18.2 30.2 
AD/CVD deposits (USD  billion)  2.3 1.9 1.8 2.4 
Source:  CBP (2022), CBP Trade and Travel Report , Fiscal Year 2021, April. Viewed at: 
https://www.cbp.gov/sites/default/files/assets/documents/2022 -
Apr/FINAL%20FY2 021_%20Trade%20and%20Travel%20Report%20%28508%20Compliant%29%20%28April%20
2022%29_0.pdf ; CBP (2021), CBP Trade and Travel Report, Fiscal Year 2020 , February. Viewed at: 
https://www.cbp.gov/sites/default/files/assets/documents/2021 -Feb/CBP -FY2020 -Trade -and-Travel -Report.pdf ; 
CBP (2020), CBP Trade and Travel Report, Fiscal Year 2019 , January. Viewed at: 
https://www.cbp.gov/sites/default/files/assets/documents/2020 -
Jan/CBP%20FY2019%20Trade%20and%20Travel%20Report.pdf ; CBP (2019), CBP Trade and Travel Report, Fisca l 
Year 2018 , January. Viewed at: https://www.cbp.gov/sites/default/files/assets/documents/2019 -
Jul/CBP%20FY18%20Trade %20and%20Travel%20Report -compliant.pdf ; and CBP (2018), CBP Trade and Travel 
Report, Fiscal Year 2017 , 13 February. Viewed at: 
https://www.cbp.gov/sites/default/files/assets/documents/2018 -Feb/CBP -FY17-Trade -and-Travel -Report -Final.pdf . 
3.5.  CBP and the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) cooperate with foreign customs 
offices through Customs Mutual Assistance Agreements (CMAA),  which provide the framework for 
the exchange of information to assist the United  States and its international partners in the 
enforcement against customs offences. Most CMAAs are legally binding, government -to-government 
international agreements; as at De cember  2021, there were 71 CMAAs in force, with 4 entering into 
force between 2018 and 2021.8 
3.1.1.2   Import procedures and formalities  
3.6.  Importer s need to file the entry documents in order to import goods. These include the 
manifest, or nowadays, eManifest, bill o f lading and an electronic cargo declaration, which must be 
submitted to CBP through the Automated Commercial Environment (ACE). Due to the development 
of the single window (ACE), all customs processing is handled through this electronic system. There 
are three types of customs entries, according to the value of the imported good: (i)  formal entries, 
for commercial and resale products, valued at over USD  2,500; (ii)  informal entries, for those valued 
between USD  801-USD 2,500; and (iii)  Section  321 entries,  for those valued at USD  800 and below, 
i.e. the de minimis  threshold for duty -free entries. In the case of formal entries, a surety bond must 
be provided to customs. Section  321 entries are generally simplified and released expeditiously, but 
they are sti ll subject to various inspections or controls depending on the product, e.g. for food, 
transport, and consumer safety reasons, or if subject to quota or trade remedies. Filing a manifest, 
i.e. eManifest, is generally not required, but it depends on the con veyance of the goods.  
3.7.  CBP automated procedures also include an Electronic Certification System (eCERT) component 
for secure transfer of customs information from foreign governments. This is used mainly for 
licenses , origin certificates, and TPL quota admin istration where endorsement by a foreign entity is 
needed for certain customs processes. For example, in order to receive preferential duties, CBP 
 
7 CBP (2019), Privacy Impact Assessment for the E -Commerce "Section  321" Data Pilot . Viewed at: 
https://www.dhs.go v/sites/default/files/publications/privacy -pia-cbp-section321 -059-september2019.pdf .  
8 The four new ones are with Paraguay, Tunisia, the United  Kingdom, and Viet  Nam.  WT/TPR/S/434 /Rev.1  • United States  
 
- 59 - 
 
  requires the use of eCERT.9 In the case of certain textiles imported under preference programs or 
quantity l imitations, a so -called "textile visa", i.e. an export document attesting to the details of a 
textile shipment, must be obtained from the foreign authorized official.10 
3.1.1.3   Policy and strategies  
3.8.  During the review period, CBP has been guided by its CBP Strategy  2020-2025, which sets out 
12 strategic initiatives. The strategy helps prioritize CBP resources such as in investing in technology, 
partnerships, and its workforce.11 Within this overall framework, CBP's Office of Trade (OT) has 
developed its Strategy 202 5, which has five primary goals: efficient trade facilitation, effective 
risk-based enforcement, secure and sustainable e -commerce, trade operational expertise, and 
workforce skills and capabilities (Box  3.1). Each of these main goals has a number of specific 
objectives and desired outcomes such as further developing the single window application, 
expanding strategic partnerships, and developing e -commerce standards and best practices.  
Box 3.1 CBP's Office o f Trade "Strategy 202 0-2025" Primary Goals  
Goal 1: Efficient Trade Facilitation – Streamline administrative processes to increase efficiency, lower cost, and reduce 
processing times to ensure compliance with trade laws and Administration policy goals  
Obje ctives   Desired Outcomes  Key Initiatives  
• Adopt digital and technological 
innovations to reduce trade compliance 
burden  
• Improve customer experience across 
trade interactions  
• Simplify trade interactions through 
integrated account management and 
billing  
• Pursue the 21st Century Customs 
Framework to modernize and enhance 
trade processes while protecting revenue 
and safeguarding the economy  • Decreased administrative costs  
• Increased integration with private 
sector digital supply chains  
• Increase d transparency and data 
sharing  
• Increased compliance and security  • Automated Commercial Environment 
(ACE) "Single Window" enhancements  
• Foster the adoption of CBP IT digital 
enterprises and technological 
innovations  
• Deploy robotic process Automation  
Goal 2: Effective Risk -Based Enforcement – Support a level trade playing field through consequence delivery, risk -based 
analysis, and an intelligence -driven enforcement approach  
Objectives  Desired Outcomes  Key Initiatives  
• Rigorously assess trade compliance risks 
through analytics and intelligence as a 
foundation for PTIa and industry sector 
plans  
• Build analytical and data management 
capabilities necessary to identify 
highest -risk transactions and entities  
• Deploy tailo red interventions to address 
identified risks, and limit interventions 
against compliant trade activity  
• Implement risk -based bonding to reduce 
U.S. Government financial exposure  • Every shipment has the data 
needed for screening and an 
evaluated risk lev el; information 
aggregated for real -time account 
risk profiles  
• CBP has a spectrum of 
interventions tailored to varying risk 
profiles  
• Predictable trade violations are 
identified prior to shipment; 
interventions are executed beyond 
U.S. borders when war ranted  
• CBP and commercial information 
is available to CBP trade personnel 
for best risk -based decision -making  • Consequence delivery  
• Intelligent enforcement to update 
targeting systems and enhanced 
bonding  
• Advanced Trade Analytics Platform 
(ATAP) dev elopment and improvement  
• Implement "federated view" to ensure 
CBP has an integrated awareness of 
activities at all levels  
 
9 CBP, eCERT General Information and Requirements . Viewed at: 
https://www.cbp.gov/trade/quota/ecert/requirements .  
10 CBP, Textile Visas . Viewed at: https://www.cbp.gov/trade/quota/quota -faq.  
11 CBP (2019), Strategy 2020 -2025. Viewed at: 
https://www.cbp.gov/sites/default/files/assets/documents/2019 -Jun/CBP -2020-2025-Strategy -Plan-Document -
FINAL -508-compressed.pdf .  WT/TPR/S/434 /Rev.1  • United States  
 
- 60 - 
 
  Goal 3: Innovative and Sustainable E -Commerce  – Create new paradigm for trade facilitation and enforcement in light 
of unprecedented growth in e -commerce  
Objectives  Desired Outcomes  Key Initiatives  
• Create new or tailor existing targeting 
and enforcement actions to low -value, 
high-volume shipments  
• Improve data sharing and data 
reporting requirements from 
non-tradition al parties to effectively vet 
and target noncompliance  
• Build upon existing networks to 
enhance partnerships with domestic 
and international stakeholders that 
address small parcel shipment  • OT regularly collects advance data 
from new supply chain parties  and 
analyses information to enhance 
enforcement efforts  
• OT applies e -commerce strategy  
to current trade models and integrates 
it into trade legislation  • Implement effective consequence 
delivery based on the unique provisions 
for low -value shipments  
• Develop e -commerce standards and 
best practices and educate community  
• Expand Sec. 321 Data pilot  
• Streamline IPR enforcement actions 
to adapt to new e -commerce risks  
Goal 4: Trade Operational Expertise – Strengthen OT's presence among national economic  and trade policy makers and 
industry stakeholders to leverage industry practices, legal requirements, and government capabilities  
Objectives  Desired Outcomes  Key Initiatives  
• Proactively engage economic and 
trade policy stakeholders and 
influencers on topics at the intersection 
of trade policy and operational 
implementation  
• Incorporate analytical insights and 
capabilities to provide an assessment of 
trade policy options  • OT is consistently involved in priority 
trade conversations with executive, 
legislative, and industry policy leaders  • Lead the shaping of global trade 
standards  
• Expand strategic partnerships  
• Communication, engagement, and 
outreach with intergovernmental 
partners and trade industry partners  
Goal 5: Workforce Skills  and Capabilities – Prepare the trade workforce with new skills and capabilities while expanding 
sources of talent for new hires  
Objectives  Desired Outcomes  Key Initiatives  
• Formalize progression for career 
paths  
• Expand expertise development and 
training programs  
• Foster a flexible work -life balance  
• Expand sources of talent for new hires 
and use all hiring authorities  
• Grow data analytics skills and 
capabilities to adapt to the changing 
trade environment  • OT critical roles are  fully staffed, well 
trained, and developed through well -
defined career paths  
• Human capital strategy established, 
linking needed employee capabilities 
with integrated recruiting and retention 
plan 
• OT is ranked in the top quartile of 
places to work in t he federal 
government  
• Trade retention exceeds federal  
government average  • Strategic Staffing Pillar (recruitment, 
direct hire, relocation, incentives)  
• Mission support system and programs 
for improved recruitment and applicant 
processing  
• Build Trade and Cargo Academy 
facility; curriculum redesign, 
establishment of knowledge 
management approach  
a Priority Trade Issues (PTIs) for CBP are high -risk areas that can cause significant revenue loss, harm 
the U.S. economy, or threaten the health and saf ety of the U.S. people. Current PTIs are Agriculture 
and Quotas, Anti -dumping  and Countervailing Duty (AD/CVD), Import Safety, Intellectual Property 
Rights, Revenue, Textiles/Wearing Apparel, and Trade Agreements. Viewed at: 
https://www.cbp.gov/trade/priority -issues . 
Source:  CBP, OT Strategy 2025 . Viewed at: https://www. cbp.gov/sites/default/files/assets/documents/2020 -
Dec/Office%20of%20Trade%20Strategy%202025_Final_0.pdf . 
3.9.  CBP has also developed an E -Commerce Strategy in response to the growing trade volumes of 
e-commerce, non -compliant shipments, and to raise consumer aw areness. The Strategy responds 
with four main goals: facilitating international trade standards for e -commerce to support economic 
prosperity; driving private sector compliance through enforcement resources and incentives; 
enhancing and adapting all affect ed CBP operations to respond to emerging supply chain dynamics 
created by the rapid growth of e -commerce; and enhancing legal and regulatory authorities to better 
posture CBP and interagency partners to address emerging threats.12 Through the Strategy, CBP 
seeks to facilitate trade and gains in efficiency, and to play a more substantial role in trade policy.  
3.1.1.4   Foreign Trade Zones (FTZs) and bonded warehouses  
3.10.   During the review period, U.S. FTZs continued to be an important part of the  U.S. trade 
regime as foreign shipments into FTZs accounted for 10.6% of U.S. imports and they employed 
 
12 CBP (2020), CBP E -Commerce Strategy . Viewed at: 
https://www.cbp.gov/sites/default/files/assets/documents/2020 -Feb/E -
Commerce%20Strategy%20Overview_0%20%281%29.pdf .  WT/TPR/S/434 /Rev.1  • United States  
 
- 61 - 
 
  470,000 persons (about 3.8% of U.S. employment in manufacturing) in 2020. FTZs remain governed 
by the 1934 Foreign Trade Zones Act, as amended, and CBP regulations (19 C.F.R. Part 146).13 
There were 195 active FTZs in 2020 and every U.S. state maintained at least one zone; they remain 
outside the U.S. customs territory for duty and prohibited merchandise purposes only. CBP oversees 
FTZs through audit and inspection. Other local, state, or federal rules apply as they may pertain to, 
inter alia, environmental, safety, and labor measures. While no retail trade can occur in FTZs, they 
allow most other activities such as assembly, cleaning, manufacturing, mixin g, processing, 
repackaging, repairs, salvaging, storage, testing, and destruction of goods. FTZs are generally 
established by a public authority, e.g. port or city, and operate pursuant to a grant from the FTZ 
Board  (composed of the Secretaries of Commerce  and of the Treasury) , which governs all U.S. FTZs.  
3.11.   The manufacturing of certain products and product groups as well as certain activities are 
prohibited by the regulations or otherwise not approved in practice by the FTZ Board for various 
reasons. For exa mple, production of alcohol, tobacco, firearms, steel, textiles, and sugar and 
blending of petroleum products are not allowed. Some of these restrictions emanate from tax 
avoidance or safety matters, but many reflect trade concerns such as evasion of quota s and other 
trade measures, or are applied on products that have traditionally been import sensitive.14 
Nevertheless, a wide range of activities take place in the zones, mainly production and distribution 
activities. The main sectors of production over the  period were oil/petroleum, pharmaceuticals, and 
vehicle parts; the top operations being performed for export were concentrated in auto 
manufacturing/assembly and petroleum refining (Table  3.2). During the review period, there was 
significant growth in pha rmaceutical production, buoyed by responses to the COVID -19 pandemic, 
and electric car production operations.  
Table  3.2 Overview of FTZs, 2018 -20 
 2018  2019  2020  
Active FTZs (No.)  195 193 195 
Firms (No.) 3,300  3,300  3,400  
Employment (No.)  440,000  460,000  470,000  
Shipments into zones (USD  billion)  794 767 625 
 Foreign inputs (USD  billion)  297 279 254 
 Domestic inputs (USD  billion)  497 488 371 
Exports (USD  billion)  113 111 94 
Largest production industries (in 
terms of foreign inputs received)  Oil/petroleum, vehicle 
parts, consumer 
electronics  Oil/petroleum, 
pharmaceuticals, vehicle 
parts Pharmaceuticals, 
oil/petroleum, vehicle 
parts 
Top production operations (in 
terms of exports)  Valero Refining -Texas, LP, 
Mercedes -Benz U.S. 
International  Tesla, Inc., Valero Refining -
Texas, LP, Mercedes -Benz 
U.S. International  Cheniere Energy 
Partners LP, Tesla Inc., 
Mercedes -Benz U.S. 
International  
Source:  Foreign Trade Zone Board (2021), 82nd Annua l Report of the Foreign -Trade Zones Board to the 
Congress of the United  States , August. Viewed at: https://www.trade.gov/sites/default/files/2021 -
08/AR -2020_0.pdf ; Foreign Trade Zone Board (2020), 81st Annual Report of the Foreign -Trade 
Zones Board to the Congress of the United  States , November. Viewed at: 
https://www.trade.gov/sites/defa ult/files/2020 -11/AR -2019.pdf ; and Foreign Trade Zone Board 
(2019), 80th Annual Report of the Foreign -Trade Zones Board to the Congress of the United  States , 
November  2019. Viewed at: https://www.trade.gov/sites/default/files/2020 -10/AR -2018.pdf . 
3.12.   In comparison to those of other countries, U.S. FTZs are somewhat unique in the fact that 
they facilitate importation into the U.S. market rather than exportation to foreign markets. 
Furthermore, they operate much like an extension of the domestic industry as the majority of 
shipments into the zones are domestic materials, with 63% of shipments from the zones directed 
mainly to the U.S. market and consumers. There has been increased attent ion and interest in FTZs 
and their policy during the review period mainly due to the economic and trade costs of the 
Section  201, 232, and 301 tariffs implemented in 2018.  
3.13.   Bonded warehouses also continue to be an important part of the U.S. trade regime. In  2020, 
imports into FTZs and bonded warehouses amounted to USD  217.3  billion.15 U.S. bonded 
warehouses were established pursuant to 19  U.S.C . 1555, whereas their operations are governed 
 
13 P.L. 73-397, 19  U.S.C. 81a -81u. Viewed at: https://www.trade.gov/ftz -act; and 19 C.F.R. Part 146. 
Viewed at: https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title -19/chapter -I/part -146.  
14 CBP (2011), Foreign -Trade Zones Manual . Viewed at: 
https://www.cbp.gov/sites/default/files/documents/FTZmanual2011.pdf .  
15 USITC Dataweb.  WT/TPR/S/434 /Rev.1  • United States  
 
- 62 - 
 
  by 19  U.S.C . 19, and there were no significant changes to the regime d uring the review period. 
There are 11 different types or classes of customs bonded warehouses authorized by CBP, mostly 
intended for storage but some manufacturing or processing can take place depending on the type, 
e.g. smelting and refining metals, manuf acture of cigars, and other in -bond manufacturing solely for 
export. Compared with FTZs, bonded warehouses are generally more restrictive: goods may be 
stored for a maximum of five years and there are limits to the types of processing or manufacturing 
allowed. However, bonded warehouses provide benefits such as not having to pay duties until the 
goods exit them for U.S.  consumption with duties determined on the basis of the final article leaving 
the warehouse, and the possibility to export the goods or tran sfer them to another warehouse.  
3.1.1.5   Violations and enforcement  
3.14.   There are various types of trade violations that are identified and enforced by CBP; the most 
prevalent are IPR  violations such as counterfeit trademarks and pirated copyrights.16 The 
misclassification of goods and missing or fake country of origin markings are the other most 
significant categories of violations.17 CBP also coordinates with other government agencie s on 
enforcement of laws on safety, consumer protection, and health matters, so as to streamline federal 
efforts and inspections.18 In terms of IPR infringements, there was a slight decrease in the number 
of seizures from a 33,810 in FY2018 to 27,107 in FY 2021 due to the COVID -19 pandemic. The total 
value of the seizures remained relatively stable, between USD  1.3-USD 1.5 billion, over the 
FY2018 -20 period. However, it significantly increased in FY2021 to USD  3.3 billion  due to a return 
to pre  pandemic trad ing level and an increase in the overall number of seizures (Table  3.3). At the 
same time, the pandemic has also created some shifts in the type of products seized, as in FY2020 
there were almost 1,000  incidents of COVID -19-related products seized such as face masks, test 
kits, and chloroquine tablets; most of these were via express consignment imports. Overall, IPR 
seizures were highly concentrated from two sources: China; and Hong  Kong,  China, accounting for 
79% of all 2020 IPR seizures, and some  90% arri ved by express consignment and international mail 
carriers.19 
3.15.   CBP undertook a number of initiatives in order to reduce IPR and other violations during the 
review period. Since 2015, CBP has facilitated the reporting of trade violations by establishing the 
e-Allegations Program, which allows for electronic submission of suspected violations to CBP. A 
dedicated website has been established for this reporting.20 The Donations Acceptance Program 
(DAP) was created in FY2015 as an arrangement to work more collabo ratively with industry to 
improve trade facilitation and enforcement activities. In terms of IPR enforcement, since the 
Program's inception, CBP has entered into 43 DAP partnerships that were IPR -related in order to 
accept tools and technology to verify an d authenticate merchandise.  
3.16.   In FY2019/20, the U.S. administration launched a number of initiatives to counter online sales 
and trafficking of counterfeit and pirated goods. A report by the Department of Homeland Security 
(DHS) in January  2020 highlighted t hat the online availability of counterfeit and pirated goods 
continued to increase and there was a need for stronger government action.21 An Executive Order 
of 31 January  2020 ordered the implementation by CBP of a number of the recommendations from 
the re port including many that involve CBP operations such as excluding trade violators from 
obtaining an importer of record number, creation of an international mail noncompliance metric, and 
 
16 These i nclude imported goods made through forced labor, duty evasion violations, import safety 
violations, shipping violations, and unauthorized import/export of defense  articles.  
17 CBP, Allegation Trends . Viewed at: https://www.cbp.gov/trade/e -allegations .  
18 Through the Commercial Targeting and Analysis Center (CTAC), CBP has memoranda of 
understanding (MOUs) with the following federal agencies: Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau (TTB), 
Animal Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS), Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC), Environmental 
Protection Agency (EPA), Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS), Food and Drug Administration (FDA), Food Safety 
and Inspection Service (FSIS), Immigration and Customs Enf orcement (ICE), National Highway Traffic Safety 
Administration (NHTSA), National Marine Fisheries Services (NMFS), and Pipeline and Hazardous Materials 
Safety Administration (PHMSA).  
19 CBP (2021), Intellectual Property Rights Seizure Statistics, Fiscal Yea r 2020 . Viewed at: 
https://www.cbp.gov/sites/default /files/assets/documents/2021 -
Sep/101808%20FY%202020%20IPR%20Seizure%20Statistic%20Book%2017%20Final%20spreads%20ALT%
20TEXT_FINAL%20%28508%29%20REVISED.pdf . 
20 CBP, Trade Violations Reporting . Viewed at: https: //eallegations.cbp.gov/s/ .  
21 DHS (2020), Combating Trafficking in Counterfeit and Pirated Goods, Report to the President of the 
United  States , 24 January. Viewed at: 
https://www.dhs.gov/sites/default/files/publications/20_0124_plcy_counterfeit -pirated -goods -report_01.pdf .  WT/TPR/S/434 /Rev.1  • United States  
 
- 63 - 
 
  publication of violation information, especially of repeat offenders.22 Certain rulemaking is required 
to implement these measures, for example to deny an importer of record number. As at March  2022, 
the drafting of the Notice of Proposed Rulemaking was ongoing. CBP has also been active in 
conducting awareness campaigns aim ed at preventive measures , such as "Truth Behind 
Counterfeits", an educative program carried out at international airports explaining the negative 
impact of purchasing of counterfeit goods.23 In FY2019, 14 such operations were held and in FY2020 
an additio nal 7 were held.  
Table  3.3 CBP enforcement statistics, FY2018 -21 
(No., unless otherwise indicated)  
 FY2018  FY2019  FY2020  FY2021  
Copyright and trademark recordation enforcements  17,500  18,735  18,757  20,758  
Shipments seized for IPR violations  33,810  27,599  26,503  27,107  
Value of shipments seized (USD  billion)  1.4 1.5 1.3 3.3 
Seizures of products posing health and safety risks  7,880  7,196  9,382  9,145  
Value of health and safety seizures (USD million)  15.8 35.2 21.6 105.5  
Wildlife trafficking violation seizures  .. 595 346 531 
Enforced labor withhold release orders (active)  30 36 44 49 
EAPA, evasion of AD/CVD orders (invest. initiated)  33 36 64 48 
Fraud, gross negligence, and negligence of AD/CVD 
requirements (USD  million)  92 81 31 43 
Non-intrusive inspection examinations (million)  .. 6.6 6.4 7.8 
.. Not available . 
Source:  CBP (2022), CBP Trade and Travel Report, Fiscal Year 2021 , April. Viewed at: 
https://www.cbp.gov/sites/default/files/assets/documents/2022 -
Apr/FINAL%20FY2 021_%20Trade%20and%20Travel%20Report%20%28508%20Compliant%29%20%28A
pril%202022%29_0.pdf ; CBP (2021), CBP Trade and Travel Report, Fiscal Year 2020 , February. Viewed at: 
https://www.cbp.gov/sites/default/files/assets/documents/2021 -Feb/CBP -FY2020 -Trade -and-Travel -
Report.pdf ; CBP (2020), CBP Trade and Trave l Report, Fiscal Year 2019 , January. Viewed at: 
https://www.cbp.gov/sites/default/files/assets/documents/2020 -
Jan/CBP%20FY201 9%20Trade%20and%20Travel%20Report.pdf ; CBP (2019), CBP Trade and Travel 
Report, Fiscal Year 2018 , January. Viewed at: 
https://www.cbp.gov/sites/default/files/assets/documents/2019 -
Jul/CBP%20FY18%20Trade%20and%20Travel%20Report -compliant.pdf ; and CBP (2018 ), CBP Trade and 
Travel Report, Fiscal Year 2017 , 13 February. Viewed at: 
https://www.cbp.gov/sites/default/files/assets/documents/2018 -Feb/CBP -FY17-Trade -and-Travel -Report -
Final.pdf . 
3.1.1.6   Trade facilitation  
3.17.   Trade facilitation has been an important part of U.S. trade policy and has guided CBP policies 
and procedures in recent years. The Trade Facilitation and Trade Enforcement Act of 2015 (TFTEA) 
continues to be the main legislation and has functioned to enhance a fair and competitive trade 
environment th rough private sector collaboration, trade enforcement measures, business 
transformation, and the modernization of processes and procedures. The TFTEA also established the 
public sector Commercial Customs Operations Advisory Committee (COAC), to advise CBP on all 
matters involving its commercial operations. The COAC has quarterly public meetings and is 
composed of a number of subcommittees, some of which specifically address trade facilitation 
matters. A number of trade facilitation measures were still being  implemented during the review 
period and a few new initiatives were launched.  
3.18.   The United  States has made seven notifications under the Agreement on Trade Facilitation 
since its inception. These include five notifications on Information on Assistance and S upport for 
Capacity Building under Article  22 of the Agreement for the years 2015 -19, and two notifications of 
 
22 Ensuring Safe and Lawful E -Commerce for United  States Consumers, Businesses, Government Supply 
Chains, and Intell ectual Property Rights Holders , Executive Order No.  13904, Federal Register  (2020), Vol.  85, 
No. 24, 31  January,  pp. 6725-6729. Viewed at: https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2020/02/05/2020 -
02439/ensuring -safe-and-lawful -e-commerce -for-united -states -consumers -businesses -government -supply -
chains .  
23 CBP (2020), CBP Trade and Travel Report, Fiscal Year 2019 , January. Viewed at: 
https://www.cbp.gov/sites/default/files/assets/documents/2020 -
Jan/CBP%20FY2019%20Trade%20and%20Travel%20Report.pdf . WT/TPR/S/434 /Rev.1  • United States  
 
- 64 - 
 
  information required under Articles  1.4, 10.4, 10.6, and 12.2.24 The latest notification is a revision 
of the earlier one related to temporary tr ade measures put in place to combat the COVID -19 crisis.  
3.1.1.6.1   Single window  
3.19.   The Automated Commercial Environment (ACE) continues to be CBP's electronic platform for 
processing imports and exports; ACE was developed further and improved during the review period.  
As at December  2021, ACE was still adding on new features and there were a number of future 
initiatives planned. ACE's automation and process simplification efforts resulted in an estimated 
economic benefit of approximately USD  1.4 billion for the trade c ommunity and USD  106 million for 
CBP in FY2020.25 The work on ACE as the main platform for trade, or the single window, commenced 
in 2014 and the main elements were completed in 2018.26 Approximately 250 government forms 
were automated through ACE and the procedures of more than 40 government agencies were 
incorporated. Thus, all import manifest, cargo release, post release, and export processes are 
handled by ACE. The use of ACE for all electronic manifest filings has been required since 
1 May 2015.  During  the review period, new features were added to ACE to implement consolidated 
importers' deferred tax statements, the Craft Beverage Modernization Act, USMCA drawback 
changes, AD/CVD Flags for EAPA Evasion and Injunctions, and Real Time Automated Surety Int erface 
(ASI). CBP announced that it would deploy Phase 1 of ACE's Portal Modernization on 
22 January  2022.27 This modernization effort was expected to transfer existing functionality to an 
upgraded platform and thereby provide easier use and better perform ance. Some of the 
enhancements included a new log -in page, global search tool, and upgraded account user interface. 
During 2022 a number of other enhancements or changes were scheduled.28 
3.20.   The import licensing regime for steel and aluminum  monitoring is handled through a separate 
web interface at the Department of Commerce whereby importers must first apply for and receive a 
license  number in which the reference can then be submitted through the CBP ACE interface.  
3.1.1.6.2   Advance rulings  
3.21.   The United  States continues to offer advance rulings on customs matters, including 
classification, marking, origin, valuation, and carriers, and on the applicability of trade programs. 
Advance rulings, or Ruling Letters as they are called, are issued pursuant to CBP regulations in 
19 C.F.R. Part 177, and can be submitted electronically through a template, with the exception for 
rulings on valuation and carriers which must be submitted in the form of a letter. As a matter of 
policy, CBP generally makes these rulings available to the pu blic after 90 days from issuance through 
a searchable database known as the Customs Rulings Online Search System (CROSS).29 The 
regulations, however, do not specify a deadline for the issuance of rulings nor the length of their 
duration or validity. Rulings remain valid unless modified or revoked by CBP or changed by operation 
of law. As at December  2021, there were 209,848 se archable rulings available in CROSS. In 2021, 
CBP issued 3,230 rulings of which classification  rulings were the most numerous.30 
 
24 WTO docum ents G/TFA/N/USA/1, 13  June 2017; G/TFA/N/USA/1/Rev.1, 26  October  2020; 
G/TFA/N/USA/2, 12  June 2017; G/TFA/N/USA/2/Add.1, 14  June 2018; G/TFA/N/USA/3, 13  May 2019; 
G/TFA/N/USA/4, 8  October  2020; and, G/TFA/N/USA/5, 8  June 2021.  
25 CBP (2021), CBP Trade and Travel Report, Fiscal Year 2020 , February. Viewed at: 
https://www.cbp.gov/sites/default/files/assets/documents/2021 -Feb/CBP -FY2020 -Trade-and-Travel -
Report.pdf .  
26 CBP (2020), ACEopedia . Viewed at: https://www.cbp.gov/sites/default/files/assets/documents/2020 -
Nov/ACEopedia%20Nov2020_ 0.pdf.  
27 CBP, ACE Portal Modernization . Viewed at: https://www.cbp.gov/trade/automated/ace -portal -
modernization .  
28 CBP (2021), Notional Schedule for Automated Commercial Environ ment (ACE) Deployments . Viewed 
at: https://www.cbp.gov/sites/default/files/assets/documents/2022 -Apr/ACE%20Devel opment%20 -
%20Deployment%20Schedule%202022_508c.pdf . 
29 CROSS database. Viewed at: https://rulings.cbp.gov/home . Rulings are also available through 
Customs Bulletin and Decisions . See https://www.cbp.gov/trade/rulings/bulletin -decisions .  
30 There was a decline in the number of advance rulings issued during the review period : in 2018 there 
were 5,585, in 2019 there were 4,427, and in 2020 3,955. The authorities attribute this to a return to the 
baseline as there was a temporary spike in 2018 when certain trade remedies were put in place.  WT/TPR/S/434 /Rev.1  • United States  
 
- 65 - 
 
  3.1.1.6.3   Trusted trader/Authorized economic operator/Advance security programs  
3.22.   The Customs Trade Partnership Against Terrorism (CTPAT) c ontinued to be CBP's most 
important trusted trader program, with 11,000 certified partners in FY2021, accounting for 52% of 
all cargo imported into the United  States (Table  3.4).31 As CTPAT is a voluntary public -private sector 
partnership program, CBP work s closely with the private sector to improve cargo security and secure 
international supply chains. The benefits of becoming a certified partner are numerous and include 
reduced customs examinations, shorter wait times at the border, and access to FAST lan es at the 
land borders. CBP also has Mutual Recognition Arrangements (MRAs) with 14 foreign partner 
customs administrations to collaborate and recognize validation findings of the partners and thereby 
facilitating the work.32 These MRAs indicate that the s ecurity requirements or standards of the 
foreign industry partnership program, as well as its verification procedures, are the same or similar 
to those of the CTPAT program.  
3.23.   In 2019 the first major update of CTPAT occurred with changes to the program's min imum 
security criteria to take a more comprehensive approach to supply chain security, including new 
requirements or recommendations on cyber security, agricultural security, prevention of trade -based 
money laundering and terrorist financing, and using sec urity technology to enhance physical security 
requirements. Other requirements in existing categories have been strengthened and a new 
recommendation was put in place for partners to have a social compliance program. As from 
January  2023, the CTPAT Securit y program will change this recommendation to a mandatory 
requirement. CTPAT categorized the new criteria into three focus areas: Corporate Security, 
Transportation Security, and People and Physical Security. Within these focus areas, there are 
12 criteria categories that apply across the supply chain to each entity group eligible for CTPAT 
membership. As part of this process, more than 2,200  validations were completed in the same year. 
In March  2020, as a result of the COVID -19 pandemic, all validation work  under CTPAT was 
postponed. C BP pursued alternatives and later in 2020 initiated the virtual validation program. In 
2021, CTPAT maintained virtual validation based on a risk management approach. The program has 
adapted the virtual validation concept, as a way to address the travel restrictions that were imposed 
as a result of the COVID -19 pandemic. In 2022, dependent upon the conditions, CBP was expected 
to revert to in -person inspections as well as maintaining virtual inspections. The benefits of becoming 
a certified partner include reduced customs examinations, shorter wait ing times at the border, and 
access to FAST lanes at the land borders and access to the AQUA lane benefits at seaports.  
3.24.   Another development during the review period was the phase -out of the Importer 
Self-Assessment (ISA) program into the newly created CTPAT Trade Compliance Program in 
March  2020. The Program aims to continue providing certain importers with benefits when they 
demonstrate enhanced compliance measures and moves CTPAT toward s trade compliance, therefore 
not limited to only security measures. CTPAT importers who participate in the CTPAT Trade 
Compliance program will have additional requirements beyond the social compliance program, with 
additional benefits. As of March  2022, t o participate, a company had to already be part of CTPAT.33 
However, new applications are expected after the issuance of the Federal Register notice on the 
Importer Self -Assessment program and the closeout of the Trusted Trader Pilot.  
Table  3.4 CTPAT key figures, FY2019 -21 
 2019  2020  2021  
Certified partners (No.)  11,600  11,300  11,000  
Imported cargo covered by CTPAT (%)  54 52 52 
Validations  2,200  1,300  1,800  
CTPAT  members in good standing (%)  97.3 97.3 98 
Suspensions (No.)  96 135 143 
 
31 CBP (2021), CBP Trade and Travel Rep ort, Fiscal Year 2020 , February. Viewed at: 
https://www.cbp.gov/sites/default/files/assets/documents/2020 -
Jan/CBP%20FY2019%20 Trade%20and%20Travel%20Report.pdf . 
32 As at December  2021, there were MRAs with Canada, Chinese  Taipei, Dominican  Republic, 
European  Union, India, Israel, Japan, Jordan, the Republic of Korea, Mexico, New  Zealand, Peru, Singapore, 
and the United  Kingdom.  
33 CBP, CTPAT Trade Compliance FAQ's . Viewed at: https://www.cbp.gov/border -security/ports -
entry/cargo -security/ctpat/trade -compliance/FAQs .  WT/TPR/S/434 /Rev.1  • United States  
 
- 66 - 
 
   2019  2020  2021  
Removals (No.)  120 155 79 
Authorized Economic Operator certificates from foreign MRA partners (No.)  338 433 150 
Source:  CBP (2021), CBP Trade and Travel Report, Fiscal Year 2020 , February. Viewed at: 
https://www.cbp.gov/sites/default/files/assets/documents/2021 -Feb/CBP -FY2020 -Trade -and-Travel -
Report.pdf ; CBP (2020), CBP Trade and Trave l Report, Fiscal Year 2019 , January. Viewed at: 
https://www.cbp.gov/sites/default/files/assets/documents/2020 -
Jan/CBP%20FY201 9%20Trade%20and%20Travel%20Report.pdf . 
3.25.   Three other programs are concerned with security or advanced clearance measures; these 
are the Container Security Initiative (CSI), the Importer Secure Filing (ISF 10+2) program, and the 
Air Cargo Advance Screening (A CAS) program. The CSI has been a long -standing program to secure 
containers for possible terrorist threats by a pre -screening process in the port of export. CBP 
identifies high -risk containers with the help of host country customs administrations and opera tes 
61 CSI ports that pre -screen over 66% of the maritime containerized cargo entering the 
United  States.34 The ISF 10+2 program requires advance cargo information for all merchandise 
arriving to the United  States by vessel. The ACAS program was establishe d in 2018 to require 
pre-arrival air cargo data to be provided to CBP for shipments arriving in the United  States by air. 
Based on a pilot project with the private sector that lasted for seven years, the ACAS is now 
obligatory and requires the submission o f the shippers' name and address, consignee name and 
address, cargo description, total quantity and weight, and air waybill number.35 
3.1.1.6.4   Expedited shipments  
3.26.   The United  States has a long -standing program and special arrangements for express 
consignments as cod ified in 19 C.F.R. 128. Through an application process and payment of a 
processing fee, CBP allows for express consignment operators or carriers to operate by moving cargo 
by special express commercial service under closely integrated administrative contro l and also for 
express consignment carrier facilities to operate in separate or shared specialized facilities at a port 
for the examination and release of express consignment shipments. Express consignment operators 
are required to submit advanced addition al manifest information to CBP such as country of origin, 
information on the shipper and consignee, description, etc.; meet the conditions as a carrier of 
bonded merchandise; comply with ACE or related EDI systems; and meet the respective informal or 
forma l entry procedures.  
3.1.1.7   Customs valuation  
3.27.   The United  States' customs valuation provisions continue to be provided for in the Trade 
Agreements Act of 1979, which implemented the Agreement on Implementation of Article  VII of the 
General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade, and related regulations  (19 U.S.C. 1401a) . There have 
been no amendments or changes to this legislation during the review period and the United  States 
continues to value merchandise imports according to the hierarchal methods in its regulations, 
i.e. transaction value, transaction value of identical and similar merchandise, deductive value, 
computed value and other possible methods, which mirror the same in the WTO  Agreement. The 
United  States assesses customs value on an f.o.b. basis. In 1996 the Un ited States notified its 
customs valuation regime to the WTO by reference to its notification under the GATT Tokyo Round 
Valuation Code.36 
3.28.   In June 2016, CBP produced a "Valuation Encyclopedia " provid ing guidance on interpretation 
or matters of judicial rev iew that influenced CBP customs valuation decisions or procedures.37 An 
update of the Encyclopedia  is expected to be issued in 2022. CBP  also has an Informed Compliance 
Publication on Customs Value from 2006 that provides information to the trade community on 
 
34 CBP, CSI: Container Security Initiative . Viewed at: https://www.cbp.gov/border -security/ports -
entry/cargo -security/csi/csi -brief.  
35 CBP, Interim Final Rule on Air Cargo A dvance Screening (ACAS), Federal Register  (2018), Vol.  83, 
No. 113, 12  June, pp.  27380 -27407. Viewed at: https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR -2018-06-
12/pdf/2018 -12315.p df.  
36 WTO document G/VAL/N/1/USA/1, 1  April 1996.  
37 CBP (2016), U.S. Customs and Border Protection Valuation Encyclopedia  (1980–2015) . Viewed at: 
https://www.cbp.gov/sites/default/files/assets/documents/2016 -
Jul/Valuation%20Encyclopedia%20Dec%202015%20final.pdf .  WT/TPR/S/434 /Rev.1  • United States  
 
- 67 - 
 
  valuation.38 It was also in the process of being updated as of March  2022. The United  States offers 
advance ruling on customs valuat ion through its CROSS system (Section  3.1.1. 1). 
3.1.2   Rules of origin  
3.1.2.1   Non-preferential rules of origin  
3.29.   The United  States' non -preferential rules of origin did not undergo amendment during the 
review period and continue to be based on the "wholly obtained" and "substantial transformation" 
principles as determined by CBP regulations, interpretations, and cour t decisions. The origin 
determination is outlined as follows: (i)  for goods wholly obtained from one country, origin is 
determined by where the product was the growth, product, or manufacture of; or (ii)  for goods of 
more than one country, substantial tran sformation determines origin by the last country in which it 
was substantially transformed into a new or different article with a name, character, or use distinct 
from that of from which it was transformed.39 
3.1.2.2   Preferential rules of origin  
3.30.   Preferential rules  of origin determine origin under the United  States' FTAs and unilateral 
preference regimes. There have not been substantial changes in these existing preferential rules of 
origin, except as outlined below, and they remain unique to each agreement or prefe rence program 
and implemented through the General Notes of the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United  States 
(HTSUS). Overall, most preferential rules of origin have a "wholly obtained" criterion and use a 
regional value content, change in HS classificat ion, or specific manufacturing processes or operations 
to determine substantial transformation when more than one country is involved.40 Many FTAs 
increasingly use a change in HS classification at HS 2 -, 4-, or 6 -digit levels to confer origin.  
3.31.   The main dev elopment during the review period was the amendment of the preferential rules 
of origin for goods from Canada and Mexico as a result of the USMCA, in particular 
chapter  4 – General Rules of Origin, chapter 5 – Rules of Origin Procedures, chapter 6 – Rules of 
Origin Specific to Textiles and Apparel, and the Uniform Regulations regarding rules of origin 
trilaterally agreed upon (including their related Annexes and Appendices). USMCA's Annex  4-B 
contains significant revisions to many of the product -specific ru les of origin of the NAFTA.41 Each of 
these has been subject to specific rulemaking by the United  States, or inclusion in the HTSUS as 
noted, in order to implement the treaty provisions.  
3.32.   The agreement follows previous preferential agreements in that it est ablishes product -specific 
rules of origin as the main entity for determining origin. However, USMCA rules of origin were 
strengthened so that higher thresholds must be met to confer origin, in particular for certain sensitive 
sectors such as autos, steel, and aluminum . For example, the regional value content requirement 
was increased from 62.5% in the NAFTA to 75% in USMCA for many automotive products.42 The use 
of aluminum  and steel from within the region at a level of 70% of auto producers' purchases is a lso 
a criterion in the automotive section, and the origin is only conferred if the metal is melted and 
poured among USMCA parties. On the other hand, some USMCA rules allow more flexibility; this is 
the case for higher de minimis  thresholds for certain non -originating content. In one new 
development, the USMCA establishes a labor value content (LVC) criterion for conferring origin in 
 
38 CBP (2006), What Every Member of the Trade Community Should Know About: Customs Value. 
Viewed at: https://www.cbp.gov/sites/default/files/assets/documents/2020 -Feb/ICP -Customs -Value -2006-
Final.pdf .  
39 CBP (2004), What Every Member of the Trade Community Should Know About: U.S. Rules of Origin . 
Viewed at: https://www.cbp.gov/sites/default/files/assets/documents/2016 -Apr/icp026_3.pdf .  
40 WTO document WT/ TPR/S/275/Rev.2, 8  March  2013.  
41 Federal Register , Vol. 85, No.  127, 1  July, pp.  39690 -39751, amending part 181 and adding a new 
part 182 containing several USMCA provisions, including the Uniform Regulations regarding rules of origin. 
Viewed at: https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title -19/chapter -I/part -182 and 
https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2021/07/06/2021 -14264/agreement -between -the-united -states -
of-america -the-united -mexican -states -and-canada -usmca . 
42 The 75% criterion is being gradually implemented and will re ach this level on 1  July 2023 for light 
trucks and passenger vehicles. For heavy trucks, the level of 70% regional value content is expected to be 
reached on 1  July 2027.  WT/TPR/S/434 /Rev.1  • United States  
 
- 68 - 
 
  the automotive sector.43 Other new provisions were added on "recovered materials", "sets, kits, and 
composite goods", and upd ated measures on accumulation, transit, and transhipment.  
3.33.   The United  States –Japan Trade Agreement (USJTA) that entered into force in 2020 also 
contains preferential rules of origin as part of the agreement in Annex  II.44 There are three main 
criteria for t he rules of origin: (i)  wholly obtained or produced entirely in one or both of the Parties; 
(ii) produced entirely in one or both of the Parties, exclusively from originating materials; or 
(iii) produced entirely in one or both of the Parties, using non -originating materials, subject to the 
applicable change in tariff classification as provided in the table in the Annex  to the USJTA. The 
Annex  table outlines the requirements for a change in tariff classification at the HS2 -, HS4 -, and 
HS6-digit level for th e respective concessions. Many of the agricultural products require a change at 
the HS2 -digit level, whereas a majority of the machinery and equipment goods require a change at 
the HS4 -digit level.  
3.34.   In 2017, the United  States implemented nomenclature change s to the HTSUS due to the 2017 
HS amendments by the WCO , which not only impacted the chapters of the HTSUS, but also 
nomenclature references in the rules of origin of the FTA with Chile contained in General Note 26 of 
the HTSUS.  The United  States made corr ections to these rules of origin to align the nomenclature.45 
These changes were characterized as "technical rectifications", thus they did not make any 
substantial modifications to the rules of origin. A  similar Presidential Proclamation from July  2018 
made changes to the rules of origin in the United  States -Bahrain Free Trade Agreement due to 
changes in the HTSUS. These were also technical rectifications to align the nomenclature.46 Changes 
to the rules of origin in the FTA with Colombia, also due to the nomenclature changes, became 
effective as at 1  January  2021. Furthermore, the United  States and Singapore agreed on changes to 
their preferential rules of origin to reflect the HS 2017 changes.47 
3.1.2.3   Country of origin marking requirements  
3.35.   When products are imp orted into the United  States, most must have a mark indicating to the 
final consumer where the product was manufactured. U.S. country of origin marking rules are distinct 
and separate from origin determination for customs purposes and therefore it is possi ble that an 
article may have a different country of origin for marking purposes. Section  304(a) of the Tariff Act 
of 1930, as amended (19  U.S.C. 1304), provides that goods be marked permanently, legibly, and in 
a conspicuous place so as to indicate to an u ltimate purchaser in the United  States the English name 
of the country of origin of the article. The related regulations identify products subject to marking, 
the methods and manner of marking  and marking requirements for special articles such as 
container s, holders, or repacked articles. They also define the country of origin for marking purposes 
as the country of manufacture, production, or growth of any article of foreign origin entering the 
United  States and any further work or material added to an arti cle in another country must effect a 
substantial transformation to render such other country the "country of origin" (19 C.F.R. 134) . 
 
43 The LVC rules are being phased in over a period of time up until 1  July 2023. The r ules introduce such 
concepts as high -wage labor costs, high -wage material, high -wage technology, and high -wage technology 
expenditures credit. In addition, a minimum hourly wage of USD  16 is established and certain percentages of 
vehicle manufacture must u se labor with this minimum wage.  
44 United  States –Japan Trade Agreement (USJTA), Annex  II, Tariffs and Tariff -Related Provisions of the 
United  States. Viewed at: 
https://ustr.gov/sites/default/files/files/agreements/japan/Annex_II_Tariffs_and_Tariff -
Related_Provisions_of_the_United_States.pdf .  
45 Presidential Proclamation 9974 of 30  December  2019 "To Take Certain  Actions Under the African 
Growth and Opportunity Act and for Other Purposes", Annex  IV, Federal Register  (2019), Vol.  84, No.  249, 
30 December, pp.  72187 -72211. Viewed at: https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2019/12/30/2019 -
28285/to -take-certain -actions -under -the-african -growth -and-opportunity -act-and-for-other -purposes .  
46 Preside ntial Proclamation 9771 of 2  August  2018 "To Take Certain Actions Under the African Growth 
and Opportunity Act and for Other Purposes", Annex  II, Federal Register  (2018), Vol.  83, No.  149, 2  August, 
pp. 37993 -38010. Viewed at: https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2018/08/02/2018 -16725/to -take-
certain -actions -under -the-african -growth -and-opportunity -act-and-for-other -purposes .  
47 Presidential Proclamation 10053 of 29  June 2020 "To Take Certain Actions Under the United  States –
Mexico -Canada Agreement Implementation Act and for Other Purposes", Federal Register  (2020), Vol.  85, 
No. 127, 1  July, pp.  39821 -39828 Viewed at: https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/ 2020/07/01/2020 -
14448/to -take-certain -actions -under -the-united -states --mexico -canada -agreement -implementation -act-and-
for.  WT/TPR/S/434 /Rev.1  • United States  
 
- 69 - 
 
  3.36.   There have been no major changes to the U.S. marking rules during the review period. An 
Executive Order was issued that aff ects, inter alia, the country of origin marking of products from 
Hong Kong,  China.48 Goods produced in Hong Kong, China that were entered, or withdrawn from 
warehouse, for consumption into the United  States after 9  November  2020 were to be marked as 
"China" for country of origin marking purposes.49 
3.37.   The USMCA does not contain marking rules . However, interim regulations related to the 
marking rules, tariff -rate quotas (TRQs), and other USMCA provisions, published in the Federal 
Register on 6  July 2021 (86 FR 35566), amended Section  102.0 of Title 19 of the C.F.R. so that the 
rules set forth in Sections  102.1 through 102.18 and 102.20 continue to determine the country of 
origin for marking purposes with respect to goods imported from Canada and Mexico. The rules 
specified in Section  102.21 already determined the country of origin marking for t extile and apparel 
products. This Interim Final Rule (IFR) became effective on 1  July 2021, and the relevant changes 
were already reflected in the U.S. marking regulations at 19 C.F.R. 134 and 19 C.F.R. 102. As at 
March  2022, the final rules had not yet be en issued.  
3.1.3   Tariffs  
3.1.3.1   Nomenclature and HTSUS changes  
3.38.   The United  States' tariff schedule, known as the HTSUS, is the legal instrument that 
determines the classification and tariffs applied to imported merchandise. The HTSUS follows the 
World Customs Organizati on's (WCO) Harmonized System nomenclature for Chapters 1 to 97 at the 
HS 6-digit level; however, U.S. tariffs are applied at the 8 -digit level with nomenclature at the 
10-digit level due to the last two digits being statistical reporting suffixes. Two  additional 
chapters,  98 and 99, contain special provisions to administer legislation, temporary modifications, 
the WTO  agricultural special safeguard (SSG), or other special tariff treatment.50 There are two rates 
of duty columns, "1" and "2", with "1" being subdivided into "General" that applies to countries or 
territories with normal trade relations with the United  States51 and "Special" that implements special 
tariff treatment programs such a s reciprocal and unilateral preferences. Column "2" is for those 
countries without normal trade relations and as of 2021 applied only to Cuba and the 
Democratic  People's Republic of Korea.  
3.39.   As a signatory to the WCO's  Harmonized System Convention, the Unite d States is expected 
to align its nomenclature to the convention and its amendments. In 2019, the WCO approved 
recommended amendments to the Harmonized System nomenclature. The so -called "HS 2022" 
amendments entered into force on 1  January  2022, and the Co ntracting Parties have committed to 
implement them by that date. The United  States commenced its internal procedures in 2020 
pursuant to Section  1205 of the Omnibus Trade and Competitiveness Act of 1988. Thus, after 
recommendations were made to the Preside nt and subject to consultation and layover provisions in 
Congress, the President proclaimed these nomenclature changes on 23 December  2021, and the 
changes entered into force for the United  States on 27  January  2022.52 The number of annual 
changes or revis ions to the HTSUS during the review period was high compared with previous years 
with 10 or more updates each year (Table  3.5). Many of these changes were a result of Section  232 
and Section  301 measures . 
 
48 Executive Order 13936 of 14  July 2020 "The President's Executive Order on Hong Kong 
Normalization", Federal Register  (2020), Vol.  85, No.  138, 17  July, pp.  43413 -43417. Viewed at: 
https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2020/07/17/2020 -15646/the -presidents -executive -order -on-
hong-kong-normalization .  
49 CBP, Frequently Asked Questions – Guidance on Marking of Goods of Hong Kong – Executive 
Order  13936 . Viewed at: https://www.cbp.gov/trade/rulings/frequently -asked -questions -guidance -marking -
goods -hong-kong-executive -order -13936 ; CBP (2020 ), "Country of Origin Marking of Products of Hong Kong", 
Notice of 11  August  2020, Federal Register (2020), Vol.  85, No.  155, 11  August, pp.  48551 -48552. Viewed at: 
https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2020/08/11/2020 -17599/country -of-origin -marking -of-products -
of-hong-kong.  
50 Tariff treatment or quotas applied pursuant to Sections  232 or 301 (and their exclusions) are 
contained in Chapter 99, as well as temporary duty suspensions when not expired.  
51 Applies to most WTO Members and implements the MFN duties.  
52 The additional WCO changes of 25  June 2020 were incorporated into the overall U.S. implementation 
of HS2022 and also entered into force for the United  States on 27  January  2022.  WT/TPR/S/434 /Rev.1  • United States  
 
- 70 - 
 
  Table  3.5 Overview of changes to the HTSUS, 2017 -21 
Year  Revisions  Main elements of change  
2017 2 Changes to GSP and AGOA  
2018 13 Changes to Ch. 99, Section  232 and 301 tariffs and exclusions, safeguard measure, ITA II staged 
rates, AGOA and GSP changes, changes from the Miscellaneous Tariff bill of 2018, WCO changes to 
nomenclature  
2019 17 Changes to Ch. 99, Section  232 and Section  301 tariffs and exclusions, changes to GSP and AGOA, 
ITA Expansion staged rates,  
2020 28 Changes to Ch. 99, Section  232 and 301 tariffs and exclusions, to reduce certain tariffs per the 
Agreement with the Europe an Union, modification of safeguard measure, GSP and AGOA 
modifications, USMCA FTA  
2021 16 Changes to Ch. 99, Section  232 and 301 tariffs and exclusions, to reduce certain tariffs per the 
Agreement with the European  Union, AGOA changes, modification of TRQs per Agreements with the 
European  Union and United  Kingdom  
Source:  USITC, Modifications t o the Harmonized Tariff Schedule. Viewed at: https://hts.usitc.gov/view/list . 
3.1.3.2   Applied rates  
3.40.   The U.S. MFN applied tariff rates did not change significantly during the review period, and 
essentially remain the same as the levels in 2018 (Tables  3.6 and A3.1). The simple average rate 
remains low at 4.8% overall. The tariff protection afforded to the agricultural sector was, however, 
significantly much higher, 9.2% on average, more than double that of the non -agricultural sector 
(4.0%). The United  States maintained a significant number of duty -free tariff lines (38.4%) that 
increased slightly from 2018 (37.5%), and a significant percent of tariffs applied at rates greater 
than 0% but less than or equal to 2% (7.1%) . Although tariff averages remain low, there are 6.9% 
of all tariff lines as peak tariffs, and 2% have very high rates of above 25% (Chart  3.1). The re is a 
high amount of predictability in  U.S. tariffs as applied tariffs are essentially at the same level a s the 
WTO bound rates (Table  3.6). 
Chart  3.1 Frequency distribution of MFN tariff rates, 2021  
(Number of tariff linesa) 
 
a The total number of lines is 10,905.  
Source:  WTO Secretariat calculations, based on data provided by the authorities.  
3.41.   The U.S. schedule contains 10 tariff lines over 300%, including 2 tariff lines over 400%. All 
but two of these are out -of-quota. With the exception of one out -of-quota dairy line, these extremely 
high tariffs are almost solely attributed to tobacco, in particular unprocessed, semi -processed, or 
refuse tobacco. Some outlying tariffs in the tobacco and dairy sectors can be attributed to ad valorem  
equivalents (AVEs) in which the calculation has led to s ome very high rates. Some other products 
with relatively high tariffs include peanuts and peanut products, footwear, and textiles and clothing. 
The HS sections of pulp and paper, and works of art have the lowest rates of duty, all at zero 
(Table  A3.1). The  high percentage of duty -free tariff lines reflects close U.S. involvement in 
(38.4%)
(29.6%)
(21.2%)
(5.6%)
(2.3%)
(1.0%)(1.9%)
0102030405060708090100
05001,0001,5002,0002,5003,0003,5004,0004,500
Duty free >0-5 >5-10 >10-15 >15-20 >20-25 >25Chart 3.1
Frequency distribution of MFN tariff rates, 2021
Number of tariff linesa%
Cumulative per cent
Number of lines (% of total)
The total number of lines is 10,905.
WTO Secretariat calculations, based on data provided by the authorities.a
Source :WT/TPR/S/434 /Rev.1  • United States  
 
- 71 - 
 
  WTO initiatives and agreements such as the Information Technology Agreement (ITA) and the 
expansion of the ITA, the Agreement on Trade in Civil Aircraft, and zero -for-zero tariff  outcomes in 
the Uruguay Round. Additional tariffs applied due to trade investigations, e.g. Sections  232 and 301 
(Section  3.1.7), are numerous; they are contained and applied through Chapter 99 of the HTSUS 
and are not included in this tariff analysis.  
Table  3.6 Structure of the tariff schedules, selected yearsa 
(%)  
2016b 2018c 2021d 
Total number of tariff lines  10,516  10,878  10,905  
Non-ad valorem  tariffs (% of all tariff lines)  10.9 10.6 10.6 
Lines subject to tariff quotas (% of all tariff lines)  1.9 1.9 1.9 
Duty-free tariff lines (% of all tariff lines)  36.8 37.5 38.4 
Dutiable lines tariff average rate (%)  7.6 7.8 7.8 
Simple average tariff (%)  4.8 4.8 4.8 
 WTO agriculture  9.1 9.4 9.2 
 WTO non -agriculture (incl. petroleum)  4.0 4.0 4.0 
 Agriculture, hunting, forestry and fishing (ISIC 1)  6.5 5.8 5.7 
 Mining and quarrying (ISIC 2)  0.4 0.4 0.4 
 Manufacturing (ISIC 3)  4.8 4.8 4.8 
Domestic tariff "peaks" (% of all tariff lines)e 6.7 6.7 6.9 
International tariff "peaks" (% of all tariff lines)f 5.1 5.1 5.2 
Overall standard deviation  14.0 13.6 13.2 
Applied rates > 0% but ≤ to 2% (% of tariff lines)  7.8 7.7 7.1 
Bound tariff lines (% of all tariff lines)g 100.0  100.0  100.0  
a The tariff is provided at the 8 -digit level for those in HTSUS Chapters 1 -97, i.e. statutory tariffs, and 
do not include temporary tariffs and those invoked pursuant to other measures in HTSUS 
Chapters  98-99. Averages exclude in -quota rates and lines. Calculations include AVEs for 
non-ad valorem  duties, which were calculated by the U.S.  authorities using import price data. In 
seven instances of HS lines at the eight -digit level, the AVE provided for compou nd duties was below 
the ad valorem  component.  
b As of January  2016.  
c As of February  2018.  
d As of November  2021.  
e Domestic tariff peaks are defined as those exceeding three times the overall average applied rate.  
f International tariff peaks are defined as those exceeding 15%.  
g Two lines applying to crude petroleum are not bound.  
Source:  WTO Secretariat calculations, based on data provided by the authorities and notifications.  
3.1.3.3   Bound rates  
3.42.   There have been no changes to the United  States' bound tar iff rates since the last Review 
and, on average, they remain at 4.8%.53 Tariffs in Chapters 1 to 97 in the U.S. Schedule remain 
fully bound except two tariff lines on crude petroleum  (HTS 2709.00.10 and 2709.00.20) . The 
United  States has "other duties and charges" bound at zero , except  seven tariff lines, bound at 
higher levels , and maintains the SSG provision on 194 HS 2017 tariff lines  at the 8 -digit level . 
3.1.3.4   Duty suspensions  
3.43.   Temporary duty suspensions of tariffs have long been a regular feature of U.S. tariff policy 
and are implemented through Chapter 99, subchapter 2, of the HTSUS. Since 2016, the procedures 
for temporary duty suspensions through Miscellaneous Tariff Bills (M TBs) have been carried out 
pursuant to the American Manufacturing Competitiveness Act of 2016 (AMCA) , which established an 
open and transparent process for consideration of duty suspensions and reductions .54 The AMCA 
gave an expanded procedural role to the  USITC, maintained a cap on the duty revenue loss at 
USD 500,000 for any one product, set up two MTB cycles in 2016 and 2019, and required reporting 
on the effects of duty suspensions/reductions on the U.S. economy.  There is currently no legislation 
to com mence future MTB cycles as the AMCA only envisioned two cycles in 2016 and 2019.  
3.44.   The 2016 MTB cycle was carried out pursuant to the new procedures outlined in the AMCA 
and resulted in the Miscellaneous Tariff Bill Act of 2018 (MTB Act of 2018) which provid ed for duty 
 
53 WTO document WT/Let/1418, 8  November  2018.  
54 American Manufacturing Competi tiveness Act of 2016 ( P.L. 114-159). Viewed at: 
https://www.usitc.gov/documents/mtbps/comments_statute_0.pdf .  WT/TPR/S/434 /Rev.1  • United States  
 
- 72 - 
 
  reductions or suspensions on 1,655 tariff lines during the period 
13 October  2018-31 December  2020.55 The second MTB cycle of 2019 was launched in October  2019 
by the USITC and followed the AMCA timeline and procedures with the respective repor ts submitted 
to the U.S.  Congress for consideration in 2020. The U.S. industry remains keen on and increasingly 
active in pursuing requests for duty suspensions as exemplified by their recent petitions. In 2016 
there were 2,524  petitions resulting in 1,655  duty suspensions and in 2019 there were 
3,442  petitions (Table  3.7). The majority of requests (over 50%) were in the chemicals sector, with 
significant requests also in the machinery and equipment, and textiles, apparel, and footwear 
sectors.56 As of Marc h 2022, there had not been any legislation passed pursuant to the 2019 cycle. 
Therefore, there were no temporary duty suspensions in place as of March  2022.  
Table  3.7 Summary of duty suspension petitions and e nactments, 2016 and 2019  
Product group  2016  2019  
No. % No. % 
Petitions  
Chemicals  1,464  58.0 1,839  53.4 
Machinery and equipment  457 18.1 715 20.8 
Textiles, apparel, and footwear  456 18.1 581 16.9 
Agriculture natural resources, and fisheries  36 1.4 307 8.9 
Other  111 4.4 n.a. n.a. 
 Total 2,524  100 3,442  100 
Enacted  
Petitions enacted  1,655  100 none n.a. 
 Resulting in duty elimination  n.a. 79 none n.a. 
 Resulting in duty reduction  n.a. 21 none n.a. 
Duty rate ranges  n.a. 0-34.6 none n.a. 
Average duty rate reduction (percentage points)  n.a. 3.3 none n.a. 
n.a. Not applicable.  
Source:  USITC, American Manufacturing Competitiveness Act of 2016: Final Report . Viewed at: 
https://www.usitc.gov/documents/mtbps/pub4712_introduction.pdf ; USITC (2020), American 
Manufacturing Competitiveness Act: 2020: Final Report . Viewed at: 
https://www.usitc.gov/publications/other/pub5097.pdf , and USITC (2019), American Manufacturing 
Competitiveness Act: Effects of Temporary Duty Suspensions and Reductions on the U.S. Economy , 
USITC Investigation No.  332-565 of October  2019. Viewed at: 
https://www.usitc.gov/publications/332/pub4987.pdf . 
3.45.   The AMCA instructed USITC to submit to Congress a report on the effects on the U.S. economy 
of duty suspensions or reductions enacted pursuant to the AMCA, including a broad assessment of 
such economic effects on producers, purchasers, and consumers in the United  States and also to 
solicit and append to its report recommendations with respect to those do mestic industry sectors or 
specific domestic industries that might benefit from permanent duty suspensions or reductions, 
either through unilateral U.S.  actions or through reciprocal tariff negotiations.57 USITC was required 
to produce a report with recomm endations and outcomes to the Congress on these aspects within 
one year of the MTB Act of 2018, thus in October  2019 the report was issued making the following 
assessments: (i)  U.S. importers saved USD  179 million in forgone duties due to the duty 
suspensi ons in place during the period November  2018-May 2019; (ii)  the positive economic impacts 
of duty relief were lessened by increased duties pursuant to Section  301 tariffs applicable to imports 
from China on 1,081 affected tariff lines, i.e.  65% of total ta riff lines under duty suspension; 
(iii) product prices for importers have declined and USITC predicted a small increase in production, 
consumption, and gross domestic product (GDP) in the United  States as a result; (iv)  the effect of 
the MTB Act of 2018 on  small and medium -sized enterprises (SMEs) appears to have had a more 
 
55 Miscellaneous Tariff Bill Act of 2018 ( P.L. 115-239). Viewed at: https://www.congress.gov/bill/115th -
congress/house -bill/4318/text .  
56 Some 63% of the tariff lines corresponding to enacted  petition were in the chemical sector . See 
USITC (20 19),"American Manufacturing Competitiveness Act: Effects of Temporary Duty Suspensions and 
Reductions on the U.S. Economy", USITC Investigation Number 332 -565 of October  2019. Viewed at: 
https://www.usitc.gov/publications/332/pub4987.pdf .  
57 American Manufacturing Competitiveness Act of 2016 ( P.L. 114-159). Viewed at: 
https://www.usitc.gov/documents/mtbps/comments_s tatute_0.pdf .  WT/TPR/S/434 /Rev.1  • United States  
 
- 73 - 
 
  immediate and stronger impact compared to larger firms; and (v)  requests were made for 
permanent duty suspension or reduction on about two  thirds of the products (1,014 tariff lines).58 
3.1.3.5   Tariff -rate quotas (TRQs)  
3.46.   The United  States maintains a number of long -standing TRQs on both agricultural and 
non-agricultural - products, the majority of which have not undergone any significant changes during 
the review period. Most Uruguay Round TRQ comm itments are implemented through specific tariff 
lines in the HTSUS with the quota volumes and allocation listed in Additional U.S. Notes to the 
respective Chapter. As of 2021, there were 44 TRQ categories covering 203 tariff lines of agricultural 
products59, however, two categories (certain dairy and sugar products) have separate licensing 
procedures and quota allocation regulations administered by the Department of Agriculture 
(Section  3.1.5.2, Table  A3.2, and Section  4.1). With few exceptions, the 44 TRQ categories and their 
volumes/country allocations have remained unchanged and are as indicated in Sections  1-A and 1 -B 
of the United  States' bound schedule. For instance, on 1  January  2022, the United  States split the 
European  Union's country allocation for certain dairy TRQs between the European  Union and the 
United  Kingdom, due to Brexit. The overall TRQ remained the s ame. The CBP also announces annual 
TRQ quantities and country allocations, if applicable, through its Customs Bulletins.60 
3.47.   The United  States has regularly reported its utilization of agricultural TRQs to the 
WTO Committee on Agriculture.61 The quota fill rate averaged around 50% across all categories 
during 2018 -20 with little variation each year, i.e. 51% -55%. TRQs were not u tilized or very little 
utilized for certain cotton categories, animal feed containing milk, chocolate, and certain 
U.S. cheeses. However, for cocoa powder, mandarins, and mixed condiments, the TRQs were 
essentially fully utilized during the period. For mos t TRQ categories, there was little change in fill 
rates over the three years except for green olives, which had a fill rate of 9% in 2018 and 100% in 
the following two years, and blue mold cheese, which declined from 96% in 2018 -19 to 58% in  2020. 
There we re also some yearly fluctuations in fill rates for various categories of dried milk and dried 
cream (Table  A3.2).  
3.48.   Other TRQs, i.e. non -agricultural, are provided for in the same manner through specific tariff 
lines in the HTSUS. These long -standing TRQs pr ovide lower in -quota duties for tuna, broom -corn 
brooms, and whiskbrooms. During the review period, quota utilization of the brooms was relatively 
low (lower than 15% in each year) whereas the tuna quota was fully utilized each year (Table  3.8). 
The TRQ qu antity for tuna changes each year as a function of U.S. consumption from the preceding 
calendar year62; it is currently set at 4.8% of consumption and is announced annually in the Federal 
Register by the CBP based on reports by the National Marine Fisherie s Service.63 
 
58 USITC (2019), American Manufacturing Competitiveness Act: Effects of Temporary Duty Suspensions 
and Reductions on the U.S. Economy , USITC Investigation No.  332-565. Viewed at: 
https://www.usitc.gov/publications/332/pub4987.pdf . 
59 Animal feed; beef; butter and butter substitutes; cheeses; cotton card strips; chocolate; low -fat 
chocolate crumb; cocoa powder; cotton; dairy; dried milk, cream, and whey; fibers  of cotton; harsh or rough 
cotton; ice cream; infant formula; mandarins; milk and cream; condensed or evaporated milk and cream; 
mixed condiments and mixed seasonings; mixes and doughs; olives; peanut butter and paste; peanuts; raw 
cotton; sugars; and toba cco.  
60 CBP, Quota Bulletins.  Viewed at: https://www.cbp.gov/trade/quota/bulletins .  
61 WTO documents G/AG/N/USA/147 and G/AG/N/USA/148, 2  March  2021; and G/AG/N/USA/153, 
3 June 2021.  
62 However, tuna  TRQ commitment levels at the WTO are bound at "…20% of the United  States pack of 
canned tuna…". Thus, this commitment is not directly comparable to the applied situation due to the change in 
the text in 2003, and the TRQ quantity has in general been less,  as yearly averages in the 1990s were over 
30 million kg per year, and afterward between 12  million -24 million kg per year. CBP, Tuna 1604.14. 
Viewed  at: https://www .cbp.gov/sites/default/files/assets/documents/2017 -Nov/tuna.pdf .  
63 For example, the TRQ for 2021 is set at 18,345,004  kg. "Tuna Tariff -Rate Quota for Calendar Year 
2021 Tuna Classifiable Under Subheading 1604.14.22, Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the Unite d States 
(HTSUS)", Federal Register  (2021), Vol.  86, No.  100, 26  May, pp.  28371 -28372. Viewed at: 
https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2021/05/26/2021 -11164/tuna -tariff-rate-quota -for-calendar -year-
2021-tuna-classifiable -under -subheading -16041422 -harmonized .  WT/TPR/S/434 /Rev.1  • United States  
 
- 74 - 
 
  Table  3.8 Tariff -rate quotas and fill rates, other products, 2018 -20 
Description of products  Tariff heading  Tariff quota  Fill rate 
2018  Fill rate 
2019  Fill rate 
2020  
Whiskbrooms, valued not over 
USD 0.96 each  9603.10.05  61,655 dozen  14.03%  11.27%  14.30%  
Other brooms, wholly or in part of 
broom corn, valued not over 
USD 0.96 each  9603.10.40  121,478 dozen  7.98%  7.44%  3.43%  
Tuna, in airtight containers, not in 
oil 1604.14.22  15,881,292  kg (2020); 
14,945,117  kg (2019); 
13,951,961  kg (2018)  100%  100%  100%  
Notes:  Tariff lines are from the 2020  U.S. Harmonized Tariff Schedule.  
 All are on a calendar year basis unless otherwise indicated.  
Source:  CBP, Calendar Year End Commodity S tatus Report, 2018, 2019, and 2020. Viewed at: 
https://www.cbp.gov/sites/default/files/assets/documents/2021 -
Feb/2020%20Calendar%20Year%20End%20Commodity%20Status%20Report.pdf ; 
https://www.cbp.gov/sites/default/files/assets/docume nts/2019 -
Nov/Quota%20Status%20Report%20Year%20End%202018%20V2_0.pdf ; and 
https://www.cbp.gov/sites/default/files/assets/documents/2020 -Feb/Quota -Status -Report -Year-
End-2019.pdf . 
3.1.3.6   Preferential tariffs  
3.49.   The United  States' 14 FTAs continue to provide significant additional tariff liberalization and 
duty-free coverage for most products, i.e. covering essentially all trade. While 38.4% of tariff lines 
are MFN duty -free, most FTAs provide preferential treatment for the remaining 61% -62% of tariff 
lines resulting in 98% -100% duty -free lines (Table  3.9). Tariff averages are all below 1%, although 
there is a significant distinction between agri cultural and non -agricultural products. Non -agricultural 
products have essentially reached full liberalization with tariff statistically averaging zero, but for 
agricultural tariffs, a number of tariffs remain in place, thus averages are between zero and 3 .7%. 
The FTAs with the Kingdom of Bahrain, Chile, Mexico, Oman, and Singapore provide for the highest 
level of duty -free treatment, at or close to 100%.  
Table  3.9 Summary analysis of tariffs according to FTA a greements, 2021  
 Number of 
preferential 
tariff lines  Share of 
preferen -
tial tariff 
lines (%)  Share of 
duty-free 
preferential 
tariff lines 
(%) Total  WTO definition categories  
Agricultural 
products  Non-agricultural 
products (including 
petroleum)  
Average 
(%) Duty -free 
lines (%)  Average 
(%) Duty - 
free 
lines 
(%) Average 
(%) Duty -free 
lines (%)  
MFN - - - 4.8 38.4 9.2 22.6 4.0 41.4 
Australia  6,653  61.0 60.0 0.2 98.4 1.0 90.2 0.0 100.0  
Bahrain, 
Kingdom of  6,710  61.5 61.5 0.0 100.0  0.0 99.8 0.0 100.0  
Chile 6,709  61.5 61.5 0.0 100.0  0.0 99.8 0.0 100.0  
Colombia  6,710  61.5 60.3 0.3 98.7 1.7 92.0 0.0 100.0  
CAFTA -DR 6,661  61.1 60.0 0.3 98.4 1.7 89.8 0.0 100.0  
Israel  6,585  60.4 60.4 0.4 98.8 2.3 92.4 0.0 100.0  
Jordan  6,685  61.3 61.1 0.3 99.5 1.8 96.8 0.0 100.0  
Korea, Rep. of  6,714  61.6 60.7 0.1 99.1 0.5 96.2 0.1 99.7 
Morocco  6,710  61.5 61.0 0.0 99.5 0.2 96.5 0.0 100.0  
Oman  6,713  61.6 61.6 0.0 100.0  0.0 100.0  0.0 100.0  
Panama  6,703  61.5 60.2 0.4 98.7 2.7 91.7 0.0 99.9 
Peru 6,714  61.6 60.3 0.2 98.7 1.2 91.7 0.0 100.0  
Singapore  6,710  61.5 61.5 0.0 100.0  0.0 99.8 0.0 100.0  
USMCA           
 Canada  6,547  60.0 59.9 0.6 98.3 3.7 89.3 0.0 100.0  
 Mexico  6,714  61.6 61.6 0.0 100.0  0.0 100.0  0.0 100.0  
- Nil. 
Note:  Tariff lines with no TRQ and out -of-quota TRQ lines are considered for the average calculations, and 
in-quota TRQ lines are excluded from the calculations.  
Source:  WTO Secretariat calculations, based on data downloaded from the USITC website. Viewed at: 
https://www.usitc.gov/ . WT/TPR/S/434 /Rev.1  • United States  
 
- 75 - 
 
  3.1.4   Other charges affecting imports  
3.50.   The main taxes on imports collected by CBP are fees for processing merc handise, i.e. the 
Merchandise Processing Fee (MPF) and Consolidated Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1985 
(COBRA) fees, as well as excise duties that are generally collected on behalf of other agencies. There 
are also a number of agricultural fees CBP collects on behalf of the Department of Agriculture.64 
3.1.4.1   Fees for processing merchandise  
3.1.4.1.1   Merchandise Processing Fee  
3.51.   The MPF continues to be applied on formal and informal imports to offset CBP commercial 
operations  (19 C.F.R. 24.23(c)) . The main fee on forma l entries remained the same over the review 
period although the minimum and maximum thresholds on how it is applied increased five  times, in 
January  2018, October  2018, October  2019, October  2020, and October  2021. For formal entries, 
the ad valorem  fee of  0.3464% is applied on the basis of customs value, f.o.b., subject to a minimum 
value of USD  27.75 and a maximum cap of USD  528.40 as of October  2021.65 Informal entries, 
i.e. by air, ship, and international mail, are subject to a set fee of USD  2.22, USD  6.66, or 
USD 9.99 per shipment. Many preferential imports are generally exempt from the MPF.66 Following 
the FAST Act of 2015 (P.L. 114-94), the MPF and COBRA fees are adjusted each year by the Treasury 
Secretary to reflect inflation.  
3.1.4.1.2   COBRA fees  
3.52.   Since 1986 , the COBRA has authorized CBP to collect user fees for various services, notably 
to offset the costs of inspections ( P.L. 99-272). As noted above, the fees are subject to annual 
adjustment based on inflation, and thus have been changed recently for FY2022 (Table  3.10).  
Table  3.10 COBRA fees, FY2022  
Fee Reference  Fee rate/cap/user fee  
Commercial vessel arrival fee  19 C.F.R. 24.22(b)(1)(ii)  USD 485.11/USD  6,610.63 (cap)  
Commercial truck arrival fee  19 C.F.R. 24.22(c)(2)  USD 6.10/USD  111.01 (annual prepayment 
fee) 
Rail car arrival fee  19 C.F.R. 24.22(d)(1)  USD 9.16/USD  111.01 (annual prepayment 
fee) 
Private aircraft/private vessel first arrival  19 C.F.R. 24.22(e)(1) and (2)  USD 30.53 (annual prepayment fee)  
Commercial Vessel or Commercial Aircraft 
Passenger Arrival Fee  19 C.F.R. 24.22(g)(1)(i)  USD 6.11 
Commercial Vessel Passenger Arrival Fee 
from a U.S.  territor y or possession  19 C.F.R. 24.22(g)(1)(ii)  USD 2.14 (per arrival)  
Dutiable mail  19 C.F.R. 24.22(f)  USD 6.11  
Customs broker permit user fee  19 C.F.R. 24.22(h)  USD 153.19 (annual fee)  
Barges and other bulk carriers arrival fee  19 C.F.R. 24.22(b)(2)(i)  USD 122.11/USD  1,665.15 (cap)  
Source:  CBP, Notice on COBRA Fees to be Adjusted for Inflation in Fiscal Year 2022 . Federal Register  (2021), 
Vol. 86, No.  143, 29  July, pp.  40864 -40866. Viewed at: 
https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2021/07/29/2021 -16237/cobra -fees-to-be-adjusted -
for-inflation -in-fiscal-year-2022. 
3.1.4.2   Harbor Maintenance Tax  
3.53.   The Harbor  Maintenance Tax (HMT) continues to apply to commercial cargo loaded on or 
unloaded from commercial vessels in designated U.S. ports in order to offset the costs of maintaining 
the harbors, i.e. mostly dredging activities. The HMT is not charged on air car go. The fee remains at 
 
64 Most agricultural fees vary based on the classification of the g oods; however, the APHIS Commercial 
Vessel User Fee is USD  825 at arrival and the APHIS Commercial Truck User Fee is USD  7.55 at arrival or 
USD 302 for the annual decal. CBP, User Fee Table . Viewed at: https://www.cbp.gov/trade/basic -import -
export/user -fee-table?_ga=2.175068010.999669950.1640566179 -174981839.1634768055 .  
65 CBP, User Fee – Merchandise Processing Fees . Viewed at: https://help.cbp.gov/s/article/Article -
334?language=en_US .  
66 Imports under AGOA and GSP are partially exempt; imports under qualified industrial zones, and the 
FTAs with Morocco  and Jordan are not exempt; and all other FTA and preference program imports are exempt. 
CBP (2018), MPF and Preferential Trade Programs . Viewed at: 
https://www.cbp.gov/sites/default/files/assets/documents/2018 -
Aug/B%20MPF%20Table%2C%20Aug%202%2C%202018.pdf .  WT/TPR/S/434 /Rev.1  • United States  
 
- 76 - 
 
  0.125% of the value of the goods and it is charged on imports, domestic shipments, Foreign -Trade 
Zone (FTZ) admissions, and passengers.67 Certain limited exemptions apply, such as, for example, 
for bunker fuel, fish catches and aquat ic animal life, and bonded cargo.68 In FY2021 the amount 
collected in HMT was USD  1.56 billion of which the majority (88%) was on imports; slightly less was 
collected in FY2020, USD  1.31 billion, of which 85% was from imports.69 In FY2019, the respective 
figures were USD  1.55 billion in collections of which 82% were from imports.70 
3.54.   The funds collected through the HMT are placed in the Harbor Maintenance Trust Fund (HMTF), 
which has maintained a growing surplus in recent years as imports have increased at a higher rate 
than expenditures.71 During the review period, the U.S. Congress was considering expanding the 
eligible uses of the HMTF to better match its revenues.72 Recent legislative initiatives by Congress 
have resulted in changes to the HMTF with provis ions in the Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic 
Security Act ( CARES Act) and Water Resources Development Act of 2020 aimed at better managing 
the expenditures per their intended purpose. The CARES Act (P.L.  116-136) removed the 
discretionary funding caps  by Congress up to the amount of revenue received into the HMTF during 
the previous fiscal year, thus allowing the prior revenues to be spent on their intended purpose the 
following year.73 This provision entered into force on 1  January  2021. The Water Res ources 
Development Act of 2020, as included (Division AA) in the Omnibus Consolidated Appropriations Act 
of 2021 (P.L.  116-260), amended this provision to further enlarge spending by the HMTF.74 In the 
first instance, the discretionary appropriations for t he Corps of Engineers are set to an amount equal 
to deposits into the HMT in the fiscal year that is two years prior to the fiscal year for which the 
appropriation is being made;  plus a fixed sum set to a sliding scale of between USD  500 million 
in 2021 ri sing to USD  1.5 billion in 2030. Secondly, additional expenditures, USD  5 million, from the 
HMTF were authorized for additional activities at certain emerging ports, and eligible expenses were 
broadened for certain "donor ports" and "energy transfer ports" . The practicalities of these changes 
mean that more funds will be distributed to projects at the largest and busiest ports.75 
3.1.4.3   Excise taxes  
3.55.   The United  States continued to apply a number of excise taxes on certain goods and services 
during the review period  Most U.S. excise taxes have been in place many years, were established 
for various reasons, and are collected in a number of different ways, i.e. at the manufacturer, 
retailer, trade, or consumer levels. For example, excise taxes on coal were established to fund black 
lung treatment for miners and are applied to domestically mined coal, and not to imported or 
exported coal.76 Likewise, the tax on heavy trucks is charged at the retail level, and the annual 
heavy vehicle use tax is charged to registered users. However, most excise taxes are applied to both 
domestic producers and importers ; the majority are applied on goods, but some are also applied on 
services . The importance of federal excise taxes for revenue purposes remained low and constituted 
 
67 Exports have been exempt from the HMT since 1998. For passengers, the value of the actual charge 
for transportation paid by t he passenger is used as the basis for calculating the fee.  
68 See 19 C.F.R. 24.24(c) for the full list of exemptions.  
69 These figures do not include interest income. U.S. Treasury Department (2021), Harbor Maintenance 
Trust Fund, Maintenance Report , Septemb er. Viewed at: 
https://www.treasurydirect.gov/ftp/dfi/tfmb/dfihm0921.pdf ; and U.S. Treasury Department (2020), Harbor 
Maintenance Trust Fund, Maintenance Report , September. Viewed at : 
https://www.treasurydirect.gov/ftp/dfi/tfmb/dfihm0920.pdf .  
70 U.S. Treasury Department (2019), Harbor Maintenance Trust Fund, Maintenance Report , September. 
Viewed at: https://www.treasurydirect.gov/ftp/dfi/tfmb/dfihm0919.pdf . 
71 The surplus was USD  9.3 billion at end -FY2021. U.S. Treasury Department (2021), Harbor 
Maintenanc e Trust Fund, Maintenance Report , September. Viewed at: 
https://www.treasurydirect.gov/ftp/dfi/tfmb/dfihm0921.pdf .  
72 Congressional Research Service (CRS) (2020), Distribution of Har bor Maintenance Trust Fund 
Expenditures , 10 September. Viewed at: https://crsreports.congress.gov/product/pdf/IF/IF11645 . 
73 Public Law 116 -136, 116th Congress, "An Act to amend the Inte rnal Revenue Code of 1986 to repeal 
the excise tax on high cost employer -sponsored health coverage". Viewed at: 
https://www.congress.gov/bill/116th -congress/house -
bill/748/text?q=%7B%22search%22%3A%5B%22Public+Law+116 -136%22%5D%7D&r=1&s=2 .  
74 P.L. 116-260, 116th Congress, "Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2021''. Viewed at: 
https://www.congress.gov/bill/116th -congress/house -bill/133/text .  
75 CRS (2020), Distribution of Harbor Maintenance Trust Fund Expenditures , 10 September. Viewed at: 
https://crsreports.congress.gov/product/pdf/IF/IF11645 .  
76 Joint Committee on Taxation (2015), Present Law and Background Information on Federal Excise 
Taxes , JCX-99-15, 13  July. Viewed at: https://www.jct.gov/CMSPages/GetFile.aspx?guid=1d30837f -97df-4f40-
bc7f-9a2811cb5c26 .  WT/TPR/S/434 /Rev.1  • United States  
 
- 77 - 
 
  2.6% of FY2020 total revenues, the lowest level since 2007. In FY2020, federal excise tax collected 
amounted to USD  96.5 billion or 0.5% of GDP.77 For excise taxes on alcohol, tobacco, and firearms, 
16% of FY2020 revenues were collected from imports, and 84% on domestic products; this is up 
from 14% on imports in 2017.78 There was a general decline in excise duty collection in 2020 on 
account of the COVID -19 pandemic, as some of the major tax revenue sources, i.e. air transport, 
were significantly reduced, and due to the lower rates enacted on alcohol products (Table  3.11).  
3.56.   There are two main categories of excise taxes – federal funds a nd trust funds  – that are so 
named based on how the funds are used. Excise fees pursuant to trust funds are collected and placed 
into a fund whereby it has a dedicated use, i.e. tax on fuels to support highway development. In 
other cases, the tax is collec ted generally by the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) or the Alcohol and 
Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau (TTB), and it goes into the general government budget and is not 
marked for any particular purpose. However, a special case exists for the excise tax on rum , which 
is remitted (or covered over) to the Treasuries of Puerto  Rico and the U.S. Virgin Islands due to 
long-standing tax laws and provisions in the Caribbean Basin Economic Recovery Act (CBERA).79 
These funds may be used in any way and have reportedly b een used to support and assist the local 
rum industry.80 The amount remitted was fixed at USD  13.25 per proof gallon until 1  January  2022 
after which it was fixed at USD 10.50 per proof gallon for rum produced in Puerto  Rico and the 
U.S. Virgin Islands as well as all U.S.  imports (26  U.S.C. 7652). The fees on imported rum are 
allocated to the two insular areas based on the relative share of rum they produce.81 
3.57.   Since the enactment of the Affordable Care Act in 2010, a number of health -related exci se 
taxes have been in place, e.g. taxes on health insurance providers, and manufacturers and imports 
of branded prescription drugs. In FY2019, these health -related excise taxes accounted for about 
14% of total excise collections. The excise tax on medical devices (2.3%) had been suspended a 
number of times, i.e. since 2015, and it was repealed permanently by legislation in 
December  2019.82 The Craft Beverage Modernization Act (CBMA) provisions of the Tax Cuts and Jobs 
Act, 2017, introduced changes to reduce  excise taxes on beer, wine, and distilled spirits.83 The initial 
cuts were for the period 2018 -19 but the Taxpayer Certainty and Disaster Tax Relief Act of 2020 
made the reductions permanent. Depending upon the type of alcoholic beverage, foreign producer s 
receive a certain tax benefit up to a maximum in the form of tax credits assignable to U.S. importers.  
3.58.   In 2021, the Consolidated Appropriations Act of 2021 (P.L.  116-260) made the earlier excise 
tax reductions permanent and also made certain modification s.84 The changes restrict the transfer 
of bonded non -bulk (bottled) distilled spirits between bonded warehouses, clarifying that bottling 
does not qualify as processing for distilled spirits, and lowering the rates for certain meads and low 
alcohol wines. Beginning in January  2023, the Treasury Department will take over from CBP the 
administration of imports subject to the lower tax rates or credits on alcoholic beverages.85 Other 
changes during the period include the scheduled reductions of the tax rates o n highway and aviation 
fuels, which will be lowered to USD  0.043 per gallon after 30  September  2022, and 
30 September  2023, respectively (26  U.S.C. 4081(d)). These rates were recently extended through 
30 September  2028 for highway fuels the by the Infrastr ucture Investment and Jobs Act , 202186, 
 
77 Joint Committee on Taxation (2021), Overview of the Federal Tax System as in Effect for 2021 , 
JCX-18-21, 15  April 2021. Viewed at: https://www.jct.gov/CMSPages/GetFile.aspx?guid=72cd3d31 -f681-4bff-
80e6-1dd04c009d9d . 
78 TTB (2020), Statistical Release Tax Collections, TTB S 5630 -FY-2020, 13 November. Viewed at: 
https://www.ttb.gov/images/pdfs/statistics/final/final2020.pdf . 
79 USTR (2019), Thirteenth Report to Congress on the Oper ation of the Caribbean Basin Economic 
Recovery Act , 31 December. Viewed at: https://ustr.gov/sites/default/files/CBI_Report_2019.pdf .  
80 Implementing the Caribbean Basin Recovery Act;  Distribution of Excise Taxes on Imported Rum, 
Federal Register  (1986), Vol.  51, pp.  28071 -28072 .  
81 The division of cover over funds is determined by a regulatory formula at 27 C.F.R. 26.31.  
82 Further Consolidated Appropriations Act of 2020 (P.L.  116-94). 
83 Department of the Treasury (2021), Report to Congress on Administration of Craft Beverage 
Moderni zation Act Refund Claims for Imported Alcohol . June. Viewed at: 
https://www.ttb.gov/images/pdfs/treasury -cbma -import -claims -report -june-2021.pdf .  
84 P.L. 116-260, 116th Congress, An Act making consolidated appropriations for the fiscal year ending 
30 September  2021, providing coronavirus emergency response and relief, and for other purposes. Viewed at: 
https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/BILLS -116hr133enr/pdf/BILLS -116hr133enr.pdf .  
85 "Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau Program Summary", FY2023. Viewed at: 
https://home.treasury.gov/system/files/266/17. -TTB-FY-2023-BIB.pdf . Congress.gov. Viewed at: 
https://www.congress.gov/bill/117th -congress/house -bill/3684/text .  
86 P.L. 117-58. Viewed at: https://www.congress.gov/bill/117th -congress/house -bill/3684/text . WT/TPR/S/434 /Rev.1  • United States  
 
- 78 - 
 
  although the 2023 date is still in place for aviation. The annual fee on health insurers was suspended 
in 2019 and permanently repealed by the Further Consolidated Appropriations Act of 2020 along 
with the medical de vice tax and the excise tax on high -cost employer -sponsored health coverage.87 
Another development was the re -introduction of the Superfund excise taxes on manufacturers, 
producers, or importers of certain chemicals and the importation of certain taxable s ubstances on 
1 July 2022.88 The Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act, 2021 put in place new Superfund excise 
rates that range from USD  0.44 to 9.74 per ton and are in place until 2031.89 In addition to federal 
excise taxes, most states also have excise t axes. Table  3.11 shows excise tax rates applicable in 
2022 and the revenue collected in FY2019 and FY2020, where available. In FY2021 alcohol 
collections were USD  8,390  million  and tobacco collections were: USD  10,756  million .90 
Table  3.11 Excise taxes, 2022  
Category/Fund  Amount/rate  Revenues (USD  million)  
FY2019  FY2020  
Federal funds:     
Alcoholic beverages  Different rates apply depending on type  7,865  8,089  
Tobacco productsa  11,375  11,239  
Local telephone service, teletypewriter service, 
and prepaid telephone cards  3% 214 593 
Health insurance  40% 9,950  15,523  
Indoor tanning services  10% 69 46 
Medical devices  2.3%  -82  -12  
Firearms and ammunition  10%-11% 545 665 
Foreign procurement  2% .. .. 
Ozone -depleting chemicals  USD 1.435 – USD 143.50/lb  .. .. 
Gas Guzzler  USD 1,000 -USD 7,700  .. .. 
Trust funds:     
Highway (fuels, tires heavy vehicles, heavy trucks and trailers)    
--gasoline motor fuel  18.3 cents/ gallona 26,703  23,730  
--diesel motor fuel and kerosene  24.3 cents/gallona 10,085  9,824  
Airport and airways    
--air transport  7.5% of the fare plus USD  4.30 per 
domestic flight segment  12,071  5,761  
--international air facilities  USD 19.70 per arrival or departure  4,271  2,040  
--aviation gasoline  19.3 cents/gallona 29 29 
Black lung disability (coal)  55 cents for surface/USD  1.10 for 
underground mines  220 252 
Inland waterway  29 cents/gallon  109 108 
Oil Spill Liability  9 cents/barrel  157 427 
Vaccine injury compensation  75 cent/dose  319 319 
Supplemental medical insurance  40% .. .. 
Patient -centered  outcome research  USD 2.08 441 420 
.. Not available . 
a This rate does not include the additional USD  0.001 per gallon to fund the Leaking Underground 
Storage Tank Trust Fund.  
Note:  This is not a comprehensive list; a number of other excise taxes exist.  
Source:  Joint Committee on Taxation (2021), Overview of the Federal Tax System as in Effect for 2021 , 
JCX-18-21, 15  April 2021. Viewed at: https://www.jct.gov/CMSPages/GetFile.aspx?guid=72cd3d31 -
f681-4bff-80e6-1dd04c009d9d ; TTB (2020), Statistical Release Tax Co llections , 
TTB S 5630-FY-2020, 13  November. Viewed at: 
https://www.ttb.gov/images/pdfs/statistics/final/final2020.pdf ; IRS, Historical Table  20. Viewed at: 
https://www.irs.gov/statistics/soi -tax-stats-historical -table-20. 
 
87 Joint Commi ttee on Taxation (2020), Overview of the Federal Tax System as in Effect for 2020 , 
JCX-14-20, 1 May. Viewed at: https://www.jct.gov/CMSPages/GetFile.aspx?gu id=52ce35d7 -ec12-481a-b38e-
eff9d50b1112 .  
88 The original Superfund excise duties were applied on 42 listed chemicals in Section  4661 of the Tax 
Code and 50 listed taxable substances in Section  4672 of the Tax Code. In December  2021 the IRS extended 
the Sup erfund duties to an additional 101 taxable substances through IRS Notice 2021 -66. 
89 Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act, 2021 ( P.L. 117-58), Congress.gov. Viewed at: 
https://www.congress.gov/bill/117th -congress/house -bill/3684/text . 
90 Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau, Annual Report. Fiscal Year 2021 . Viewed at: 
https://www.ttb.gov/images/pdfs/ttbar2021.pd f. WT/TPR/S/434 /Rev.1  • United States  
 
- 79 - 
 
  3.1.5   Import prohibitions, restrictions, and licensing  
3.1.5.1 Prohibitions, restrictions, and quantitative measures  
3.59.   CBP is responsible for enforcing laws on behalf of other agencies that restrict or otherwise 
prohibit importation of a number of goods, often to protect human, animal, plant life and health, or 
to conserve exhaustible natural resources. As at March  2022, 3 2 categories of goods were subject 
to prohibitions or restrictions, most of which had been in force for many years (Table  A3.3). Many 
of the measures are codified in CBP statutes (19 C.F.R. Part 12 – Special classes of merchandise), 
contained in various tr ade legislation, i.e. the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended, or in legislation of 
other agencies, e.g. the Clean Air Act.91 A few new measures were put in place or amended during 
the review period.  
3.60.   The American Innovation and Manufacturing (AIM) Act of 2020 ( 42 U.S.C. 7675) contains 
provisions for the phasedown of production and consumption of hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs) by 85% 
by 2036.92 As of 1  January  2022, entities are required to expend allowances established by the 
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) whe n HFCs are produced and imported, with limited 
exceptions. New regulations setting up the allocation and trading program have recently been issued 
and provide for producers and importers to receive allowances based on their historical production 
and import  volumes; a set -aside pool is also being created for a limited set of entities.93 
3.61.   New rules were put in place to implement amendments to the Lacey Act requirements on the 
importation of certain plant and plant products in April  2020.94 These provisions rel axed the import 
requirements by creating a de minimis  threshold of no more than 5% of the total weight of the 
product provided the total weight of the plant material does not exceed 2.9 kilograms.  
3.62.   In April  2020, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Adminis tration's (NOAA) National Marine 
Fisheries Service imposed import restrictions on shrimp and other fish and fish products caught in 
the Upper Gulf of California due to unsustainable bycatch of vaquita, a species of porpoise on the 
brink of extinction.95 The restrictions were imposed under the Marine Mammal Protection Act 
(MMPA), which includes provisions to reduce marine mammal bycatch associated with fisheries that 
supply imports to the United  States. Specifically, the MMPA requires that the United  States ban 
imports of commercial fish or fish products caught in commercial fisheries resulting in the accidental 
killing or serious injury (bycatch) of marine mammals in excess of U.S. standards.  
3.63.   In addition to measures applied multilaterally, the United  States also maintains a number of 
quantitative restrictions or prohibitions on a bilateral or plurilateral basis.96 For example, pursuant 
to MOUs with Colombia and El  Salvador, restrictions are in place on certain categories of 
 
91 CBP (2006), Importing into the United  States, A Guide for Commercial Importers . Viewed at: 
https://www.cbp.gov/sites/default/files/documents/Importing%2 0into%20the%20U.S.pdf .  
92 P.L. 116-260, 116th Congress, Consolidated Appropriations Act of 2021. Viewed at: 
https://www.congress.gov/bill/116th -congress/house -bill/133/text . 
93 Phasedown of Hydrofluorocarbons: Establishing the Allowance Allocation and Trading Program Under 
the American  Innovation and Manufacturing Act, A Rule by the EPA on 5 October  2021. Viewed at: 
https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2021/10/05/2021 -21030/phasedown -of-hydrofluorocarbons -
establishing -the-allowance -allocation -and-trading -program -under -the.  
94 Lacey Act Implementation Plan: De Minimis  Exception, A Rule by the Animal and Pla nt Health 
Inspection Service on 2  March  2020. Federal Register  (2020), Vol.  85, No.  41, 2 March, pp.  12207 -12213. 
Viewed at: https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2020/03/02/2020 -04165/lacey -act-implementation -
plan-de-minimis -exception .  
95 NOAA (2020), Seafood Import Restrictions . Viewed at: 
https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/foreign/marine -mammal -protection/seafood -import -restrictions .  
96 Temporary legislation has existed since 1991 providing for import quotas on upland cotton when a 
price mechanism is triggered in order t o allow imports to enter at lower cost. During the review period, the 
quota has been opened on many occasions but rarely utilized. CBP, Calendar Year End Commodity Status 
Report, 2018, 2019, and 2020 . Viewed at: https://www.cbp.gov/sites/default/files/assets/documents/2021 -
Feb/2020%20Calendar%20Year%20End%20Commodity%20Status%20Report.pdf ; 
https://www.cbp.gov/sites/default/files/assets/documents/2019 -
Nov/Quota%20Status%20Report%20Year%20End%202018%20V2_0.pdf ; and 
https://www.cbp.gov/sites/default/files/assets/documents/2020 -Feb/Quota -Status -Report -Year-End-2019.pdf .  WT/TPR/S/434 /Rev.1  • United States  
 
- 80 - 
 
  archaeological, ecclesiastical, and  ethnological materials from these countries in order to protect 
cultural heritage. These restrictions were extended during the review period.97 
3.64.   In October  2021, the United  States and the European  Union issued a joint statement 
announcing, inter alia, that  they were resolved to negotiate future arrangements for trade in steel 
and aluminum  that take account of both global non -market excess capacity and the carbon intensity 
of these industries (Section  2.3.3).98 Thus, steel and aluminum  Section  232 tariffs we re replaced 
with a TRQ for EU imports as of 1  January  2022 with volumes based on historical trade levels. 
Absolute quotas on certain steel products from Argentina, Brazil, and the Republic of Korea and 
aluminum  products from Argentina have been applied sin ce mid-2018 pursuant to several 
Presidential Proclamations. These quotas are set out by product subheadings in Chapter 99 of the 
HTSUS.99 
3.65.   Preferential import measures prescribed in FTAs are sometimes implemented through 
quantitative measures that the United  States refers to as tariff preference levels (TPLs) and 
administered much like TRQs. In 2020 over 100 such TPLs were in place on a variety of products for 
FTA partner countries.100 A quota system for the duty -free importation of watches and watch 
movements from U.S. insular possessions also exists and is administered by the U.S. Department 
of Commerce. The preference program s for the African Growth and Opportunity Act (AGOA) and for 
Haiti, i.e. HOPE Act, HOPE Act II, and HELP Act also include quotas f or certain apparel imports. The 
United  States also used TRQs on certain imports resulting from safeguard (Section  201) 
investigations during the review period (Section  3.1.6).  
3.1.5.2 Import licensing  
3.66.   The United  States require s licenses  or permits for a li mited number of product categories upon 
importation, most of which did not undergo significant change during the review period. As of 
March  2022, there were 19 such licensing requirements in place on a variety of goods for various 
purposes; most (17) were non-automatic and two were automatic licensing requirements. 
Long-standing licensing requirements remained in place to implement agricultural TRQs, i.e. on dairy 
and sugar products; to provide protection against the import of pests and diseases for animal and 
plant products; to prevent tax fraud, i.e. on alcohol and tobacco products; and on a number of other 
products like chemicals, firearms, explosives, nuclear materials, etc. for protection and safety 
reasons (Table  A3.4). New or revised licensing measure s were put in place for monitoring reasons 
on certain steel and aluminum  products.  
3.67.   The United  States has continued to provide  annual replies to the annual questionnaire on 
import licensing procedures during the period under review, and three such notificat ions have been 
received pursuant to Article  7.3.101 In addition, two notifications were made pursuant to Article  5 on 
changes to import licensing procedures concerning the new or amended monitoring mechanisms, 
i.e. the Steel Import Monitoring and Analysis ( SIMA) system and the Aluminum Import Monitoring 
and Analysis (AIM) system, which entered into force in October  2020 and June  2021, respectively.102 
 
97 Extension of Import Restrictions Imposed on Ce rtain Archaeological and Ethnological Materials From 
Colombia. Rule by U.S. Customs and Border Protection. Viewed at: 
https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2021/03/12/2021 -05173/extension -of-import -restrictions -
imposed -on-certain -archaeological -and-ethnological -materials -from; Extension of Import Restrictions on 
Archaeological Material and Imposition of Import Restrictions on Ecclesiastical Ethnological Material From 
El Salvador. Rule by U.S. Customs and Border Protection. Viewed at: 
https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2020/03/18/2020 -05694/extension -of-import -restrictions -on-
archaeological -material-and-imposition -of-import -restrictions -on.  
98 USTR (2021), Fact Sheet: U.S. – EU Arrangements on Global Steel and Aluminium Excess Capacity 
and Carbon Intensity, 31 October . Viewed at: https://ustr.gov/about -us/policy -offices/press -office/fact -
sheets/2021/october/fact -sheet -us-eu-arrangements -global -steel-and-alumi nium-excess -capacity -and-carbon -
intensity . 
99 HTSUS, Ch.  99. Viewed at: https://hts.usitc.gov/view/Chapter%2099?release=2021HTSABasicRev11 .  
100 CBP, Calendar Year End Commodit y Status Report, 2020 . Viewed at: 
https://www.cbp.gov/sites/default/files/assets/documents/2021 -
Feb/2020%20Cale ndar%20Year%20End%20Commodity%20Status%20Report.pdf .  
101 WTO documents G/LIC/N/3/USA/16, 28  January  2020; G/LIC/N/3/USA/17, 14  December  2020; and 
G/LIC/N/3/USA/18, 5  October  2021.  
102 WTO documents G/LIC/N/2/USA/4, 25  February  2021; and G/LIC/N/2/USA/5, 3  August 2021.  WT/TPR/S/434 /Rev.1  • United States  
 
- 81 - 
 
  3.68.   The AIM system was implemented by USDOC  through authority under the Census Act, as 
amended (13  U.S.C. 301(a) and 302), and pursuant to the joint understandings with Canada and 
Mexico on Section  232 Duties on Steel and Aluminum in order to facilitate the monitoring of 
aluminum  imports, including import surges, and to prevent transhipment.103 The AIM system was 
modelled on the SIMA system, which was amended during the period, although the United  States 
has monitored imported steel products through licenses  since 2002. The main changes to the SIMA 
system were to: (i)  require the identification of the country where the steel used in the manufacture 
of the imported product was melted and poured; (ii)  harmonize the scope of product coverage to 
that covered by Section  232 tariffs; (iii)  clarify how import data collected from the licenses  would be 
aggregated and reported to the public; and (iv)  formally change the threshold of low -value multiple 
shipment licenses  from USD  250 to USD  5,000 to align with existing practice.104 The SIMA system 
was also made permanent. These changes were prompted by the joi nt understandings, the need to 
modernize the SIMA system, and to enhance U.S. Government monitoring of steel.  
3.1.5.3 Other restrictions on imports  
3.69.   The U.S. Department of the Treasury's Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC) and the 
U.S. State Department administer and enforce a variety of economic and trade sanctions program s 
designed to protect U.S. national security interests. The program s include outright prohibitions or 
restrictions on transactions involving certain sanctioned jurisdictions, governmen ts, companies, and 
individuals that may affect import and export activities. The number of sanctioned programs and 
parties changes from time to time, and OFAC may issue licenses  to permit otherwise prohibited 
transactions. The OFAC website lists the curren t sanctions program s, regulations, guidance, broadly 
applicable licenses , and a searchable database of sanctioned party lists.105 
3.70.   The United  States updated or created new sanction measures during the review period 
including the implementation of new sanctio ns required by recent Congressional legislation and 
Executive Orders. OFAC actions during the review period are publicly available at 
https://home.treasury.gov/polic y-issues/financial -sanctions/recent -actions . 
3.1.6   Anti-dumping, countervailing and safeguard measures  
3.1.6.1   Anti-dumping and countervailing measures  
3.1.6.1.1   Legal and administrative framework  
3.1.6.1.1.1   Main laws and regulations  
3.71.   The main U.S . legislation with respect to anti -dumping (AD) and countervailing duties (CVD). 
Is contained in Title VII of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended by the Trade Agreements Act of 1979 
and the Trade Facilitation and Trade Enforcement Act of 2015 . The main regul ations governing AD 
and CVD investigations (including reviews) are included in 19 C.F.R. Parts 201, 207, and 351. The 
Trade Preferences Extension Act (TPEA) of 2015 (P.L.  114-27)106, and in the Trade Facilitation and 
 
103 Aluminum Import Monitoring and Analysis System, Rule by the International Trade Administration, 
23 December  2020. Viewed at: https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2020/12/23/2020 -
28166/aluminum -import -monitoring -and-analysis -system ; USTR, Joint Statement by the United  States and 
Canada on Section  232 Duties on Steel and Aluminum,  and Joint Statement by the United  States and Mexico 
on Section  232 Duties on Steel and Aluminum . Viewed at: 
https://ustr.gov/sites/default/files/Joint_Statement_by_the_United_States_and_C anada.pdf  and 
https://ustr.gov/sites/default/files/Joint_Statement_by_the_United_States_and_Mexico.pdf .  
104 Steel Import Monitoring and Analysis System,  Rule by the International Trade Administration, 
11 September  2020. Viewed at: https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2020/09/11/ 2020-19753/steel -
import -monitoring -and-analysis -system .  
105 OFAC, U.S. Department of the Treasury Sanctions Programs and Country Information. Viewed at: 
https://home.treasury.gov/policy -issues/financial -sanctions/sanctions -programs -and-country -information ; 
U.S. Department of the Treasury, OFAC, Sanctions List Search. Viewed at: 
https://sanctionssearch.ofac.treas.gov/ .  
106 Title V of the TPEA, known as the American Trade Enforcement Effectiveness Act, i ntroduced, among 
others, amendments to the provisions addressing information that may be used as facts otherwise available in 
an AD or CVD proceeding, as well as certain aspects pertaining to determinations of ''material injury'' or "threat 
of material inj ury". It also modified the definition of ''ordinary course of trade'' and the provisions governing 
the treatment of a ''particular market situation (PMS)'' in AD proceedings.  WT/TPR/S/434 /Rev.1  • United States  
 
- 82 - 
 
  Trade Enforcement Act of 2015 ( P.L. 114-125) introduced further amendments to  trade enforcement 
legislation . In particular, Title IV of the Act, known also as the Enforce and Protect Act of 2015 
(EAPA), contains provisions to prevent the evasion of the payment of duties. T o this end, t he EAPA  
created a new framework for CBP to investigate allegations of evasion of AD/CVD orders, under 
Section  517 (Procedures for Investigating Claims of Evasion of AD and CVD orders) and established 
the Trade Remedy Law Enforcement Directorate (TRLED) within CBP, t o carry out the  investigat ions. 
3.72.   During the period under review, the United  States Department of Commerce ( USDOC) 
introduced important changes to its Trade Enforcement Regulations to strengthen and make more 
efficient the administration and enforcement of A D/CVD laws, and to better address circumvention 
and evasion of trade remedies. On 20  September  2021, USDOC issued Final Regulations to Improve 
Administration and Enforcement of Anti -dumping  and Countervailing Duty Laws.107 The new 
regulations, which were no tified to the WTO on adoption, establish new procedures for scope, 
circumvention and covered merchandise inquiries, and make a number of substantive and technical 
revisions with respect to other areas, such as new shipper reviews.108 
3.1.6.1.1.2   Administrative procedur es 
3.73.   USDOC's International Trade Administration (ITA) and the United  States International Trade 
Commission (USITC) are jointly  responsible  for conducting AD and CVD investigations and five -year 
(sunset) reviews under Title VII of the Tariff Act of 1930. USIT C determines material injur y, or threat  
thereof , or material retard ation of an industry by reason of dumped or subsidized imports.109 USDOC , 
through ITA's Enforcement and Compliance Unit (E&C ), is in charge of determin ing the existence 
and amount of dumping and subsidy in AD and CVD investigations. CBP is responsible for enforcing 
AD/CVD laws and orders on imported goods, for collecting AD/CVD cash deposits, administering 
AD/CVD entries, assessing and collecting final AD/C VD, and enforcing AD/CVD on imports that evade 
AD/CVD orders.110 The Trade Remedy Law Enforcement Directorate (TRLED) within the Office of 
Trade at CBP, is responsible for directing enforcement and compliance assessment activities 
concerning evasion , and for protecting the collection of AD and CVD duties. TRLED develop s policies 
for the assessment of risk of importers, to better determine the application of single entry and 
continuous bonds for entries of covered merchandise.  
3.74.   USDOC is charged with establishi ng and interpreting the scope of AD/CVD orders to ensure 
that all imports causing injury are addressed and, additionally, may take into account potential 
circumvention and duty evasion concerns. Upon issuance of an AD or CVD order, USDOC is required 
to pro vide a description of the class or kind of merchandise subject to the order at issue, referred to 
as the scope of the AD/CVD order. CBP is both empowered and obligated to determine in the first 
instance whether imported goods are subject to existing AD/CVD  orders. This determination is final 
and conclusive unless an interested party seeks a scope ruling from USDOC, which retains discretion 
to define the scope of the order to ensure that all imports causing injury are included and may also 
take into account potential circumvention and duty evasion concerns in its determination.  
3.75.   AD and CVD investigations may be initiated at the request of petitioners, or may be 
self-initiated by USDOC, although this has seldom been the case.111 USDOC must determine that a 
petition is filed by an interested party and on behalf of the industry, for which it must meet two 
criteria: (i)  the domestic producers or workers who support the petition account for at least 25% of 
the total production of the domestic like product; and (ii)  the domestic producers or workers who 
support the petition account for more than 50% of the production of the domestic like product 
produced by that portion of the industry expressing support for or opposition to the petition. The 
 
107 Regulations to Improve Administration and Enforcement of Anti -dumping  and Count ervailing Duty 
Laws 52300. Federal Register  (2021), Vol. 86, No.  179, 20  September. The proposed rule was published in 
85 FR 49472 (13  August  2020) (Proposed Rule).  
108 WTO document G/ADP/N/1/USA/1/Suppl. 31, G/SCM/N/1/USA/1/Suppl.32, 1  October  2021.  
109 USITC, About Import Injury Investigations . Viewed at: https://www.usitc.gov/trade_remedy.htm .  
110 USDOC, U.S. Anti -dumping  and Countervailing Duties . Viewed at: https://www.trade.gov/us -
antidumping -and-countervailing -duties . CBP is charged with applying and enforcing AD/ CVD orders; it is 
responsible for fixing the amount of duty owed on imported goods and is both empowered a nd obligated to 
determine in the first instance whether goods are subject to existing AD/CVD orders. Pursuant to 
19 U.S.C.  1514(b), this determination is final and conclusive unless an interested party seeks a scope ruling 
from USDOC (19  U.S.C. 1516a).  
111 USDOC self -initiated AD and CVD investigations of imports of common alloy aluminum  sheet from 
China in 2017. Prior to that case, there had been three self -initiations by USDOC since 1980.  WT/TPR/S/434 /Rev.1  • United States  
 
- 83 - 
 
  petition must provide in formation on value and volume of domestic production of the like product, 
and a  statement indicating if the petitioner has filed for other forms of import relief for the same 
merchandise.112 
3.76.   A determination on whether or not to initiate an investigation is generally made within 20  days 
from the date of filing of the petition. USITC has 45 days from the filing of the petition or 
self-initiation by USDOC or, if the time has been extended, 25 day s after USDOC informs it of the 
initiation of the investigation, to make a preliminary determination of reasonable indication of 
material injury, threat there of, or material retardation of the establishment of a domestic industry. 
If USITC's injury determi nation is negative, the investigation is terminated; if it is affirmative, the 
investigation continues. After a determination of injury has been made by USITC, USDOC has 
115 days (160 days after petition) to issue a preliminary AD determination, or 40 days  (85 days 
after petition) to issue a preliminary CVD determination.113 The investigation continues whether 
USDOC's preliminary determination is affirmative or negative, even if no margin of dumping or 
subsidization is found, or the margin found is below the  de minimis  threshold.114 USDOC has an 
additional 75 days to determine the final margin of dumping.  In case of an affirmative determination 
by USITC and a p reliminary affirmative determination by USDOC, preliminary AD or CVD measures 
may be applied for a period no longer than four  months, which may be extended to six  months. 
They generally consist of a cash deposit equivalent to the preliminary estimated margin of dumping 
or subsidy rate.  
3.77.   Critical circumstances may be alleged in a petition or by amendment at any time up to 21  days 
before the date of USDOC's final determination, or at any time in the case of a self -initiated 
investigation. A petitioner alleging critical circumstances should provide information that 
indicates:  (i) that a surge in imports prio r to the suspension of liquidation of entries of the subject 
merchandise will undermine the effectiveness of the relief; and (ii)  there have been massive imports 
over a relatively short period. In an AD investigation, the petitioner must demonstrate that e ither 
there is a history of dumping, or the importer(s) knew or should have known that the exporter was 
selling at less -than-fair-value and that there would be material injury by reason of such sales. CVD 
petitions should identify any countervailable subsi dy that is inconsistent with the WTO  Agreement 
on Subsidies and Countervailing Measures (SCM  Agreement). If the petitioner submits an allegation 
of critical circumstances 20 days or more before the scheduled date of the final determination, 
USDOC will make  a preliminary finding. Where USDOC makes a preliminary determination of critical 
circumstances, preliminary measures may be applied retroactively to imports entered up to 90 days 
before the determination was published in the Federal Register. USDOC's fina l determination of 
critical circumstances in AD investigations is based on a history of dumping and material injury, 
knowledge of dumping, which is presumed to exist when there is a margin of dumping of 25% or 
more for export price sales, and a margin of 1 5% or more for constructed export price sales, together 
with massive imports over a short period of time.115 
3.78.   If USDOC makes a negative final determination of dumping or subsidization, the investigation 
is terminated, provisional measures are lifted, and all  cash deposits are returned, with interest. If 
USDOC makes an affirmative final determination and finds a margin of dumping or a subsidy rate 
above the de minimis  level, the investigation goes back to USITC, which has 45 days to issue a final 
determination  of injury. If USITC's final determination is affirmative, USDOC issues an order 
imposing AD or CVD duties. If USITC's final determination is negative, the investigation is 
terminated, no order is issued, provisional measures are lifted, and all cash depos its are returned, 
with interest. The imposition of an order in the case of an affirmative determination, or of the 
 
112 USITC (2015), Anti-dumping  and Countervailing Duty Handbook , 14th ed., June. Viewed at: 
https://www.usitc.gov/trade_remedy/documents/handbook.pdf .  
113 USDOC has the authority to postpone its preliminary determination by up to 50 days in AD  cases and 
by up to 65 days in CVD cases if the investigation is extraordinarily complicated, or at the request of the 
petitioner if made not later than 25 days before  the scheduled date of the determination. See Commerce 
regulations 351.205(b) and (e) (19 C.F.R. 351.205(b) and (e)). USITC (2015), Anti-dumping  and 
Countervailing Duty Handbook , 14th ed., June. Viewed at: 
https://www.usitc.gov/trade_remedy/documents/handbook.pdf .  
114 The de minimis  threshold is 2% for AD investigations (0.5% for reviews) and, in the case of 
countervailable subsidies, 1% for developed countries, and 2% for developing c ountries.  
115 The existence of massive imports is usually determined by examining: (i)  the volume and value of 
imports; (ii)  seasonal trends; and (iii)  the share of domestic consumption accounted for by the imports. 
Imports are considered massive generally w hen, during three months, they have increased by at least 15% 
over the imports during the immediately preceding period.  WT/TPR/S/434 /Rev.1  • United States  
 
- 84 - 
 
  termination of the application of provisional measures in case of a negative determination, takes 
place within the 287th day (212th for CVDs)  and is published in the Federal Register . Affirmative 
determinations are subject to sunset reviews after five years (see below).  
3.79.   After issu ing an AD/CVD order, USDOC directs CBP to suspend liquidation and collect cash 
deposits, or estimated amounts of dut ies, on appropriate entries subject to the scope of the order 
corresponding to the margins of dumping established under an AD order and the CVD rates 
established under a CVD order. On a yearly basis, interested parties may request that USDOC 
conduct an adm inistrative review to determine the appropriate margin of dumping or CVD rate for 
entries subject to the order during the previous review year. Pursuant to its administrative review 
procedures, USDOC instructs CBP to lift the suspension of liquidation  and assess AD/CVDs at the 
appropriate amount.  
3.80.   In 2020, the United  States notified to the WTO a Temporary Rule Modifying AD/CVD Service 
Requirements due to COVID ‐19.116 In the initial notification, in March  2020, the United  States 
indicated that USDOC was tempor arily modifying certain requirements for serving documents 
containing business proprietary information in AD/CVD cases to facilitate the effectuation of service 
through electronic means (19 C.F.R. Part 351). More specifically, USDOC implemented temporary 
modifications to its service regulations to enable non -U.S. Government personnel responsible for 
serving documents in the ITA's E&C AD/CVD cases to work remotely. The temporary modifications 
were implemented to facilitate the continued administration of AD/ CVD proceedings.117 Initially, the 
temporary modification was applied until 19  May 2020.118 On 18  May 2020, E&C published a 
notification extending the temporary modifications through 17  July 2020.119 In July, USDOC 
extended the duration of these temporary mod ifications indefinitely , as it  did not establish a 
termination date and indicated that the modifications w ould remain in place until further notice.120 
3.1.6.1.1.3   New Regulations on Administration and Enforcement of A D and C VD Laws  
3.81.   On 20  September  2021, USDOC introduced important changes to its Trade Enforcement 
Regulations and issued Final Regulations to Improve Administration and Enforcement of 
Anti-dumping  and Countervailing Duty Laws.121 The regulations, which were notified to the  WTO on 
adoption, establish new procedures for three types of proceedings (scope, circumvention, and 
covered merchandise inquiries), and make a variety of other substantive and technical revisions with 
respect to other areas, such as new shipper reviews.122 The stated purpose of the modifications and 
additions to USDOC's regulations is to strengthen the administration and enforcement of AD/CVD 
laws, make such administration and enforcement more efficient, and create new enforcement tools 
for USDOC to address  circumvention and evasion of trade remedies. According to the Final Rule, 
these modifications allow USDOC to address the injurious effects of unfairly traded imports and 
promote the Administration's objective to enforce and administer the AD/CVD laws rigo rously.  
3.82.   Specifically, through the new regulations USDOC: (i)  modified the time for submission of 
comments pertaining to industry support in AD and CVD proceedings; (ii)  modified its regulation 
regarding new shipper reviews; (iii)  modified its regulation co ncerning scope matters in AD and CVD 
proceedings; (iv)  promulgated a new regulation concerning circumvention of AD and CVD orders; 
(v) promulgated a new regulation concerning covered merchandise referrals received from CBP; 
(vi) promulgated a new regulatio n pertaining to USDOC requests for certifications from interested 
parties to establish whether merchandise is subject to an AD or CVD order; (vii) modified its 
 
116 WTO document G/ADP/N/1/USA/1/Suppl.30 , G/SCM/N/1/USA/1/Suppl.29, 16  July 2020.  
117 Service requirements in E&C's regulations are often e ffectuated by hand delivery or by U.S. mail 
delivery of hard copy documents. Based on these circumstances, E&C announced that it would temporarily 
deem service of submissions containing business proprietary information (BPI) to be effectuated when the BPI 
submissions are filed by parties in USDOC's electronic system ACCESS, with certain exceptions.  
118 Temporary Rule Modifying AD/CVD Service Requirements Due to COVID ‐19, 85 FR 17006 
(26 March  2020) (Temporary Final Rule).  
119 Temporary Rule Modifying AD/CVD Ser vice Requirements Due to COVID ‐19; Extension of Effective 
Period, 85 FR 29615 (18  May 2020)  
120 Federal Register  (2020), Vol.  85, No.  133, 10  July, pp.  41363 -41364.  
121 Regulations to Improve Administration and Enforcement of Anti -dumping  and Countervailing Du ty 
Laws, Federal Register  (2021), Vol. 86, No.  179, 20  September, p.  52300 -52384. Viewed at: 
https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR -2021-09-20/pdf/2021 -17861.pdf . The proposed rule was published 
in 85 FR 49472 (13  August  2020) (Proposed Rule).  
122 WTO document G/ADP/N/1/USA/1/Suppl. 31, G/SCM/N/1/USA/1/Suppl.32, 1  October  2021.  WT/TPR/S/434 /Rev.1  • United States  
 
- 85 - 
 
  regulation regarding importer reimbursement certifications filed with CBP; and (viii) modified i ts 
regulations regarding service lists, entries of appearance, and importer filing requirements for access 
to business proprietary information in AD and CVD proceedings.123 All amendments were effective 
by 4 November  2021 (some were effective as of 20  Octob er 2021). The main points included in the 
Final Regulations are presented on Table  3.12. 
Table  3.12 Final Regulations to Improve Administration and Enforcement of 
Anti-dumping  and Countervailing Duty Laws, 202 1 
Background/Previous practice  Change introduced by the Final Regulations, 2021  
Initiation comment period for industry support   
Comments on industry support could be filed up to 
and including the scheduled date of the 
determination of investigation initiation.  Modification to Section  351.203 to provide for the establishment of a deadline by 
which parties may file comments on industry support. The deadline established for 
comments is no later than five business days before the scheduled date of 
initiation and rebuttal comments no later than two calendar days thereafter. These 
changes apply to petitions for investigations filed on or after 20  October  2021.  
New shipper reviews   
Section  351.214 provides a procedure by which "new 
shippers" (exporters or producers that did not export 
to the United  States during the period of 
investigation) may obtain their own individual 
dumping margin or countervailable subsidy rate on 
an expedited basis. New shippers could obtain a new 
shipper review withou t submitting information 
pertaining to whether the sales at issue constitute 
bona fide sales.  Revision of Section  351.214 to ensure that the sales to be reviewed are bona fide 
sales, and to conform the regulation with EAPA. The new rules : a) clarify the 
circumstances under which USDOC will grant a new shipper review ; b) establish a 
requirement for additional information to demonstrate the existence of a bona fide 
sale; c) establish factors to consider in determining bona fide sales for purposes of 
the AD a nd CVD laws ; and d)  eliminate the option of the importer posting an 
AD/CVD -specific bond or security in lieu of an AD/CVD cash deposit for each entry 
of the subject merchandise. These changes apply to new shipper reviews in which 
the request for review is filed on or after 20  October  2021.  
Scope   
When issuing an AD or CVD order, USDOC provides a 
general description of the merchandise covered 
(scope of the order).  
Previous regulations allowed for parties to request 
scope rulings from USDOC, which issued these based 
on the information contained in the scope ruling 
request or, if further inquiry was needed, initiated a 
formal scope inquiry and then issued a scope ruli ng. 
USDOC may also self -initiate a formal scope inquiry.  
USDOC has established methodologies to determine 
a product's country of origin, and the scope of an 
order. USDOC regulations also establish various 
procedures and standards for conducting a scope 
inquiry and issuing a scope ruling, as well as 
ordering the suspension of liquidation of entries of 
products subject to a scope inquiry.  
 Adoption of  procedural and substantive changes to Section  351.225 concerning 
scope inquiries to expedite deadlines, and r evise notice and service requirements.  
The procedural changes include: eliminating "informal inquiry" proceedings; 
publishing notices of self -initiation; adopting a standardized scope ruling 
application; publishing a monthly list of received applications; updating electronic 
service list procedures; modifying and standardizing filing timelines, among 
others.  
USDOC now has 30 days to accept or reject a scope ruling application; 
applications that are not rejected are deemed accepted and a scope inquiry will b e 
initiated. Scope inquiries must be completed within 120  days, or, if extended, 
within 300 days.  
The regulations also seek to ensure that AD/CVD duties are appropriately applied 
to products determined to be subject to the scope of the order regardless of when 
a scope ruling is requested. In this respect, the Final Rule extends scope rulings to 
all unliquidated entries of subject merchandise, excluded from such rulings before, 
with some exceptions.  
The new regulations also allow USDOC to address scope matte rs in other 
proceedings, including circumvention inquiries, covered merchandise inquiries, and 
administrative reviews; or to align scope deadlines with other segments of the 
proceeding.  
The new regulations separate the conduct of circumvention inquiries in to a 
different set of regulations.  
These changes apply to scope inquiries initiated on or after 4  November  2021.  
Circumvention   
The AD and CVD statute identifies four types of 
merchandise originating from a country with an 
existing AD and CVD order that may be found 
circumventing the order(s): (i)  merchandise 
completed or assembled in the United  States after 
importation; (ii)  merchandise completed or 
assembled in a third country before exportation to 
the United  States; (iii)  merchandise that has 
undergone minor alterations; and (iv)  merchandise 
developed after the order was established. If USDOC 
reaches an affirmative final determination, such 
merchandise will be covered by the scope of the 
order(s).  
In previous practice, circumvention inquiries were 
generally governed by USDOC's scope regulations on 
a case -by-case basis.  Introduc tion of  a new Section  351.226 concerning circumvention inquiries and the 
issuance of circumvention determinations and codify USDOC's existing practice.  
USDOC may now conduct a  circumvention inquiry at the request of an interested 
party or self -initiate it.  
USDOC  must determine within 30  days (45 days if extended ) whether to initiate a 
circumvention request , and issue its final determination within 300  days, or, if 
extended, wit hin 365 days.  
USDOC now may : address a scope matter or covered merchandise referral within 
a circumvention inquiry; defer a circumvention inquiry to first consider a scope 
matter; or align its deadlines with other segments of the proceeding.  
The regulation s clarify USDOC's authority to apply circumvention determinations 
on a country -wide basis to both products which are similar and to products which 
are the same as those subject to inquiry, and to impose a certification 
requirement.  
The regulations codify U SDOC's "commercial availability" test applied in later -
developed merchandise inquiries.  
The regulations modify previous regulations to adopt a case -specific analysis to 
determine whether to extend the suspension of liquidation to entries that pre -date 
the initiation of the inquiry.  
These changes apply to circumvention inquiries for which a circumvention request 
is filed, as well as any circumvention inquiry self -initiated by USDOC, on or after 
4 November  2021.  
Covered merchandise referrals   
Under the EAP A CBP may make a "covered 
merchandise referral" to USDOC for scope purposes ". 
Prior to the new rules, there were no regulations  for 
USDOC's receipt of a covered merchandise referral 
from CBP; practice was on a case -by-case basis.  Introduc tion of  a new Sect ion 351.227 concerning ''covered merchandise referrals'' 
from CBP to USDOC to determine if the product at issue is covered by the scope of 
the order(s).  
These changes apply to covered merchandise inquiries for which a sufficient 
covered merchandise referra l is received on or after 4  November  2021.  
 
123 Federal Register  (2021), Vol. 86, No.  179, 20  September, pp.  52300 -52384. Viewed at: 
https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR -2021-09-20/pdf/2021 -17861.pdf .  WT/TPR/S/434 /Rev.1  • United States  
 
- 86 - 
 
  Background/Previous practice  Change introduced by the Final Regulations, 2021  
Certifications   
USDOC  may require certifications by importers, 
exporters, and other interested parties as to whether 
merchandise is subject to an AD/CVD order. In 
previous practice, there were no regulations 
governing USDOC's certification practice.  Introduction of a new Secti on 351.228 to codify and enhance USDOC's authority to 
require certifications by importers, exporters, and other interested parties as to 
whether merchandise is subject to an AD/CVD order. The y provide procedures for 
complying with certification requirement s and consequences of failure to satisfy 
them. The changes are applicable as of 20  October  2021.  
Importer reimbursement certification   
Importers must certify whether they have entered 
into an agreement for the payment or 
reimbursement of AD and CVD duties  with the 
exporter . USDOC's previous regulation set forth 
specific requirements for the reimbursement 
certification.  Modification of  Section  351.402 regarding importer certifications for the payment 
or reimbursement of AD/CVD duties. The revised regu lation no longer requires a 
specific format for the certification and allows for either electronic or paper filing in 
accordance with CBP's procedures. These changes are applicable on or after 
20 October  2021.  
Source:  Final Regulations to Improve Administration and Enforcement of Anti -dumping  and Countervailing 
Duty Laws. Federal Register  (2021), Vol. 86, No.  179, 20  September, pp.  52300 -52384. Viewed at: 
https://w ww.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR -2021-09-20/pdf/2021 -17861.pdf ; and International Trade 
Administration, Anti-dumping  and Countervailing Duty FAQs.  Viewed at: 
https://www.trade.gov/anti -dumping -and-countervailing -duty-frequently -asked -questions . 
3.83.   The new regulations introduce new rules for scope, circumvention, and covered merchandise 
inquiries. They establish timelines for the initiation of the proceeding and the issuance of a final 
determination and provide that USDOC may initiate scope and circu mvention inquiries either based 
on a request from an interested party or by self -initiation instead of performing either a formal or 
informal scope inquiry. The previous regulations contained no separate rules on circumvention 
inquiries, nor did they expli citly indicate that USDOC had authority to self -initiate circumvention 
inquiries, nor did they have a section on covered merchandise inquiries.  
3.84.   Regarding new shipper reviews, the modifications clarify the circumstances under which 
USDOC will grant a new sh ipper review and establish specific factors to be considered in determining 
whether the sales at issue constitute bona fide sales for purposes of the AD and CVD laws.124 The 
new regulation requires that new shipper applicants provide evidence to support the  assertion that 
the sale or sales subject to a new shipper review are bona fide sales for purposes of determining 
AD margins. This is a new requirement that did not exist under the previous regulations.125 With 
these amendments, the regulations are now cons istent with Section  433 of the EAPA, which removed 
the ability for importers to post AD -/CVD-specific bonds or security in lieu of AD/CVD cash deposits 
and added a provision that the individual dumping margin or countervailing duty rate determined 
for a ne w shipper must be based on bona fide sales in the United  States. In this respect, the new 
rules codify the factors that USDOC has been using to determine whether a sale is bona fide.  
3.85.   The new rules introduce the possibility of retroactive application of AD/ CVD duties in scope 
and covered merchandise inquiries. It is now considered that "a scope ruling that a product is 
covered by the scope of an order is a determination that the product has always been covered by 
the scope of that order" (19  C.F.R.  351.225(a )). In the previous regulations, the date of initiation of 
a scope inquiry was a cut -off date, before which no unsuspended entries were subject to duties even 
if they involved merchandise subsequently determined to be within the scope of an AD/CVD order. 
In the new rule, for both scope and covered merchandise inquiries, at the time of an affirmative 
preliminary or final scope ruling, USDOC normally will direct CBP to begin the suspension of 
liquidation of unliquidated entries not yet suspended, which entere d before the date of initiation of 
the scope inquiry, and collect applicable cash deposits. The new circumvention rules also state that 
USDOC may apply duties retroactively if the Secretary of Commerce determines that it is appropriate 
to do so. For all th ree types of inquiries, USDOC will consider retroactive application on a 
case-by-case basis and may consider arguments and evidence from parties as appropriate.  
3.86.   The new regulations provide USDOC with authority to require importers and other interested 
parties to certify whether a particular product is subject to an AD/CVD order. If a party fails to 
provide the certification upon request, or the certification is false, USDOC may order CBP to collect 
AD/CVD duties from the importer at the applicable rate.  
 
124 New shipper reviews allow foreign producers/exporters to obtain a company -specific AD/CVD rate if 
they did not produce/export the relevant merchandise to the United  States during the time period covered by 
the original AD/CVD investigation and are not affiliated with any such producer/exporter.  
125 Federal Register  (2021) , Vol. 86, No.  179, 20  September, p.  52301 .  WT/TPR/S/434 /Rev.1  • United States  
 
- 87 - 
 
  3.1.6.1.1.4   Suspension agreements  
3.87.   U.S. law allows USDOC to enter an agreement to suspend an AD and/or CVD investigation 
under certain circumstances and when certain statutory and policy criteria are met. The suspension 
is based on an agreement by the relevant parties to the case to cease exports, or to eliminate the 
injurious effect. These agreements are generally voluntary limits on exports or price undertakings; 
or involve the elimination of subsidies or dumping by the foreign producers/exporters or 
government, as relev ant. Suspension agreements are monitor ed by USDOC to ensure compliance. 
For AD investigations, exporters may agree to accept price undertakings or to cease exports. 
AD suspension agreements reached with non -market economies (NMEs) may combine price 
underta kings and additional elements. In CVD investigations, a suspension agreement may be 
reached if the government alleged to be providing the subsidy agrees to eliminate the subsidy, to 
completely offset the net subsidy, or to cease or limit exports to the Uni ted States. Suspension 
agreements with a WTO Member considered a market economy may involve only price undertakings 
in the case of AD  investigations. Agreements with respect to CVD investigations may involve 
quantitative restrictions.  Notwithstanding the s uspension agreement, a written request to the 
Secretary of Commerce may be filed for the continuation of the investigation. If USDOC and USITC 
make affirmative final determinations in an investigation that has been continued, the suspension 
agreement will remain in effect. If either USDOC or USITC makes a negative final determination, the 
agreement will cease to have force or effect.  
3.88.   As of the end of 2021, there were seven suspension agreements in place: Fresh Tomatoes 
from Mexico; Sugar from Mexico (one AD  and one CVD); Uranium from the Russian  Federation; 
Certain Cut -to-Length Carbon Steel Plate from Ukraine; Lemon Juice from Argentina; and Certain 
Cut-to-Length Carbon Steel Plate from the Russian  Federation. Six relate to the suspension of 
AD investigatio ns; Sugar from Mexico also relates to the suspension of a CVD investigation. 
Suspension agreements are subject to sunset reviews and may also be subject to administrative 
reviews. During the period under review, five suspension agreements (Fresh Tomatoes f rom Mexico; 
Sugar from Mexico (AD/CVD); Certain Cut -to-Length Carbon Steel Plate from Ukraine; and Certain 
Cut-to-Length Carbon Steel Plate from the Russian  Federation) were subject to sunset reviews. In 
the first case, a new suspension agreement was signe d; in the other four, the suspension agreement 
was continued. The provisions of the agreements with Mexico on sugar were renegotiated in 2019 
and introduced in 2020.126 The amendment to the AD agreement includes revisions of the definitions 
of refined sugar ; increases to the minimum selling prices; and the inclusion, as part of the (quarterly) 
certification that sales took place at the reference price, of a listing of the total quantity of Other 
Sugar and Refined Sugar that was exported during each quarter. The CVD agreement contains the 
same amendments to the definitions of refined sugar plus amendments relative to export limits.127 
3.1.6.1.1.5   Administrative reviews  
3.89.   An administrative review of an AD or CVD order is a process that determines the amount of 
duties that nee d to be paid on the entries of a particular product subject to an order entered, or 
withdrawn from warehouse, for consumption, during a given period. An administrative review also 
establishes a new cash deposit rate for estimated AD/CVDs collected for futu re entries made by each 
of the companies for which the review is initiated. Cash deposit rates calculated in administrative 
reviews apply to entries of subject merchandise entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, for 
consumption, on or after the date the fina l results of review are published in the Federal Register.128 
3.90.   Administrative reviews of orders and suspension agreements in effect may be requested each 
year by interested parties during the anniversary month of the publication of the order  
 
126 Sugar from Mexico: Amendment to the Agreement Suspending the Anti -dumping  Investigation 
Countervailing Duty Investigation. Federal Register  (2020), Vol.  85, No.  14, 22  January, pp.  3620-3623. 
Viewed at: https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR -2020-01-22/pdf/2020 -00970.pdf ; and Sugar From 
Mexico: Amendment to the Agreement Suspending the Countervailing Duty Investigation. Ibid., 
pp. 3613-3616. Viewed at: https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2020/01/22/2020 -00972/sugar -from-
mexico -amendment -to-the-agreement -suspending -the-countervailing -duty-investigation .  
127 The amended CVD agreement modifies USDOC's calculation of the (sugar) Export Limit for each 
Subsequent Export Limit Period after the new initial export period going from 1 October  2019 to 
30 September  2020. Following the amendment, the Export Limit  will be 50% of the Target Quantity of 
U.S. Needs.  
128 ITA, Anti-dumping  and Countervailing Duty FAQs . Viewed at: https://www.trade.gov/antidumping -
and-countervailing -duty-frequently -asked -questions .  WT/TPR/S/434 /Rev.1  • United States  
 
- 88 - 
 
  (19 C.F.R.  351.213) . The list of orders and suspension agreements eligible for review is published 
monthly in the Federal Register. An interested party must specify the individual producer or exporter 
covered by the order for which they are requesting a review, and t he basis for the request. For 
suspension agreements, USDOC reviews the status of, and compliance with, the agreement. In 
reviews of AD/CVD orders, the USDOC examines a particular company's entries, exports, or sales 
made 12 months immediately preceding the  anniversary month in which the review was requested. 
The review determines the actual weighted -average amount of dumping or subsidy and 
AD/CVD  assessments for that period, and the future cash deposit rate. Requests for duty absorption 
rulings may also be made in an administrative review.  
3.91.   The results of the reviews are normally issued within 12 months from the date of initiation. 
Once the review is completed, USDOC sends cash deposit and liquidation instructions to CBP. 
Currently, CBP is notified of the ass essment 35  days after publication of the final results in the 
Federal Register , as the  previous requirement of a 15 -day notification period when no statutory 
injunction was requested was eliminated in January  2021.129 Only the decisions from the final resul ts 
of an administrative review impact the collection of cash deposits or assessment of duties.  
3.1.6.1.1.6   Sunset reviews  
3.92.   Section  751(c) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended by the URAA , provides for conducting 
five-year sunset reviews of AD and CVD orders or suspended investigations. USDOC and USITC must 
initiate sunset reviews no later than 30 days before the fifth anniversary of publication in the Federal 
Register of an AD or CVD orde r or suspension agreement. Initiations of the reviews are automatic. 
USDOC policy is to provide a one -month advance notification of sunset reviews in the Federal 
Register. USITC institutes its five -year review and sets its schedule in a published Federal R egister 
notice effective the same day as USDOC's initiation of the five -year review. Approximately 95 days 
after publication in the Federal Register of its notice of institution of the five -year review, USITC 
decides whether to conduct a full or expedited five-year review.  
3.93.   USDOC makes its final determination within 240 days after the date on which a review is 
initiated, except in cases of no responses and waivers. If no interested party responds to the notice 
of initiation of the review, USDOC issues a fina l determination, within 90 days after the initiation of 
a review, revoking the order or terminating the suspended investigation to which such notice relates. 
In the case of a waiver, the order is usually continued.130 If USDOC's final determination is 
affirmative, the USITC will typically complete the review within 360 days of initiation. However, both 
USDOC and the USITC may extend the period of time for making their respective determinations by 
not more than 90 days, if the review is extraordinarily compli cated. If USDOC extends the time for 
making a final determination, but USITC does not, the injury determination shall be made not later 
than 120  days after the date on which USDOC's final determination is published. In cases where 
interested party response s to a notice of initiation are inadequate, USDOC can make a final expedited 
determination (dumping) within 120 days after initiation, and USITC (injury) after 150 days, without 
further investigation, and based on the facts available.  
3.94.   In its determination of whether revocation of an order would likely lead to continuation or 
recurrence of dumping, USDOC considers the rates established in the investigation and/or reviews 
conducted during the sunset review period, as well as the volume of imports for the peri ods before 
and after issuance of the order. USITC determines whether revocation of the AD or CVD order or 
termination of the suspended investigation would be likely to lead to continuation or recurrence of 
material injury to the U.S. industry. If USITC's d etermination is affirmative, the order or suspension 
agreement will remain in place. If USITC's determination is negative, the order will be revoked, or 
the suspension will be terminated. Sunset reviews are order -specific (country - and product -specific), 
but several reviews may be grouped in an investigation; suspended investigations/suspension 
 
129 Federal Register  (2021), Vol.  86, No.  10, 15  January, p.  3995. Viewed at: 
https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2021/01/15/2021 -00884/notice -of-discontinuation -of-policy -to-
issue-liquidation -instructions -after-15-days-in-applicable .  
130 An interested party may elect not to participate in a review conducted by USDOC and to participate 
only in the review conducted by the USITC (waiver of participation). In a review in which an interested party 
waives its partic ipation, USDOC will conclude that revocation of the order or termination of the investigation 
would be likely to lead to continuation or recurrence of dumping or a countervailable subsidy with respect to 
that interested party. Section  751(c)(4) of the Tari ff Act of 1930, as amended.  WT/TPR/S/434 /Rev.1  • United States  
 
- 89 - 
 
  agreements are also subject to sunset review. There are no sunset reviews for AD orders on products 
from non -WTO Members.  
3.1.6.1.1.7   Circumvention rulings  
3.95.   Section  781 of the Ta riff Act contains provisions related to the prevention of circumvention of 
AD and CVD orders by having a small portion of the merchandise completed or assembled in the 
United  States. This includes merchandise sold in the United  States of the same class or kind as any 
other merchandise that is the subject of an AD and/or CVD order, completed or assembled in the 
United  States from parts or components produced in the foreign country with respect to which such 
order or finding applies, for which the process of assembly or completion in the United  States is 
minor or insignificant, while the value of the (imported) parts or components is a significant portion 
of the total value of the merchandise.131 If this is the case, USDOC, after taking into account any 
advice provided by USITC, may include within the scope of such order or finding the imported parts 
or components used in the completion or assembly of the merchandise in the United  States at any 
time such order or finding is in effect.132 Similar provisions apply for when the minor processing 
takes place in a third country, other than the United  States.  The Final Regulations to Improve 
Administration and Enforcement of Anti -dumping  and Countervailing Duty Laws separated 
circumvention inquiries from rules governing scope inquiries. Thy introduced of a new 
Section  351.226 concerning circumvention inquiries and the issuance of circumvention 
determinations and codified USDOC's existing practice.  
3.96.   In determining whether the process of assembly or completion is minor or in significant, 
USDOC take s into account: (i)  the level of investment in the foreign country; (ii)  the level of R&D in 
the foreign country; (iii)  the nature of the production process in the foreign country; (iv)  the extent 
of production facilities in the fore ign country; and (v)  whether the value of the processing performed 
in the foreign country represents a small proportion of the value of the merchandise imported into 
the United  States. To determine whether to include merchandise assembled or completed, or parts 
or components in other foreign countries in an AD or CVD order, USDOC takes into account such 
factors as: (i)  the pattern of trade, including sourcing patterns; (ii)  whether the manufacturer or 
exporter of the merchandise (or part or component) is af filiated with the person who uses it to 
assemble or complete in the foreign country the merchandise that is subsequently imported into the 
United  States; and (iii)  whether imports into the foreign country of the merchandise (or part or 
component) have incr eased after the initiation of the investigation which resulted in the issuance of 
such order or finding.133 
3.97.   Circumvention inquiries may also take place in the case of minor alterations of merchandise, 
whether or not included in the same tariff classification of the merchandise subject to an order. 
Inquiries may also arise to determine if merchandise developed af ter an AD or CVD investigation is 
initiated is within the scope of an order issued as a result of such investigation. USDOC must take 
into account advice provided by USITC before making a later -development merchandise 
determination. USDOC may not exclude a  later-developed merchandise from an AD or CVD order 
merely because the merchandise is classified under a different tariff classification or performs 
additional functions. USDOC has, to the extent practicable, 300 days from the date of the initiation 
of an AD or CVD circumvention inquiry to make its determination.  
3.98.   The 27 anti -circumvention determinations made by USDOC between 1  January  2018 and 
31 January  2022 are presented in Table  3.13; they have been grouped by AD/CVD order. Several 
are linked to investi gations regarding steel products; others deal with chemical, wood, and paper 
 
131 In determining whether the process of assembly or completion is minor or insignificant, USDOC shall 
take into account the level of investment in the United  States, the level of R&D in the United  States, the nature 
of the produ ction process in the United  States, the extent of production facilities in the United  States, and 
whether the value of the processing performed in the United  States represents a small proportion of the value 
of the merchandise sold in the United  States.  
132 USITC advice is required in investigations with respect to: (i)  merchandise completed or assembled 
in the United  States (other than minor completion or assembly); (ii)  merchandise completed or assembled in 
other foreign countries; or (iii)  any later -develo ped merchandise that incorporates a significant technological 
advance or significant alteration of an earlier product, with respect to an AD or CVD order or finding where 
USITC has made an affirmative injury determination.  
133 To formulate its advice with re spect to merchandise completed or assembled in the United  States 
from parts or components produced in a foreign country, USITC shall consider whether the inclusion of such 
parts or components taken as a whole would be inconsistent with its prior affirmativ e determination.  WT/TPR/S/434 /Rev.1  • United States  
 
- 90 - 
 
  products. Most of the cases are the result of a petition by the industry, but a few of them were 
self-initiated by USDOC. In most determinations made by USDOC during the period, c ircumvention 
of the order(s) was found, and the imports from the investigated supplier(s), or imports from the 
country as a whole, were made subject to the order(s). Some AD/CVD orders were the subject of 
more than one investigation during the period analy zed. 
Table  3.13 Anti-circumvention determinations made 1  January  2018 -31 January  2022  
Case  Determination  
A-351-842: Uncoated Paper from 
Brazil  Imports of subject paper rolls that are converted into uncoated paper sheets 
circumvent the AD and CVD orders; 14  December  2021 
A-560-828 and C -560-829: 
Uncoated Paper from Indonesia  Imports of subject paper rolls that are converted into uncoated paper sheets 
circumvent the AD and CVD orders; 14  December  2021 
A-570-022 and C -570-023: 
Uncoated Paper from China  Imports of subject paper rolls that are converted into uncoated paper sheets 
circumvent the AD and CVD orders China; 14  December  2021 
A-570-943: Oil Country Tubular 
Goods (OCTG) from China 
(Self-initiat ed) Imports of welded oil country tubular goods (OCTG) completed in Brunei or the 
Philippines using inputs manufactured in China circumvent the AD and CVD orders 
on OCTG from China; 26  November  2021 
A-570-026 and C -570-027: Certain 
Corrosion Resistant Ste el Products 
(CORE) from China (Self -initiated)  CORE completed in Malaysia from hot -rolled steel or cold -rolled steel substrate 
manufactured in China and exported to the United  States circumvent the AD and 
CVD orders on CORE from China; 1  June 2021.  
CORE pr oduced in South  Africa do not circumvent the orders; 1  June 2021.  
CORE completed in Costa  Rica and the UAE from hot -rolled steel or cold -rolled steel 
substrate manufactured in China, and subsequently exported to the United  States 
circumvents the AD and CVD  orders on CORE from China; 6  July 2020.  
CORE produced in Guatemala does not circumvent the orders; 6  July 2020.  
Imports of CORE, produced in Viet  Nam using carbon hot -rolled steel or cold -rolled 
steel flat products manufactured in China, circumvent the or ders; 23  May 2018.  
A-583-856: Certain Corrosion 
Resistant Steel Products (CORE) 
from Chinese  Taipei (Self -initiated)  CORE completed in Malaysia from hot -rolled steel or cold -rolled steel substrate 
manufactured in Chinese  Taipei and subsequently exported t o the United  States 
circumvents the AD order on CORE from Chinese  Taipei; 1  June 2021 
A-570-028: Hydrofluorocarbon 
(HFC) Blends from China  Imports of certain HFC blends containing HFC components from India and China 
blended in India prior to importation into the United  States are circumvent the AD 
order on HFC blends from China; 1  October  2020.  
Unpatented R -421A produced in China circumvents the order; 4  June 2020.  
Imports of unfinished blends of HFC components R -32 and R -125 from China 
circum vent the AD order on HFC blends from China; 18  March  2020.  
A-201-844: Steel Concrete 
Reinforcing Bar (Rebar) from Mexico  Imports of otherwise straight rebar bent on one or both ends from Mexico produced 
and/or exported by Deacero S.A.P.I. de C.V. circumve nt the AD order; 
29 May 2020.  
A-570-900: Diamond Sawblades and 
Parts thereof from China  Diamond sawblades made with Chinese cores and segments in Canada by Protech 
Diamond Tools Inc. and exported from Canada to the United  States are within the 
scope of th e order; 20  February  2020.  
Diamond sawblades made with Chinese cores and segments in Thailand and 
exported to the United  States are within the scope of the AD duty order; diamond 
sawblades made with Chinese cores and Thai segments; or Thai cores and Chines e 
segments, in Thailand and exported to the United  States are outside its scope; 
10 July 2019.  
A-570-890: Wooden Bedroom 
Furniture from China   A desk/console table with drawers, a TV cabinet with minibar, a trunk storage unit, 
and a bed bench base are not  covered by the scope of the AD order. However, 
certain TV credenzas/dressers and a console/custom dresser are covered by the 
scope of the order; 31  December  2019.  
A-580-881 and C -580-882: Certain 
Cold-Rolled Steel (CRS) Flat 
Products from Korea  Imports of certain CRS flat products, produced in Viet  Nam using carbon hot -rolled 
steel (HRS) manufactured in the Republic of Korea, circumvent the AD and CVD 
orders; 26  December  2019.  
A-583-856: Corrosion -Resistant 
Steel Products from Chinese  Taipei  CORE produced in Viet  Nam from HRS and/or CRS substrate produced in 
Chinese  Taipei and subsequently exported to the United  States from Viet  Nam 
circumvent the AD duty order; 26  December  2019.  
A-580-878 and C -580-879: Certain 
CORE Products from Korea  Importers and exporters of CORE produced in Viet  Nam using HRS manufactured in 
Viet Nam or third countries; or CRS manufactured in Viet  Nam using HRS produced 
in Viet  Nam o r third countries; and/or CRS manufactured in third countries, must 
certify that the HRS or CRS processed into CORE in Viet  Nam did not originate in 
the Republic of Korea, or their merchandise may be subject to AD and CVD duties; 
16 December  2019.  
A-570-051 and C -570-052: 
Hardwood Plywood from China  Certain plywood products with a Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) or California 
Air Resources Board (CARB) label and made with a resin, exported from China, 
circumvent the AD and CV duty orders; 22  November  2019. 
A-570-967 and C -570-968: 
Aluminum Extrusions from China  Aluminum extrusions exported from Viet  Nam, produced from aluminum previously 
extruded in China, circumvent the orders; 12  August  2019.  
A-201-830: Carbon and Certain 
Alloy Steel Wire Rod from Mexico 
Requestor: Nucor Corporation. Wire  Wire rod produced and/or exported by Deacero S.A.P.I. de CV with an actual 
diameter less than 4.75 millimeters , altered in form or appearance in minor 
respects from in -scope merchandise is subject to the AD duty o rder; 
13 March  2019.  
A-570-928: Uncovered Innersprings 
from China  Innersprings assembled or completed in Macao, China by companies part of the 
Macao Commercial Group and exported to the United  States, circumvent the AD 
order; 21  December  2018.  
A-570-814: Carbon Steel Butt -Weld 
Pipe Fittings from China   Fire-protection weld outlets from China are subject to the order, as they meet the 
description of merchandise covered by the scope; 11  December  2018.  WT/TPR/S/434 /Rev.1  • United States  
 
- 91 - 
 
  Case  Determination  
A-570-029 and C -570-030: Certain 
Cold-Rolled Steel (CRS) Flat 
Products from China  USDOC determined that CRS produced in Viet  Nam from HRS substrate 
manufactured in China circumvent the orders and fall within their scope; 
23 May 2018.  
USDOC determined that CRS produced in Viet  Nam from HRS substrate 
manufac tured in China circumvent the AD and CVD orders; 17  August  2018.  
Source:  Federal Register , Notices of Scope Rulings (several). Viewed at: 
https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/ ; and USDOC Access Database. Viewed at: 
https://access.trade.gov/ . 
3.1.6.1.1.8   Scope rulings  
3.99.   19 C.F.R. 351.225 allows a domestic interested party to allege that changes to an imported 
product or the place where the imported product is assembled constitutes circumvention. When such 
issues arise, USDOC  issues ''scope rulings'' that clarify the scope of an order or suspended 
investigation with respect to particular products.  
3.100.   Scope investigations may be self -initiated if USDOC determines from available information 
that an inquiry is warranted to determine  whether a product is included within the scope of an AD 
or CVD order or a suspended investigation, or any interested party may apply for a ruling. The 
application must contain a detailed description of the product, and its current HTSUS Classification 
number; a statement of the interested party's position as to whether the product is within the scope 
of an order, and any factual information supporting it.  Within 45 days of the date of receipt of an 
application, USDOC will issue a final ruling as to whether  the product is included within the order or 
will initiate a scope inquiry if it cannot determine whether a product is included within the scope of 
an order based solely upon the application and the descriptions of the merchandise.134 USDOC issues 
a final r uling normally within 120 days of the initiation of the inquiry. USDOC may conduct the scope 
inquiry in conjunction with an administrative review, a new shipper review, or an expedited 
AD review. USDOC will notify USITC  in writing of the proposed inclusion of products in an order prior 
to issuing a final ruling.  USDOC may include within the scope of an AD or CVD order: (i)  imported 
parts or components used in the completion or assembly of the merchandise in the United  States at 
any time such order is in effect; (ii)  imported merchandise completed or assembled in a foreign 
country other than the country to which the order applies; (iii)  articles altered in form or appearance 
in minor respect; and (iv)  later-developed merch andise.  
3.101.   If a preliminary scope ruling that a product is included within the scope of an order is issued, 
USDOC will instruct CBP to suspend liquidation and to require a cash deposit of estimated duties for 
each unliquidated entry of the product entered, or  withdrawn from warehouse, for consumption, on 
or after the date of initiation of the scope inquiry. If USDOC issues a final scope ruling, that the 
product in question is included within the scope of the order, the suspension of liquidation will 
continue. If USDOC's final scope ruling is to the effect that the product in question is not included 
within the scope of the order, any suspension of liquidation on the subject product will be ended and 
CBP will refund any cash deposits relating to this product. If a product subject to inquiry is already 
subject to suspension of liquidation, the suspension will be continued, pending a preliminary or a 
final scope ruling, at the cash deposit rate that would apply if the product were included within the 
scope of the o rder. On a quarterly basis, USDOC publishes in the Federal Register a list of scope 
rulings (Notice of Scope Rulings) issued within the last three months.  
3.102.   Between 1  January  2018 and 31  January  2022, USDOC made 169 final scope rulings. 
Several of the cases involved both AD and CVD orders; all the cases involved at least one AD order. 
In some cases, the same order was the subject of more than one investigation/ruling. About half of 
the rulings were linked to steel, iron, and aluminum  products. Other scope rul ings dealt with wood  
products , chemicals, photovoltaic products, canvas, ceramics, agricultural goods, and machinery.  
3.1.6.1.1.9   Determination of evasion of AD/CVD orders  
3.103.   Title IV of TFTEA, Prevention of Evasion of Anti -dumping and Countervailing Duty Orders, 
known a s EAPA, allows CBP to investigate whether a company or other entity has evaded AD/CVD 
duties. Section  421 of EAPA amended the Tariff Act of 1930 by creating a new framework for CBP to 
 
134 Interested parties have 20 days to provide comments and supporting information relating to the 
inquiry, and 10 days to provide any rebuttal to such comments. If USDOC finds that a scope inquiry presents 
an issue of significant difficulty , it may issue a preliminary scope ruling, based upon the available information.  WT/TPR/S/434 /Rev.1  • United States  
 
- 92 - 
 
  investigate allegations of evasion of AD/CVD orders, under newly created  Section  517 (Procedures 
for Investigating Claims of Evasion of Anti -dumping  and Countervailing Duty Orders). CBP 
implemented EAPA through regulation in August  2016. EAPA was notified to the WTO in 2016.135 
3.104.   EAPA requires CBP to initiate an investigation wit hin 15  business days of the receipt of a 
properly filed allegation from an interested party (EAPA allegation) or referral from another federal 
agency that reasonably suggests that merchandise covered by an AD/CVD order has entered the 
customs territory of the United  States through evasion (Table  3.14). EAPA allegations may be filed 
via the EAPA option on the e -Allegations web portal or through other means.136 On 1 April 2021, 
CBP updated the process to submit EAPA allegations. Users may now submit EAPA alleg ations 
through the EAPA Portal.137 EAPA allegations are specific to AD/CVD evasion.138 An EAPA  allegation 
may be filed by interested parties, or by other U.S.  government agencies, and must provide a 
statutory description of covered merchandise and the applicable AD/CVD order(s). CBP cannot file 
or initiate its own EAPA allegations. Allegers must pr ovide reasonably available information that 
suggests evasion of an AD/CVD order; allegers who do not feel that the information they have meets 
EAPA requirements may file an E -Allegation.139 TRLED within CBP is in charge of investigating an 
allegation, from initiation until the determination as to evasion. CBP may apply an adverse inference 
(lack of response as evidence of wrongdoing) if the importer, foreign producer, or exporter of the 
merchandise under investigation, or the interested party making the alle gation, fail to cooperate in 
the investigation to the best of their ability.140 
Table  3.14 Timeline for an EAPA investigation  
Day Event  
0 daysa Initiation of the investigationb 
No later than 90 calendar days  Determination of reasonable suspicion of evasion and issuance 
of interim measures  
5 business days after interim measures are taken  Notice of decision to initiate an investigation and whether 
interim measures were taken  
200 calendar days  Deadline to voluntarily submit factual informationc 
230 calendar days  Deadline to submit written arguments  
15 calendar days after a written argument was filed  Deadline to submit responses to the written argument  
No later than 300 calendar days  Determinatio n as to evasion or notice of extension of time  
No later than 360 calendar days  Determination as to evasion if the investigation is 
extraordinarily complicated  
5 business days after determination  Notice of CBP's  determination as to evasion  
a CBP may submit a referral to USDOC  if it cannot determine whether the entered merchandise 
described in the allegation is properly within the scope of an AD or CVD order. The time required for 
a referral and determination by USDOC will not be counted towards CBP's deadlines.  
b If CBP consol idates allegations into a single investigation, the date on which CBP receives the first of 
such allegations will start the time period for the deadline to initiate the investigation.  
c Parties to the investigation have 10 calendar days to provide rebuttal  information.  
Source:  CBP, Timeline for an EAPA Investigation and Administrative Review . Viewed at: 
https://www.cbp.gov/trade/trade -enforcement/tftea/en force-and-protect -act-eapa/timeline . 
 
135 WTO document G/ADP/N/1/USA/1/Suppl.23 , G/SCM/N/1/USA/1/Suppl.23, 1  April 2016.  
136 Investigations under EAPA are not the only statutory authority by which CBP can investigate 
allegations by the public or requests by other federal agencies with respect to the evasion of AD/CVD orders. 
The public has the option to make more general allegations of evasion through CBP's e -Allegations system, an 
official online portal for the public  to report violations of the trade laws (see below). Apart from its own 
functionality, e -Allegations also has an option for filing allegations of evasion under EAPA. CBP, e -Allegations 
portal. Viewed at: https://eallegations.cbp.gov/Home/Index . 
137 CBP, Enforce and Protect Act (EAPA) . Viewed at: https://www.cbp.gov/trade/trade -
enforcement/tftea/eapa .  
138 CBP, New to EAPA . Viewed at: https://www.cbp.gov/trade/trade -enforcement/tftea/eapa/new -to-
eapa.  
139 There is a dif ference between an EAPA allegation and an e -Allegation. An e -Allegation is more 
general, since it can pertain to any trade violation and may be filed by any member of the public; allegers can 
remain anonymous, However, they must provide an adequate and spe cific description of the merchandise 
involved, as well as evidence to help CBP in its review of the merits of the allegation. CBP cannot share specific 
information about the allegation and its status. In an e -Allegation investigation, CBP does not have the  
authority to apply an adverse inference. CBP, New to EAPA . Viewed at: https://www.cbp.gov/trade/trade -
enforcement/tftea/eapa/new -to-eapa.  
140 CBP, Enforce and Protect Act of  2015: Overview of the Investigation Process . Viewed at: 
https://www.cbp.gov/sites/default/files/assets/docume nts/2017 -
Apr/EAPA%20Investigation%20Process%20Overview_FINAL%20%28002%29.PDF . WT/TPR/S/434 /Rev.1  • United States  
 
- 93 - 
 
  3.105.   EAPA provides for a mechanism to ensure that duties can be collected on entries of covered 
merchandise made during the pendency of an investigation. CBP must determine within 90 calendar 
days of initiation of an EAPA in vestigation whether there exists reasonable suspicion that covered 
merchandise subject to an allegation was entered through evasion. If CBP determines that such 
reasonable suspicion exists, it applies interim measures. CBP will proceed to suspend the liqui dation 
of unliquidated entries of the covered merchandise entered after the date of initiation141, and extend 
the period for liquidating the unliquidated entries that entered before the initiation of the 
investigation. CBP may also take any additional measu res necessary to protect the ability to collect 
appropriate duties, which may include requiring posting a cash deposit or reliquidating entries. EAPA 
requires CBP to determine, not later than 300  calendar days (or 360  calendar days in extraordinarily 
compl icated cases) after the date of initiation of an EAPA investigation, whether there is substantial 
evidence that merchandise covered by an AD/CVD order was entered into the customs territory of 
the United  States through evasion (Table  3.14). No later than f ive business days after making a 
determination, CBP must communicate the determination to the interested party who made an 
allegation that initiated the evasion investigation. CBP posts its decisions as to interim measures 
and final determination of evasio n on its website.142 
3.106.   If CBP makes an affirmative determination of evasion, it will: (i)  suspend (or continue to 
suspend if a preliminary measure was applied) the liquidation of unliquidated entries of the covered 
merchandise subject to the determination; (i i) extend the period for liquidating the unliquidated 
entries of covered merchandise that entered before the initiation of the investigation; (iii)  when 
necessary, notify USDOC of the determination and request that it determine the appropriate duty 
rates f or such covered merchandise; (iv)  require importers of covered merchandise to post cash 
deposits and assess duties on the covered merchandise; and/or (v)  take such additional enforcement 
measures as CBP deems appropriate, including (but not limited to) mod ifying CBP's procedures for 
identifying future evasion, reliquidating entries, and referring the matter to ICE for a possible civil 
or criminal investigation. Additionally, if a violation of the Customs Act is identified as part of an 
affirmative determina tion, CBP may impose penalties under Section  1592 of the Tariff Act of 1930 
or use any of its other enforcement authorities. In September  2021, the United  States introduced 
final regulations for the application of the EAPA and notified them to the WTO.143 As provided for in 
If CBP determines during an EAPA investigation that the merchandise being investigated poses a 
health or safety risk, it will notify the appropriate federal agencies of that risk.144 
3.107.   EAPA calls for cooperation with foreign countries on preventing evasion of trade remedy 
laws, by seeking to negotiate and enter into bilateral agreements with their customs authorities or 
other appropriate authorities. These agreements should allow for the pro vision of production, trade, 
and transit documents and other information necessary to determine whether exports from the 
exporting country are subject to the importing country's trade remedy laws; they should also allow 
verification in the exporting countr y, including through a site visit.  
3.108.   A party to an EAPA investigation that has received an adverse determination from CBP  may 
file a request for an administrative review no later than 30 business days after the initial 
determination as to evasion. The administrative review period starts  on the date when CBP accepts 
the last properly filed request and electronically transmits  the case number to all parties to the 
investigation. CBP must complete the review and issue a final administrative determination  not later 
than 60 business days after the request for a review of an initial determination is filed (Table  3.15).  
 
141 Liquidation of an entry is the final calculation of money owed to CBP based on the current duty rates 
and the value of the imported goods. At the time of entry, the importer pa ys these estimated duties. During 
liquidation, CBP examines if this estimated amount is correct based on the HTSUS codes. If liquidation is 
stopped, a cash deposit must be placed instead (prior to the adoption of the 2021 Final Rules, the deposit 
could als o take the form of a bond).  
142 CBP, Enforce and Protect Act (EAPA) . Viewed at: https://www.cbp.gov/trade/trade -
enforcement/tftea/enforce -and-protect -act-eapa. 
143 Regulations to Improve Administration and Enforcement of Anti -dumping  and Countervailing Duty 
Laws, Federal Register  (2021), Vol. 86, No.  179, 20  September, p.  52300; and WTO  document 
G/ADP/N/1/USA/1/Suppl.31 and G/SCM/N/1/USA/1/Suppl.32, 1  October  2021.  
144 Section  517(b)(6) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended by the EAPA (19 U.S.C. 1517(b)(6)).  WT/TPR/S/434 /Rev.1  • United States  
 
- 94 - 
 
  Table  3.15 Timetable for administrative review under the EAPA  
Day Event  
0 days  Initiation of the administrative review and transmission of the case tracking number  
10 business days  Deadline to submit written responses to the request(s) for review  
60 business days  Completion of the administrative review  
Source:  CBP, Timeline for an EAPA Investigation and Administrative Review . Viewed at: 
https://www.cbp.gov/trade/trade -enforcement/tftea/enforce -and-protect -act-eapa/timeline . 
3.109.   Section  517(g) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended by the EAPA (19 U.S.C. 1517(g)), 
provides that judicial review of the final administrative determination and the original determination 
as to evasion is available to the party alleging evasion or the party found to have entered 
merchandise subject to the investigation  through evasion. A request for a judicial review must be 
made not later than 30 business days after completion of the final administrative determination. The 
request for judicial review must be made to the U.S. Court of International Trade (CIT).  
3.1.6.1.2   Anti-dumping measures  
3.110.   Between 2018 and 2021, the number of AD investigation initiations totaled  178, compared 
to 133 in the period between 2015 and 2017 , covered by the previous review . The number of 
initiations decreased slightly from 34 in 2018 to 33 in 2019, bu t increased substantially, to 89, 
in 2020. Between 1995 and 2020, the United  States initiated 817 AD investigations.145 There were 
11 new AD investigations initiations in the first half of 2021.146 Thirteen new AD investigations were 
initiated by ITA between  1 July and 31  December  2021.147 
3.111.   There was an increase in the number of AD measures in force during the period under review. 
In accordance with information from the USITC, 489 AD measures were in place as of 
31 December  2021 (Table  3.16).148 This included 483 AD orders and 6 AD suspension agreements, 
compared with 321 definitive AD measures in force as of 31  December  2017. The latest notification 
made to the WTO (as of late -March  2022), with measures up to 30  June 2021, lists 454 measures.149 
The AD measures in place as of end -2021 were appl ied to imports from 58  trading partners. The 
trading partners subject to the largest number of AD orders as of 31  December  2021 were China 
(148); the Republic of Korea (34); India (32); and Chinese  Taipei (30). Of the 489 AD orders in 
place as of 31 December  2021, 233 (48.0% of the total) were applied on iron and steel products, 
21 (4.3%) on miscellaneous manufactured products, 68 (14.0%) on chemicals and pharmaceuticals, 
51 (10.5%) on metals and minerals, 39 (8.0%) on agricultural products, 24 (5.0%)  on plastics and 
rubber, 11 on transportation (2.3%), 20 (3.4%) on textiles and apparel, 15 (3.1%) on machinery 
and equipment, and 2 (0.4%) on energy products.150 
3.112.   Of the 489 AD measures in place (including suspension agreements) as of 
31 December  2021, 245 had been renewed after a sunset review, i.e.  they had been in place for 
 
145 WTO, Anti-Dumping Initiations by Reporting Member 01/01/1995 -30/06/2021 . Viewed at: 
https://www.wto.org/english/tratop_e/adp_e/AD_InitiationsByRepMem.pdf . 
146 WTO document G/ADP/N/357/USA, 13  October  2021. The investigations initiated were: 
Pentafluoroethane  (R-125) from China, 2  February  2021 with a corresponding CVD investigation; Granular 
PTFE Resin from India and the Russian  Federation (2 investigations), 17  February  2021; Mobile Access 
Equipment and Subassemblies Thereof from China, 19  March  2021, with a  corresponding CVD investigation; 
Certain Walk -Behind Snow Throwers and Parts Thereof from China, 20  April 2021, with a corresponding CVD 
investigation; Organic Soybean Meal from India, 21  April 2021, with a corresponding CVD investigation; and 
Raw Honey f rom Argentina, Brazil, India, Ukraine, and Viet  Nam (5 investigations), 12  May 2021.  
147 Acrylonitrile -butadiene Rubber from France, Mexico, and the Republic of Korea (3 investigations), 
21 July 2021; Urea Ammonium Nitrate Solutions from the Russian  Federati on and Trinidad and Tobago 
(2 investigations) with corresponding CVD investigations (2), 21  July 2021; Freight Rail Coupler Systems and 
Certain Components Thereof from China, 20  October  2021; Oil Country Tubular Goods (OCTG) from Argentina, 
Mexico, and the  Russian  Federation (3  investigations), with parallel CVD investigations of OCTG from the 
Russian  Federation and the Republic of Korea (2), 27  October  2021; Certain Superabsorbent Polymers from the 
Republic of Korea, 22  November  2021; and Emulsion Styrene -Butadiene Rubber from the Czech  Republic, 
Italy, and the Russian  Federation, 6  December  2021 (3 investigations). ITA, Recent Case Announcements. 
Viewed at: https://www.trade.gov/ec -adcvd -case-announcements .  
148 USITC, Anti-dumping  and Countervailing Duty Orders in Place as of April  01, 2022 . Viewed at: 
https://www.usitc.gov/sites/default/files/trade_rem edy/documents/orders.xls . 
149 WTO document G/ADP/N/357/USA, 13  October  2021.  
150 USITC, Anti-dumping  and Countervailing Duty Orders in Place as of April  01, 2022 . Viewed at: 
https://www.usitc.gov/sites/default/files/trade_remedy/ documents/orders.xls . WT/TPR/S/434 /Rev.1  • United States  
 
- 95 - 
 
  over 5 years. The average duration of an AD measure in place at the end of 2021 was some 
10.4 years, compared to 11 years in 2017. This is partly explained by the relatively large numb er of 
orders put in place since 2017. At the end of 2021, 96 AD measures had been in place for at least 
20 years, and 193 AD measures had been in place for at least 10 years. The longest -lasting 
AD measure in place dates from 1978 and is applied on pre -stressed concrete steel wire strand from 
Japan. Duties applied during the period under review varied significantly. The level of AD definitive 
duties applied during 1  January  2018-31 December  2021 ranged from 0.00% to 541.75%; 
provisional duties applied over the same period also range from 0.00% to 541.75%.  
Table  3.16 Anti-dumping measures in force, by trading partner (including suspension 
agreements), 2018 -2021 (31 December)  
 2018  2019  2020  2021  
Trading partner/ region      
Argentina  2 2 2 3 
Armenia  - - - 1 
Australia  2 2 2 2 
Austria  1 1 2 2 
Bahrain, Kingdom of  - 2 - 1 
Belarus  2 - 2 2 
Belgium  3 3 4 4 
Bosnia and Herzegovina  - - - 1 
Brazil  10 10 10 12 
Cambodia  - - - 1 
Canada  4 5 5 5 
Chile 1 1 1 1 
China  120 132 135 148 
Colombia  1 1 1 2 
Croatia  - - - 1 
Czech  Republic  - - - 1 
Egypt  - - - 2 
France  6 3 3 4 
Germany  6 7 6 9 
Greece  1 1 1 1 
Iceland  - - - 1 
India 24 26 30 32 
Indonesia  10 10 11 15 
Iran, Islamic Rep. of  1 1 1 1 
Italy 10 10 10 12 
Japan  18 19 19 21 
Kazakhstan  1 1 1 1 
Korea, Rep. of  27 27 31 34 
Latvia  1 1 1 1 
Malaysia  4 4 4 9 
Mexico  12 13 13 14 
Moldova, Rep. of  2 2 2 2 
Netherlands  1 1 1 2 
Oman  3 3 4 6 
Pakistan  1 1 1 1 
Philippines  1 1 1 1 
Poland  2 2 2 2 
Portugal  1 1 1 1 
Romania  1 1 1 2 
Russian  Federation  5 5 5 7 
Saudi Arabia, Kingdom of  - - - 1 
Serbia  - - - 2 
Singapore  - 1 1 1 
Slovenia  - - - 1 
South  Africa  5 5 6 8 
Spain  4 5 5 10 
Sweden  1 1 1 1 
Switzerland  1 1 1 1 
Chinese  Taipei  26 26 27 30 
Thailand  8 12 12 15 
Trinidad and Tobago  1 1 1 1 
Tunisia  - - - 1 
Türkiye  10 11 12 16 
Ukraine  6 6 6 8 
United Arab Emirates  4 4 4 5 WT/TPR/S/434 /Rev.1  • United States  
 
- 96 - 
 
   2018  2019  2020  2021  
United Kingdom  3 3 3 3 
Venezuela, Bolivarian Rep. of  1 1 1 1 
Viet Nam 10 11 12 16 
Total  364 371 405 489 
- Nil. 
Source:  WTO documents G/ADP/N/357/USA, 13  October  2021; G/ADP/N/350/USA, 15  April 2021; 
G/ADP/N/335/USA, 25  June 2020; and G/ADP/N/222/USA, 19  March  2019; and USITC , 
Anti-dumping  and Countervailing Duty Orders in Place as of April  01, 2022 . Viewed at: 
http://www.usitc.gov/trade_remedy/documents/orders.xls . 
3.113.   As noted above, at the end of 2021, six AD suspension agreements were in place, with 
Argentina  (1), Mexico  (2), Russian  Federation  (2), and Ukraine  (1), relating to lemon juice, fresh 
tomatoes, sugar, carbon steel plate, uranium, and oil country tubular goods, respectively. Five of 
the agreements involve price undertakings, and one involves export limits. Between 1  January  2018 
and 31  December  2021, 30 AD investigations were terminated due to a negative determination, and 
one investigation was withdrawn (Table  3.17). Of the negative determinations in AD investigations, 
22 were USITC negative (no injury or threat ther eof) and 7 ITA negative (no  dumping). Negative 
determinations on AD investigations involved imports from 18 trading partners.  
Table  3.17 Anti-dumping investigations terminated by negative determinations, 2018 -21 
Product  Trading partner  Determination  Date  
Anti-dumping investigations     
Steel Propane Cylinders  Chinese  Taipei  Withdrawn  26/06/2018  
Silicon Metal  Australia  ITC negative  16/04/2018  
Silicon Metal  Brazil  ITC negative  16/04/2018  
Silicon Metal  Norway  ITC negative  16/04/2018  
Polyethylene Terephthalate (PET) Resin  Brazil  ITC negative  13/11/2018  
Polyethylene Terephthalate (PET) Resin  Indonesia  ITC negative  13/11/2018  
Polyethylene Terephthalate (PET) Resin  Korea, Rep. of  ITC negative  13/11/2018  
Polyethylene Terephthalate (PET) Resin  Pakistan  ITC negative  13/11/2018  
Polyethylene Terephthalate (PET) Resin  Chinese  Taipei  ITC negative  13/11/2018  
Polytetrafluoroethylene  China  ITC negative  04/12/2018  
Polytetrafluoroethylene  India ITC negative  04/12/2018  
Rubber Bands  Sri Lanka  ITC negative  19/03/2018  
Sodium Gluconate  France  ITC negative  22/01/2018  
Steel Propane Cylinders  Chinese  Taipei  ITC negative  27/06/2018  
Acetone  Saudi Arabia, Kingdom of  ITC negative  11/04/2019  
Certain Collated Steel Staples  Chinese  Taipei  ITA negative  22/07/2019  
Certain Collated Steel Staples  Korea, Rep. of  ITA negative  22/07/2019  
Polyethylene Terephthalate (PET) Sheet  Mexico  ITA negative  13/09/2019  
Magnesium  Israel  ITC negative  13/01/2020  
Dried Tart Cherries  Türkiye  ITC negative  27/01/2020  
Fabricated Structural Steel  Canada  ITC negative  20/03/2020  
Fabricated Structural Steel  China  ITC negative  20/03/2020  
Fabricated Structural Steel  Mexico  ITC negative  20/03/2020  
Sodium Sulfate Anhydrous  Canada  ITC negative  19/05/2020  
Glass Containers  China  ITC negative  05/11/2020  
Fluid End Blocks  India ITA negative  21/12/2020  
Wood Moldings and Millwork Products  Brazil  ITC negative  05/01/2021  
4th Tier Cigarettes  Korea, Rep. of  ITC negative  29/01/2021  
Common Alloy Aluminum Sheet  Greece  ITA negative  08/03/2021  
Common Alloy Aluminum Sheet  Korea, Rep. of  ITA negative  08/03/2021  
Passenger Vehicle and Light Truck Tires  Viet Nam ITA negative  19/07/20 21 
Source:  USITC, Anti-dumping  and Countervailing Duty Orders in Place as of April  01, 2022 . Viewed at: 
https://www.usitc.gov/sites/default/files/trade_remedy/ documents/orders.xls . 
3.114.   According to CBP data, at the end  of FY2021, 633 AD/CVD orders were in effect (compared 
to 539 orders at the  end of FY2020), USD  18.2 billion of imported goods were subject to AD/CVD, 
and CBP collected USD  1.8 billion in AD/CVD cash deposits and levied monetary penalties totaling  
over USD  31 million on importers for fraud, gross negligence, a nd negligence of AD/CVD 
requirements. CBP's collection of AD/CVD cash deposits increased by 32% since the last Review 
(FY2016).151 Considering a total level of imports of USD  2.4 trillion  for FY2020, revenue collected on 
 
151 CBP (2021), Trade and Travel Report Fiscal Year 2020 , February. Viewed at: 
https://www.cbp.gov/document/annual -report/cbp -trade-and-travel -fiscal-year-2020-report#wcm -survey -
target -id; and DHS (2017), Fact Sheet: Establishing Enhanced Collection and Enforcement of Anti -dumping  and 
Countervailing  Duties and Violations of Trade and Customs Laws . Viewed at: 
 WT/TPR/S/434 /Rev.1  • United States  
 
- 97 - 
 
  imported goods subject to AD/CVD represented 0.08% of the value of imports.152 CBP entry 
summary reviews during FY2020 resulted in recovery of over USD  94.2 million in AD/CVD duties 
owed. Also in FY2020, CBP's audit services identified more than USD  203 million in AD/CVD 
discrepanci es, and collected USD  7.2 million. In the same FY, CBP and ICE seized shipments with a 
domestic value of more than USD  1.1 million for AD/CVD violations, and CBP's auditors identified 
over USD  1.8 billion of additional duties owed to the U.S.  Government.153 In FY2020, CBP received 
103 e -Allegations regarding the evasion of AD/CVD orders.  
3.115.   There were 316 sunset review initiations of AD and CVD orders and suspension agreements 
during the period from 1  January  2018 to 31  December  2021; 250 were reviews of AD dut ies orders. 
Of the 186 orders for which the review had been concluded as of that date (among the 
316 investigations initiated during the period), 173 were continued for five more years, 9 were 
revoked, and 4 suspension agreements were renewed. During the 2 018-21 period, there were 
14 revocations (11 AD orders), counting revocations from reviews started prior to 2018. The 
revocations during that period included iron and steel products, tires, washers, chemicals, plastic 
tape, and uranium (Table  3.18).  
Table  3.18 Anti-dumping orders revoked 2018 -21 
Order date  Type  Revocation date  Product  Trading partner  
15/02/2013  A 15/02/2018  Large residential washers  Korea, Rep. of  
12/09/2001  A 12/06/2018  Ammonium nitrate  Ukraine  
04/09/2008  A 04/02/2019  New pneumatic off -the-road tires  China  
13/02/2002  A 15/03/2019  Low enriched uranium  France  
15/09/1997  A 16/05/2019  Crawfish tail meat  China  
24/06/2014  A 24/06/2019  Prestressed concrete steel rail tie wire  Mexico  
12/11/2019  A 09/06/2020  Refillable stainless steel kegs  Germany  
29/05/2009  A 15/06/2020  Citric acid and certain citrate  Canada  
22/03/1984  A 02/11/2020  Chloropicrin  China  
21/10/1977  A 14/04/2021  Pressure sensitive plastic tape  Italy  
12/02/1986  A 11/08/2021  Porcelain -on-steel cooking ware  China  
Source:  USITC, Anti-dumping  and Countervailing Duty Orders in Place as of April  01, 2022 . Viewed at: 
https://www.usitc.gov/sites/default/files/trade_remedy/ documents/orders.xls . 
3.1.6.1.3   Countervailing measures  
3.116.   Between 2018 and 2021, the re were 81  CVD investigation initiations, up from 63  between 
2015 and 2017, with 23 in 2018, 17 in 2019, 30 in 2020, and 11 in 2021. There were six initiations 
in the first six months of  2021, and five from 1  July to 31  December  2021.154 Overall, as of 
31 December  2021, there were 169 CVD orders in place and one suspension agreement with Mexico 
regarding sugar. The CVD orders involved 23 trading partners, where China was the trading partner 
subject to the largest number of orders (83), almost half of the total, follow ed by India (27).155 This 
compares with 106 CVD orders as at 17  July 2018, on 17 trading partners, as reported in the last 
Review, and with 160 orders from 21 trading partners as at 30  June 2021, as notified to the WTO.156 
Between 1  January  2018 and 31  Decem ber 2021, 81 CVD orders were issued and 3 order s revoked . 
3.117.   Of the 170 CVD measures in place on 31 December  2021 (including a suspension 
agreement), 78 (45.9% of the total) were on iron and steel products, 20 (11.8%) on chemicals and 
pharmaceuticals, 16 (9.4 %) on agricultural products, 13 (7.6%) on plastics and rubber, 12 (7.1%) 
on metals and minerals, 9 (5.3%) on miscellaneous manufactured products, 8  (4.7%) on machinery 
 
https://www.dhs.gov/news/2017/03/31/fact -sheet -enhanced -collection -and-enforcement -antidumping -and-
countervailing -duties . 
152 CBP (2021), Trade Statistics. Viewed at: https://www.cbp.gov/newsroom/stats/tradeU , 25 October.  
153 CBP (2021), Trade and Travel Report Fiscal Year 2020,  February. Viewed at: 
https://www.cbp.gov/document/annual -report/cbp -trade-and-travel -fiscal-year-2020-report#wcm -survey -
target -id.  
154 ITA information. Viewed at: https://access.trade.gov/public/FRNoticesListLayout.aspx .  
155 The trading partners subject to CVD measures as at 31  Decembe r 2021 were: Argentina (1); the 
Kingdom of Bahrain (1); Brazil (4); Canada (2); China (83); Chinese  Taipei (1); Germany (1); India (27); 
Indonesia (5); the Islamic Republic of Iran  (2); Italy (4); Kazakhstan (1); the Republic of Korea (8); 
Malaysia  (1); Me xico (2); Morocco (1); Oman (1); Russian  Federation (2); South  Africa  (1); Spain (1); 
Thailand (1); Türkiye  (13); and Viet  Nam (6). USITC (2022) . Viewed at: 
https:/ /www.usitc.gov/sites/default/files/trade_remedy/  documents/orders.xls . 
156 WTO document G/SCM/N/379/USA, 8  October  2021.  WT/TPR/S/434 /Rev.1  • United States  
 
- 98 - 
 
  and equipment, 7 (4.1%) on transportation equipment, and 7 (4.1%) on textiles and appare l.157 
There were 41 sunset reviews of CVD orders concluded during the period from 1  January  2018 to 
29 October  2021. As a result of the reviews, 37 orders were continued, a suspension agreement was 
renewed, and three orders were revoked.  
3.1.6.1.4   EAPA  investigations  
3.118.   EAPA came into effect in August  2016, and until October  2021, TRLED initiated 
56 investigations eligible for public disclosure from allegations of evasion of duties. In most these 
initiated investigations (48), interim measures, similar in scope to final measures, were applied.158 
As noted above, an affirmative final determination generally implies: (i)  suspending liquidation of 
unliquidated entries already suspended under the investigation (as interim measure); (ii)  adjusting 
and changing th e rate of Entry Type 03 entries subject to the investigation and suspend 
liquidation159; (iii) rejecting any entry summaries and requiring a re -file for those entries that are 
within the entry summary reject period; (iv)  requiring "live" entry for all impor ts meeting the evasion 
criteria, requiring the importer to submit proper documentation and all duties prior to release of the 
merchandise; and (v)  requiring single transaction bonds, as appropriate, and evaluating the 
sufficiency of the importer's continuo us bonds. None of these actions precludes CBP or other 
agencies from pursuing additional enforcement actions or penalties.  
3.119.   As of February  2022, CBP, through TRLED, had made a final determination in 51 cases, 1 of 
them involving 8 investigations ( Table  3.19). CBP made 45 affirmative determinations of evasion 
and 5 negative determinations; one case was referred to USDOC because CBP could not make a 
determination, and USDOC made an affirmative determination of evasion. The products for which 
evasion was found were, to a large extent, steel products, but also aluminum  products, plywood, 
furniture, glycine, hydrofluorocarbon blends, paper, hangers, garlic, pencils, xanthan gum, and 
polyethylene retail carrier bags.  
Table  3.19 EAPA investigations (eligible for public disclosure), 2016 -February  2022  
AD/CVD order evaded/date of initiation  Final determination of 
evasion/date  
A-570-918 on Steel Wire Garment Hangers from China (circumvention through 
Thailand)/11  October  2016 Affirmative, 14  August  2017 
A-570-9001 on Diamond Sawblades from China/22  March  2017  Affirmative, 17  September  2019 
A-570-890 on Wooden Bedroom Furniture from China/9  May 2017  Affirmative, 18  May 2020 
A-570-918 on Wire Garment Hangers from China (8 consolidated 
investigations)/12  May 2017 Affirmative, 15  March  2018 
A-570-9001 on Diamond Sawblades from China/18  July 2017 Affirmative, 20  July 2018 
A-552-817 on Oil Country Tubular Goods from Viet  Nam/18  July 2017  Affirmative, 21  May 2018  
A-570-8361 on Glycine from China/28  August  2017 Affirmative, 2  July 2018 
A-570-028 on Hydrofluorocarbon Blends from China/ 5 September  2017 CBP referred to USDOC: 
affirmative, 4  June 2020 
A-570-967 and C -570-968 on Aluminum  Extrusions from China/ 5  February  2018 Affirmative, 11  December  2018 
A-570-976 and C -570-968 on Aluminum  Extrusions from China/ 9  February  2018  Affirmat ive, 20  March  2019 
A-570-827 on Certain Cased Pencils from China/27  March  2018 Affirmative, 6  May 2019 
A-570-836 on Glycine from China (transhipment through Thailand)/16  October  2018 Negative, 25  September  2019  
A-570-064 and C -570-065 on Stainless Stee l Flanges from China (transhipment 
through the Philippines) (2 cases)/30  August and 13  September  2018 Affirmative, 9  October  2019 
A-570-967 and C -570-968 on Aluminum Extrusions from China ( mislabeling  of imports 
of affected goods)/10  August  2018 Affirmative, 18  September  2019 
A-570-814 on Carbon Steel Butt -Weld (CSBW) Pipe Fittings from China (transhipment 
through Cambodia and/or misclassification of merchandise)/13  February  2019 Affirmative, 22  January  2020  
A-570-831 on Fresh Garlic from China (lower AD duty rate than the applicable cash 
deposit rate) /8  April 2019 Affirmative, 10  February  2020 
A-570-985 on Xanthan Gum from China (transhipment through India) /7  May 2019 Affirma tive, 9  March  2020 
 
157 USITC, Anti-dumping  and Countervailing Duty Orders in Place as of April  01, 2022 . Viewed at: 
https://www.usitc.gov/sites/default/files/trade_remedy/  documents/orders.xls .  
158 EAPA allows implementing interim measures within 90 days of beginning an investigation. Interim 
measures allow CBP to require the importer(s) to pay cash deposits for AD/CVD duties on any future imports 
until conclusion of the investigation and to pause the final processing of payment to CBP for e ntries up to one 
year prior to the initiation of the investigation so that CBP can determine if additional duties are owed. CBP, 
Enforce and Protect Act (EAPA) . Viewed at: https://www.c bp.gov/trade/trade -enforcement/tftea/eapa .  
159 The Automated Commercial Environment (ACE), the platform that enables the United  States' Single 
Window, is the system of record by which electronic trade transactions are conducted and recorded by CBP. 
Transact ions must be filed by way of ACE with specified entry types. Entry Type 03 is used for consumption 
goods subject to anti -dumping/countervailing duty. CBP, ACE Transaction Details . Viewed at: 
https://www.cbp.gov/trade/automated/ace -transaction -details .  WT/TPR/S/434 /Rev.1  • United States  
 
- 99 - 
 
  AD/CVD order evaded/date of initiation  Final determination of 
evasion/date  
A-570-985 on Xanthan Gum from China (transhipment through Malaysia)/7  May 2019 Affirmative, 9  March  2020 
A-570-051 and C -570-052 on Certain hardwood plywood products from China 
(transhipment through Viet  Nam)/9  July 2019 Affirmative, 1 1 May 2020  
A-570-8361 and C -570-0812 on Glycine from China (transhipment through 
India)/17  July 2019 Affirmative, 19  May 2020 
A-570-051 and C -570-052 on Certain Hardwood Plywood Products (transhipment 
through Cambodia)/26  June 2019 Affirmative, 29  June 2020 
A-570-928 on Uncovered Innerspring Units from China/ 20  September  2019 Affirmative, 23  July 2020 
A-549-502 on Certain Circular Welded Carbon Steel Pipes and Tubes from Thailand / 
8 November  2019 Affirmative, 11  September  2020  
A-570-918 on Steel Wire Garment Hangers from China/ 21  November  2019 Affirmative, 23  September  2020 
A-533-840 on Certain Frozen Warmwater Shrimp from India/9  October  2019 Affirmative, 13  October  2020  
A-552-806 and C -552-805 on Polyethylene Retail Carrie r Bags from Viet  Nam / 
19 December  2019 Affirmative, 21  October  2020 
A-552-812, C -552-813 on Steel Wire Garment Hangers from 
Viet Nam/25  October  2019 Affirmative, 26  October  2020  
A-570-967 and C -570-968 on Aluminum  Extrusions from China/ 31  Oct. 2019  Affirmative, 4  November  2020 
A-570-814 on Certain carbon steel butt -weld pipe fittings from China/ 
6 November  2019 Affirmative, 5  November  2020 
A-570-954 and C -570-955 on Certain Magnesia Carbon Brick (MCB) from China / 
30 January  2020 Affirmative, 3  December  2020 
A-570-836 and C -570-081 on Glycine from China/18  December  2019 Negative, 21  December  2020 
A-570-967 and C -570-968 on Aluminum Extrusions from China (transhipment through 
the Dominican  Republic)/27  January  2020 Affirmative, 28  January  2021 
A-570-079 and C -570-080 on Cast Iron Soil Pipe (Soil Pipe) from China/7  April 2020  Affirmative, 8  February  2021 
A-570-062 and C -570-063 on Cast Iron Soil Pipe Fittings from China/ 7  April 2020 Affirmative, 8 February  2021 
A-570-904 on Activated Carbon from the China/20  February  2020 Negative, 23  February  2021 
A-570-947, C -570-948 on Steel Grating from China/30  June 2020 Affirmative, 21  June 2021 
A-570-073 and C -570-0741 on Common Alloy Aluminum Sheet from  
China/30  June 2020 Negative, 2  July 2021 
A-570-106 and C -570-107 on Wooden Cabinets and Vanities (WCV) and Component 
Parts Thereof from China (transhipment through Cambodia)/17  September  2020 Negative, 21  July 2021 
A-570-900 on Diamond Sawblades from China (transhipment through 
Thailand)/25  July 2018 Affirmative, 10  August  2021 
A-570-920 and C -570-921 on Lightweight Thermal Paper (LWTP) from 
China/20  October  2020 Affirmative, 23  August  2021 
A-570-918 on Steel Wire Garment Hangers from China (transhipment through 
Thailand)/14  September  2020  Affirmative, 16  September  2021  
A-570-106 and C -570-107 on WCV from China/ 13  November  2020 Affirmative, 16  September  2021  
A-570-084 and C -570-085 on Q uartz Surface Products from China/23  November  2020 Affirmative, 24  November  2021 
A-570-084 and C -570-085 on Quartz Surface Products from China/23  November  2020 
(second case)/1  February  2021 Affirmative, 6  December  2021 
A-570-900 on Diamond Sawblades and Parts Thereof from China/11  Sept. 2019  Affirmative, 15  December  2021 
A-570-985 on Xanthan Gum from China (transhipment through 
India)/19  February  2020 Affirmative, 23  December  2021 
A-570-106 and C -570-107 on WCV  from China (transhipment through 
Viet Nam)/26  March  2021 Affirmative, 27  January  2022 
A-570-051 and C -570-052 on Hardwood Plywood from China, 15  August  2018 Affirmative, 28  January  2022 
A-570-106 and C -570-107 on WCV from China (transhipment through 
Viet Nam)/26  January  2021 Affirmative, 31  January  2022 
A-570-084 and C -570-085 on Quartz Surface Products (QSP) from China 
(transhipment through Viet  Nam)/3  March  2021 Affirmative, 25  January  2022 
A-570-967 and C -570-968 on Aluminum Extrusions from China (t ranshipment through 
the Dominican  Republic)/2  February  2021 Affirmative, 4  February  2022 
A-570-106 and C -570-107 on WCV from China (transhipment through 
Malaysia)/21  April 2021 Affirmative, 23  February  2022 
Source:  WTO Secretariat based on CBP, Enforce and Protect Act (EAPA) . Viewed at: 
https://www.cbp.gov/trade/trade -enforcement/tftea/enforce -and-protect -act-eapa. 
3.1.6.2   Safeguards  
3.1.6.2.1   Main laws and regulations  
3.120.   Sections  201-204 of the Trade Act of 1974, as amended (collectively, Section  201), provide 
the legal framework through which the President may provide import relief under safeguard action. 
Under Section  201, USITC condu cts an investigation upon receipt of a petition from a trade 
association, firm, certified or recognized union, or group of workers that is representative of a 
domestic industry; upon receipt of a request from the President or the USTR; upon receipt of a 
resolution of the House Committee on Ways and Means or Senate Committee on Finance; or upon WT/TPR/S/434 /Rev.1  • United States  
 
- 100 - 
 
  its own motion.160 A petitioner may submit to USITC an adjustment plan detailing steps to facilitate 
adjustment to import competition.161 USITC is required to undertake  an investigation to determine 
whether an article is being imported into the United  States in such increased quantities as to be a 
substantial cause of serious injury, or the threat thereof, to the domestic industry producing an 
article like, or directly c ompetitive with, the imported article. If USITC makes an affirmative 
determination, or is equally divided in its determination, it must recommend to the President action 
to address the serious injury, or threat thereof, to the domestic industry. USITC is a uthorized to 
recommend: (i)  an increase in, or the imposition of an  import  duty; (ii)  a tariff rate quota on the 
article; (iii)  a modification or imposition of a quantitative restriction; (iv)  one or more adjustment 
measures, including providing  trade adju stment assistance; or (v)  any combination of the previous 
actions. The President makes the final decision whether to provide relief and the amount of relief.  
3.121.   USITC generally must make its injury determination within 120 days (150 days in more 
complicated c ases) of receipt of the petition, and must transmit its report to the President, together 
with any relief recommendations, within 180  days after th at date. If the period of the measure (or 
an extension of the measure) exceeds three years, USITC must submit  a report on the results of its 
monitoring to the President and Congress at the mid -point of the initial period or extension. 
Section  201 also provides a procedure under which the President, or the industry concerned, may 
request USITC, between six and nin e months before the measure is to terminate, to investigate to 
determine whether the measure continues to be necessary to prevent or remedy serious injury. 
USITC must submit a report on its extension investigation and determination to the President. USITC 
must also submit a report to the President and Congress on the effectiveness of the safeguard 
measure in facilitating the positive adjustment of the domestic industry to import competition no 
later than 180 days after termination of the action.  
3.122.   The most re cent major amendments made to regulations pertaining to safeguards date from 
2015, as notified by the United  States to the WTO, and relate to provisions of USITC's Rules of 
Practice and Procedure concerning safeguard actions.162 In March  2020, to address co ncerns related 
to COVID -19, USITC decided to temporarily waive certain of its rules that require the filing of paper 
copies, CD -ROMs, and other physical media, and amending certain of its rules that allow only for 
paper filing of certain documents in impor t injury investigations.163 In this respect, USITC approved 
the temporary amendment of Rule 206.2 and Rule 207.10(a) to permit parties to file import injury 
petitions, exhibits, attachments, and appendices electronically. The temporary change was effective 
19 March  2020, and until further notice.164 
3.1.6.2.2   Safeguard investigations 2018 -21 
3.123.   Between 2018 and 2021, one new safeguard investigation was conducted by the 
United  States under Section  201; measures corresponding to two investigations started in 2017 
were in pl ace. The new investigation was notified to the WTO. USITC made a negative serious injury 
determination in that investigation, and no safeguard measure was imposed.165 The President 
extended the safeguard measure in each of the two investigations started in 2017 (see below).  
3.1.6.2.2.1   Crystalline silicon photovoltaic cells  
3.124.   A safeguard investigation regarding certain crystalline silicon photovoltaic (CSPV) cells and 
modules (collectively, CSPV products) was initiated by the USITC in May  2017.166 On 
23 January  2018, the President signed a proclamation imposing a safeguard measure on imports of 
 
160 USITC, Understanding Safeguard Investigations . Viewed at: 
https://www.usitc.gov/press_room/us_safeguard.htm .  
161 USITC (2014), Summary of Statutory Provisions Related to Import Relief, USITC Publication 4468, 
August. Viewed at: https://www.usitc.gov/oig/documents/pub4468_2014.pdf . 
162 WTO document G/SG/N /1/USA/1/Suppl.1, 20  July 2015.  
163 Notified to the WTO in WTO document G/SG/N/1/USA/1/Suppl.2, 8  October  2020.  
164 Federal Register  (2020), Vol.  85, No.  54, 19  March, pp.  15797 -15798.  
165 WTO document G/SG/N/9/USA/5, 6  April 2021. 
166 These comprise CSPV cells assembled into modules or panels (HTSUS 8541 /40/6020 ), CSPV cells not 
assembled into modules (8541 /40/6030 ), inverters or batteries with CSPV cells attached (8501.61.00 and 
8507.20.80, respectively), and DC generators (8501.31.80).  WT/TPR/S/434 /Rev.1  • United States  
 
- 101 - 
 
  CSPV products.167 The measure was notified to the WTO, and went into effect for four years, 
beginning on 7  February  2018.168 The measure took the form of: (i)  a duty -free tariff rate quota on 
imports of solar cells not partially or fully assembled into other products, with unchanging 
within -quota quantities; and (ii)  an increase in duties from 0% to 30% on imports of out -of-quota 
CSPV cells and of modules, with  annual reductions in the rates of duty in the second, third, and 
fourth years (up to 15%). In September  2018, the United  States notified to the WTO its decision to 
exclude some products from the measure.169 In June  2019, the United  States notified its deci sion to 
exclude other particular products from the safeguard measure.170 In October  2019, the United  States 
notified its decision to withdraw the exclusion of bifacial solar panels from the safeguard measure.171 
In February  2020, USITC submitted a mid -term r eport on developments in the domestic industry.172 
In March  2020, USITC issued an additional report regarding the probable economic effect on the 
domestic CSPV  cell and module manufacturing industry of modifying the safeguard measure to 
increase the level of the TRQ on CSPV cells.173 
3.125.   Following USITC's mid -term monitoring report, the President determined  in a proclamation 
in October  2020 to revoke the exclusion pr eviously granted for bifacial panels , and  to adjust the 
duty rate of the safeguard tariff for the fourth year of the measure from 15% to 18% (Table  3.20).174 
This proclamation was subsequently invalidated by the U.S. CIT on 16  November  2021.175 As a result 
of the court 's decision is  bifacial products became excluded from the measure, and the applicable 
duty rate in the fourth year went back to 15% instead of 18%. On 14  January  2022, the Government 
filed a notice of appeal to the U.S. Court of App eals for the Federal Circuit.  
Table  3.20 Safeguard measures applied on imports of CSPV cells, 2018 -26 
HTSUS subheading  Applied 
rate 
before 
the 
increase  Year 1  
7 February  2018 -
6 February  2019  Year 2  
7 February  2019 -
6 February  2020  Year 3  
7 February  2020 -
6 February  2021  Year 4  
7 February  2021 -
6 February  2022  
9903.45.21 (in -quota 
CSPV cells)  0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 
9903.45.22 (out -of-
quota CSPV cells)  0% 30%  25%  20% 18%/15%  
9903.45.25 (modules)  0% 30%  25%  20% 18%/15%  
9903.45.21 (in -quota 
CSPV cells)  0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 
9903.45.22 (out -of-
quota CSPV cells)  0% 14.75%  14.5%  14.25%  14.0%  
9903.45.25 (modules)  0% 14.75%  14.5%  14.25%  14.0%  
Source:  Presidential Proclamation 10101 of 10  October  2020, Federal Register  (2020), Vol. 85, No.  201, 
16 October, p.  65639; and Proclamation 10339 of 4  February  2022, Federal Register  (2022), 
Vol. 87, No.  27, 9 February, p.  7359.  
 
167 Proclamation 9693 of 23  January  2018, To Facilitate Positive Adjustment to Competition from 
Imports of Certain Crystalline Silicon Photovoltaic Cells (Whether or Not Partially or Fully Assembled into Other 
Products) and for Other Purposes, Federal Register  (2018), Vol. 83, No.  17, 25  January, pp.  3541-3551. 
Viewed at: https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR -2018-01-25/pdf/2018 -01592.pdf . 
168 WTO document G/SG/N /8/USA/9/Suppl.4, 26  January  2018.  
169 WTO document G/SG/N/10/USA/7/Suppl.1, 24  September  2018.  
170 WTO document G/SG/N/10/USA/7/Suppl.4, 14  June 2019.  
171 WTO document G/SG/N/10/USA/7/Suppl.6, 9  October  2019.  
172 WTO document G/SG/N/10/USA/7/Suppl.9, 20  February  2020. The report can be found in: USITC 
(2020), Crystalline Silicon Photovoltaic Cells, Whether or Not Partially or Fully Assembled Into Other Products: 
Monitoring Developments in the Domestic Industry , Investigation No. TA -201-075 (Monitoring), Publicatio n 
5021, February. Viewed at: https://usitc.gov/publications/other/pub5021.pdf . 
173 USITC (2020), Crystalline Silicon Photovoltaic Cells, Whether or Not Partially or Fully Assembled Into 
Other P roducts: Advice on the Probable Economic Effect of Certain Modifications to the Safeguard Measure , 
Investigation No. TA -201-075 (Modification), Publication 5032, March. Viewed at: 
https://usi tc.gov/publications/other/pub5032.pdf . 
174 Presidential Proclamation 10101 of 10  October  2020, To Further Facilitate Positive Adjustment to 
Competition from Imports of Certain Crystalline Silicon Photovoltaic Cells (Whether or Not Partially or Fully 
Assemble d Into Other Products). Federal Register  (2020), Vol. 85, No.  201, 6  October, pp.  65639. Viewed at: 
https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR -2020-10-16/pdf/FR -2020-10-16.pdf. 
175 Solar Energy Industries Association et al. v. United  States  (2021). Viewed at: 
https://www.cit.uscourts.gov/sites/cit/files/21 -154.pdf .  WT/TPR/S/434 /Rev.1  • United States  
 
- 102 - 
 
  3.126.   In August  2021, at the petition o f the domestic industry, USITC initiated a proceeding to 
determine whether the measure on CSPV products continues to be necessary.176 In December  2021, 
USITC transmitted its report to the President regarding extension relief.177 On 4 February  2022, the 
President issued a proclamation extending the safeguard measure on CSPV products. The extension, 
to be in effect for four years, became effective on 7  February  2022, and took the form 
of: (i) continuation of the TRQ on imports of solar cells not partially or fu lly assembled into other 
products, with in -quota quantities increasing from 2.5 to 5 GW per year; (ii)  a duty rate of 14.75% 
ad valorem  on imports of out -of-quota CSPV cells and of modules, with annual reductions in the 
rates of duty in the sixth, seventh,  and eighth years (up to 1%); and (iii)  the exclusion of bifacial 
panels from the extension of the measure.178 The extension was notified to the WTO (Table  3.20).179 
3.127.   On 14  August  2018, China requested consultations with the United  States concerning the 
definitive safeguard measure imposed by the United  States on imports of certain CSPV products. 
The DSB established a panel on 15  August  2019. On 2  September  2021, the Pa nel Report was 
circulated to Members. The Panel found that China had not established that the safeguard measure 
on CSPV products failed to comply with the requirement in Article  XIX:1(a) of the GATT  1994 that 
imports increased "as a result of unforeseen de velopments and of the effect of the obligations 
incurred"180, and had not established that the United  States acted inconsistently with the Agreement 
on Safeguards by failing to demonstrate the required "causal link" between the increased imports 
and the ser ious injury found to exist. The Panel made no recommendation to the DSB pursuant to 
Article  19.1 of the DSU.181 On 16  September  2021, China notified the DSB of its decision to appeal 
certain issues of law and legal interpretations in the report.  
3.1.6.2.2.2   Large resid ential washers  
3.128.   A safeguard investigation on imports of large residential washers (LRWs) and certain parts 
thereof was initiated on 5  June 2017.182 On 23  January  2018, the President signed a proclamation 
imposing a safeguard measure to imports of LRWs and ce rtain parts. The measure was notified to 
the WTO.183 The products covered are: (i)  washers (HTSUS subheadings 8450.11.00 and 
8450.20.00); (ii)  all cabinets, or portions thereof, designed for use in washers (HTSUS subheading 
8450.90.60); (iii)  all assembled tubs designed for use in washers that incorporate, at a minimum, a 
tub and a seal (HTSUS subheading 8450.90.20); and (iv)  any combination of the foregoing parts or 
subassemblies (HTSUS subheadings 8450.90.20 or 8450.90.60).184 The safeguard measure was 
approved for three years and one day. It entered into force on 7  February  2018, and took the form 
of: (i)  a TRQ, with unchanging within -quota quantities, annual reductions in the rates of duty for 
goods entered within the TRQ in the second and third years, and  annual reductions in the rates of 
duty applicable to goods entered in excess of the TRQ in the second and third years; and (ii)  a TRQ 
on imports of covered washer parts, with increasing within -quota quantities and annual reductions 
in the rates of duty ap plicable to goods entered in excess of the TRQ in the second and third years 
(Table  3.21). Imports from Canada and certain developing countries were excluded. In 
February  2019, USITC initiated an investigation to monitor developments in the domestic 
 
176 WTO document G/SG/N/6/USA/11/Suppl.2, 10 August  2021.  
177 USITC (2021), Crystalline Silicon Photovoltaic Cells, Whether or Not Partially or Fully Assembled Into 
Other Products: Advice on the Probable Economic Effect of Certain Modifications to the Safeguard Measure , 
Investigation No. TA -201-075 (Extension), Publication 5066, December. Viewed at: 
https://usitc.gov/publications/other/pub5066.pdf . 
178 Proclamation 10339 of 4  February  2022, To Continue Facilitating Positive Adjustment to Competition 
from Imports of Certain Crystalline Silicon Photovoltaic Cells (Whether or Not Partially or Fully Assembled into 
Other Products), Federal Register  (2022), V ol. 87, No.  27, 9 February, pp.  7357-7362. Viewed at: 
https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR -2022-02-09/pdf/2022 -02906.pdf .  
179 WTO documents G/SG/N/10/USA/7/Suppl.13, 8  February  2022; and 
G/SG/N/10/USA/7/Suppl.13/Corr.1, 10  February  2022.  
180 WTO document WT/DS562/R, 2  September  2021.  
181 WTO, DS562: United  States – Safeguard Measure on Imports of Crystalline Silicon Photovoltaic 
Products . Viewed at: https://www.wto.org/english/tratop_e/dispu_e/cases_e/ds562_e.htm .  
182 WTO document G/SG/N/6/USA/12, 12  June 2017.  
183 WTO document G/SG/N/8/USA/10/Suppl.3, 26  January  2018.  
184 Proclamation 9694 of 23  Januar y 2018, To Facilitate Positive Adjustment to Competition from 
Imports of Large Residential Washers. Federal Register  (2018), Vol. 83, No.  17, 25  January, pp.  3553-3562. 
Viewed at: https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR -2018-01-25/pdf/2018 -01604.pdf . WT/TPR/S/434 /Rev.1  • United States  
 
- 103 - 
 
  indust ry.185 On 7 August  2019, USITC released its report.186 The review did not result in the measure 
being withdrawn nor the pace of liberalization increased.187 The measure was subsequently modified 
by amending the TRQs applicable to imports of washers under HTS subheadings 8450.11.00 and 
8450.20.00, by allocating the within -quota quantities in the third year of relief on a quarterly basis, 
rather than annual basis, beginning on 7  February  2020.188 
3.129.   In August  2020, USITC instituted an investigation on the request of  a domestic producer of 
LRWs to determine whether safeguard action continued to be necessary. USITC made an affirmative 
determination and issued its report in December  2020 and recommended that the President extend 
the relief action for two additional year s through 7  February  2023.189 USITC recommended that the 
President decrease the in -quota tariff rate to 15% in the fourth year and 14% in the fifth year and 
the above -quota tariff rate to 35% in the fourth year and 30% in the fifth year. USITC also 
recommen ded that the volume of imports of LRWs subject to the in -quota tariff rate remain at 
1.2 million units per year, administered on a quarterly basis. USITC also recommended to continue 
to progressively increase the additional tariff -free quota of covered par ts to 110,000  units in the 
fourth year  and to 130,000  units in the fifth year.190 The President accepted the USITC's 
recommendations and issued Proclamation 10133 on 14  January  2021.191 The measures for 2021 -23 
are presented in Table  3.21.192 
Table  3.21 Safeguard measures applied on large residential washers, 2018 -23 
HTSUS 
sub-
heading  Applied rate 
before the 
increase  Year 1  Year 2  Year 3  Year 4  Year 5  
7 Feb. 2018  
6 Feb. 2019  7 Feb. 2019  
6 Feb. 2020  7 Feb. 2020  
6 Feb. 2021  7 Feb. 2021  
6 Feb. 2022  7 Feb. 2022  
6 Feb. 2023  
9903.45.01 
(in-quota 
LRWs) (TRQ 
1.2 million 
units)  1.4% 
(8450.11.00)  
1% 
(8450.20.00)  1.4% + 20% 
(8450.11.00)  
1% + 20% 
(8450.20.00)  1.4% + 18% 
(8450.11.00)  
1% + 18% 
(8450.20.00)  1.4% + 16% 
(8450.11.00)  
1% + 16% 
(8450.20.00)  1.4% + 15% 
(8450.11.00) 
1% + 15% 
(8450.20.00)  1.4% + 14% 
(8450.11.00) 
1% + 14% 
(8450.20.00)  
9903.45.02 
(out-of-
quota 
LRWs)  1.4% 
(8450.11.00)  
1% 
(8450.20.00)  1.4% + 50% 
(8450.11.00)  
1% + 50% 
(8450.20.00)  1.4% + 45% 
(8450.11.00)  
1% + 45% 
(8450.20.00)  1.4% + 40% 
(8450.11.00)  
1% + 40% 
(8450.20.00)  1.4% + 35% 
(8450.11.00)  
1% + 35% 
(8450.20.00)  1.4% + 30% 
(8450.11.00)  
1% + 30% 
(8450.20.00)  
9903.45.05 
(in-quota 
parts of 
LRWs)  2.6%  2.6% for 
50,000 units 
(TRQ)  2.6% for 
70,000 units 
(TRQ)  2.6% for 
90,000 units 
(TRQ)  2.6% for 
110,000 units 
(TRQ)  2.6% for 
130,000 units 
(TRQ)  
9903.45.06 
(out-of-
quota parts 
of LRWs)  2.6%  2.6% + 50%  2.6% + 45%  2.6% + 40%  2.6% + 35%  2.6% + 30%  
Source:  WTO documents G/SG/N/8/USA/10 Supp.3, 26  January  2018; G/SG/N/10/USA/8/Suppl.6, 
15 December  2020; G/SG/N/10/USA/8/Suppl.7, 22  January  2021; and G/SG/N/8/USA/10 Supp.3, 
26 January  2018; Presidential Proclamation 9694 of 23  January  2018, and Presidential Proclamation 
10133 of 14  January  2021.  
 
185 WTO document G/SG/N/10/USA/8/Suppl.1, 26  February  2019.  
186 WTO document G/SG/N/10/USA/8/Suppl.4, 9  August  2019; USITC (2019), Large Residential 
Washers: Monitoring Developments  in the Domestic Industry Investigation  No. TA -204-013. Publication 4941, 
August.  
187 WTO document G/SG/N/10/USA/8/Suppl.5, 22  October  2020.  
188 Proclamation 9979 of 23  January  2020, To Further Facilitate Positive Adjustment to Competition 
From Imports of Larg e Residential Washers. Federal Register  (2020), Vol.  85, No.  18, 28  January, 
pp. 5125-5127. Viewed at: https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2020/01/28/2020 -01650/to -further -
facilitate -positive -adjustment -to-competition -from-imports -of-large-residential -washers .  
189 USITC (2020), Large Residential Washers: Extension of Action , Investigation No. TA -201-076 
(Extension), Publication 5144, December. Viewed at: https://usitc.gov/publications/safeguards/pub5144.pdf . 
190 USITC (2020), Large Residential Washers: Extensio n of Action , Investigation No. TA -201-076 
(Extension), Publication 5144, December. Viewed at: 
https://www.usitc.gov/publications/safeguards/pub5144.pdf .  
191 Proclamation 10133 of 14  January  2021, To Continue Facilitating Positive Adjustment to Competition 
From Imports of Large Residential Washers. Federal Register  (2021), Vol.  86, No.  12, 21  January, 
pp. 6541-6546. Viewed at: https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR -2021-01-21/pdf/2021 -01466.pdf . 
Notified to the WTO in WTO document G/SG/N/10/USA/8/Suppl.7, 22  January  2021.  
192 WTO document G/SG/N/10/USA/8/Suppl.7, 22  January  2021.  WT/TPR/S/434 /Rev.1  • United States  
 
- 104 - 
 
  3.130.   On 14  May 2018, the Republic of Korea requested consultations with the United  States 
concerning the definitive safeguard measure imposed by the United  States on i mports of LRWs and 
certain parts thereof. The DSB established a panel on 26  September  2018. On 8  February  2022, the 
Panel  Report was circulated to Members. The Panel found that the United  States had acted 
inconsistently with Article  XIX:1(a) of the GATT  1994 and Article  3.1 of the Agreement on 
Safeguards because USITC's report in the underlying safeguard investigation did not contain a 
reasoned and adequate explanation of "unforeseen developments" and the "obligations incurred" by 
the United  States, within the meaning of Article  XIX:1(a) of the GATT  1994. The Panel also found 
that the Republic of Korea had not established under Article  5.1 of the Agreement on Safeguards 
that the safeguard measure exceeded what was necessary to remedy the serious injury. The Panel 
recommended that the United  States bring its measure into conformity with its obligations under 
Article  XIX:1(a) of the GATT  1994 and the Agreement on Safeguards.193 
3.1.6.2.2.3   Fresh, chilled, or frozen blueberries  
3.131.   USITC initiated an investigation on fresh, chil led, or frozen blueberries (blueberries) on 
6 October  2020, with the initiation effective for purposes of U.S. law on 29  September  2020. The 
investigation was initiated pursuant to a request filed by the USTR, which did not allege critical 
circumstances. O n 11 February  2021, USITC issued its determination that blueberries were not being 
imported into the United  States in such increased quantities as to be a substantial cause of serious 
injury, or the threat of serious injury, to the domestic industry produc ing an article like or directly 
competitive with the imported article.194 Because USITC found that the domestic industry was not 
seriously injured or threatened with serious injury, it did not make any findings as to whether imports 
would be a substantial c ause of such injury or threat thereof.195 USITC transmitted its report to the 
President on 29  March  2021 and the investigation was concluded.196 
3.1.7   Other measures affecting imports  
3.132.   Apart from Title VII of the Tariff Act of 1930 and Sections  201-204 of the Trade Act of 1974, 
U.S. laws contain provisions to adjust the imports of an article so that such imports do not threaten 
to impair the national security of the United  States, step up enforcement of its trade laws, and seek 
the elimination of foreign barrie rs to its products and services. Some of the trade enforcement tools 
available that have an impact on imports and have been utilized during the review period include 
investigations under Section  232 of the Trade Expansion Act of 1962 and Section  301 of the  Trade 
Act of 1974.  
3.1.7.1   Section  232 investigations  
3.1.7.1.1   Legal and administrative framework  
3.133.   Section  232 of the Trade Expansion Act of 1962 (19  U.S.C. 1862) grants the Secretary of 
Commerce the authority to conduct investigations to determine the effects of imports o f any article 
on the national security of the United  States. Section  232 investigations may be initiated on request 
from an interested party, or from the head of any department or agency, or may be self -initiated by 
the Secretary of Commerce who must notif y the Secretary of Defense that an investigation has been 
initiated.197 USDOC may  hold public hearings or afford interested parties an opportunity to present 
information and advice relevant to the investigation. Requests for a Section  232 investigation must 
be submitted in writing and must contain, among other things: (i)  a description of the domestic 
industry affected, including information regarding companies and their plants, locations, capacity 
and current output of the industry; (ii)  statistics on imports and domestic production, showing 
quantities and values; (iii)  the nature, sources, and degree of the competition created by imports of 
 
193 WTO, DS546: United  States – Safeguard Measure on Imports of Large Residential Washers . 
Viewed  at: https://www.wto.org/english/tratop_e/dispu_e/cases_e/ds546_e.htm .  
194 Federal Register  (2021), Vol. 86, No.  62, 2 April, pp.  17401 -17402. Viewed at: 
https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR -2021-04-02/pdf/2021 -06756.pdf . 
195 USITC (2021), Fresh, Chilled, or Frozen Blueberries , Investigation No. TA -201-77, Publication  5164. 
Viewed at: https://www.usitc.gov/publications/safeguards/pub5164.pdf .  
196 WTO document G/SG/N/9/USA/5, 6  April 2021.  
197 Bureau of Industry and Security Office of Technology Evaluation (BIS) (2007), Section  232 
Investigations Program Guide: The Effect of Imports on the National Security, Investigations Conducted under 
the Trade Expansion Act of 1962, as Amended , June. Viewed at: 
https://www.bis.doc.gov/index.php/documents/section -232-investigations/86 -section -232-booklet/file .  WT/TPR/S/434 /Rev.1  • United States  
 
- 105 - 
 
  the article; and (iv)  the effect that imports of the article may have upon the restoration of domest ic 
production capacity in the event of national emergency. Requests must also contain information 
about the extent to which the economy, employment, investment, specialized skills, and productive 
capacity is, or will be, adversely affected , as well as regarding the revenues of federal, state, or local 
governments that are, or may be, adversely affected, and with respect to  national security 
supporting uses of the article, including data on applicable contracts or subcontracts.  
3.134.   When conducting a 232 investig ation and determining the effect of imports on national 
security, USDOC must take into account: (i)  the domestic production needed for projected national 
defense  requirements198; (ii)  the domestic industry's capacity to meet those requirements; 
(iii) existi ng and anticipated availabilities of the human resources, products, raw materials, and other 
supplies and services essential to the national defense ; (iv)  the growth requirements of such 
industries and such supplies and services including the investment, e xploration, and development 
necessary to ensure such growth; (v)  the importation of goods in terms of their quantities, 
availabilities character, and use as those affect such industries and the capacity of the United  States 
to meet national security requir ements; and (vi) the relation of U.S. economic welfare to 
U.S. national security.199 USDOC's report with its findings and recommendations must be submitted 
to the President no later than 270 days after the date on which the investigation was initiated. The 
President has 90  days to determine whether action must be taken to adjust the imports of the article 
and its derivatives so that such imports will not threaten to impair the national security. No later 
than 30 days after the date on which the President mak es a determination, the President must 
submit to Congress a written statement of the reasons for it.200 
3.135.   USDOC has conducted 21 Section  232 investigations since 1980; of these, 14 were 
concluded before or in 2001. In 2018, two investigations were initiated o n steel and aluminum . 
During the period under review, five new Section  232 investigations were initiated and completed: 
on automobiles and auto parts (February  2019); uranium (April  2019); titanium sponge 
(November  2019); lamination for stacked cores (Octo ber 2020); and vanadium (February  2021). 
The President has taken action to adjust imports in response to the Secretary's findings in two recent  
instances, imposing additional duties on aluminum  and steel products in 2018 . 
3.1.7.1.2   Steel investigation  
3.136.   The investigat ion under Section  232 of the Trade Expansion Act of 1962, to determine the 
effect of imported steel on national security, was initiated on 19  April 2017 and notified to the 
Department of Defense (D OD) the same day. In January  2018, the Secretary of Commerc e 
submitted to the President a USDOC report with the main findings resulting from the investigation. 
Based on these findings, the USDOC report concluded that the quantities and circumstances of steel 
imports threatened to impair national security, and reco mmended to the President t o consider action 
through either global or targeted tariffs, or a global quota.201 The tariffs and quotas would be in 
addition to any duties already in place.  
 
198 BIS (2007), Section  232 Investigations Program Guide: The Effect of Imports on the National 
Security, Investiga tions Conducted under the Trade Expansion Act of 1962, as Amended , June. Viewed at: 
https://www.bis.doc.gov/index.php/documents/section -232-investigations/86 -section -232-booklet/file .  
199 USDOC must take into consideration the impact of foreign competition on the economic welfare of 
individual domestic industries and on unemployment, as well as any serious effects resulting from the 
displacement  of any domestic products by excessive imports, including a decrease in government revenues, or 
loss of skills or investment. USDOC, Section  232 Investigation on the Effect of Imports of Steel on 
U.S. National Security . Viewed at: https://www.commerce.gov/page/section -232-investigation -effect -imports -
steel-us-national -security#factsheet232 . 
200 BIS (2007), Section  232 Investigati ons Program Guide:  The Effect of Imports on the National 
Security, Investigations Conducted under the Trade Expansion Act of 1962, as Amended. Viewed at:  
https://www.bis.doc.gov/index.php/forms -documents/section -232-investigations/86 -section -232-booklet . 
201 USDOC proposed: (i)  a global tariff of at least 24% on all steel imports from all countries, or a tariff 
of at least 53% on all steel impor ts from 12 countries (Brazil, China, Costa  Rica, Egypt, India, Malaysia, 
Republic of Korea, Russian  Federation, South  Africa, Thailand, Türkiye , and Viet  Nam), with a quota by product 
on steel imports from all other countries equal to 100% of their 2017 ex ports to the United  States; or (ii)  a 
quota on all steel products from all countries equal to 63% of each country's 2017 exports to the 
United  States. BIS (2018), The Effect of Imports of Steel on the National Security: An Investigation Conducted 
under Sec tion 232 of the Trade Expansion Act of 1962, as Amended , 11 January. Viewed at: 
https://www.commerce. gov/sites/commerce.gov/files/the_effect_of_imports_of_steel_on_the_national_securit
y_-_with_redactions_ -_20180111.pdf . WT/TPR/S/434 /Rev.1  • United States  
 
- 106 - 
 
  3.137.   The President proclaimed adjustments to steel imports by imposing, as from 23  March  2018, 
an additional 25% ad valorem  tariff on steel articles included in HTSUS six‑digit subheadings 
7206.10 through 7216.50, 7216.99 through 7301.10, 7302.10, 7302.40 throug h 7302.90, and 
7304.10202 through 7306.90203, imported from all countries.204 Imports from Argentina, Australia, 
Brazil, Canada, Mexico, the Republic  of Korea, and the member States of the European  Union were 
exempted from the measure until 1  May 2018.205 On 3 0 April 2018, an agreement with the 
Republic  of Korea was reached on alternative means to address the threatened impairment to 
U.S. national security posed by steel article imports. The measures agreed included annual  
aggregate limits of steel product impo rts from the Republic of Korea for the different HTSUS 
subheadings covered to apply for the period starting with calendar year 2018 and for subsequent 
years .206 In light of the measures, steel article imports from the Republic of Korea were excluded 
from th e tariffs. On 31  May 2018, the United  States announced agreements with Argentina, 
Australia, and Brazil on alternative means to address the threatened impairment to U.S. national 
security posed by steel article imports from these countries. The measures ag reed included annual  
aggregate limits of steel product imports from Argentina and Brazil for the period starting with 
calendar year 2018 and for subsequent years.207 The status of quotas may be viewed in the CBP 
website.208 Canada, Mexico, and the European  Union were exempted from the measure until 
1 June 2018.209 
3.138.   The additional tariffs were applied to Canada, Mexico, and the European  Union as from 
1 June 2018. In  2018, the European  Union, Canada, Mexico, China, India, the Russian  Federation, 
Türkiye , Norway, and Switzerland requested WTO DSB consultations with the United  States 
regarding the U.S. duties on certain imported steel and aluminum  products and requested the 
establishment of a panel. Subsequently, the DSB established a panel for each of the nine disp utes.210 
In 2019, the disputes with Canada and Mexico were terminated after the parties notified that they 
had reached a mutually agreed solution. In 2021, the dispute with the European  Union was 
terminated. For the remaining disputes, on 4  February  2021, t he Chair of the Panel informed the 
DSB that due to delays caused by the COVID -19 pandemic, the Panel expected to issue its final 
report no earlier than the second half of 2021.  
3.139.   On 16  July 2018, the United  States requested consultations with Canada, China, the 
European  Union, Mexico, and Türkiye  regarding additional duties imposed by these Members in 
 
202 Amended to HTSUS 731011 by Presidential Proclamation 9711, Adjusting Imports of Steel into the 
United  States, of 22  March  2018. Federal  Register  (2018), Vol. 83, No.  60, 8 March. Viewed at: 
https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR -2018-03-28/pdf/FR -2018-03-28.pdf  
203 The current MFN tariff rate for all pro ducts affected by the measure is 0%.  
204 Proclamation 9705 of 8  March  2018, Adjusting Imports of Steel Into the United  States. 
Federal  Register  (2018), Vol.  83, No.  51, 15  March, pp.  11625 -11630. Viewed at: 
https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2018/03/15/2018 -05478/adjusting -imports -of-steel-into-the-
united -states .  
205 Proclamati on 9711 of 22  March  2018, Adjusting Imports of Steel Into the United  States. 
Federal  Register  (2018), Vol.  83, No.  60, 28  March, pp.  13361 -13365. Viewed at: 
https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2018/03/28/2018 -06425/adjusting -imports -of-steel-into-the-
united -states . 
206 Also, quarterly  imports in an aggregate quantity under any of the subheadings covered by the 
agreement canno t exceed 30% of the total quota or 500 tons, whichever is greater. Proclamation 9740 of 
30 April 2018, Adjusting Imports of Steel Into the United  States. Federal Register  (2018), Vol. 83, No.  88, 
7 May, pp.  20683 -20705. Viewed at: https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2018/05/07/2018 -
09841/adjusting -imports -of-steel-into-the-united -states . 
207 Proclamation 9759 of 31  May 2018, Adjusting Imports of Steel Into the United  States. 
Federal  Register  (2018), Vol. 83, No.  108, 5  June, pp.  25857 -25877.Viewed at: 
https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2018/06/05/2018 -12140/adjusting -imports -of-steel-into-the-
united -states . These are absolute quotas: once the quota is filled, imports cannot take place under any 
condition. For Argentina and Brazil, quotas of 50 0,000  kg and 30% of the total aggregate quantity provided for 
a calendar year for each country, as set forth on CBP's internet site, were fixed.  
208 CBP, Commodity Status Reports . Viewed at: https://www.cbp.gov/trade/quota/tariff -rate-quotas . 
209 Proclamation 9740 of 30  April 2018, Adjusting Imports of Steel Into the United  States . 
Federal  Register  (2018), Vol. 83, No.  88, 7 May, pp.  20683 -20705. Viewed at: 
https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2018/05/07/2018 -09841/adjusting -imports -of-steel-into-the-
united -states .  
210 WTO docume nts WT/DS544/8, WT/DS548/14, WT/DS550/11, and WT/DS551/11, 19  October  2018; 
WT/DS545/7, 16  August  2018; WT/DS547/8, 9  November  2018; and WT/DS552/12, 10  September  2019.  WT/TPR/S/434 /Rev.1  • United States  
 
- 107 - 
 
  response to the additional duties imposed by the United  States on steel and aluminum  products.211 
On 27  August  2018, the United  States requested consultations with the Russian  Federation  on the 
same grounds .212 On 18  October  2018, the United  States requested additional consultations with 
Türkiye .213 On 3 July 2019, the United  States requested similar consultations with India.214 The 
United  States stated that it did not consider the additional duties justified, as,  in its view, Section  232 
measures were taken pursuant to Article  XXI of the GATT  1994  and were not measures taken 
pursuant to Article  XIX of the GATT  1994 or the Agreement on Safeguards.215 Panels were 
established in each dispute. In 2019, the disputes wit h Canada and Mexico were terminated after 
the parties notified that they had reached a mutually agreed solution. In 2021, the dispute with the 
European  Union was terminated. On 9  December  2021, the DSB was informed that due to the 
complexity of the dispute  and the delays caused by the global COVID -19 pandemic, the remaining 
panels expected to issue its final report to the parties no earlier than the first half of 2022.216 
3.140.   In January  2020, the European  Union and the United  States notified the DSB that they ha ve 
mutually agreed pursuant to Article  25.2 of the Understanding on Rules and Procedures Governing 
the DSU to resort to arbitration. The parties also requested that upon the composition of the 
arbitrator, the arbitration be immediately and indefinitely sus pended, and the dispute before the 
panel in United  States – Certain Measures on Steel and Aluminum Products  (DS548) be immediately 
terminated through withdrawal of the complaint.217 
3.141.   On 31  October  2021, the United  States and the European  Union issued a joint  statement 
with respect to the steel and aluminum  tariffs. In the statement, both parties express their joint 
desire to address non -market excess capacity so as to preserve their critical steel and aluminum  
industries, and agree to ongoing cooperation, and  promote arrangements to address global 
non-market excess capacity as well as the carbon intensity of the industries. They also agreed to 
terminate their DSB disputes.218 As noted in Box  3.2, as part of the arrangement, the United  States 
and the European  Union intend to negotiate for the first time, a global arrangement to address 
carbon intensity and global overcapacity. As a result of the arrangement, the United  States wi ll allow 
historically based volumes of EU steel and aluminum  products to enter the United  States without 
Section  232 duties and the European  Union will suspend related tariffs on U.S.  products. To 
implement the arrangement, the United  States and the Europe an Union will create a technical 
working group charged with developing a common methodology and share relevant data for 
assessing the embedded emissions of traded steel and aluminum . The global arrangement will be 
open to any interested country that shares  the commitment to achieving the goals of restoring 
market orientation and reducing trade in carbon intensive steel and aluminum  products.219 
Box 3.2 U.S.-EU joint statement on steel and aluminum , 31 October  2021  
On 31  October  2021, the United  States and the European  Union issued a joint statement with respect to the steel and 
aluminum  tariffs with the main following points:  
1) Ongoing cooperation  
a. Trade remedy/customs cooperation:  
- To help address excess capac ity, both sides agree to expand coordination involving trade remedies and customs matters.  
- The United  States will share public information and best practices with EU officials and/or member State officials on topics 
including how detection of fraud/evasi on and circumvention of duties is approached and possible self -initiation.  
- Officials could also coordinate industry engagement with relevant sectors.  
- Customs cooperation is concerned may take the form of mutual administrative assistance in accordance w ith the U.S. -EU 
Agreement on customs cooperation and mutual assistance in customs matters.  
 
211 WTO documents WT/DS557/1, WT/DS558/1, WT/DS559/1, WT/DS560/1 and WT/DS561/1, 
19 July 2018.  
212 WTO document WT/DS566/1, 27  August  2018.  
213 WTO document, WT/DS561/1/Add.1, 18  October  2018.  
214 WTO document WT/DS585/1, 4  July 2019.  
215 WTO document WT/DS548/13, 6  July 2018.  
216 WTO, Index of Disputes Issues . Viewed at: 
https://www.wto.org/english/tratop_e/dispu_e/dispu_subjects_index_e.htm .  
217 WTO document WT/DS548/19, 21  January  2022.  
218 USTR, Steel & Aluminum, U.S. -EU Joint Statement, 31  October  2021. Viewed at:  
https://ustr.gov/sites/default/files/files/Statements/US -EU%20Joint%20Deal%20Statement.pdf .  
219 European Commission (2021), "Joint EU -US Statement on  a Global Arrangement on Sustainable 
Steel and Aluminium", 31  October. Viewed at: 
https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/en/ip_21_5724 ; and USTR (2021), "Joint US -EU 
Statement on Trade in Steel and Aluminum" 31 October . Viewed at: https://ustr.gov/about -us/policy -
offices/pr ess-office/press -releases/2021/october/joint -us-eu-statement -trade -steel-and-aluminum .  WT/TPR/S/434 /Rev.1  • United States  
 
- 108 - 
 
  b. Monitoring:  
- The United  States and the European  Union will monitor steel and aluminum  trade between them.  
c. Cooperation on non -market excess capacity:  
- The United  States and the European  Union agree to regularly meet to consult with a view to developing additional actions 
to contribute to adjustments and solutions and address non -market excess capacity in the global steel and aluminum  
sectors.  
d. Review : 
- The United  States and the European  Union agree to review the operation of this arrangement, and ongoing cooperation, 
on an annual basis, including in light of changes in the global steel and aluminum  markets, U.S. demand, and imports.  
2). Global stee l and aluminum  arrangements to restore market -oriented conditions and address carbon intensity  
- The United  States and the European  Union are resolved to negotiate future arrangements for trade in steel and aluminum  
to reduce market excess capacity as well as the carbon intensity of the industries.  
- The United  States and the European  Union will inv ite like -minded economies to participate in the arrangements and 
contribute to achieving the goals of restoring market -oriented conditions and supporting the reduction of carbon intensity 
of steel and aluminum  across modes of production.  
- The United  State s and the European  Union will seek to conclude the negotiations on the arrangements within two years.  
- To encourage similar efforts by other steel producing economies, the United  States and the European  Union will consult with 
respect to bringing these ma tters into relevant international fora for discussion.  
- Compatible with international obligations and the multilateral rules, each participant in the arrangements would undertake 
the following actions:  
(i) restrict market access for non -participants that do not meet conditions of market orientation and that contribute to non -
market excess capacity, through application of appropriate measures including trade defense  instruments;  
(ii) restrict market access for non -participants that do not meet standards for low carbon intensity;  
(iii) ensure that domestic policies support the objectives of the arrangements and support lowering carbon intensity across 
all modes of production;  
(iv) refrain from non -market practices that contribute to carbon intens ive, non -market -oriented capacity;  
(v) consult on government investment in decarbonization; and  
(vi) screen inward investments from non -market -oriented actors in accordance with their respective domestic legal 
frameworks.  
- To enhance their cooperation and  facilitate negotiations on a global sustainable steel and aluminum  arrangements, the 
United  States and the European  Union agree to form a technical working group that will, inter alia, confer on methodologies 
for calculating steel and aluminum  carbon inte nsity and share data.  
3. WTO disputes  
- The United  States and the European  Union agree to suspend by 5  November  2021, pursuant to Article  12.12 of the DSU, 
the WTO disputes they have initiated against each other regarding the U.S. Section  232 measures (DS 548) and the 
European  Union's additional duties (DS559).  
- Regarding the matters that are before these panels, the United  States and the European  Union mutually agree to resort to 
arbitration pursuant to Article  25 of the DSU, so as to fully preserve the w ork of the parties and the panels and procedural 
steps in these disputes.  
- The United  States and the European  Union will agree by 17  December  2021 on the procedures to be followed in an 
arbitration of those matters. Upon agreement on these procedures, the  United  States and the European  Union will terminate 
their respective disputes before the panels, and the arbitrations will be suspended, without temporal limit.  
- A complaining party may request to resume the arbitration at any time after a 30 -day consult ation period and no sooner 
than 31  October  2022. Before resuming an arbitration, a complaining party will first seek to consult at the ministerial level 
with the other party with a view to reaching an alternative solution.  
- The United  States and the Europ ean Union also intend not to initiate any new WTO dispute relating to these matters for so 
long as each party considers this arrangement to be operating satisfactorily.  
Source:  USTR, Steel & Aluminum, U.S. -EU Joint Statement, 31 October  2021. Viewed at: 
https://ustr.gov/sites/default/files/files/Statements/US -EU%20Joint%20Deal%20Statement.pdf . 
3.142.   In November  2021, the U nited States  announced the start of consultations with Japan to 
address global steel and aluminum  excess capacity and take effective measures to ensure the 
long-term viability of the steel and aluminum  industries. In accordance with the announcement, the 
United  States and Japan will seek to resolve bilateral concerns in this area, including the application 
of Section  232 measures, trade flows, and the sufficiency of actions that address steel and alumin um 
excess capacity with the aim of taking mutually beneficial and effective actions to restore 
market -oriented conditions and preserve their critical industries.220 On 7  February  2022, the 
United  States and Japan issued a joint statement.221 In the statement , both parties express their 
joint desire to address non -market excess capacity so as to preserve their critical steel and aluminum  
industries, and agree to ongoing cooperation. As a result of the arrangement, the United  States will 
allow historically base d volumes of Japanese steel products to enter the United  States without 
Section  232 duties.  
 
220 USTR (2021), "U.S. Statement on Working With Japan to Address Global Steel and Aluminum Excess 
Capacity", 12  November. Viewed at: https://ustr.gov/about -us/policy -offices/press -office/press -
releases/2021/november/us -statement -working -japan -addres s-global -steel-and-aluminum -excess -capacity .  
221 Department of Commerce (2022), U.S.-Japan Joint Statement , 7 February. Viewed at: 
https://www.commerce.gov/sites/default/files/2022 -02/US -Japan -Joint-Statement.pdf . WT/TPR/S/434 /Rev.1  • United States  
 
- 109 - 
 
  3.1.7.1.3   Aluminum  investigation  
3.143.   A Section  232 investigation to determine the effect of imported aluminum  on national 
security was initiated on 26  April 2017.222 USDOC issued its report in January  2018, finding that 
aluminum  is being imported into the United  States in such quantities and under such circumstances 
as to threaten to impair the national security of the United  States.223 The Secretary of Commerce 
recommended to the P resident three alternative remedies for dealing with excessive imports of 
aluminum : a global tariff, a mix of selective tariffs and quotas, or a quota on all imports. The tariffs 
and quotas would be in addition to any duties already in place. The President  opted for imposing, 
through Proclamation 9704, as from 23  March  2018, an additional 10% ad valorem  tariff on certain 
aluminum  articles imported from all countries except Canada and Mexico.224 On 22  March  2018, the 
President exempted Argentina, Australia, B razil, the Republic of Korea, and the member States of 
the European  Union from the measure until 1  May 2018.225 On 30  April 2018, the President extended 
the exemption for Canada, Mexico, and member States of the European  Union until 1  June 2018, 
and extende d the exemption for Argentina, Australia, and Brazil without a deadline in light of the 
agreements in principle on satisfactory alternative means.226 On 31  May 2018, the President 
announced agreements with Australia and Argentina on alternative means to add ress the threatened 
impairment to U.S. national security posed by aluminum  articles imported from these countries.227 
The measures agreed included annual  aggregate limits of aluminum  product imports from Argentina 
for the period starting with calendar year 2018 and for subsequent years. In light of the agreements, 
the President exempted Argentina and Australia from the measure on a long -term basis.  
3.144.   The additional tariffs were applied to Canada, Mexico, and the European  Union as from 
1 June 2018. In 2018, the European  Union, Canada, Mexico, China, India, the Russian  Federation, 
Türkiye , Norway, and Switzerland requested DSB consultations with the United  States regarding the 
U.S. duties on certain imported steel and aluminum  products and reque sted the establishment of a 
panel (see above steel section for information about the WTO disputes concerning the U.S. duties, 
as well as additional duties imposed by other Members in response to the U.S. duties). On 
31 October  2021, the United  States and t he European  Union issued a joint statement with respect 
to the steel and aluminum  tariffs that terminated their DSB disputes (see above, steel).228 
3.145.   Section  232 duties must be paid on imports  under preferences . Imports of any steel or 
aluminum  article subjec t to Section  232 duties admitted into U.S. FTZs on or after 23  March  2018 
 
222 The investigation covered: unwrought aluminum  (HTSUS  7601), aluminum  bars, rods and profiles 
(7604); aluminum  wire (7605); aluminum  plates, sheets, and strip, of a thickness exceeding 0.2  mm (7606); 
aluminum  foil (whether or not printed, or backed with paper, paperboard, plastics or similar backing materials) 
of a thickness (excluding any backing) not exceeding 0.2  mm (7607); aluminum  tubes and pipes (7608); 
aluminum  tube and pipe fittings (7609); other articles of aluminum : castings (7616.99.51.60); and forgings 
(7616.99.51.70). BIS (2018), The Effect of Imports of  Aluminum on the National Security. An Investigation 
Conducted under Section  232 of the Trade Expansion Act of 1962, as Amended , 17 January. Viewed at: 
https://www.commerce.gov/sites/commerce.gov/files/the_effect_of_imports_of_aluminium_on_the_national_s
ecurity_ -_with_redactions_ -_20180117.pdf . 
223 BIS (2018), The Effect of Imports of Aluminum on the Nat ional Security: An Investigation Conducted 
under Section  232 of the Trade Expansion Act of 1962, as Amended , 17 January. Viewed at: 
https://www.commerce.gov/sites/commerce.gov/files/the_effect_of_imports_of_aluminium_on_the_national_s
ecurity_ -_with_redactions_ -_20180117.pdf . 
224 Proclamation 9704 of 8  March  2018, Adjusting Imports of Aluminum Into the Un ited States . 
Federal  Register  (2018), Vol.  83, No.  51, 15  March, pp.  11619 -11624. Viewed at: 
https://www.federalregister.go v/documents/2018/03/15/2018 -05477/adjusting -imports -of-aluminum -into-
the-united -states . 
225 Proclamation 9710 of 22  March  2018, Adjusting Imports of Aluminum Into the United  States.  
Federal  Register  (2018), Vol.  83, No.  60, 28  March, pp.  13355 -13359. Viewed at: 
https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2018/03/28/2018 -06420/adjusting -imports -of-aluminum -into-
the-united -states . 
226 Proclamation 9739 of 30  April 2018, Adjusting Imports of Aluminum Into the United  States. 
Federal  Register  (2018), Vol.  83, No.  88, 7 May, pp.  20677 -20682. Viewed  at: 
https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2018/05/07/2018 -09840/adjusting -imports -of-aluminum -into-
the-united -states .  
227 Annex to Proclamation 9758 Adjusting Imports of Aluminum Into the United  States  of 31 May 2018. 
Federal Register  (2018), Vol. 83, No.  108, 5  June, pp.  25849 -25855. Viewed at: 
https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2018/06/05/2018 -12137/adjusting -imports -of-aluminum -into-
the-united -states .  
228 Steel & Aluminum, U.S. -EU Joint Statement, 31  October  2021. Viewed at: 
https://ustr.gov/sites/default/files/files/Statements/US -EU%20Joint%20Deal%20Statement.pdf .  WT/TPR/S/434 /Rev.1  • United States  
 
- 110 - 
 
  enter with a "privileged foreign status"229, except those articles eligible for admission under 
"domestic status"230, and will be subject, upon entry for consumption, to any ad valorem  rates of 
duty related to the classification under the applicable HTSUS subheading.  
3.1.7.1.4   Investigation into auto imports  
3.146.   On 23  May 2018, USDOC initiated a Section  232 investigation into auto imports to determine 
whether imports of automobiles, including SUVs, v ans, and light trucks, and automotive parts into 
the United  States threatened to impair the national security as defined in Section  232. USDOC took 
into account the increase of the share of imports of passenger vehicles sold in the United  States 
from 32% t o 48% in the previous 20 years; the 22% decline in employment in motor vehicle 
production between 1990 and 2017; the low share of R&D represented by U.S. vehicle manufacturers 
in the United  States (20% of the total); and the fact that U.S. auto part manufa cturers account for 
only 7% of that industry in the United  States. The investigation also analy zed whether the decline 
of U.S. automobile and automotive parts production threatens to weaken the U.S. internal economy, 
including by potentially reducing R&D a nd jobs for skilled workers in cutting -edge technologies.  
3.147.   In its report issued in February  2019, the Secretary of Commerce found that the impact of 
excessive imports on the domestic automobile and automobile parts industry and the displacement 
of production in the United  States was causing a weakening of the U.S. internal economy that could 
impair the national security as set forth in Section  232. USDOC found that significant import 
penetration over the past three decades had severely weakened the U.S. automotive industry, as 
U.S.-owned production of automobiles and automobile parts had been redu ced by imports and the 
domestic manufacturing base had weakened. Overall, the share of global R&D investments in the 
automotive sector attributable to the United  States had significantly declined and was a fraction of 
the share conducted by foreign competi tors. A further decline in domestic production volumes would 
further weaken U.S.  contribution to automotive R&D and impede the industry's ability to invest in 
the development of technologies needed to maintain a leading edge in U.S. military capabilities. The 
Secretary of Commerce concluded that current quantities and circumstances of imports of 
automobiles and certain automobile parts were weakening the U.S. internal economy and 
threatening to impair national security as set forth in Section  232 and recomm ended negotiating an 
agreement or imposing tariffs of up to 35%.231 The President agreed with the Secretary's finding 
and directed the USTR to pursue negotiation of agreements to address the threatened national 
security impairment.  
3.1.7.1.5   Investigation into uraniu m imports  
3.148.   On 18  July 2018, USDOC announced the initiation of a Section  232 investigation into 
whether the quantity and circumstances of uranium ore and product imports into the United  States 
threatened to impair national security. The investigation covered  the entire uranium sector, from 
the mining industry through enrichment, defense , and industrial consumption.  The report of the 
investigation was issued in April  2019. Some of its findings include: (i)  domestic uranium production 
is essential to U.S. natio nal security; (ii)  the current level of imports adversely affects the economic 
welfare of the U.S. uranium industry; and (iii)  the displacement of U.S. uranium by excessive 
quantities of imports has the effect of weakening the U.S. internal economy.232 Based on these 
findings, the report concluded that the present quantities and circumstance of uranium imports were 
weakening the U.S. internal economy and threatened to impair the national security as defined in 
Section  232. The Secretary of Commerce recommend ed that the President take immediate action 
so as to increase the price to USD  55 per pound through a phased -in reduction of uranium imports  
 
229 In 19 C.F.R. 146.41, merchandise having a privileged foreign status is  defined as foreign 
merchandise that has not been manipulated or manufactured so as to effect a change in tariff classification.  
230 Domestic status may be granted to merchandise: (i)  which is the growth, product, or manufacture of 
the United  States on which  all internal revenue taxes, if applicable, have been paid; (ii)  previously imported 
and on which duty and tax has been paid; or (iii)  previously entered free of duty and tax (19 C .F.R. 146.43).  
231 USDOC (2019), The Effect of Imports of Automobiles and Auto mobile Parts on the National Security. 
An Investigation Conducted Under Section  232 of the Trade Expansion Act of 1962, as Amended , 
17 February  2019. Viewed at: https://www.bis.doc.gov/index.php/documents/section -232-
investigations/2774 -redacted -autos -232-final-and-appendix -a-july-2021/file . 
232 USDOC, Bureau of Industry and Security, Office of Technology Evaluatio n (2019), The Effect of 
Imports of Uranium on the National Security: An Investigation Conducted under Section  232 of the Trade 
Expansion Act of 1962, as amended . Viewed at: https://www.bis.doc.gov/index.php/documents/section -232-
investigations/2791 -uranium -section -232-report -and-appendices -april-2019-redacted/file .  WT/TPR/S/434 /Rev.1  • United States  
 
- 111 - 
 
  over a five -year period, and that either a targeted or global quota be used to adjust the level of 
imports for a du ration sufficient to allow the necessary time needed to stabilize and revitalize the 
U.S. uranium industry (two to five years, and several additional years to add new capacity). The 
report was publicly released in 2021.233 
3.149.   In July  2019, the President issued a memorandum stating that, at that time, he did not 
concur with the Secretary of Commerce's finding that uranium imports threatened to impair the 
national security of the United  States as defined under Section  232. A United  States Nuclear Fuel 
Working Group would be established to examine the current state of domestic nuclear fuel production 
and develop recommendations for reviving and expanding domestic nuclear fuel production.234 The 
Working Group issued its report in April  2020. The repor t contains a strategy that vies to restore 
U.S. comparative nuclear advantages.235 
3.1.7.2   Section  301 of the Trade Act of 1974  
3.1.7.2.1   Section  301 regulatory framework , procedures and determinations  
3.150.   Section  301(a) of the Trade Act of 1974 requires the U.S. Trade Represent ative (the USTR) 
to take action in cases where, as a result of an investigation, it is determined that a foreign 
government is engaging in (i)  trade agreement violations; (ii)  or acts, policies, or practices that are 
inconsistent with U.S. international le gal rights and that burden or restrict U.S.  commerce.236 
Section  301(b) of the Trade Act of 1974 authorizes the USTR to take action in cases where, as a 
result of an investigation, it is determined that a foreign government is engaging in acts, policies, 
or practices that are unreasonable or discriminatory, and that burden or restrict U.S. commerce.237 
Under Section  301(b), unreasonable practices include the denial of: (i)  fair opportunities for the 
establishment of enterprises; (ii)  adequate and effective in tellectual property rights (IPRs) 
protection; (iii)  fair and equitable market access opportunities for U.S. persons that rely on IPR 
protection; (iv)  fair and equitable market opportunities, including a foreign government's toleration 
of anti -competitive a ctivities that restrict access of U.S. goods or services to a foreign market; and 
(v) worker rights. Unreasonable practices may also include export targeting.  
3.151.   Under Section  301, interested persons may file a petition with the USTR requesting USTR to 
invest igate a foreign government act, policy, or practice that may be burdening or restricting 
U.S. commerce and take appropriate action. The USTR may also self -initiate an investigation.238 The 
Trade Facilitation and Trade Enforcement Act of 2015 ( P.L. 114–125) amended Section  306 of the 
Trade Act of 1974 by adding a new section which permits the USTR to reinstate a Section  301 action 
following: (i)  a request from the petitioner or any representative of the domestic industry that would 
benefit from the reinstatem ent of the action; (ii)  consultations under Section  306(d) of the Trade 
Act; and (iii)  a review under Section  307(c) of the Trade Act.  
3.152.   The Office of the U.S. Trade Representative (USTR) conducts Section  301 investigations. It 
may be assisted in by a Sectio n 301 Committee, a subordinate body of the Trade Policy Staff 
Committee (TPSC). The Section  301 Committee reviews complaints received pursuant to 
 
233 Federal Register  (2021), Vol. 86,  No. 145, 2  August. Viewed at: 
https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR -2021-08-02/pdf/2021 -16113.pdf .  
234 Memorandum on the Effect of Uranium Imports on the National Security and Establishment of the 
United  States Nuclear Fuel Working Group, 12  July 2019. Viewed at: 
https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/DCPD -201900470/pdf/DCPD -201900470.pdf .  
235 U.S. Department of Energy (2020), Restoring America's Competitive Nuclear Energy Advantage: 
A Strategy to Assure U.S. National Security , April. Viewed at: 
https://www.energy.gov/sites/prod/files/2020/04/f74/Restoring%20America%27s%20Competitive%20Nuclear
%20Advantage -Blue%20version%5B 1%5D.pdf .  
236 The law provides for exceptions, including where the WTO DSB has adopted a report dealing with a 
dispute regarding the matter covered in the investigation concerned that finds no violation or denial of 
U.S. rights.   
237 Under Section  301, the te rm "discriminatory" includes any act, policy, and practice that denies 
national or MFN treatment to U.S. goods, services, or investment, while an "unreasonable" act, policy, or 
practice is one that "while not necessarily in violation of, or inconsistent wi th, the international legal rights of 
the United  States is otherwise unfair and inequitable".  
238 Section  301 provides two means by which the USTR may initiate an investigation in the absence of 
a petition: (i)  self-determination; and (ii)  within 30 days aft er identifying a trading partner  as a "Special 301" 
"Priority Foreign Country". Congressional Review Service (CRS) (2020), Section  301 of the Trade Act of 1974: 
Origin, Evolution, and Use , updated 14  December. Viewed at: https://sgp.fas.org/crs/misc/R46604.pdf . WT/TPR/S/434 /Rev.1  • United States  
 
- 112 - 
 
  Section  301, holds public hearings upon request by a complainant or an interested party, reports to 
the TPSC t he results of reviews and hearings conducted with respect to complaints received pursuant 
to Section  301, and makes recommendations to the TPSC for review by that Committee.239 
3.153.   If the USTR receives a petition to initiate an investigation, USTR must determin e, within 
45 days, whether to initiate it. Once the investigation is initiated, the USTR must seek consultations 
with the foreign government whose acts, policies, or practices are under investigation. If the USTR 
determines that the investigation involves a trade agreement and a mutually acceptable resolution 
is not reached before the close of the consultation period specified in the trade agreement, or the 
150th day after the day on which consultation was commenced, whichever is earlier, the USTR must 
request formal dispute settlement proceedings under the governing trade agreement (WTO or other 
relevant trade agreement to which the United  States is a party). If a dispute is not resolved before 
the close of the minimum dispute settlement period provided for  in the agreement, the USTR is 
required to submit a report to Congress, within 15 days after the close of such period, setting forth 
the reasons why the dispute was not resolved, the status of the case, and the prospects for 
resolution. Where the investiga tion involves an alleged violation of a multilateral trade agreement 
or of a regional economic agreement with dispute settlement provisions, USTR must follow the 
consultation and dispute settlement provisions set out in that agreement.  
3.154.   Under Section  301 pr oceedings, USTR must make determinations in investigations involving 
a trade agreement with dispute settlement provisions within 18  months after initiation, or 30 days 
after the conclusion of dispute settlement procedures, whichever comes first. If the inv estigation 
does not involve a trade agreement with a dispute settlement mechanism, USTR must make 
determinations within 12 months after its initiation. Certain investigations concerning IPRs must lead 
to a determination within six months of initiation of t he investigation, or nine months if the 
investigation involves complicated issues.  
3.155.   The USTR must take action if, as a result of the investigation, the acts, policies, or practices 
are determined to violate a trade agreement or to be unjustifiable. If they are determined to be 
unreasonable or discriminatory and to burden or restrict U.S. commerce, action is discretionary: the 
USTR must determine whether action is appropriate and, if so, what action to take.240 Actions that 
may be taken under Section  301 inclu de to: (i)  suspend trade agreement concessions; (ii)  impose 
duties or other import restrictions; (iii)  impose fees or restrictions on services; (iv)  enter into 
agreements with the subject country to eliminate the offending practice or to provide compensato ry 
benefits for the United  States; and/or (v)  restrict service sector authorizations.  
3.156.   Section  307 allows for the modification of a tariff action under certain circumstances and 
such modifications may include a tariff exclusion process that enables interest ed parties to petition 
for an exemption from the Section  301 tariff increases for specific imports classified within a HTSUS 
subheading. USTR has granted exclusions where, for example, a requester has demonstrated the 
lack of availability of the product fr om other sources; there have been failed attempts by the importer 
to source the product from the United  States or third countries; or in cases of severe economic harm 
to the importer or other U.S. interests caused by the imposition of Section  301 tariffs o n a product. 
There is no timetable for providing responses to filed requests. The measure adopted by the USTR 
may be directed at any economic sector, without regard to whether the good or sector was involved 
in the act, policy, or practice subject to the d etermination. The action may be taken on either a 
non-discriminatory basis or solely against the foreign country involved but, in this case actions taken 
must be limited to a value equivalent to the burden or restriction imposed on U.S. commerce by the 
foreign country. Actions must generally be implemented within 30 days of a determination but may 
be delayed by not more than 180 days at the petitioner's request, or if substantial progress is being 
 
239 CRS (2020), Section  301 of the Trade Act of 1974: Origin, Evolution, and Use , updated 
14 December. Viewed at: https://sgp.fas.org/crs/mi sc/R46604.pdf .  
240 The USTR does not have to take action, however, if: (i)  the WTO DSB has adopted a formal dispute 
settlement report that concludes that the trade policy or practice in question does not violate or is not 
inconsistent with WTO  Agreements; ( ii) USTR determines that the foreign country subject to investigation is 
taking satisfactory measures to grant U.S. rights under a trade agreement; (iii)  the foreign country subject to 
investigation enters into a binding agreement that commits it to stop t he practice or phase out the policy, find 
a solution that eliminates the burden on U.S. commerce, or provide compensatory trade benefits to the 
United  States; or (iv)  the USTR determines that taking action would either have an adverse impact on the 
U.S. economy or cause serious harm to U.S. national security.  WT/TPR/S/434 /Rev.1  • United States  
 
- 113 - 
 
  made in negotiations with the foreign country, or if a delay  is deemed necessary or convenient to 
obtain a satisfactory solution to the issue.  
3.157.   Under Section  306 of the Trade Act of 1974, USTR must monitor the implementation of each 
measure taken and agreement entered resulting from a Section  301 investigation or fr om a dispute 
settlement proceeding under a trade agreement or under the WTO. If, as result of monitoring, USTR 
considers that the foreign country is not satisfactorily implementing a measure or agreement, it 
must make a determination for further action.241 Section  306 of the Trade Act of 1974 requires the 
USTR to periodically revise the list of products subject to retaliation when the targeted foreign 
government does not implement a recommendation made pursuant to a dispute settlement 
proceeding under the W TO. This periodic revision is known as "carousel" retaliation. The USTR has 
120 days after the date in which an action is first taken (and every 180 days thereafter) to review 
the list of products and revise it, in whole or in part. A revision is not requi red if the USTR determines 
that compliance is imminent or agrees with the affected U.S. industry that revising the list is not 
necessary.242 
3.158.   The USTR is required to submit, on a biannual basis, a report to the House of Representatives 
and Senate describing petitions filed or investigations initiated under Section  301, the 
determinations made, and actions taken. The USTR may modify or terminate any Section  301 action, 
subject to the specific direction of the President and criteria set forth in legi slation. The USTR is 
required to publish notice of the modification or termination in the Federal Register and submit a 
written report to Congress on the reasons for doing so.  
3.1.7.2.2   Section  301 cases  
3.1.7.2.2.1   China technology transfer regime  
3.159.   On 18  August  2017, USTR initi ated a  Section  301 investigation into the Government of 
China's acts, policies, and practices related to technology transfer, intellectual property, and 
innovation. In March  2018, USTR issued a report that concluded that the acts, policies, and practices 
of the Chinese Government related to technology transfer, IP, and innovation were unreasonable or 
discriminatory, and burdened or restricted U.S.  commerce, resulting in harm to the U.S. economy 
of at least USD  50 billion a year.243 As a result of the report' s findings, in a Memorandum signed on 
22 March  2018, the President directed the USTR to take a range of actions responding to China's 
acts, policies, and practices, including preparing a list of proposed additional tariffs.244 The President 
also directed US TR to present a complaint with respect to China's technology licensing practices 
before the WTO DSB. On 23  March  2018, the United  States requested consultations with China 
concerning certain measures pertaining to the protection of IPRs.245 On 15  June 2018,  USTR issued 
a list of products covering 1,102 separate U.S.  tariff lines valued at some USD  50 billion in 2018 
trade values.246 The additional duties were imposed in two tranches: in July  2018, the additional 
25% duty was imposed on the first tranche, or L ist 1, which covered 818  tariff subheadings with an 
approximate annual trade value of USD  34 billion. In August  2018, an additional 25% duty was 
imposed on the second tranche, or List 2, which covered 279 tariff subheadings with an annual trade 
value of US D 16 billion. The lists included products from industrial sectors that contribute to, or 
benefit from, the "Made in China 2025" industrial policy. CBP was instructed to begin to collect the 
 
241 The USTR is not required to take action if it is found that the foreign country is taking satisfactory 
measures to grant U.S. rights under a trade agreement or has agreed to eliminate or phase out the act, policy, 
or practice or to provide any other satis factory solution for the United  States  or, if this is not possible, to 
provide the United  States  with compensatory trade benefits.  
242 CRS (2020), Section  301 of the Trade Act of 1974: Origin, Evolution, and Use , updated 
14 December. Viewed at: https://sgp.fas.org/crs/misc/R46604.pdf .  
243 USTR (2018), Findings of the Investigation into China's Acts, Policies, and Practices related to 
Technology Transfer, Intellectual Property, and Innovation under Section  301 of the Trade Act of 1974 , 
22 March  2018. Viewed at: https://ustr.gov/sites/default/files/Section%20301%20FINAL.PDF . 
244 USTR (2018), Section  301 Fact Sheet . Viewed at: 
https://ustr.gov/sites/default/files/USTR%20301%20Fact%20Sheet.pdf . 
245 WTO document WT/DS542/4, 6  April 2018.  
246 The full list of products was published in Federal Register  (2018), Vol. 83, No.  137, 17  July, Notices. 
Viewed at: https://ustr.gov/sites/default/files/enforcement/301Investigations/2018 -
0026%20China %20FRN%207 -10-2018_0.pdf .  WT/TPR/S/434 /Rev.1  • United States  
 
- 114 - 
 
  additional duties on 6  July 2018.247 USTR received and reviewed app roximately 11,000 and 
2,900  exclusion requests pertaining to Lists 1 and 2, respectively, approving approximately 3,700 
and 1,100 of them.248 
3.160.   On 15  June 2018, China announced it would take countermeasures for USD  50 billion in the 
form of additional 25% tar iffs. On 6  July 2018, China responded to the initial action by imposing 
increased duties on goods of the United  States. On 18  June 2018, the President directed the USTR 
to identify USD  200 billion worth of Chinese goods for additional tariffs at a rate of 10%.249 On 
6 July 2018, the USTR proposed taking further action in the form of an additional 10% ad valorem  
duty on products of China covered in 6,031 tariff subheadings.250 In September  2018, the USTR 
approved List 3, which imposed additional duties on prod ucts of China classified under 5,733 tariff 
subheadings (from the 6,031 proposed) with an annual trade value of approximately 
USD 200 billion. The rate of the additional duty on these List 3 products was increased from 10% to 
25% in May  2019. USTR again es tablished an exclusion process for products of China covered under 
List 3, receiving approximately 30,300 exclusion requests, of which USTR approved approximately 
1,500. In August  2019, the USTR determined a new action, devising a List 4 comprising 3,805 t ariff 
subheadings with an approximate annual trade value of USD  300 billion to be subject to additional 
10% ad valorem  duties. The tariff subheadings were separated into two lists with different effective 
dates: 1  September  2019 for List 4A, and 15  December  2019 for List 4B. Subsequently, the USTR 
determined to increase the rate of the additional duties from 10% to 15%.  
3.161.   On 15 January  2020, the Economic and Trade Agreement Between the Government of the 
United  States of America and the Government of the People's Republic of China (Phase One 
Agreement) was signed.251 The Agreement entered into force on 14  February  2020. The Ph ase One 
Agreement requires changes to China's economic and trade regime, including with respect to certain 
issues covered in the Section  301 investigation. Chapter 1 of the Agreement, Intellectual Property, 
calls for various improvements in IP protection a nd enforcement. Chapter 2 of the Agreement, 
Technology Transfer, affirms the importance of ensuring that the transfer of technology occurs on 
voluntary, market -based terms.252 As a result of the Agreement, the USTR determined to suspend 
indefinitely the imp osition of the 15% additional duties on products of China covered by List 4B, and 
to reduce the rate of additional duties on products of China covered by List 4A, from 15% to 7.5% 
effective 14  February  2020. USTR established an exclusion process for produc ts of China covered 
under List 4A, received approximately 8,800 requests and approved 575 of them. In response to the 
COVID -19 pandemic, the USTR extended 137 exclusions covered under List 1, 59  exclusions on List 
2, 266 exclusions on List 3, and 87  exclus ions on List 4. On 22  December  2020, the USTR determined 
to further extend certain product exclusions on medical -care products and to make further 
modifications to remove Section  301 duties from additional medical -care products to address the 
 
247 USTR (2018), USTR Issues Tariffs on Chinese Products in Response to Unfair Trade Practices , 
USTR  Press Release, 15  June. Viewed at: https://ustr.gov/about -us/policy -offices/press -office/press -
releases/2018/june/ustr -issues -tariffs -chinese -products . 
248 USTR (2021), 2021 Trade Policy Agenda and 2020 Annual Report of the President of the 
United  States o n the Trade Agreements Program . Viewed at: 
https://ustr.gov/sites/default/files/f iles/reports/2021/2021%20Trade%20Agenda/Online%20PDF%202021%20
Trade%20Policy%20Agenda%20and%202020%20Annual%20Report.pdf .  
249 Statement from the President Regarding Trade with China , 18 June 2018. Originally viewed at: 
https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefings -statements/statement -president -regarding -trade -china -2/. 
250 The full list of products was published in Federal Register  (2018),  Vol. 83, No.  137, 17  July, Notices. 
Viewed at: https://ustr.gov/sites/default/files/enforcement/301Investigations/2018 -
0026%20Chin a%20FRN%207 -10-2018_0.pdf . 
251 Economic and Trade Agreement Between the Government of the United  States of America and the 
Government of the People's Republic of China . Viewed at: 
https://ustr.gov/sites/default/files/files/agreements/phase%20one%20agreement/Economic_And_Trade_Agree
ment_Between_The_United_States_And_China_Text.pdf . 
252 The Parties  agreed to: (i)  allow natural or legal persons of a Party to have effective access to and be 
able to operate openly and freely in the jurisdiction of the other Party without any force or pressure to transfer 
their technology to persons of the other Party; (ii) any transfer or licensing of technology between persons of a 
Party and those of the other Party must be based on market terms that are voluntary and reflect mutual 
agreement; (iii)  a Party shall not support or direct the outbound foreign direct invest ment activities of its 
persons aimed at acquiring foreign technology with respect to sectors and industries targeted by its industrial 
plans that create distortion; and (iv)  neither Party shall require or pressure persons of the other Party to 
transfer tec hnology to its persons in relation to acquisitions, joint ventures, or other investment transactions.  WT/TPR/S/434 /Rev.1  • United States  
 
- 115 - 
 
  COVID -19 pand emic. On 5  October  2021, USTR announced the start of a review to possibly reinstate 
549 previously extended exclusions (86 FR 56345).253 
3.1.7.2.2.2   EU beef trade  
3.162.   Following a request from representatives of the beef industry, USTR initiated on 
9 December  2016, a procee ding under Section  306(c) of the Trade Act of 1974 on beef from the 
European  Union.254 The primary concern of the U.S. industry was that non -U.S. exporters had been 
filling a substantial part of the 45,000 metric -tons (MT) TRQ for high -quality beef (HQB) pr oducts 
established by the 2009  U.S.- EU Beef MOU, which denied the benefits to the United  States expected 
under the MOU. A list of products under consideration for the imposition of increased duties in 
accordance with the WTO DSB authorization in the 1999 EU-Beef dispute 
(DS26:  European  Communities  – Measures Concerning Meat and Meat Products (Hormones) 
(EC-Hormones) ) was published in the Federal Register.255 
3.163.   The United  States subsequently entered into negotiations with the European  Union to 
address U.S.  concerns with the operation of the HQB TRQ. The negotiations concluded on 
2 August  2019 when the European  Union and United  States signed the Agreement on the Allocation 
to the United  States of a Share in the Tariff Rate Quota for High Quality Beef Referred to  in the 
Revised MOU Regarding the Importation of Beef from Animals Not Treated with Certain 
Growth -promoting Hormones and Increased Duties Applied by the United  States to Certain Products 
of the European  Union. The Agreement went into effect on 1  January  2020. Pursuant to this 
agreement, the European  Union allocated to the United  States 35,000 MT of the 45,000 MT HQB 
TRQ established under the 2009  U.S.-EU Beef MOU. In light of the agreement, the USTR decided to 
conclude the proceeding under Section  306(c) o f the Trade Act with a determination not to reinstate 
action, effective 1  January  2020. This determination was made in consultation with the U.S. beef 
industry, and in accordance with the advice of the interagency Section  301 committee.256 Despite 
the agree ment, the United  States continues to have an authorization to suspend concessions in 
connection with the EC – Hormones dispute.257 
3.1.7.2.2.3   EU civil aircraft  
3.164.   On 12  April 2019, the USTR announced the initiation of an investigation to enforce 
U.S. rights in the WTO di spute against the European  Union and certain EU member States addressed 
to subsidies on large civil aircraft.258 On 2 October  2019, the WTO  Arbitrator issued a Decision that 
concluded that the appropriate level of countermeasures in response to the aid prov ided by the 
European  Union or certain member States to their large civil aircraft domestic industry was 
approximately USD  7.5 billion annually.259 
3.165.   Effective 18  October  2019, the USTR determined to impose additional duties on products of 
certain EU member States, with an annual trade value of approximately USD  7.5 billion. The 
products affected by the tariff surcharges included, inter alia, new airpla nes and aircraft; a number 
 
253 USTR, Reinstatement of Certain Exclusions Previously Extended . Viewed at. https://ustr.gov/issue -
areas/enforcement/section -301-investigations/section -301-china -technology -transf er/china -section -301-tariff-
actions -and-exclusion -process/reinstatement -certain -exclusions -previously -extended . 
254 Section  306(c) of the Trade Act of 1974 allows the USTR to reinstate a previously terminated 
Section  301 action in order to exercise a WTO aut horization to suspend trade concessions, by filing a written 
request for reinstatement of action. USTR, Section  301 – EU Beef . Viewed at: https://ustr.g ov/issue -
areas/enforcement/section -301-investigations/section -301-eu-beef.  
255 Federal Register  (2016), Vol. 81, No.  249, 28  December, pp.  95561 -95562. Viewed at : 
https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR -2016-12-28/pdf/2016 -31410.pdf . 
256 Federal Register  (2019), Vol. 84, No.  240, 13  December, pp.  68286 -68287. Viewed at: 
https://ustr.gov/sites/default/files/Determination_Not_to_Reinstate_Action_in_Connection_with_t he_EU%E2%
80%99s_Measures_Concerning_Meat_and_Meat_Products.pdf . 
257 The original DSB case dates from 1996. In 1999, it reached the arbitration phase. The arbitrators 
determined that the level of nullification or impairment suffered by the United  States in the matter 
European  Communities – Measures Concerning Meat and Meat  Products (Hormones)  (EC – Hormones ) was 
USD 116.8  million per year and stated that a suspension of tariff concessions and related obligations under 
GATT  1994 covering trade for up to that maximum amount would be consistent with Article  22.4 of the DSU. 
WTO document WT/DS26/ARB, 12  July 1999. 
258 Federal Register  (2019), Vol. 84, No.  71, 12  April, pp.  15028 -15036. Viewed at: 
https://ustr.gov/sites/d efault/files/enforcement/301Investigations/Preliminary_Product_List.pdf .  
259 WTO document WT/DS316/ARB, 2  October  2019.  WT/TPR/S/434 /Rev.1  • United States  
 
- 116 - 
 
  of milk products; butter; cheese; oranges, mandarins; lemons; cherries; peaches; some juices; 
olives; coffee; some biscuits; clams; mussels; other molluscs; frozen meat, olive oil; printed books; 
and some tools. Some of the surch arges applied to all EU member States, and others only to targeted 
countries.260 The additional duties were applicable with respect to products that are entered for 
consumption, or withdrawn from warehouse for consumption, on or after 18  October  2019. In or der 
to implement the determination, Subchapter III of Chapter 99 of the HTSUS was modified and new 
HTSUS subheadings were added. Products provided for in new HTSUS subheadings 9903.89.05261 
and 9903.89.07262 were to be subject to an additional ad valorem  duty of 10%; products in new 
HTSUS subheadings 9903.89.10, 9903.89.13, 9903.89.16, 9903.89.19, 9903.89.22, 9903.89.25, 
9903.89.28, 9903.89.31, 9903.89.34, 9903.89.37, 9903.89.40, 9903.89.43, 9903.89.46, and 
9903.89.50 would be subject to an additional ad valorem  duty of 25%.  
3.166.   The list of products subject to the additional tariffs was modified effective 5  March  2020, and 
a new subheading 9903.89.52 was inserted applying to all products of France or Germany class ified 
in subheading 8214.90.60.263 In June  2020, USTR initiated a review of the measure.264 As a result 
of the review, effective 1  September  2020, some changes were introduced: subheading 9903.89.52 
was deleted and a subheading 9903.89.55 was introduced to a pply to all products of Austria, 
Belgium, Bulgaria, Croatia, Cyprus, Czech  Republic, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, Germany, Hungary, 
Ireland, Italy, Latvia, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Malta, Netherlands, Portugal, Romania, 
Slovak  Republic , Slovenia, Spain, Sweden , or the United  Kingdom classified in subheading 
0406.90.99. Some new products (subheadings 2007.99.05, 2007.99.10, 2007.99.15, 2007.99.20, 
2007.99.25, 2007.99.35, 2007.99.60) were also made subject to the 25% surcharge.265 In 
January  2021, new modification s were introduced to, inter alia, remove subheading 9903.89.55 and 
replace it with subheading 9903.89.63, and created a new subheading 9903.89.57 for some spirits 
from France and Germany (11 subheadings of heading 2204).266 In March  2021, the USTR 
announced  the decision to modify the action by suspending the additional duties on products of the 
United  Kingdom and of the European  Union for four months.267 
3.167.   In June  2021, the United  States reached understandings on cooperative frameworks with 
the European  Union a nd the United  Kingdom regarding the disputes involving large civil aircraft 
(LCA). The EU -U.S. Understanding on a Cooperative Framework for Large Civil Aircraft calls for 
moving to a more collaborative and consultative relationship, to promote a level play ing field, 
address shared challenges, overcome long -standing differences, and avoid future litigation. The 
 
260 The list of subheadings and products by country affected may be found in Annex  A and Annex  B to 
the Notice of Determination and Action Pursuant to Section  301: Enforcement of U.S. WTO Rights in Large Civil 
Aircraft Dispute in Federal Register  (2019), Vol. 84, No.  196, 9  October, pp.  54245 -54264. Viewed at: 
https://ustr.gov/sites/default/files/enforcement/301Investigations/Notice_of_Determination_and_Action_Pursu
ant_to_Section_301 -Large_Civil_Aircraft_Dispute.pdf .  
261 New airplanes and aircraft, subject to a 10% tariff surcharge.  
262 Technical Adjustments to Section  301 Action: Enforcement of U.S. WTO Rights in Large Civil Aircraft 
Dispute. Federal Register  (2019), Vol. 84, No.  202, 18  October, pp.  55998 -56009. Viewed at: 
https://ustr.gov/sites/default/files/enforcement/301Investigations/84_FR_55998.pdf .  
263 USTR, Notice of Modification of Section  301 Action: Enforcement of U.S . WTO Rights in Large Civil 
Aircraft Dispute. Federal Register  (2020), Vol. 85, No.  35, 21  February, pp.  10204 -10211. Viewed at: 
https://ustr.gov/sites/default/files/enforcement/301Investigations/Notice_of_Modification_of_Section_301_Acti
on_Enforcement_of_U.S._WTO_Rights_in_Large_Civil_Aircraft_Dispute.pdf .  
264 USTR,  Review of Action: Enforcement of U.S. WTO Rights in Large Civil Aircraft Dispute. 
Federal  Register  (2020), Vol. 85, No.  124, 26  June, pp.  38488 -38530. Viewed at: 
https://ustr.gov/sites/default/files/enforcement/301Investigations/Review_of_Action_Enforcement_of_U.S._W
TO_Rights_in_Large_Civil_Aircraft_Dispute_June_23_2020.pdf .  
265 USTR, Notice of Modification of Section  301 Action: Enforcement of U.S. World Trade Organization 
(WTO) Rights in Large Civil Aircraft Dispute. Federal Register  (2020), Vol. 85, No.  160, 18  August, 
pp. 50866 -50874.  Viewed at: https://ustr.gov/sites/default/files/files/Press/Releases/85FR50866.pdf .  
266 USTR, Notice of Revision of Section  301 Action: Enforcement of U.S. WTO Rights in Large Civil 
Aircraft Dispute. Federal Register  (2021), Vol. 86, No.  3, 6 January, pp.  674-691. Viewed at: 
https://ustr.gov/sites/default/files/enforcement/301Investigat ions/LCARevisionNotice_January_2021.pdf .  
267 USTR, Notice of Modification of Section  301 Action: Enforcement of U.S. WTO Rights in Large Civil 
Aircraft Dispute. Federal Register  (2021), Vol. 86, No.  46, 11  March, pp.  13961 -13962. Viewed at: 
https://ustr.gov/sites/default/files/enforcement/301Investigations/UK_Notice_of_Modification_Action_Enforce
ment_LCA_Dispute.pdf , and USTR, Notice of Modification of Section  301 Action: Enforcement of U.S. WTO 
Rights in Large Civil Aircraft Dispute. Federal Register  (2021), Vol. 86, No.  49, 16  March, pp.  14513 -14514. 
Viewed at: 
https://ustr.gov/sites/default/files/enforcement/301Investigations/Notice_of_Modification_Action_Enforcement
_LCA_Dispute_March_2021.pdf .  WT/TPR/S/434 /Rev.1  • United States  
 
- 117 - 
 
  parties agreed to: (i)  the establishment of a Working Group on large civil aircraft, that will meet on 
request or at least every six months; (ii)  the Working Group will seek to analyze  and overcome any 
disagreements that may arise between the sides; (iii)  each side intends to provide any financing to 
its LCA producer for the production or development of large civil aircraft on market terms; (iv)  each 
side intends to provide any funding for R&D for large civil aircraft to its LCA producer through an 
open and transparent process and intends to make the results of fully government -funded R&D 
widely available, to the extent permitted by law, while engaging not to provide R&D funding or other 
support that is specific to its LCA producer in a way that would cause negative effects to the other 
side; (v)  the two sides will continue discussions to further operationalize the agreement; (vi) each 
side intends to co llaborate on jointly analy zing and addressing non -market practices of third parties 
that may harm their respective LCA industries, and will implement the understanding on cooperation 
on non -market economies annexed to the main Understanding through the Wor king Group; 
(vii) both sides endeavor  to suspend application of its countermeasures for a period of five years, in 
the expectation that the other side will contribute to establishing a level playing field and to 
addressing shared challenges from non -market  economies; and (viii) the two sides will continue to 
confer on addressing outstanding support measures.268 
3.168.   Following the understandings reached with the European  Union and the United  Kingdom, the 
USTR determined to suspend for a period of five years the action being taken in the Section  301 
investigation involving the enforcement of U.S. WTO rights in the LCA d ispute, beginning 
4 July 2021, with respect to tariffs on goods of the United  Kingdom, and 11  July 2021, with respect 
to tariffs on goods of EU member States.269 Pursuant to Section  306 of the Trade Act, and in advance 
of the end of the five -year suspension  period, the USTR will review implementation by the 
European  Union and United  Kingdom of the framework understandings.  
3.1.7.2.2.4   France's Digital Services Tax (DST)  
3.169.   On 10  July 2019, USTR initiated the investigation of France's DST pursuant to 
Section  302(b)(1)(A) of  the Trade Act of 1974, as amended.270 On 6  December  2019, USTR 
announced its determination that France's DST was unreasonable or discriminatory and burdened 
or restricted U.S. commerce. On 10  July 2020, the USTR determined to take action in the form of 
additional duties of 25% on products of France specified in 21 HT SUS subheadings, with an estimated 
trade value for calendar year 2019 of approximately USD  1.3 billion. The determination pointed out 
that France's 3% DST covered transactions of U.S. companies with estimated revenues of 
approximately USD  15 billion in 2020, with expected collections of some USD  450 million in taxes 
for activities during 2020, and over USD  500 million for activities during 2021. The additional duties 
would result in the collectio n of tariffs on goods of France at comparable, though somewhat lower, 
amounts. Pursuant to Section  305(a) of the Trade Act, the USTR determined to suspend the 
additional duties for up to 180 days (up to 6  January  2021) to allow additional time for bilatera l and 
multilateral discussions that could lead to a satisfactory resolution of this matter.271 
3.170.   In January  2021, the USTR decided to suspend indefinitely the application of the duties, 
since Section  301 investigations of DSTs adopted or under consideration b y Austria, Brazil, the 
Czech  Republic, the European  Union, India, Indonesia, Italy, Spain, Türkiye , and the 
United  Kingdom involving similar DST measures, had been initiated and were ongoing.272 In 
 
268 USTR (2021), Unders tanding on a Cooperative Framework for Large Civil Aircraft , June. Viewed at: 
https://ustr.gov/sites/default/f iles/files/FINAL%20Understanding%20on%20Principles%20relating%20to%20L
arge%20Civil%20Aircraft.pdf .  
269 USTR, Suspension of Action: Enforcement of U.S. WTO Rights in the Large Civil Aircraft Dispute. 
Federal Register  (2021), Vol. 86, No.  129, 9  July, pp.  36313-36315. Viewed at: 
https://ustr.gov/sites/default/files/enforcement/301Investigations/FRNLCA5yrSuspension.pdf .  
270 See Federal Register  (2019), Vol.  84, No.  136, 16  July, p.  34042.  
271 Federal Register  (2020), Vol. 85, No.  137, 16  July, pp.  43292 -43297. Viewed at: 
https://u str.gov/sites/default/files/enforcement/301Investigations/France_Digital_Services_Tax_Notice_July_2
020.pdf   
272 Federal Register  (2021), Vol. 86, No.  7, 12 January, pp.  2479-2480. Viewed at: 
https://ustr.gov/sites/default/files/enforcement/301Investigations/Notice_of_Modification_France_DST_Januar
y_2021.pdf .  WT/TPR/S/434 /Rev.1  • United States  
 
- 118 - 
 
  October  2021, the USTR agreed to withdraw the Section  301 a ction as a result of the agreement 
between the United  States and Austria, France, Italy, Spain, and the United  Kingdom.273 
3.1.7.2.2.5   DSTs in 10 economies  
3.171.   In June  2020, the USTR initiated Section  301 Investigations of DSTs adopted or under 
consideration by Austria, Br azil, the Czech  Republic, the European  Union, India, Indonesia, Italy, 
Spain, Türkiye , and the United  Kingdom.274 USTR considered that available evidence suggested the 
DSTs were expected to target large, U.S. -based tech companies.  
3.172.   In January  2021, USTR issu ed the reports of the different investigations, and notices of 
determination for Austria, India, Italy, Spain, Türkiye , and the United  Kingdom. On 31  March  2021, 
USTR announced the termination of Section  301 DST -related Investigations of Brazil, the 
Czech  Republic, the European  Union, and Indonesia with no measures adopted. On the same date, 
proposed actions with respect to the investigations of Austria's DST, as well as India's, Italy's, 
Spain's, Türkiye 's, and the United  Kingdom's were issued. Notices of Action in the Section  301 
Investigations of those six countries were issued on 7  June 2021. The action consisted in the 
application of 25% tariff surcharge on imports of a number of products, which varied according to 
the country; the amount affected was c alculated to correspond to the annual amount of the tax on 
U.S. digital service providers (Table  3.22). The implementation of the surcharges was delayed until 
29 November  2021 to leave time for negotiations.275 
Table  3.22 Proposed measures to counter the effect DST application, following 
Section  301 investigations  
Trading partner/coverage  
Austria  
23 tariff subheadings, with an estimated trade value in 2019 of USD  65 million. The estimated value of the DST payable by 
U.S.-based company groups to Austria is USD  45 million per year.  
France  
21 tariff subheadings, mostly make -up, soap, and handbags, with an estimated trade value for 2019 of USD  1.3 billion. 
France's 3% DST covers transactions of U.S. companies with estimated revenues of USD  15 billion in 2020, with expected 
collections of USD  450 million in taxes from U.S. companies in 2020, and over USD  500 million in 2021.  
India  
26 tariff subheadings, with an estimated trade value for 2019 of USD  119 million. The estimated value of the DST payable 
by U.S. -based company groups to India is U SD 55 million per year.  
Italy  
A total of 44 tariff subheadings, with an estimated trade value for calendar year 2019 of approximately USD  386 million. 
Estimates indicate that the value of the DST payable by U.S. -based company groups to Italy will be up t o USD  140 million 
per year.  
Spain  
27 tariff subheadings, with an estimated trade value for 2019 of USD  324 million. The estimated value of the DST payable 
by U.S. -based company groups to Spain is some USD  155 million per year.  
Türkiye  
32 tariff subhea dings, with an estimated trade value for 2019 of USD  310 million. The estimated value of the DST payable 
by U.S. -based company groups to Türkiye  is USD  160 million per year.  
United Kingdom  
67 tariff subheadings, with an estimated trade value for 2019 of approximately USD  887 million. Estimates indicate that the 
value of the DST payable by U.S. -based company groups to the United  Kingdom is USD  325 million per year. The level of 
trade covered by the action takes into account estimates of the tariffs  to be collected on goods of the United  Kingdom and 
of taxes to be assessed by the United  Kingdom.  
Note:  The application of the measures (25% tariff surcharge) was suspended.  
Source:  Federal Register  (201), Vol. 86, No.  107, 7  June, p.  30352.  
3.173.   The signatur e of the Joint Statement by the United  States, Austria, France, Italy, Spain, and 
the United  Kingdom, Regarding a Compromise on a Transitional Approach to Existing Unilateral 
Measures During the Interim Period Before Pillar 1 Is in Effect, on 21  October  2021, led to a 
 
273 U.S. Department of the Treasury (2021), "Joint Statement from the U nited States, Austria, France, 
Italy, Spain, and the United  Kingdom, Regarding a Compromise on a Transitional Approach to Existing 
Unilateral Measures During the Interim Period Before Pillar 1 Is in Effect", 21  October. Viewed at: 
https://home.treasury.gov/news/press -releases/jy0419 .  
274 Federal Register  (2020), Vol. 85, No.  109, 5  June, pp.  34709 -34711. Viewed at: 
https://ustr.gov/sites/default/files/enforcement/301Investigations/DST_Initiation_Notice_June_2020.pdf .  
275 The documents for the different investigations, including Federal Register  Notices and the transcripts 
of virtual hearings, may be viewed at: https://ustr.gov/issue -areas/enforcement/section -301-
investigations/section -301-digital -services -taxes .  WT/TPR/S/434 /Rev.1  • United States  
 
- 119 - 
 
  suspension of the measures.276 The Joint Statement followed the agreement reached between 
136 countries regarding digital taxation under the auspices of the OECD. On 8  October  2021, the 
United  States, Austria, France, Italy, Spain, and the United  Kingdom joined other members of the 
OECD/G20 Inclusive Framework on Base Erosion and Profit Shifting (IF) in reaching political 
agreement on the Statement on a Two -Pillar Solution to Address the Tax Challenges Arising from 
the Digitalization of the Economy.277 The Two -Pillar Solution is expected  to ensure that multinational 
enterprises (MNEs) are subject to a minimum tax rate of 15%, and is expected to eliminate double 
taxation. A Detailed Implementation Plan was agreed, with deadlines to complete work on the rules 
and instruments needed to bring  the Two -Pillar Solution into effect by 2023.278 The Implementation 
of Pillar 1 will lead to a Multilateral Convention (MLC), resulting in the allocation of tax to the 
jurisdiction where it is generated, and the removal of all DSTs and other relevant simila r measures 
on all companies. Under the Joint Statement, no newly enacted DSTs or other similar measures will 
be imposed on any company from 8  October  2021 and until the earlier of 31  December  2023 or the 
coming into force of the MLC.279 In line with the IF,  Austria, France, Italy, Spain, and the 
United  Kingdom agreed that as part of Pillar 1, they will withdraw all unilateral measures on all 
companies and refrain from imposing new ones. The Joint Statement contains a transitional approach 
to existing unilate ral measures while implementing Pillar 1, the Unilateral Measures Compromise, 
under which Austria, France, Italy, Spain, and the United  Kingdom are not required to withdraw their 
unilateral measures until Pillar 1 is in place. As part of the Unilateral Mea sures Compromise, the 
United  States agreed to terminate proposed trade actions and commit not to impose further trade 
actions against Austria, France, Italy, Spain, and the United  Kingdom with respect to their existing 
DST until the end of the Interim Peri od.280 
3.174.   The United  States also completed similar agreements with India and with Türkiye , the other 
two countries subject to the June  2021 determination on trade actions. As a result, these duties also 
were not put into effect.  
3.1.7.2.2.6   Viet Nam currency  
3.175.   On 2 October  2020, the USTR initiated an investigation of Viet  Nam's acts, policies, and 
practices related to the valuation of its currency pursuant to Section  302(b)(1)(A) of the Trade Act 
of 1974. In the notice of initiation, USTR explained that  the State B ank of Viet  Nam (SBV) 's active 
interven tion in the exchange market  had contributed to the Vietnamese  dong's undervaluation in 
2019.281 Consultations were held in December  2020 and a determination was published in the 
 
276 U.S. Department of the Treasury (2021),  "Joint Statement from the United  States, Austria, France, 
Italy, Spain, and the United  Kingdom, Regarding a Compromise on a Transitional  Approach to Existing 
Unilateral Measures During the Interim Period Before Pillar 1 Is in Effect", 21  October. Viewed at: 
https://home.treasury.gov/news/press -releases/jy0419 .  
277 OECD (20 21), Two-Pillar Solution to Address the Tax Challenges Arising from the Digitalisation of the 
Economy , October. Viewed at: https://www.oecd.org/tax/beps/brochure -two-pillar-solution -to-address -the-
tax-challenges -arising -from-the-digitalisation -of-the-economy -october -2021.pdf .  
278 Pillar 1 includes the removal and standstill of DST and other similar measures. It aims to ensure a 
fairer distribution of profits and taxing rights among countries with respect to the largest MNEs; 25% of the 
residual profit (profit in excess of 10% of r evenue) of MNEs with global turnover above EUR  20 billion and 
profitability above 10% will be allocated to market jurisdictions where the revenue is generated (Amount A). 
Pillar 2 consists of: (i)  two domestic rules, jointly called the Global Anti -Base Ero sion Rules (GloBE) rules; and 
(ii) a Subject to Tax Rule (STTR) that allows source jurisdictions to impose limited source taxation on certain 
related party payments subject to tax below a minimum rate. The goal of Pillar 2 is to put a floor on tax 
competit ion through the introduction of a global minimum corporate tax  of 15%  on a jurisdictional basis. The 
GloBE rules will apply to MNEs that meet the EUR  750 million threshold, and include: (i)  an Income Inclusion 
Rule (IIR), which imposes a minimum tax rate; and (ii)  an Undertaxed Payment Rule (UTPR), which requires 
an equivalent adjustment if the low tax income of a country is not subject to tax under an IIR. The STTR aims 
to prevent companies from avoiding tax on their profit by making deductible payments th at benefit from 
reduced withholding tax rates under tax treaties. The minimum rate for the STTR will be 9%.  
279 OECD (2021), Two-Pillar Solution to Address the Tax Challenges Arising from the Digitalisation of the 
Economy , October. Viewed at: https://www.oecd.org/tax/beps/brochure -two-pillar-solution -to-address -the-
tax-challenges -arising -from-the-digitalisation -of-the-economy -october -2021.pdf .  
280 U.S. Department of the Treasury, "Joint Statement from the United  States, Austria, France, Italy, 
Spain, and the United  Kingdom, Regarding a Compromise on a Transitional Approach to Existing Unilatera l 
Measures During the Interim Period Before Pillar 1 Is in Effect", 21  October. Viewed at: 
https://home.treasury.gov/news/press -releases/jy0419 .  
281 USTR, Initiation of Section  301 Investi gation: Viet  Nam's Acts, Policies, and Practices Related to 
Currency Valuation. Federal Register  (2020), Vol. 85, No.  196, 8  October, pp.  63637 -63638. Viewed at: 
https://w ww.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR -2020-10-08/pdf/2020 -22271.pdf . WT/TPR/S/434 /Rev.1  • United States  
 
- 120 - 
 
  Federal Register on 22  January  2021.282 The determination was based on a report prepared by USTR 
in consultation with the Department of the Treasury.283 The USTR determined that Viet  Nam's acts, 
policies, and practices related to currency valuation, including excessive foreign exchange market 
interventions and other related actions, taken in their totality, were unreasonable and burdened or 
restricted U.S. commerce, and thus were actionable under Section  301(b).  
3.176.   The Treasury and the SBV  issued a joint statement on 19  July 2021announcing that they 
had reached an agreement.  Viet Nam agreed to avoid manipulating its exchange rate and refrain 
from any competitive devaluation of the Vietnamese  dong. Viet  Nam stated that the SBV was making 
ongoing efforts to further modernize and make more transparent its  monetary policy and exchange 
rate framework and would continue to improve exchange rate flexibility over time and would provide 
information to the Treasury on the SBV's activities in the foreign exchange market. The USTR found 
that the Treasury -SBV agreem ent provided a satisfactory resolution of the matter subject to 
investigation and determined to take no action in this investigation, and stated that, in coordination 
with Treasury, USTR will monitor Viet  Nam's implementation of its commitments under the 
agreement and associated measures.284 
3.1.7.2.2.7   Viet Nam timber  
3.177.   On 2 October  2020, the USTR initiated a Section  301 investigation to examine whether 
Viet Nam's acts, policies, and practices related to the import and use of illegal timber are 
unreasonable or discriminatory and burden or restrict U.S. commerce. In its initiation notice, the 
USTR indicated that the investigation would initially focus on the following issues: (i)  Vietnamese 
imports of illegal timber may be inconsistent with Viet  Nam's domestic la ws, the laws of exporting 
countries, or international rules; for species listed under the CITES imported from Cambodia or the 
Democratic Republic of the Congo, Vietnamese authorities are not requiring the permits or 
certificates that should be needed to en ter or re -export from Viet  Nam; (ii)  Viet Nam at least tacitly 
may support the import and use of illegal timber; and (iii)  other acts, policies, and practices of 
Viet Nam relating to the import and use of illegal timber.285 
3.178.   On 1 October  2021, the United  States and Viet  Nam signed an agreement to resolve the 
Section  301 timber investigation.286 The Agreement contains multiple commitments by Viet  Nam on 
issues related to illegal timber.287 Viet Nam agreed to request, within three months of entry into 
force of th e Agreement, that timber processing, importing, transporting, exporting, and reselling 
enterprises, and associations and their members, commit to not participate in auctions of confiscated 
timber. Viet  Nam agreed to eliminate, within nine months of entry i nto force of the Agreement, any 
financial incentives to import, process, or export timber that is not plantation -grown in Viet  Nam or 
that is a product of illegal logging or timber trade. Also, Viet  Nam agreed, within 18 months of entry 
into force of the A greement, to revise its laws to prohibit any person engaged in, or who has engaged 
in, the processing, importing, transporting, exporting, or reselling of timber or timber products from 
 
282 USTR, Notice of Determination Pursuant to Section  301: Viet  Nam's Acts, Policies, and Practices 
Related to Currency Valuation. Federal Register  (2021), Vol. 86, No.  13, 22  January, pp.  6732-6733. 
Viewed  at: https://ustr.gov/sites/default/files/files/Press/Releases/VietnamCurrencyFRN.pdf .  
283 USTR (2021), Section  301 Investigation: Report on Vietnam's Acts, Policies, and Practices Related to 
Currency Valuation , 15 January. Viewed at: 
https://ustr.gov/sites/default/files/enforcement/301Investigations/Vietnam_Currency_301_Actiona bility_Repor
t_Jan_15_21.pdf .  
284 USTR, Determination on Action and Ongoing Monitoring: Viet  Nam's Acts, Policies, and Practices 
Related to Currency Valuation. Federal Register  (2021), Vol. 86, No.  142, 28  July, pp.  40675 -40676. 
Viewed  at: https://ustr.gov/sites/default/files/files/Press/Releases/Vietnam_Currency_301_Notice_FRN.pdf .  
285 USTR, Initiation of Section  301 Investigation: Viet  Nam's Acts, Po licies, and Practices Related to the 
Import and Use of Illegal Timber. Federal Register  (2020), Vol. 85, No.  196, 8  October, pp.  63639 -63640. 
Viewed at: 
https://ustr.gov/sites/default/files/enforcement/301Investigations/Vietnam_Timber_Initiation_Notice_October_
2020.pdf .  
286 USTR (2021), Agreement between the Government of the Socialist Republic of Viet  Nam and the 
Government of  the United  States of America on Illegal Logging and Timber Trade , 1 October. Viewed at: 
https://ustr.gov/sites/default/files/files/V ietnam Timber/VN Timber Agreement Text (9 -30-21).pdf . 
287 USTR (2021), "USTR Announces Agreement Between the United  States and Viet  Nam to Resolve 
Timber Section  301 Investigation", 1 October. Viewed at: https://ustr.gov/about -us/policy -offices/press -
office/press -releases/2021/october/ustr -announces -agreement -betwe en-united -states -and-vietnam -resolve -
timber -section -301-investigation .  WT/TPR/S/434 /Rev.1  • United States  
 
- 121 - 
 
  participating in any auctions of confiscated timber.288 The USTR found that the Agreement 
satisfactorily resolved the matter, and determined that the investigated acts, policies, and practices 
were not actionable in light of the Agreement and that no action was appropriate at this time.289 
3.2  Measures Directly Affecting Exports  
3.2.1   Customs procedures and requirements  
3.179.   CBP is responsible for ensuring that goods leaving the United  States do so in conformity with 
all applicable laws, regulations, and rules governing exports. It may act on behalf of other 
government agencies in the enforce ment of rules. All relevant export information is filed prior to the 
departure of cargo in the Automated Export System (AES) or AESDirect, a portal within the 
single -window Automated Commercial Environment (ACE). Penalties may apply for the filing of 
incorrect export data, e.g. regarding the place and estimated date of shipment.290 Paper submissions 
are no longer accepted. Foreign entities may not register for the filing of electronic information 
through ACE; they must choose and authorize a U.S. agent to fi le information on their behalf.  
3.180.   The filing of data for shipments valued at less than USD  2,500 is not necessary unless a 
license  or license  exemption is required for the export.291 It is the duty of the exporter to determine 
whether an export license  is req uired due to the nature of the product, its destination, or possible 
end uses. Applications for license  or license  exemption, if needed, are submitted electronically to 
the Bureau of Industry and Security (BIS) at USDOC for dual -use and less sensitive mili tary items. 
The application is reviewed by the BIS, who forwards it to other relevant agencies (i.e. Departments 
of State, Defense, and Energy) for review and recommendations.  
3.2.2   Taxes, charges, and levies  
3.181.   The Constitution (Article  I, Section  9) bans the appl ication of export taxes, although it allows 
fees to be charged for specific services rendered (Article  I, Section  10). Charges may thus be 
applied, for example, for inspection and certification of agricultural exports.  
3.2.3   Export prohibitions, restrictions, an d licensing  
3.182.   Export controls are guided by national security and the pursuit of foreign policy objectives. 
The United  States currently restricts exports of certain goods, including defense  articles, dual -use 
(commercial and military) goods, and nuclear mate rials and technology, or to deter the proliferation 
of nuclear, chemical, and biological weapons or the missile technology used to deliver them. In many 
instances, the United  States cooperates with other countries to control exports of such goods and 
techn ologies. The Wassenaar Arrangement, the Missile Technology Control Regime, the Treaty on 
the Non -Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons and the Exporters Committee (Zangger Committee), the 
Australia Group, and the Nuclear Suppliers Group constitute the main elem ents of this system. 
Export controls also apply to countries subject to economic sanctions by the United  States.  
3.183.   The Export Control Reform Act of 2018 (P.L.  115-232) (ECRA) is the principal implementing 
statute for export controls on dual -use and less sensitive military items; it is administered by the 
BIS. The BIS also enforces U.S. anti -boycott legislation. Export controls on nuclear materials, 
facilities and equipment for civilian purposes are administered by the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory 
Commission in  accordance with the Atomic Energy Act of 1954 (P.L.  83-703).292 The Arms Export 
Control Act of 1976 (P.L.  94-329) provides the President with the statutory authority to control 
 
288 USTR, Agreement Between the Government of the Socialist Republic of Viet  Nam and the 
Government of the United  States of America on Illegal Logging and Timber Trade . Viewed at: 
https://ustr.gov/sites/default/files/files/Vietnam%20Timber/VN%20Timber%20Agreement%20Text%20(9 -30-
21).pdf .  
289 USTR, Determinations and  Ongoing Monitoring: Investigation Concerning Viet  Nam's Acts, Policies 
and Practices Related to Illegal Timber. Federal Register  (2021), Vol. 86, No.  191, 6  October, 
pp. 55681 -55682. Viewed at: https://ustr.gov/sites/default/files/files/Notices/2021 -21809.pdf .  
290 The CBP allows the actual date of export to deviate by up to four days past the date indicated in the 
electronic submission. The submission will need to be updated i f longer delays are expected.  
291 Exports of items that would otherwise require a license  may be authorized if the exporter certifies 
that the terms, provisions, and conditions of the transaction meet license  exception eligibility criteria.  
292 The BIS licen ses "outside the core" civilian power plant equipment, and the Department of Energy 
authorizes the export of nuclear technology.  WT/TPR/S/434 /Rev.1  • United States  
 
- 122 - 
 
  exports of defense  articles and services. Short supply controls may be maintain ed under the 
International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA) or other regulatory authority. Economic 
sanctions or embargoes may be imposed by the President pursuant to the IEEPA or by specific acts 
of Congress. E xport controls  are administered and enfo rced by the Office of Foreign Assets Control 
and the State Department (Table  3.23).  
Table  3.23 Items subject to export controls, including licensing  
Product category  Responsible agencies  Legal reference  
Dual-use items, certain munitions and military 
items, and items controlled for short supply  USDOC, BIS  ECRA, EAA, IEEPA  
Defense  services and defense  articles  Department of State, Directorate of Defense 
Trade Controls  22 C.F.R. Parts 120 -130 
International transfers of defense -related 
goods, services and technologies  Defense Technology Security Administration   
Controlled substances and listed chemicals 
used in the production of controlled 
substances  Drug Enforcement Administration, Office of  
Diversion Control, Import -Export Unit 
(chemicals and controlled substances)  
Food and Drug Administration, Import/Export 
(drugs and biologics)  
Food and Drug Administration, International 
Affairs (investigational drugs permitted)  21 C.F.R. Parts 
1311-1313 
 
21 U.S.C. 301 et seq.  
 
21 C.F.R. 312.1106  
Fish and wildlife controls; endangered species  Department of the Interior, U.S.  Fish and 
Wildlife Service  50 C.F.R. 17.21, 17.22, 
17.31, 17.32  
Foreign assets and transaction controls  Department of Treasury, Office of Foreign 
Assets Control, Licensing  31 C.F.R. Parts 500 -590 
Medical devices  Food and Drug Administration, Office of 
Compliance  21 U.S.C. et seq.  
Natural gas and electric power  Department of Energy, Office of Fuels 
Programs  10 C.F.R. 
205.300-205.379 , 590 
Nuclear materials and equipment  Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Office of 
International Programs  10 C.F.R. Part 110  
Nuclear technology; technical data for nuclear 
weapons, and special nuclear materials  Department of Energy, Office of 
Nonproliferation and Arms Control  10 C.F.R. Part 810  
Ocean freight forwarders  Federal Maritime Commission, Office of Freight 
Forwarders  46 C.F.R. Part 510  
Patent filing data sent abroad  Department of Commerce, Patent and  
Trademark Office, Licensing and Review  35 U.S.C. 184 et seq.  
37 C.F.R. Part 5  
U.S. flagged or U.S. manufactured vessels 
over 1,000 gross tons U.S. Maritime Administration, Division of 
Vessel Transfer and Disposal  46 C.F.R. Part 221  
Hazardous waste  Environmental Protection Agency, Office of 
Resource Conservation and Recovery  40 C.F.R. Part 262, 
subpart E ; 263.20 ; 
263.22(d)  
Certain petroleum products produced or 
derived from the Naval Petroleum Reserves  USDOC, BIS  15 C.F.R. Part 754  
Unprocessed western red cedar  USDOC, BIS  15 C.F.R. Part 754  
Horses exported by sea intended for slaughter  USDOC, BIS 15 C.F.R. Part 754  
Export transactions involving individuals on 
the list of Specially Designated Nationals and 
Blocked Persons  Department  of the Treasury, Office of Foreign 
Assets Control  Not available  
Source:  WTO Secretariat, based on information contained in Supplement No.  3 to Part 730 of the Export 
Administration Regulations and from the BIS; and information provided by the authorities. 
Viewed  at: https://www.bis.doc.gov/index.php/about -bis/resource -links. 
3.184.   The BIS administers the laws, regulations, and policies governing exports and re -exports of 
goods , services, software, and technologies that fall under the jurisdiction of the Export 
Administration Regulations (EAR). It coordinates with other domestic agencies or those of foreign 
governments regarding export control, non -proliferation of weapons of ma ss destruction, and 
strategic trade issues. The Export Administration (EA) of the BIS reviews license  applications for 
exports, re -exports, or transfers, including transfers of technology covered by the EAR to foreign 
nationals in the United  States. Licens e denials may be appealed. Foreign availability, i.e. that an 
item may be available from a non -U.S. source in sufficient quantity and comparable quality to render 
a U.S. restriction ineffective, may be an argument favoring  the reversal of a denial.  
3.185.   All ite ms subject to the EAR have either been given an Export Control Classification Number 
(ECCN) or been designated EAR99. Controlled dual -use and certain munitions goods are listed on 
the Commerce Control List (CCL) together with their ECCNs, and any item not on the CCL 
(i.e. EAR99) may be exported or re -exported without a license  unless the destination is an 
embargoed or sanctioned country, a party of concern, or in support of a prohibited end -use. 
Antiterrorism controls prohibit exports of nearly all items on  the CCL to four countries (Democratic 
People's Republic of Korea, Cuba, the Islamic Republic of Iran, and Syria). Regarding parties of WT/TPR/S/434 /Rev.1  • United States  
 
- 123 - 
 
  concern, the BIS maintains a Denied Persons List, an Unverified List, and an Entity List.293 Exports, 
re-exports, and in -country transfers may be authorized under License  Exception Strategic Trade 
Authorization (STA) to destinations considered low risk for non -authorized or impermissible uses 
(43 countries as of April  2022).  
3.186.   The Directorate of Defense Trade Controls (DDTC) a t the U.S. Department of State regulates 
exports and temporary imports of defense  articles and defense  services per the International Traffic 
in Arms Regulations (ITAR). The defense  articles and defense  services regulated by DDTC are 
described in the U.S. Munitions List (USML) and may require a license  prior to export or temporary 
import into the United  States. The ITAR provides many exemptions that may enable exporters and 
temporary importers to conduct a transfer without obtaining a license  from DDTC. Suc h exemptions 
enable transfers to Australia, Japan, NATO countries, Sweden, and others. Exports of defense  articles 
and defense  services described in the USML  are subject to a policy of denial for eight countries. An 
additional 16 countries are subject to a policy of denial with certain exceptions. Such policies of 
denial can result from United Nations Security Council sanctions or unilateral sanctions. Persons  
engaged in the United  States in the business of manufacturing, exporting, temporarily importing 
defense  articles, or furnishing defense  services described in the USML must register with the DDTC 
and pay an annual fee.  
3.187.   Reforms to reduce the complexity of e xport controls were launched by Presidential initiative 
in 2009. Many of the initial aims, including the establishment of a single control list for dual -use 
goods and munitions (i.e. merging the CCL and the USML), a single licensing agency, and a single 
export control enforcement agency have not been realized. However, a single electronic platform 
facilitates the submission and processing of licenses , and an Export Enforcement Coordination Center 
has been operational since 2012. The dual -use and munitions l ists have been rationalized with the 
transfer of less sensitive items from the USML to the CCL. Revisions of 18 of the 21 categories in 
the USML were completed in 2016. The migration of remaining items (Category I, II, and III items) 
was completed in Janua ry 2020.294 
3.188.   According to BIS data analy zed by the Congressional Research Service, about 83% of 
U.S. exports (by value) were subject to the EAR in 2019, including 13.7% covered by the CCL and 
thus requiring export licenses  to certain destinations. However, a s exports to many destinations are 
exempt, and many transactions are eligible for license  exemption, no more than 0.4% of 
U.S. exports (by value) involved the procurement of a license . The BIS reviewed nearly 
33,000  license  applications in that year and de nied approximately 1.1% of them. The low level of 
denied applications may be partly explained by detailed information available to exporters about end 
uses and end users likely to be denied, thus discouraging the submission of non -conforming 
applications.295 
3.189.   The ECRA mandates an interagency process, led by the Department of Commerce, to identify 
emerging and foundational technologies and subsequently to establish a licensing policy to control 
their export. Work is ongoing. The BIS introduced additional contr ols on the exportation of certain 
technologies, including software, during the period under review. The ECRA also requires a review 
of the licensing procedures for exports, re -exports, and in -country transfers connected with countries 
that are subject to a  comprehensive U.S. arms embargo.  
3.190.   The export control regime was subject to numerous modifications in the period under review. 
These reflect, for example, changes in the international export controls of the United  States and its 
partners regarding munitions , dual -use goods and technologies, and missile technology; national 
security concerns; frequent changes in the Entity List and Unverified List of the BIS; the creation of 
a Military End User (MEU) List; and modifications of sanctions and embargoes towards specific 
countries or entities (Table  A3.5). Notably, new controls affect the export of U.S. origin items to 
China (or Hong  Kong, China) and to Chinese -owned companies, such as Huawei and its affiliates. 
 
293 The lists identify persons and entities denied export privileges and with whom dealings are prohibited 
(Denied Persons List),  end users the BIS has been unable to verify in prior transactions (Unverified List), and 
parties whose presence in a transaction may trigger a supplementary license  requirement (Entity List).  
294 Federal Register  (2020), Vol.  85, No.  15, 23  January, p. 413 6. 
295 CRS, The U.S. Export Control System and the Export Control Reform Act of 2018 , R46814, updated 
7 June. Viewed at: https://www.everycrsr eport.com/files/2021 -06-
07_R46814_4ada880cd0a8b2b2822d942b4114828c13908820.pdf . WT/TPR/S/434 /Rev.1  • United States  
 
- 124 - 
 
  Economic sanctions were revised and tightened (e.g. the Russian  Federation, the Bolivarian Republic 
of Venezuela, Cuba, and Cambodia), or reintroduced (Myanmar).  
3.191.   In April  2020, the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) issued a temporary rule 
affecting exports of certain scarce critical health and medi cal resources.296 Due to the rapid spread 
of COVID -19, explicit FEMA approval was required for the export of five types of medical resources, 
including personal protective equipment (i.e. respirators, masks, and gloves). The product coverage 
was modified in  August  2020, when certain respirators were eliminated from the list, and in 
December  2020, when syringes and hypodermic needles were added.297 The temporary measures 
remained in place until 30  June 2021, when they lapsed. The temporary export restrictions were 
notified to the WTO.298 
3.2.4   Export support and promotion  
3.192.   Located within the International Trade Administration of the Department of Commerce, the 
United  States & Foreign Commercial Service (US&FCS) is the trade and investment promotion arm 
of the United  States. Its  mission is to promote exports of goods and services from the United  States, 
particularly by SMEs; to advance and protect U.S. business interests abroad; and to attract and 
retain investment in the U.S. economy.  
3.193.   Assistance to boost exports of SMEs  is provided, inter alia, (for a fee) in the form of online 
and customized market research, matchmaking services to introduce U.S. exporters to qualified 
buyers and distributors, due diligence on foreign parties, in -country promotion of products and 
servic es, and support to participation in selected trade fairs at home or overseas. Individual 
counselling and advocacy, as well as training (e.g.  on required documentation and export controls), 
are also provided without a fee. The US&FCS operates a network of i nternational trade specialists 
through offices at 106 domestic Export Assistance Centers , as well as staff at U.S.  Embassies and 
Consulates in 117 cities in more than 75 overseas markets.  
3.194.   A dedicated website ( www.trade.gov/export -solutions ) has been set up to provide training 
for established and prospective exporters on specific subjects and tools such as learning how to 
export, finding buyers and partners, researching foreign markets, resolving export p roblems and 
trade barriers, navigating shipping and logistics, protecting intellectual property, negotiating an 
export sale, providing tariff information, supplying country commercial guides, understanding 
internationally recognized rules (Incoterms), and classifying products using the Harmonized System. 
U.S. restrictions on certain exports, re -exports, and transfers may be identified using a Consolidated 
Screening List search engine. The ongoing pandemic has accentuated the focus on virtual export 
promotio n services. The US&FCS charges fees for the use of its services, some of which may also 
be accessed by non -U.S. enterprises.  
3.195.   The Export Enhancement Act of 1992 created the Trade Promotion Coordinating Committee 
(TPCC), an interagency committee chaired by t he Secretary of Commerce, to provide a unifying 
framework for export promotion and export -financing activities and the planning of such program s. 
It brings together 20 federal agencies with export -related program s. In principle, the TPCC  is 
required to publish an annual National Export Strategy document. However, the last such report was 
issued in December  2016. The TPCC also coordinates with state trade promotion agencies to enhance 
overall effectiveness of export promotion strategies, d evelop best practices, and better assist small 
businesses.  
3.196.   The President's Export Council (PEC) is an advisory body created in 1973 to advise the 
President on U.S. export expansion. The PEC reports to the President through the Secretary of 
Commerce. It has  not met since 2016. Although the current Administration renewed the PEC, which 
 
296 FEMA , Prioritization and Allocation of Certain Scarce or Threatened Health and Medical Resources for 
Domestic Use, Federal Register  (2020), Vol.  85, No.  70, 10  April, p.  20195. Exemptions were notified on 
21 April 2020 ( Federal Register  (2020), Vol.  85, No.  77, 21  April, p.  22021).  
297 Federal Register  (2020), Vol.  85, No.  154, 10  August, p. 48113; and Federal Register  (2020), 
Vol. 85, No.  251, 31  December, p.  86835.  
298 WTO documents G/MA/QR/N/USA/4/Add.1, 14  May 2020; G/MA/QR/N/USA/4/Add.2, 
1 September  2020; G/MA/QR/N/USA/5, 6  October  2020; G/MA/QR/N/USA/5/Add.1, 1  February  2021; and 
G/MA/QR/N/USA/5/Add.2, 16  September  2021.  WT/TPR/S/434 /Rev.1  • United States  
 
- 125 - 
 
  now has an active charter for the 2021 -23 term, it has not yet released its plans for the PEC going 
forward.  
3.197.   The U.S. Trade and Development Agency (USTDA) was created in 1992 a s an independent 
agency to advance economic development and U.S. commercial interests in developing and 
middle -income countries. The agency funds grant -based project preparation and partnership 
building activities that develop sustainable infrastructure an d foster economic growth in partner 
countries. USTDA places particular emphasis on vital economic sectors where U.S. companies are 
competitive, including clean energy, information and communications technology, transportation, 
healthcare infrastructure, an d agri -business . In FY2021, USTDA identified more than USD  2.3 billion 
in U.S.  exports to emerging economies as a result of programming that facilitated quality 
infrastructure development.299 
3.2.4.1   Drawback regime  
3.198.   The duty drawback procedures laid out in Section  906 of the TFTEA (P.L.  114-125) were 
deployed in ACE on 24  February  2018. Drawback claims could still be filed manually at four CBP 
drawback offices until 23  February  2019. The data elements provided by the claimant in ACE are 
verified and validated, and a n automated message confirms that a claim has been accepted. An 
automated message will also be generated if one or more data elements are rejected by the CBP. 
Rejected claims may be corrected and resubmitted within the prescribed amendment period.  
3.199.   While th e electronic filing of drawback claims is now mandatory, the TFTEA "Modernized 
Drawback" also implies standardized and extended timelines for the filing of drawback claims, 
enhanced record retention requirements, a simplified merchandise substitution stand ard, and 
broader legal liability for false claims. Certificates of Delivery are no longer required to demonstrate 
the transfer of merchandise from the importer to the manufacturer or claimant. The final rule 
implementing "Modernized Drawback" was published  in the Federal Register in December  2018.300 
3.200.   The deadline for filing of duty drawback is five years from the date of importation of the 
designated merchandise, or three years from the date of exportation for certain claims filed pursuant 
19 U.S.C. 1313(d). The drawback normally amounts to 99% of cust oms duties, certain excise taxes, 
and fees such as the merchandise processing fee and the harbor  maintenance tax collected at 
importation. Section  232 duties are not eligible for drawback.  
3.2.5   Export finance, insurance, and guarantees  
3.2.5.1   Export -Import Bank (EXIM)  
3.201.   EXIM, a wholly owned government corporation, is the official export credit agency of the 
United  States. An independent agency of the Federal Government, EXIM assists exporters unable to 
access export financing from private sources with direct loans, loan guarantees, export credit 
insurance, and working capital loan guarantees. Private sector lenders and insurance brokers usually 
act as partners in EXIM transactions. EXIM ensures, as necessary, that its financial products are 
provided on competitive terms r elative to the export credit agencies of other countries. Although 
EXIM acts independently of the Government in its daily business, EXIM's existence is periodically 
reauthorized by Congress, which also caps its lending authority. Moreover, its Board member s are 
appointed by the President of the United  States, with the advice and consent of the Senate.  
3.202.   While EXIM assumes credit and country risks that private actors are unable or unwilling to 
undertake, all of its transactions carry a statutory requirement to  demonstrate a reasonable 
assurance of repayment  (12 U.S.C. 635(b)(1)(B) ). Risks are monitored closely, and EXIM's default 
rate has been consistently below the statutory threshold. Support to export transactions involving 
Cuba, the Islamic Republic of Iran , the Democratic People's Republic of Korea, and Syria is legally 
 
299 USTDA (2021), "USTDA Generates Record Resu lts for U.S. Exporters", 4  October. Viewed at: 
https://ustda.gov/ustda -generates -record -results -for-u-s-exporters/ .  
300 Federal Register  (2018), Vol.  83, No.  242, 18  Decembe r, p. 64942. Viewed at: 
https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR -2018-12-18/pdf/2018 -26793.pdf .  WT/TPR/S/434 /Rev.1  • United States  
 
- 126 - 
 
  prohibited, and EXIM's Country Limitation Schedule includes a number of other countries where it 
avoids or restricts its exposure to commercial and/or political risks.301 
3.203.   At the end of Septem ber 2021, EXIM's exposures totaled  USD 41,343.6  million towards 
163 countries. Individual countries with the highest exposures were Mozambique, the Kingdom of 
Saudi  Arabia, Mexico, Türkiye , and China. Aircraft (38%), oil and gas (26%), and manufacturing 
(19%) constituted the major part of the global sectoral exposure. EXIM derives income from 
commitment fees, exposure fees and interest, and an annual appropriation that covers 
administrative costs. It is considered a self -financing agency. Beyond the build -up of prudent 
reserves, EXIM hands over excess revenues to the Treasury. Some USD  9 billion (net) has been 
returned in this manner since 1992. The most profitable business for EXIM has traditionally been 
long-term project finance. However, domestic politica l differences have recently impeded EXIM's 
engagement in such projects for sustained periods. In December  2015, legislation came into effect 
that reauthorized EXIM until 30  September  2019 with a lending authority capped at USD  135 billion, 
of which no less  than 30% is targeted towards small business lending. Even so, while EXIM staff 
were authorized to approve small loans and certain medium -term loans, all medium - and long -term 
authorizations exceeding USD  10 million were being held up, as the five -member B oard of Directors 
lacked a quorum to take such decisions.302 
3.204.   The impasse was finally resolved in May  2019, when the Senate confirmed the President's 
nominations for Chairperson and two Members of the Board of Directors.303 Furthermore, legislation 
extending EXIM's authority until 31  December  2026, the longest reauthorization period in its 85 -year 
history, was signed into law in December  2019.304 Removing the legal and operational uncertainties 
and impediments, EXIM resumed the financing of large projects. It a pproved a direct loan to finance 
an integrated liquefied natural gas project in Mozambique in September  2019. The transaction (up 
to USD  5 billion) is its largest ever (Table  3.24). Nevertheless, the current level of total exposures 
is more than USD  90 billion below the statutory limit, maintained at USD  135 billion.  
Table  3.24 EXIM authorizations, FY2017 -21 
 2017  2018  2019  2020  2021  
No. USD mil. No. USD mil. No. USD mil. No. USD mil. No. USD mil. 
Loans  12 5.6 0 0 2 5,008.8  1 9.5 1 69.8 
Long-term 0 0 0 0 1 5,000.0  0 0 1 69.8 
Medium -term 0 0 0 0 1 8.8 1 9.5 0 0 
Working capital  12 5.6 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 
Guarantees  221 961.1  197 879.0  205 927.7  194 2,879.8  205  
Long-term 1 2.6 0 0 0 0 10 1,201.4  15 2,116.1  
Medium -term 25 119.5  32 193.9  37 239.8  53 221.1  66 176.8  
Working capital  195 839.0  165 685.1  168 687.9  131 1,457.3  124 4,601.5  
Credit Insurance  2,228  2,464.3  2,192  2,444.2  2,141  2,277.7  1,878  2,505.9  1,868  2,273.2  
Short -term 2,186  2,414.3  2,117  2,346.4  2,065  2,191.7  1,848  2,450.2  1,848  2,232.2  
Medium -term 42 50.0 75 97.8 76 86.0 30 55.7 20 41.0 
Source:  EXIM, Annual Reports , 2017, 2018, 2019, 2020 , and 2021. Viewed at: 
https://www.exim.gov/news/reports/annual -reports . 
3.205.   EXIM operates under Congressional mandates in accordance with its Charter. There are 
currently four such mandates addressing  small businesses, Sub-Saharan Africa, environmentally 
beneficial goods and services, and China and transformational exports. Reauthorizing EXIM, 
Congress also mandated the establishment of an Advisory Committee to advise the Bank on policies 
and program s generally as well a s a Sub -Saharan Advisory Committee specifically for policies and 
program s relating to that region.  
3.206.   The Small Business Mandate states that a minimum of 30% of EXIM's  aggregate loan, 
guarantee, and insurance authority should be made available to finance exports of small 
 
301 The Country Limitation Schedule effective since 14  October  2021 lists 23 c ountries for which EXIM 
assumes no political or commercial risks, and other countries where long - and mid -term exposures are limited. 
Viewed at: https:/ /www.exim.gov/sites/default/files/tools/countrylimitationschedule/clsoct2021.pdf .  
302 EXIM staff have been authorized to approve transactions up to USD  25 million since May  2019. In 
addition, a temporary Board with voting authority may now be formed in situ ations where there is an 
insufficient number of confirmed EXIM Board members.  
303 The Secretary of Commerce and the USTR continued to serve ex officio  as non -voting Board 
members.  
304 The Further Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2020 (P.L.  116-94), Division I, Title IV.  WT/TPR/S/434 /Rev.1  • United States  
 
- 127 - 
 
  U.S. businesses.305 Almost 89% of EXIM's authorizations were for small businesses in FY2019 and 
FY2020, and nearly USD  1.6 billion of the USD  2.5 billion total authorized in export credit insurance 
policies was for small businesses in FY2020. These figures include USD  335.4  million approved for 
minority - and women -owned businesses. In FY2021, EXIM utilized 28.2% of its aggregate loan, 
guarantee, and insur ance authorizations (USD  1,627.7  million) to assist small businesses.  
3.207.   The Sub -Saharan Mandate encourages EXIM to expand its financial commitments in the 
region consistent with the credit standards otherwise required by law. According to EXIM, its support 
has become increasingly critical for U.S. enterprises bidding on large infrastructure and other 
projects in Sub -Saharan Africa. Discussions indicate a  range of export opportunities, e.g.  in mining, 
refining, agriculture, telecommunications, electricity, avi ation, petrochemicals, and potable water.  
3.208.   In 1992, Congress required EXIM to adopt procedures and guidelines to assess the 
environmental impact of projects it is financing. EXIM authorized USD  107.5  million in FY2019, 
USD 92.6 million in FY2020, and USD  71.9 million in FY2021 to assist U.S. exports of 
environmentally beneficial goods and services. Included in its portfolio are exports of 
renewable -energy equipment, wastewater -treatment projects, air -pollution technologies, and 
waste -management services. Mos t of these supported exports are associated with small enterprises.  
3.209.   The law reauthorizing EXIM directs the agency to establish a Program on China and 
Transformational Exports and reserves 20% of its total financing authority (i.e. USD  27 billion) to 
this e nd. The purpose is to support U.S. leadership, innovation, employment, and technological 
standards in 10 transformational industries: (i)  artificial intelligence; (ii)  biotechnology; 
(iii) biomedical sciences; (iv)  wireless communications equipment (includ ing 5G); (v)  quantum 
computing; (vi) renewable energy, energy efficiency, and energy storage; (vii)  semiconductor and 
semiconductor -machinery; (viii) emerging financial technologies; (ix) water treatment and 
sanitation; and (x) high -performance computing. The proposed transaction must have minimum 
51% U.S. content to qualify for EXIM financing, at which point up to 85% of the value of eligible 
goods and services in the U.S. contract may be supported.306 EXIM formed a Subcommittee on 
Strategic Competition wit h China in September  2020. In FY2021, USD  141.3  million was authorized 
in direct support of this program . 
3.210.   EXIM announced new principles and standards governing the use of its Tied Aid Credit Fund 
(TACF) in October  2020.307 The new Reed -McIntosh Procedures were developed jointly with the 
Department of the Treasury. Henceforth, the TACF may be used, also pre -emptively, to counter 
potential tied aid offers of other governments. EXIM's Board of Directors decides whether to make  
use of the TACF on a case -by-case basis.  
3.211.   The legislation reauthorizing EXIM in 2019 maintained a provision introduced in 2015 that, 
inter alia, instructed the United  States to initiate and pursue negotiations with other major exporting 
countries, includin g members of the OECD, to reduce substantially and possibly eliminate subsidized 
export -financing program s and other forms of export subsidies. The Department of the Treasury 
updates Congress annually on progress achieved in implementing these instructions . 
3.2.5.2   Small Business Administration (SBA) export loan programs  
3.212.   The Office of International Trade of the SBA administers three broad export -financing 
programs for small businesses (Table  3.25). Loans up to USD  500,000 may be provided under the 
Export Express Lo an Program for a wide range of export development activities, e.g. for early -stage 
exporters participating in trade fairs overseas or entering new markets. A delegated authority 
program, Export Express, guarantees 90% of loans up to USD  350,000 each; the g uarantee ratio is 
75% for amounts between USD  350,000 and USD  500,000.  
 
305 The Congressional mandate on small business authorizations (at first 10%) was introduced in 1985. 
The minimum percentage was increased from 25% to 30% effective 1  January  2021.  
306 Under certain circumstances, EXIM Bank may approve financing even if the 51% threshold is not 
met. Content of Chinese origin in a proposed offering is presumptively ineligible for EXIM Bank support.  
307 The procedures are available at: 
https://www.exim.gov/sites/default/files/newsreleases/tied_aid_procedures_10 -29-20.pdf .  WT/TPR/S/434 /Rev.1  • United States  
 
- 128 - 
 
  Table  3.25 Approved applications and loan amounts under SBA export loan programs, 
FY2017 -20 
Program title  2017  2018  2019  2020  
No. USD mil. No. USD mil. No. USD mil. No. USD mil. 
Export Express  53 15.0 59 15.5 53 14.7 37 11.2 
Export Working Capital  166 337.0  162 320.0  147 275.0  138 272.0  
International Trade Loan  192 308.0  256 400.0  222 369.0  163 309.0  
Source:  SBA, FY Congressional Justification and FY Annual Performance Report, various issues.  Viewed at: 
https://www.sba.gov/sites/default/files/aboutsbaarticle/SBA_FY_19 _508-Final-FINAL.PDF ; 
https://www.sba.gov/sites/default/files/2019 -
04/SBA%20FY%202020%20Congressional%20Justi fication_final%20508%20%204%2023%202019.
pdf; https://www.sba.gov/sites/default/files/2020 -02/FY%202021%20CJ -508_FINAL.pdf ; and 
https://www.sba.gov/sites/default/files/2021 -06/FY2022_SBA_Congressional_Justification -
508_0.pdf . 
3.213.   The Export Working Capital Program provides liquidity from purchase orders to fin al payment 
up to USD  5 million with up to a 90% guarantee. The same conditions apply to the International 
Trade Loan Program. These loans are designed to assist exporters in getting loans for financing 
expenditures related to exporting such as day -to-day o perations, advance orders with suppliers, and 
refinancing for existing debts related to international buyers given that many U.S. banks view loans 
to small business exports as risky. Small business export development is also encouraged through 
competitive awards to U.S. states and territories under the State Trade Expansion Program (STEP). 
The SBA awarded 29 grants under the STEP program in FY2021. This is in addition to the 48  grants 
under the STEP program in FY2020. These two grant cycles (FY2020 and FY20 21) will end on 
29 September  2022. The 41 grants from FY2019 and 48 grants from FY2018 ended on 
29 September  2021.308 The SBA is not a bank as such. The financing terms are accordingly 
negotiated between qualified borrowers and private sector commercial lenders approved by the SBA. 
Loan applicants must provide business plans and written information that supports the likelihood of 
repayment through increased export sales. Loans are offered on market terms. The fees charged by 
the SBA are initial ly paid by the lender and vary according to a loan's maturity and the guaranteed 
amount. According to the SBA, its international trade finance programs were negatively affected by 
the COVID -19 pandemic. Borrowers reported delays in the transportation of go ods, port restrictions, 
and payment difficulties of foreign customers.  
3.2.5.3   The U.S. International Development Finance Corporation (DFC)  
3.214.   The Better Utilization of Investments Leading to Development (BUILD) Act 
(22 U.S.C.  9601ff.) (P.L. 115-254), enacted on 5  October  2018, created the DFC by consolidating 
and expanding development financing functions until then primarily undertaken by the Overseas 
Private Investment Corporation (OPIC) and the Development Credit Authority housed in the 
U.S. Agency for Internationa l Development (USAID). The stated purpose of the DFC is to mobilize 
and facilitate the participation of private sector capital and skills in the economic development of 
less developed countries (prioritizing low -income and lower -middle -income economies) an d 
countries in transition from non -market to market economies, to complement the development 
assistance objectives, and advance the foreign policy interests of the United  States 
(22 U.S.C.  9612(b)). The DFC facilitates such market -based private sector deve lopment and 
inclusive economic growth in less developed countries through the provision of credit, capital, and 
other financial support to, inter alia, provide countries a robust alternative to state -directed 
investments by authoritarian governments and Un ited States strategic competitors, using best 
practices with respect to transparency and environment and social safeguards, and which take into 
account the debt sustainability of partner countries.309 
3.215.   The DFC is the successor agency of OPIC by statute. Although many OPIC authorities and 
policies are continued by the DFC, the new agency is characterized also by a higher exposure cap 
(USD  60 billion, as opposed to USD  29 billion for OPIC )(22 U.S.C. 9633 ), the ability to make limited, 
minority -interest equity investments (22  U.S.C. 9621(c)(1)), provide grants for technical assistance 
 
308 SBA (2021), Congressional Budget Justification and Annual Performance Report . Viewed at: 
https://www.sba.gov/document/report -congressional -budget -justification -annual -performance -report .  
309 22 U.S.C. 9 611(6). This stated purpose reflects concerns raised about China's Belt and Road 
Initiative and its growing economic influence in developing countries around the time that the BUILD Act was 
passed. See CRS (2019), Build Act: Frequently Asked Questions Abou t the New U.S. International Development 
Finance Corporation , R45461, updated 15  January.  WT/TPR/S/434 /Rev.1  • United States  
 
- 129 - 
 
  (22 U.S.C. 9621(e)), and more specific oversight and risk management functions (22  U.S.C. 9614). 
Currently, under the BUILD A ct, the DFC is authorized to approve new project commitments under 
its programs for a seven -year period  (22 U.S.C. 9624(a)) . By contrast, OPIC's program operations 
had been authorized annually through appropriations legislation, especially towards the end of its 
history.310 Like OPIC, the DFC is expected to be financially self -sustaining.  
3.216.   The DFC has its own Inspector General reviewing, investigating, and inspecting its operations 
and activities.311 The BUILD Act requires the DFC Board to establish a "transpa rent and independent 
accountability mechanism" to evaluate and report annually about DFC's statutory compliance with 
environmental, social, labor, human rights, and transparency standards  (22 U.S.C. 9614) . The DFC 
is required to consult with USTR, at least  annually, regarding recipient countries' compliance with 
international trade obligations, and give preferential consideration to countries that are in 
compliance, or are making substantial progress in reaching compliance, with these obligations.312 
The DFC  draws on previous USAID authorities to provide technical assistance and funds for feasibility 
studies, including planning, development, management, and procurement in connection with 
bilateral and multilateral development projects eligible for support  (22 U.S.C. 9621(e)(1)).  The 
BUILD Act directs the DFC to insist on cost -sharing by those receiving funds for investment 
promotion to the maximum extent practicable  (22 U.S.C. 9621(e)(2)).  The Act authorizes the DFC 
to support projects as a minority investor, subject to certain limitations.313 Such equity stakes are 
to be liquidated as soon as commercially feasible, while also taking into consideration the national 
security interests of the United  States.314 
3.217.   The DFC was authorized through the BUILD Act's enactmen t as of 5  October  2018, but it 
initiated operations as of 20  December  2019. In FY2020, the DFC's first year of operation, its 
committed investments totaled  USD 4.67 billion, including USD  15 million made available for direct 
equity and USD  5 million for te chnical assistance activities. The DFC expects its own commitments 
from FY2020 to mobilize an additional USD  6.8 billion in private capital. Two  thirds of the projects 
approved in FY2020 were in low -income and lower -middle -income countries (as defined by t he World 
Bank) or in fragile states. In 2020, the DFC launched a rapid response liquidity facility (USD  4 billion) 
as part of its support to portfolio projects affected by the pandemic. The DFC also prioritized 
investments in healthcare and establishment o f resilient health systems. Beyond the short term, the 
DFC launched its global development strategy called Roadmap for Impact. The Roadmap is the 
agency's five -year strategy that aims to catalyze USD  75 billion to maximize development impact 
while creating  strategic and sustainable growth.315 To reach this amount, the Roadmap foresees that 
the DFC's commitment of USD  25 billion should mobilize an additional USD  50 billion by 2025 for 
investments in key sectors such as energy, healthcare, financial inclusion,  food security and 
agriculture, and WASH (water, sanitation, and hygiene).  
3.218.   Women's economic empowerment, a strategic DFC priority, channeled  USD 2.5 billion (and 
catalyzed more than USD  4 billion in capital) to projects that are owned or led by women, or o ffer 
products or services that benefit women, in FY2020. Some USD  7 billion has been catalyzed towards 
gender -smart investments under the 2X Women's Initiative since its inception in 2017.316 
3.2.5.4   Private Export Funding Corporation (PEFCO)  
3.219.   PEFCO complement s export financing by commercial banks and other lenders.317 EXIM 
guarantees the interest on PEFCO's secured notes under a long -term Guarantee and Credit 
 
310 OPIC and USAID legacy programs are extended through 2025 with the creation of the DFC.  
311 Section  1414, Division F, Title I, of P.L. 115-254, codified at  5 U.S.C. App., Inspector General Act of 
1978, §8G(a)(2), lists the DFC as a "designated Federal entity" that is required by the act to establish and 
maintain an Office of Inspector General.  
312 22 U.S.C. 9671(c). The initial consultation between USTR and DFC's Chief  Development Officer took 
place on 23  August  2021.  
313 22 U.S.C. 9621(c)(1). The limitations are listed mainly under Sections  9621(c)(3) and 9621(c)(4).  
314 22 U.S.C. 9621(c)(5).  
315 DFC, Roadmap for Impact . Viewed at: https://www.dfc.gov/roadmap -for-impact . 
316 The 2X Challenge , which has committed to mobilize USD  3 billion to empower women economically 
across the developing world, is a cooperative effort between agencies of the United  States, the 
United  Kingdom, Canada, France, Italy, Japan, and Germany.   
317 At present, PEFCO has 33 shareholders: 26 commercial banks, 6 industrial companies, and 
1 financial services company.  WT/TPR/S/434 /Rev.1  • United States  
 
- 130 - 
 
  Agreement.318 All PEFCO -funded loans are guaranteed by EXIM or in some cases by other 
U.S. government institut ions, e.g. the DFC. Under its long -term loan program s, PEFCO acts as a 
direct lender as well as a secondary market purchaser of export loans originated by other lenders. 
Its medium -term facilities (guaranteed note, discount, or guaranteed lease) are only a vailable to 
other lenders, and only for the portions of loans covered by EXIM (or other U.S. government 
institution) guarantees.  
3.220.   At the end of FY2021, PEFCO's loan portfolio totaled  USD 3.29 billion, and export loans of 
the aviation industry represented ap proximately three quarters of that amount. By country, the 
largest exposures concerned China (USD  680 million), Mexico (USD  653 million), and Kenya 
(USD  490 million). PEFCO's performance was hampered by EXIM's inability to approve large, 
long-term transact ions between 2015 and 2019, and it reported annual net operational losses of 
around USD  8 million to USD  21 million in FY2019, FY2020, and FY2021.319 
3.3  Measures Affecting Production and Trade  
3.3.1   Incentives  
3.221.   Federal government agencies and departments may provide grants, loans, scholarships, 
insurance, property, counselling, or other assistance. The official website at which interested parties 
register to do business with the Federal Government ( www.sam.gov ) presents infor mation on federal 
assistance available to States and Territories, local administrations, private profit and non -profit 
organizations, and individuals. Users may employ an online tool to search the federal assistance 
information database maintained by the G eneral Services Administration for up -to-date information 
on available programs at: https://sam.gov/content/assistance -listings . Alternatively, an annual 
publication serves as a government -wide co mpendium of federal programs, projects, services, and 
activities that provide financial (and non -financial) benefits or assistance to the public.320 
3.222.   State, territorial, and local governments also provide incentives, notably for business 
start-ups and expans ions. Tax credits, grants, loans or loan participation, and tax exemptions are 
the most common types of support, but assistance may be provided in a variety of forms. The 
Council for Community and Economic Research (C2ER) has developed a database of all st ate 
programs, accessible through SelectUSA. In early 2022, the C2ER database contained information 
about nearly 2,400 such programs.321 
3.223.   Among the programs administered by the Economic Development Administration (EDA) of 
the USDOC, cost -shared technical assi stance may be provided under the Trade Adjustment 
Assistance for Firms (TAAF) program to U.S. enterprises that have lost sales and employment due 
to imports of like or directly competitive products. The support is normally delivered by private 
consultants hired through a nationwide network of 11 Trade Adjustment Assistance Centers  (TAAC) 
funded by the EDA. No funds are provided directly to firms. The TAAC helps firms free of charge in 
completing and submitting the petition for assistance, while minimum 25% of the costs for preparing 
the business recovery plan ("adjustment proposal"), which must be approved by the EDA for a firm 
to be a certified participant in the TAAF, is borne by the enterprise. Finally, the TAAC may support a 
firm for up to five years, to  implement the approved business recovery plan, which may total up to 
USD 150,000, while a minimum of 50% of the costs to implement the business recovery plan is 
borne by the enterprise. The EDA awards grants to each of the 11 TAACs, and the value of each 
grant ranges from USD  1 million to USD  1.6 million. The budget funding for TAAF amounted to 
USD 13 million in FY2020 and USD  13.5 million in FY2021. U.S. Department of Labor's Trade 
Adjustment Assistance for Workers (TAAW) provides assistance to workers wh o have been adversely 
affected by foreign trade, including training, employment and case management services, income 
support, wage supplements for older workers, and other benefits. In FY2021, the TAAW program 
 
318 The initial 25 -year partnership with EXIM was concluded in 1971, and renewed until  the end of 2020 
in 1994. The expiry date for the present Guarantee and Credit Agreement is 31  December  2045.  
319 PEFCO, Annual Report 2020 . Viewed at: https://pefco.com/wp -content /uploads/2021/01/PEFCO -
AR2020.pdf .  
320 Formerly entitled the Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance, the most recent 2021 Annual 
Publication of Assistance Listings is a document of more than 1,900 pages. Printed copies of this publication 
are no longer provided free of charge but may be downloa ded as PDFs. Viewed at: 
https://sam.gov/content/assistance -listings . 
321 The search engine is at: http://www.stateincentives.org/ . WT/TPR/S/434 /Rev.1  • United States  
 
- 131 - 
 
  provided USD  441 million to state governments to serve workers affected by trade and certified an 
estimated 107,454 new workers as being eligible for benefits and services.  
3.224.   In response to the COVID -19 pandemic and its disruption of economic activity, Congress 
appropriated considerable funds through em ergency legislation, notably the March  2020 Coronavirus 
Aid, Relief, and Economic Security (CARES) Act, an economic stimulus package that provides 
approximately USD  2.8 trillion322; the December  2020 Consolidated Appropriations Act of 2021; and 
the American  Rescue Plan Act of 2021 (ARP Act). The Department of the Treasury administers relief 
programs assisting U.S. industries, including airlines and certain transportation service providers.323 
3.225.   The CARES Act, and subsequent legislation, channeled  nearly USD  1 trillion  through the SBA 
to protect jobs and avert bankruptcies.324 The SBA guaranteed some 11.4  million loans, provided 
through approximately 5,242 lenders, for a total USD  792.7  billion und er the Paycheck Protection 
Program (PPP) through 5  September  2021. The PPP loans allowed small businesses, sole proprietors, 
self-employed individuals, independent contractors, tribal business concerns, veterans' 
organizations, and eligible non -profit orga nizations to cover eligible payroll and non -payroll costs. 
During the same period, the SBA fully forgave more than 7  million  loans worth more than 
USD 553 billion. During FY2021, the SBA approved 250,000 new COVID Economic Injury Disaster 
Loans (EIDL) for over USD  30 billion. Previously, by mid -July 2020, the SBA had also exceeded its 
appropriation of USD  20 billion for loan advances, having supported nearly 5.8  million EIDL 
Advances. In 2021, the SBA also funded 547,576 applications for EIDL Advances totaling 
USD 4.7 billion by 23  December  2021. The SBA provided USD  3.5 billion in debt relief to ease the 
financial strain on small businesses in FY2021.325 In addition, grants worth USD  240 million were 
provided to SBA's Small Business Development Centers and W omen's Business Centers for 
entrepreneurial development programs to help businesses retool their operations and recover.  
3.226.   As for its regular activities, the SBA provided approximately 61,500  businesses with access 
to loans totaling  nearly USD  45 billion. As  usual, the loans were made available through partner 
financial institutions with the SBA providing loan guarantees and making available counselling, and 
other forms of assistance. Its microloan intermediaries further approved over 4,500 microloans in 
FY2021. The SBA also continued to provide oversight in federal contracting to ensure that the 
government -wide statutory goal for contract dollars to small businesses (minimum 23%) is met, 
including the specific targets for small -disadvantaged businesses and wo men-owned small 
businesses, service -disabled veteran -owned small businesses, and small businesses in Historically 
Underutilized Business Zone locations.  
3.227.   The United  States notifies subsidy programs to the WTO Committee on Subsidies and 
Countervailing Measur es on a regular basis. The notifications are provided as a matter of 
transparency without prejudice to the legal status of the programs under the Agreement on Subsidies 
and Countervailing Measures. The most recent notification, circulated in July  2021, cov ers FY2019 
and FY2020. The notification includes nearly 750 programs maintained at the sub -federal level. The 
estimated expenditures on federal non -agricultural programs are summarized in Table  3.26. 
Table  3.26 Federal subsidy programs (non -agriculture), FY2018 -20 
(USD million)  
Programs  Type of subsidy  Expenditure  
FY2018  FY2019  FY2020  
Energy and fuels      
Advanced Research Projects  Annual Congressional 
appropriations  46.3 359.8  332.5  
Cybersecurity for Energy Delivery Systems  Co-financing  26.1 2.6 19.4 
Resilient Distribution Systems  Co-financing  0.0 7.2 0 
Nuclear Energy: Small Modular Reactor Licensing 
Technical Support  Co-financing  0.0 0 0.7 
 
322 US Datalab, The F ederal Response to COVID -19. Viewed at: 
https://datalab.usaspending.gov/federal -covid-funding/   
323 Department of the Treasury, Airline and National Security Relief Programs . Viewed at: 
https://home.treasury.gov/policy -issues/coronavirus/assistance -for-american -industry/airline -and-national -
security-relief-programs .  
324 SBA, FY 2022 Congressional Justification, FY 2020 Annual Performance Report . Viewed at: 
https://www.sba.gov/sites/defa ult/files/2021 -06/FY2022_SBA_Congressional_Justification -508_0.pdf .  
325 Debt relief was provided to borrowers under the SBA's most common loan program  (7(a) loans); 
long-term, fixed rate financing to Certified Development Companies (504 loans); and Microloa n borrowers.  WT/TPR/S/434 /Rev.1  • United States  
 
- 132 - 
 
  Programs  Type of subsidy  Expenditure  
FY2018  FY2019  FY2020  
Nuclear Energy: Supercritical Transformational Electric 
Power  Co-financing  0.0 Ended  Ended  
Nuclear Energy: Fuel Cycle R&D  Co-financing  22.4 80.7 84.9 
Nuclear Energy: Enabling Technologies  Co-financing  18.9 53.9 93.9 
Nuclear Energy: Reactor Concepts R&D and 
Demonstration – Advanced Reactor Technologies  Co-financing  78.9 14.4 7.0 
Renewable Energy Resources  Co-financing  69.6 45.5 81.6 
Energy Conservation Programs – Transportation 
Sector  Co-financing  241.2  190.6  288.6  
Energy Conservation Programs – Building 
Technologies Office  Co-financing  1.0 0.7 0.6 
Energy Conservation – Advanced Manufacturing  Co-financing  67.7 25.7 43.5 
Fossil Energy R&D  Cost-shared contracts  571.2  127.4  43.1 
Innovative Technology Loan Guarantee Program  Loan guarantees  30.9 45.0 29.0 
Advanced Technology Vehicles Manufacturing Loan 
Program (ATVM)  Direct loans  5.0 5.0 5.0 
Tribal Energy Loan Guarantee Program  Partial loan guarantees  (a) 1.0 1.0 
Other energy and fuels      
Expensing of Exploration and Development (E&D) 
Costs for Oil, Gas and other Fuels  Income tax concession  970.0  930.0  40.0 
Excess of Percentage over Cost Depletion for Oil, Gas 
and Other Fuels  Income tax concession  350.0  670.0  590.0  
Capital Gains Treatment of Royalties on Coal  Income tax concession  160.0  150.0  100.0  
Second Generation Biofuel Credit  Income tax concession  Unknown  Unknown  Unknown  
Biodiesel and Renewable Diesel Credit  Income and excise tax 
concession , and direct 
payments  3,430.0  2,130.0  5,120.0  
Alternative Fuel Mixture Credit  Excise tax concession  710.0  500.0  550.0  
Credits for Investment in Advanced Coal Facilities and 
Advanced Gasification Facilities  Income tax concession  90.0 20.0 30.0 
Advanced Energy Property Credit  Income tax concession  0 10.0 10.0 
Two-year Amortization of Geological and Geophysical 
Expenditures  Income tax concession  230.0  230.0  80.0 
Energy Production Credit  Income tax concession  3,150.0  4,230.0  5,020.0  
Energy Investment Credit  Income tax concession  3,180.0  3,710.0  6,070.0  
Energy Grant in lieu of the Energy Production Credit or 
the Energy Investment Credit  Direct payment  48.0 0 0 
Credit for Holding New Clean Renewable Energy Bonds  Income tax concession  110.0  120.0  100.0  
Credit for Holding Qualified Energy Conservation 
Bonds  Income tax concession  70.0 70.0 60.0 
Carbon Oxide Sequestration Credit  Income tax concession  200.0  70.0 14.0 
Enhanced Oil Recovery Credit  Income tax concession  390.0  510.0  470.0  
Accelerated Depreciation for Renewable Energy 
Property  Income tax concession  1,900.0  (a) (a) 
Deduction for Tertiary Injectants  Income tax concession  10.0 10.0 10.0 
Fisheries      
Columbia River Fishery Development Program  Operating grants  16.2 16.3 17.3 
Fisheries Finance Program  Collateralized loans  (b) (b) (b) 
Saltonstall -Kennedy Grant Program: Fisheries R&D  Competitive grants  10.0 10.0 10.0 
Capital Construction Fund  Deferring tax on federal 
fishing income  2.4 2.5 (c) 
Bycatch Reduction Engineering Program  Competitive grants  2.3 2.3 2.3 
Vessel Monitoring System Reimbursement Program  Grant  2.6 0.3 0.7 
Fishery Disaster Assistance Program [appropriations]  Grant  220.0  165.0   
Lumber and timber      
Capital Gains Treatment of Certain Timber Income  Income tax concession  160.0  150.0  130.0  
Expensing of Multi -period Timber Growing Costs  Income tax concession  220.0  40.0 50.0 
Expensing and Seven -Year Amortization for 
Reforestation Expenditures  Income tax concession  50.0 40.0 50.0 
Medical      
Office of Nuclear Physics, Isotope Development and 
Production for Research and Applications Program  Annual Congressional 
appropriations  29.7 44.3 50.3 
Orphan Drug Tax Credit  Income tax concession  1,960.0  1,550.0  1,720.0  
Non-fuel minerals, metals      
Excess of percentage over Cost Depletion for Non -fuel 
Minerals  Income tax concession  330.0  120.0  110.0  
Expensing of Exploration and Development Costs for 
Non-fuel Minerals  Income tax concession  50.0 170.0  10.0 
Shipyards      
Assistance to Small Shipyards Grant Program  Grants  20.0 20.0 20.0 WT/TPR/S/434 /Rev.1  • United States  
 
- 133 - 
 
  Programs  Type of subsidy  Expenditure  
FY2018  FY2019  FY2020  
Regional programs      
Empowerment Zones  Income tax concession  110.0  60.0 160.0  
New Markets Tax Credit  Income tax concession  1,410.0  1,320.0  1,280.0  
Opportunity Zones  Income tax concession  0 2,720.0  3,770.0  
Note:  (a) Not included ; (b) The amount of the loans and the general terms of the loans are provided but 
the subsidy benefit, if any, is not estimated ; and (c) Pending.  
Source:  WTO documents G/SCM/N/343/USA, 16 July 2019; and G/SCM/N/372/USA, 14  July 2021.  
3.3.2   Standards and other technical requirements  
3.228.   In the United  States, the private sector leads the development of voluntary consensus 
standards (VCS), which are based on needs or concerns identified by industry, government, and 
consumers.326 The American National Standards Institute (ANSI), a private non -profit organization, 
has a central role in coordinating the private sector in this demand -driven system, but does not 
develop standards. This responsibil ity is entrusted to the hundreds of standards developing 
organizations (SDOs) located within the United  States. The United  States considers any VCS 
developed in accordance with the Committee Decision on International Standards327 to be an 
international stan dard under the WTO TBT  Agreement regardless of the specific SDO or its location. 
The ANSI Essential Requirements: Due Process Requirements for American National Standards 
(Essential Requirements) serve as guidelines to develop VCSs and include principles f or openness, 
balance, lack of dominance, due process, consensus, and the right to appeal. The procedural 
requirements outlined in the Essential Requirements align closely with the criteria for VCS outlined 
in the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) Circu lar A-119 (discussed below) and also with the 
principles outlined in the Committee Decision on International Standards. Moreover, ANSI was also 
in charge of the process of reviewing and updating the U.S.  Standards Strategy, whose fifth update 
was completed  in December  2020 with the participation of all stakeholders.  
3.229.   The National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST), within USDOC, aims to promote 
U.S. innovation and industrial competitiveness by advancing measurement science, standards, and 
technolog y. The Standards Coordination Office (SCO) at NIST serves as the WTO TBT Enquiry Point 
and is the notification authority of the United  States under the WTO TBT  Agreement.328 The SCO 
manages and operates Notify U.S., a free, web -based email registration serv ice, disseminating 
notifications of other WTO Members to domestic stakeholders and providing them with an 
opportunity to review and comment on foreign regulations. Comments and queries on notified 
proposed U.S. measures are forwarded by the TBT Enquiry Poi nt to the relevant U.S. regulatory 
agency upon receipt. Under the National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act (NTTAA ), NIST 
coordinates government conformity assessment activities with the private sector to reduce 
unnecessary duplication and complexit y.329 NIST maintains a reference collection of technical 
regulations, specifications, test methods, codes, and recommended practices, and produces the 
U.S. Standard Reference Data (SRD).330 
3.230.   SDOs that adhere to the Essential Requirements may be accredited by ANSI to develop 
American National Standards (ANS) related to products, processes, services, systems, or personnel. 
In March  2022, there were 237 ANSI -accredited standard developers (ASDs)331; 18 organizations 
became ASDs during the review period. By the sam e date, ANSI listed more than 13,600 standards 
 
326 Consensus implies a general agreement without necessarily requiring a unanimous decision. Any 
party with a direct and material interest in a specific standard can participate in its development by expressing 
its position, having it consider ed, and having a right to appeal.  
327 WTO TBT Committee's Decision of the Committee on Principles for the Development of International 
Standards, Guides and Recommendations with relation to Articles 2 and 5 of and Annex  3 to the Agreement.  
328 The SCO acts as the USA Notification Contact Point for the recently negotiated United  States -Mexico -
Canada Agreement (USMCA).  
329 NIST updated its Guidance on Federal Conformity Assessment Activities (15 C.F.R. Part 287) 
outlining agencies' responsibilities for using confor mity assessment in an efficient and cost -effective manner for 
the agency and its stakeholders. Viewed at: https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title -15/subtitle -B/cha pter-
II/subchapter -J/part -287. 
330 NIST, Standard Reference Data. Viewed at: https://www.nist.gov/srd . 
331 A complete list of ASDs is available at: https://www.ansi.org/american -national -standards/info -for-
standards -developers/accredited -standards -developers . WT/TPR/S/434 /Rev.1  • United States  
 
- 134 - 
 
  developed by ASDs332, of which 1,075 new standards were issued between July  2018 and 
March  2022. In addition to the thousands of VCS developed by SDOs, consortia standards also help 
to fill the need for standar ds used by industry, especially in technology areas where a more rapid 
development pace is needed to meet market needs.  
3.231.   In the United  States, technical regulations can be established at the federal or sub -federal 
level, and rely heavily on VCS developed by  the private sector making them mandatory by reference; 
technical regulations cover mostly products but can also concern processes or services. While 
Congress can establish product regulations legislatively, it usually delegates enabling legislation to 
regulatory agencies, generally pursuant to broad guidance as to the factors to be considered and 
policy goals to be achieved.  The majority of rulemaking involves three steps: issuance of a notice of 
proposed rulemaking soliciting public comment, agency consid eration of all relevant information, 
and the issuance of a final rule after consideration of the relevant information. Executive Order (E.O.) 
13563 requires the use of the Internet for the consultation procedure and the publication of rules to 
the extent p ossible and establishes a 60 -day period for consultations.  Any interested person can 
submit petitions for reconsideration after final rules have been issued. All final rules may be judicially 
reviewed. All regulations issued by agencies as final rules are subject to Congressional review under 
the Congressional Review Act (CRA).  
3.232.   Title IV of the Trade Agreements Act (TAA) of 1979 (P.L . 96-39), as amended, provides the 
legal basis on which the WTO TBT  Agreement and the SPS  Agreement are implemented. In addition 
to enabling legislation, various  other requirements govern the development and issuance of technical 
regulations by the Federal  Government, including other statutes and Presidential E.O.s that impose 
procedural requirements intended to ensure reasoned and fair decision -making, as well as Circulars 
from the OMB. Consequently, t he legal framework for the preparation of technical reg ulations and 
adoption of standards is also prescribed by the Administrative Procedure Act (APA) (P.L.  79-404), 
the National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act (NTTAA) (P.L.  104-113), U.S. Office of 
Management and Budget Circular A -119, and E.O.s 12866  (Regulatory Planning and Review), 13563 
(Improving Regulation and Regulatory Review)333, 13609 (Promoting International Regulatory 
Cooperation), and 13610 (Identifying and Reducing Regulatory Burdens). E.O.  13771 (Reducing 
Regulation and Controlling Regula tory Costs) and E.O.  13777 (Enforcing the Regulatory Reform 
Agenda) were revoked  by E.O.  13992 (Revocation of Certain Executive Orders Concerning Federal 
Regulation), issued on 20  January  2021. 
3.233.   OMB's Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs (OIRA) is r esponsible for regulatory 
oversight and leads interagency review of significant regulation pursuant to E.O. 12866.334 The 
agency or agencies responsible for developing technical regulations depend on the product in 
question. Agencies may adopt technical  regulations only after thoroughly analy zing their potential 
impact, typically by means of an assessment and comparison of either the benefits and costs or the 
cost-effectiveness of alternative regulatory approaches. OIRA keeps an updated repository of 
ongoing  reviews and those completed since 1981. Final rules are published in the Federal Register 
and codified in the Code of Federal Regulations; a unified agenda for regulatory and deregulatory 
actions is also available on OIRA's website.335 A memorandum, issued  on 20  January  2021, initiated 
consultations to improve and modernize the regulatory review.336 
3.234.   E.O. 13609 aims at promoting international regulatory cooperation between the 
United  States and its foreign trading partners to avoid unnecessary impediments for  U.S. businesses 
 
332 Six ASDs sponsore d more than 500 standards each, and they account for more than half (54.9%) of 
the total inventory of standards under ANSI. Complete lists of issued and proposed ANS are available at: 
https://www.ansi.org/american -national -standards/info -for-standards -developers/ans -complete -lists. 
333 E.O. 13579, July  2011, clarifies that E.O. 13563 also applies to independent regulatory agencies.  
334 Economically "significant regulatory actions" are those likely to result in a rule that may: (i)  have an 
annual effect on the economy of USD  100 million or more or adversely affect in a material way the economy, a 
sector of the economy, productivity, competition, jobs,  the environment, public health or safety, or State, 
local, or tribal governments or communities; (ii)  create a serious inconsistency or otherwise interfere with an 
action taken or planned by another agency; (iii)  materially alter the budgetary impact of e ntitlements, grants, 
user fees, or loan programs or the rights and obligations of recipients thereof; or (iv)  raise novel legal or policy 
issues arising out of legal mandates, the President's priorities, or the principles set forth in E.O. 12866. 
Viewed  at: http://www.archives.gov/federal -register/executive -orders/pdf/12866.pdf . 
335 OMB, Fall 2021 Unified Agenda of Regulatory and Deregulatory Actions . Viewed at: 
https://www.reginfo.gov/public/do/eAgendaMain . 
336 The White House, Modernizing Regulatory Review . Viewed at: https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing -
room/presidential -actions/2021/01/20/modernizing -regulatory -review/ . WT/TPR/S/434 /Rev.1  • United States  
 
- 135 - 
 
  to export and compete internationally. While USTR has statutory authority in the area of trade policy, 
the Interagency Regulatory Working Group serves, where appropriate, as a forum to discuss 
international regulatory cooperation activitie s in which the United  States is engaged such as in the 
Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC), the U.S. -Canada Regulatory Cooperation Council, the 
OECD Regulatory Policy Committee, and other bilateral and regional engagements.  
3.235.   The TAA restricts governmen t agencies from engaging in any standards -related activity that 
creates unnecessary obstacles to the foreign commerce of the United  States and ensures that 
imported goods are treated no less favorably  than like domestic products in the application of 
stand ards-related activities. The NTTAA directs federal agencies and departments to use VCS, both 
domestic and international, in lieu of government -developed requirements in regulations, to meet 
their objectives and reaffirms principles already expressed in Cir cular A -119. The NTTAA further 
directs the agencies to participate in the development of such standards to ensure that VCSs reflect 
government needs and to reduce government reliance on government -unique standards. To keep 
track of the use of government -unique standards used in technical regulations, the NIST publishes 
an annual report based on developments provided by 22  agencies for the fiscal year 2019.337 
Circular  A-119 also encourages federal agencies, in line with their missions, to participate in SDOs . 
3.236.   Agencies are not required to rely only on VCSs available free of cost for their rules; however, 
a principle of "reasonable availability" of the information is applied.338 Federal agencies are also 
required, when developing technical regulations, to take i nto account  international standards and, if 
appropriate, base their regulations on those international standards. Title IV of the TAA of 1979 as 
amended (19 U.S.C. 2531) provides that the reasons for which it may not be appropriate to base a 
U.S. technical  regulation on an international standard include, but are not limited to, the protection 
of human health or safety, animal or plant life or health, or the environment.  
3.237.   The Internet of Things (IoT) Cybersecurity Improvement Act of 2020, P.L. 116-207, enacte d 
in December  2020, required NIST and the OMB to take steps to increase the cybersecurity of IoT 
devices. NIST subsequently developed a series of guidelines, through an open comment and review 
process, for the use and management of IoT devices by federal a gencies.339 
3.238.   In March  2020, the FDA issued a final rule for new health warnings on cigarette packages 
and advertisements to increase public awareness of lesser -known, but serious negative health 
consequences of cigarette smoking.340 
3.239.   Since the beginning of the pandemic, numerous Emergency Use Authorizations (EUAs) were 
issued by the FDA under Section  564 of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act  (21 USC, 
Chapter  9), covering more than 400 test and sample collection devices, 119  ventilators and  
accessories, 11  COVID -19 treatments, and 3 vaccines. In 2021, more than 600 drug development 
program s were in the planning stages, a new guidance for conducting clinical trials was issued to 
facilitate the response to COVID -19, and in addition, the FDA de alt with some numerous reports of 
fraudulent products related to COVID -19. 
3.240.   The U.S. conformity assessment system utilizes a variety of mechanisms depending on the 
product and assessed risk. Standards and technical regulations that rely on supplier's 
self-declaration are also supported, to a large extent, through product -liability laws. It is generally 
the responsibility of the supplier (producer or importer) to ensure compliance with existing technical 
regulations or with standards when such compliance is r equired by the purchaser. In the case of 
imports, it is primarily the responsibility of importers representing foreign manufacturers to meet 
 
337 NIST (2020), 23rd Annual Report on Federal Agency Use of Voluntary Consensus Standards and 
Conformity Assessment Activities , 20 November  2020. Viewed at: 
https://nvlpubs.nist.gov/nistpubs/ir/2020/NI ST.IR.8329.pdf . A total of 80 government -unique standards were 
being used in lieu of VCS as of fiscal year 2019.  
338 Federal Register  (2014), Vol.  79, No.  216, 7  November , p. 66267. Standards incorporated by the 
U.S. Government in rulemakings may be offered at no cost in read -only format or presented for online reading 
in ANSI Incorporated by Reference Portal . Viewed at:  https://ibr.ansi.org/Default.aspx . 
339 NIST, IoT Device Cybersecurity Guidance for the Feder al Government: Establishing IoT Device 
Cybersecurity Requirements . Viewed at: https://www.nist.gov/itl/applied -cybersecurity/nist -cybersecurity -iot-
program/sp -800-213-series . 
340 Federal Register  (2020), Vol.  85, No.  53, 18  March, p.  15638, Viewed at: 
https://www.federalregister.gov/d/2020 -05223 . This regulation was challenged by manufactu rers and pending 
this litigation, the effective date for this rule was postponed to 13  July 2022.  WT/TPR/S/434 /Rev.1  • United States  
 
- 136 - 
 
  technical regulations and to ensure that permits, if required, have been obtained in advance of the 
goods arriving in the United  States. For some products, a declaration or proof of conformity or 
compliance must be submitted by the manufacturer or the importer upon or prior to importation.  
3.241.   When assessment of conformity to a technical regulation is required, it may be d one by the 
Federal Government, state or local governments, or an independent testing authority where the 
Government gives official recognition through accreditation or similar measures.  CBP, in cooperation 
with other agencies responsible for regulated prod ucts, such as the Consumer Product Safety 
Commission (CPSC), is responsible for enforcing technical regulations at the border, and taking 
enforcement actions when such regulations are violated, including refusing admission. The CPSC has 
jurisdiction over m any types of consumer products. However, some types of consumer products are 
covered by other federal agencies. For example, automobiles, trucks, and motorcycles are within 
the jurisdiction of the Department of Transportation (DOT); food, drugs, and cosmet ics are covered 
by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA); pesticides and fungicides are monitored by the 
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA); boats by the U.S. Coast Guard; and chemicals by the 
U.S. Chemical Safety and Hazard Investigation Board (CSB).341 Assessment of conformity with 
SPS requirements, especially for plants and animal products, is generally carried out by APHIS and 
Food Safety and Inspection Service (FSIS) inspectors located at the borders. The CPSC also controls 
labelling requirements, s uch as those of the Federal Hazardous Substances Act (FHSA), which 
requires precautionary labelling on the immediate container of hazardous household products.  
3.242.   Accreditation procedures of conformity assessment bodies (CABs) vary depending on each 
standard or technical regulation following a risk -based approach. U.S. requirements generally follow 
the standards issued by the Committee on Conformity Assessment at the International Organization 
for Standardization (ISO CASCO).  
3.243.   Between July  2018 and March  2022, the United  States submitted 1,290 TBT notifications 
concerning proposed and final measures to the WTO. More than 300 notifications were submitted 
the last two years: 370 in 2020 and 393 in 2021. TBT notifications per year were only higher in 
2016.342 During  the review period, the notifications covered both federal - and state -level 
regulations; 113  notifications covered the latter. More than half (53.4%) of all notifications were 
amendments to previous notifications, while 36.3% of all notifications were regu lar ones; only 
20 urgent notifications were submitted since July  2018, accounting for 1.6% of all notifications.  
3.244.   Overall, 980 notifications (76.0%) relate to technical regulations (out of which 110 at the 
state level) and 255 notifications (19.8%) relate t o conformity assessment procedures (out of which 
28 at the state level). An increasing number of notifications, 18.4% of all notifications during the 
period under review, simultaneously refer to technical regulations and conformity assessment 
procedures. M oreover, an increasing proportion of notifications (19.1% over the review period, or 
246 notifications) does not specify its relationship with a specific article of the TBT  Agreement.343 
Based on standardization fields reported in the notifications followin g the International Classification 
of Standards (ICS), at least two  ICS fields are mentioned in 70.9% of up from 51.9% in the previous 
review period.344 At the same time, regulations aimed at attaining several objectives also increased , 
from 15.6% to 48.8%.  The most frequent objectives are the protection of the environment (49.3%), 
the protection of human health or safety (38.4%), the prevention of deceptive practices and 
consumer protection (26.0%), and consumer information and labelling (16.3%).  
3.245.   During the  review period, 12 specific trade concerns (STCs) relating to measures maintained 
by the United  States were raised in the TBT Committee; 1 STC raised before the review period was 
reiterated since July  2018. The United  States actively participates in the TB T Committee and has 
raised or supported 82 new STCs against its trade partners. There is a dispute against U.S.  measures 
 
341 CPSC, Products Under the Jurisdiction of Other Federal Agencies and Federal Links . Viewed at: 
https://www.cpsc.gov/Regulations -Laws--Standards/Products -Outside -CPSCs -Jurisdiction . 
342 WTO ePing SPS and TBT Platform. Viewed at: https://epingalert.org/ . 
343 The authorities ind icate their use of the "Other (not defined)" option in notifications when the reason 
for notifying the addendum does not match any of the other criteria listed in WTO document G/TBT/35/Rev.1, 
21 November  2019. Furthermore, 40 notifications since July  2016 do not specify a relationship with any article 
of the TBT  Agreement.  
344 The authorities indicated that this is in line with recommendations of the TBT Committee (WTO 
documents G/TBT/41, 19  November  2018 and G/TBT/46, 17  November  2021), for enhanced transpa rency and 
improved use of HS and ICS codes in notifications.  WT/TPR/S/434 /Rev.1  • United States  
 
- 137 - 
 
  concerning the origin marking requirement applicable to goods produced in Hong  Kong,  China.345 
The United  States is participating as a t hird party in two disputes with reference to the 
TBT Agreement.346 
3.246.   ANSI represents the United  States at ISO and, through its U.S. National Committee, it 
coordinates the U.S. engagement in the International Electrotechnical Commission (IEC). The 
Department o f State, the Department of Commerce, and the Federal Communications Commission 
are the U.S.  representatives at the International Telecommunication Union (ITU). Moreover, the 
United  States is a member of the International Maritime Organization (IMO), and th e International 
Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO), participating in the respective standards development activities 
of these organizations. The United  States also participates in other regional organizations and for a 
related to standards.347 In addition, m ost of the bilateral FTAs that the United  States has concluded 
incorporate provisions reaffirming the adherence to obligations under the TBT  Agreement, as well 
as decisions and recommendations adopted by the TBT Committee (e.g. Chapter 11 of the USMCA).  
3.247.   The United  States has concluded mutual recognition agreements (MRAs) covering different 
sectors with numerous foreign partners, including two MRAs with the United  Kingdom in 2021. MRA 
implementation varies for each partner, even within a common or regional a rrangement, regarding 
the recognition level of CABs348 and the product coverage. In the area of telecommunications 
equipment, MRAs  are implemented with some APEC members (Australia; Canada; Chinese  Taipei; 
Hong Kong, China; the Republic of Korea; Malaysia; New  Zealand; Singapore; and Viet  Nam), the 
European  Union, some EFTA States (Norway, Iceland, and Liechtenstein), and other tradi ng partners 
(Israel, Japan, Mexico, and the United  Kingdom). MRA signatories designate their accredited CABs 
to the Federal Communication Commission (FCC) while the NIST, through its Telecom MRA Program 
Office, serves as the designated authority for U.S. C ABs.349 The MRA with the EFTA States also 
covers recreational craft, while the MRA with the European  Union extends to electrical safety, 
recreational craft, medical devices, and pharmaceutical Good Manufacturing Practices (GMPs). The 
coverage of this latter  sector in the U.S. -EU MRA was amended in 2017. Pharmaceutical GMPs are 
also part of the recent MRA with the United  Kingdom. The United  States has also signed separate 
MRAs with the European  Union, EFTA, and the United  Kingdom for marine safety equipment.  
3.3.3   Sanitary and phytosanitary requirements  
3.248.   The United  States has numerous laws and regulations pertaining to food safety, animal 
health, and plant health. Major, and long -standing, pieces of SPS legislation include the Federal 
Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act (FFD CA), the Federal Meat Inspection Act, the Poultry Products 
Inspection Act, the Egg Products Inspection Act, the Plant Protection Act, the Animal Health 
Protection Act, and the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and the Rodenticide Act.350 Since the 
promulgatio n of the FDA Food Safety Modernization Act (FSMA) in 2011, the United  States has not 
made a comparable large -scale update to its SPS legislation. However, some changes took place 
during the review period in relation with implementing regulations which acco mpany this overall 
regulatory framework (see below).  
3.249.   According to the product and the type of risk inherent to products, responsibilities for the 
development, implementation, and enforcement of SPS measures are split among federal 
agencies.351 In general, S PS measures are subject to the same administrative rulemaking procedures 
 
345 A panel was established in April  2021. Further information available at: 
https://www.wto.org/english/tratop_e/di spu_e/cases_e/ds597_e.htm . 
346 DS593: European  Union – Certain Measures concerning Palm Oil and Oil Palm Crop -based Biofuels , 
and DS600: European  Union and Certain Member States — Certain Measures concerning Palm Oil and Oil Palm 
Crop-based Biofuels . 
347 These  include the Pacific Area Standards Congress (PASC), the Pan American Standards Commission 
(COPANT), the Council for Harmonization of Electrotechnical Standards of the Nations in the Americas 
(CANENA), and APEC's Sub -Committee on Standards and Conformance (SCSC).  
348 Two broad levels of mutual recognition consist of: (i)  the recognition of testing laboratories and their 
testing results; and (ii)  the recognition of certification bodies and acceptance of certifications.  
349 NIST, Mutual Recognition Agreements for  Conformity Assessment of Telecommunications Equipment . 
Viewed at: https://www.nist.gov/mutual -recognition -agreements -mras. 
350 These Acts are codified in 21 U.S.C. 301 et seq.;  21 U.S.C . 601 et seq.; 21 U.S.C.  451 et seq.; 
21 U.S.C. 1031 et seq.; 7 U.S.C. 7701 et seq.;  7 U.S.C. 8301 et seq.; and 7 U.S.C. 136 et seq.,  respectively.  
351 State -level authorities may develop their own measures, subject to federal laws and regulations. 
WTO docum ent WT/TPR/S/235/Rev.1, 29  October  2010, pp. 40 -46. WT/TPR/S/434 /Rev.1  • United States  
 
- 138 - 
 
  as technical regulations (see above). FDA is responsible for the regulation of a broad range of 
products, including food (except food products regulated by the Department of Agricultu re); food 
additives; dietary supplements; human and veterinary drugs; medical devices; human biologics; 
tobacco; and cosmetics, including imported goods.352 FSIS within the Department of Agriculture 
(USDA) is responsible for ensuring a safe, wholesome, and correctly labelled and packaged 
commercial supply of meat, poultry, Siluriformes fish and fish products (catfish), and some egg 
products in the United  States, including imported goods.353 The Animal and Plant Health Inspection 
Service (APHIS) at USDA protec ts the health of U.S. agriculture and natural resources against 
invasive pests and diseases, and regulates genetically engineered crops while promoting exports of 
U.S. plant and animal products.354 In cases where requirements by APHIS and FSIS simultaneousl y 
apply to imported goods, APHIS evaluates the animal and plant health risks while FSIS ensures the 
enforcement of food safety requirements. The responsibilities of  EPA include, inter alia, the 
registration of pesticides, including herbicides and fungicide s, and the establishment of tolerances 
(maximum residue limits (MRLs)) for pesticides in food.355 
3.250.   Other agencies involved in SPS issues include the Agricultural Marketing Service, the 
Agricultural Research Service, and the National Institute of Food and Agriculture in the Department 
of Agriculture, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention in the Department of Health and 
Human Services, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration in the Department of 
Commerce, CBP in the Department of Homeland Security, and the Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and 
Trade Bureau in the Department of the Treasury.  
3.251.   Agencies have jurisdiction over imported products at the time of entry and after the products 
have entered the country. When a food does not meet FDA food safety requirements, such as when 
the food contains organisms of public health significance, foreign obje cts, or a major food allergen, 
firms may recall products356; on average, some 1,000  recalls of FDA -regulated products have been 
conducted every year since 2018. Of these recalls, 248  were related to imported human food and 
animal feed.357 Since July  2018, th e FDA has reported nearly 45,000  import refusals at the border.358 
In case of a refusal, the owner or consignee is entitled to an informal hearing regarding the 
admissibility of the product and can submit a plan to bring the product into compliance. A 
non-compliant product must be re -exported or destroyed within 90 days of FDA's notice of intent to 
refuse the goods. Similarly, whenever a health hazard situation with a reasonable probability that 
the use of the product will cause serious, adverse health conse quences or death arises, FSIS 
recommends the voluntary recall of the product.359 From January  2018 to January  2022, there were 
330 recalls, and 38 recalls involved imported meat, poultry, or egg products. Compared to the period 
2015-19, there were fewer rec alls in 2020 and 2021; factors including societal disruptions and 
consumer behavior  during the pandemic, explain this decrease.  
3.252.   Regarding the enforcement of APHIS regulations, CBP plays a key role at U.S. ports of entry 
and its staff inspects shipments of imported agricultural products to certify that the required animal 
or plant health import permits and SPS documentation accompany each shipment. In 2020, CBP 
 
352 Import requirements by type of product under the responsibility of the FDA is available at: 
https://www.fda.gov/internation al-programs/imports -and-exports . 
353 Requirement for the importation of FSIS -regulated products is available at: 
https://www.fsis.usda.gov/inspection/import -export/import -guidance. 
354 Import requirements for animal products and live animals as well as temporary restrictions are listed 
at: https://www.aphis.usda.gov/aphis/ourfocus/animalhealth/animal -and-animal -product -import -information . 
Plant import requirements and related information are available at: 
https://www.aphis.usda.gov/aphis/ourfocus/planthealth/import -information . 
355 Import requirements for pesticides and tolerances established by EPA are available at: 
https://www.epa.gov/compliance/importing -and-exporting -pesticides -and-devices#import . 
356 FDA requires a recall only when the goods present a health hazard and the voluntary recall has not 
been implemented. Only a handful of mandatory recalls were conducted during the period under review. A list 
of FDA -regulated products subject to a recall since 2017 is available at: https://www.fda.gov/safety/recalls -
market -withdrawals -safety -alerts . Additional data related to recalls are available at: 
https://datadashboard.fda.gov/ora/cd/recalls.htm . 
357 FDA, FDA-TRACK: Imported Food Safety Measures . Viewed at: https://www.fda.gov/about -fda/fda -
track-agency -wide-program -performance/imported -food-safety -measures . 
358 Half of these refusals are related t o merchandise originating in five large trading partners: China, 
India, Mexico, Canada, and the Republic of Korea. Viewed at: 
https://www.accessdata.fda.gov/scripts/ImportRefus als/index.cfm . 
359 A list of recalls and public health alerts since 2010 for FSIS -regulated products is available at: 
https://www.fsis.usda.gov/recalls . WT/TPR/S/434 /Rev.1  • United States  
 
- 139 - 
 
  reported the daily discovery of 250 pests and 3,091 materials (plant, meat, animal by -product, or 
soil) for quarantine at U.S. ports of entry.360 To meet increased requirements, the Protecting 
America's Food and Agriculture Act of 2019 , P.L. 116-122, authorized CBP to recruit 240 additional 
agriculture specialists above the current level (2,600 speciali sts in March  2020); these specialists 
conduct the SPS -related inspections on imports at the 328 ports of entry covered by CBP.  
3.253.   EPA establishes tolerances for each crop's use of pesticides and notifies its Notices of Filings 
(NOF) in the Federal Register.361 The tolerances for meat, poultry, and certain egg products are 
enforced by USDA, while FDA enforces them for other foods. The application fees for the registration 
of pesticides rose by 5% in 2020 and will increase by an additional 5% in 2022 a s instructed by the 
Pesticide Registration Improvement Extension Act of 2018.  
3.254.   Equivalence determinations of an exporting country's regulatory food safety inspection 
system for products regulated by FSIS are a prerequisite for trade with the United  States. The only 
FDA-regulated food products requiring an assessment as a precondition to import into the 
United  States are Grade A dairy products and raw bivalve molluscan shellfish. On 
24 September  2020, FDA announced its first -ever equivalence determination, wh ich recognizes the 
control systems of Spain and the Netherlands on raw bivalve molluscan shellfish as equivalent to 
the U.S. National Shellfish Sanitation Program.362 Imports from Spanish and Dutch establishments 
listed by FDA on the Interstate Certified Sh ellfish Shippers List are now allowed. FSIS has also 
determined equivalent certified and approved producers in 34 countries and the product scope of 
these equivalences varies from country to country. Following a regulatory change in 2019, a single 
list of eligible foreign countries to import FSIS -regulated goods is kept on the FSIS website.363 During 
the review period, FSIS notified the adoption of seven equivalence determinations on poultry 
products, Siluriformes fish and fish products, and egg products.  FDA has also concluded Systems 
Recognition Arrangements with food safety agencies in three trading partners. The authorities 
indicate that these arrangements do not constitute trade -facilitating measures and that they are not 
the same as equivalence determin ations.364 
3.255.   The FSMA requires that U.S. importers develop a Foreign Supplier Verification Programs 
(FSVP) for each type of human and animal food product and each foreign supplier they import to 
confirm that the imported good complies with FDA requirements, h as the same level of public health 
protection as in the United  States, including preventive controls, produce safety regulations, and 
controls against adulteration or misbranding. On 10  May 2021, FDA launched the FSVP Importer 
Portal for FSVP Records Submi ssion as a means for importers to upload FSVP records electronically 
to FDA.365 More specifically, the FSVP rule requires importers to perform risk -based foreign supplier 
verification activities to verify that: (i)  the food is produced in a manner that prov ides the same level 
of public health protection concerning hazard analysis and risk -based preventive controls, or 
standards for the safe production and harvesting of certain fruits and vegetables than U.S. -produced 
food; (ii)  the food is not adulterated; a nd (iii)  the human food is not misbranded (concerning food 
allergen labelling). Moreover, U.S.  importers may request to participate in the Voluntary Qualified 
Importer Program (VQIP), an expedited review and entry program  for food. Four U.S. importers are 
approved to participate in VQIP for fiscal year 2022 (1  October  2021-30 September  2022).366 
 
360 CBP, Stats. Viewed at: https://www.cbp.gov/newsroom/stats/typical -day-fy2020 . 
361 An NOF issued by EPA may refer to several types of actions (new tolerances, changes, and 
corrections) and may cover more than one tolerance per NOF. Tolerances  for pesticide chemicals are updated 
once a year in 40  C.F.R. Part 180 and daily in the electronic Code of Federal Regulations (e -CFR). The Pesticide 
Registration Improvement Extension Act of 2018 (P.L.  116-8), issued in March  2019, reaffirmed the authorit y 
of the EPA to collect fees and maintain the pesticides registration until FY2023.  
362 Federal Register  (2020), Vol.  85, No.  186, 24  September, p.  60172. Viewed at: 
https://www.federalregister.gov /d/2020 -20755 . 
363 Federal Register  (2019), Vol.  84, No.  229, 27  November, p.  65265. Viewed at: 
https://www.federalregister.gov/d/2019 -25750 . 
364 A System Recognition Arrangement establishes a regulatory partnership in which the competent 
authorities detail how they will rely on each other's facility inspections and investigations of foodborne illness.  
365 FDA, FSMA Final Rule on Foreign Supplier Verification Programs (FSVP) for Importers of Food for 
Humans and Animals . Viewed at: https://www.fda.gov/food/food -safety -modernization -act-fsma/fsma -final-
rule-foreign -supplier -verification -programs -fsvp-importers -food-humans -and-animals . 
366 FDA, Voluntary Qualified Importer Program (VQIP) Public List of Approved VQIP Importers . 
Viewed  at: https://www.fda.gov/food/importing -food-products -united -states/voluntary -qualified -import er-
program -vqip-public -list-approved -vqip-importers . WT/TPR/S/434 /Rev.1  • United States  
 
- 140 - 
 
  3.256.   On 1  August  2018, new U.S. standards for barley under the U.S.  Grain Standards Act 
entered into force.367 In June  2019, APHIS issued a final rule clarifying and furth er detailing the 
criteria to be used when assessing risks related to plant pests for the importation, interstate 
movement, and release of biological control organisms.368 On 18  May 2020, APHIS made public the 
first comprehensive revision of regulations on g enetically engineered organisms since 1987 to 
facilitate the development of genetically engineered organisms that are unlikely to pose plant pest 
risks.369 On 17  September  2020, the regulations governing the importation of cattle and bison in 
regards to bov ine tuberculosis and brucellosis were amended.370 In December  2020, FDA issued a 
final regulation for accreditation of laboratories that perform food testing. When fully implemented, 
laboratory analysis of food for import purposes or when subject to food te sting orders will be required 
to be performed by accredited laboratories.371 In April  2021, label requirements for allergens in food 
products were extended to sesame  (P.L. 117-11). 
3.257.   In line with the 2018 Agriculture Improvement Act, P.L. 115-334 (also known as the 2018 
Farm Bill), APHIS maintains a list of animal and plant diseases and pests of concern posing a 
significant risk to U.S. food and agriculture resources and developed emergency response plans for 
these diseases and pests.372 This list is in additio n to other disease, pest, or health statuses lists 
kept by APHIS's Plant Protection and Quarantine (PPQ) and Veterinary Services (VS) for specific 
purposes, such as the U.S. Regulated Plant Pest List, the National List of Reportable Animal Diseases, 
or lists of APHIS -recognized animal health statuses of regions.  
3.258.   In July  2020, FDA outlined the steps to create a more digital, traceable, and safer human 
and animal food system over the next decade. Through tech -enabled technology, smarter tools, and 
approaches for prevention and outbreak response, and an adaptation to new emerging business 
models and retail modernization, FDA seeks to keep promoting a food safety culture. Other agencies 
have also embraced the modernization of their systems, policies, and approac hes in their respective 
strategic plans.373 
3.259.   In March  2020, APHIS launched the Veterinary Services Permitting Assistant (VSPA), a 
search tool designed to guide applicants in determining their import requirements for animal 
products.374 Since September  2021, VSPA  covers requirements on live animals and it is expected 
that in the future, all permits will be processed only through APHIS eFile, a more comprehensive 
platform replacing the previous APHIS ePermit platform.  Since 2018, APHIS has contributed to and 
suppor ted the development and launch of the International Plant Protection Convention (IPPC) global 
ePhyto system and started exchanging electronic phytosanitary certificates. Currently, 30 trading 
partners send ePhyto certificates to APHIS while 59  trading part ners receive ePhyto certificates 
issued by APHIS.375 To facilitate clearance of imported plants and plant products during the 
COVID -19 emergency, APHIS and CBP have accepted digital phytosanitary certificates including 
since March  2020.376 This measure was e xtended until through 31  March  2022.  
 
367 Federal Register  (2017), Vol. 82, No.  84, 3 May, p. 20541. Viewed at: 
https://www.federalregister.gov/d/2017 -08942 . Note that the U.S. Grain s Standards Act was reauthorized until 
the FY2025 in December  2020 (P.L.  116-216).  
368 Federal Register  (2019), Vol. 84, No.  122, 25  June, p. 29938. Viewed at: 
https://www.federalregister.gov/d/201 9-13246 . 
369 Federal Register  (2020), Vol. 85, No.  96, 18  May, p. 29790. Viewed at: 
https://www.federalregister.gov/d/2020 -10638 . 
370 Australia, Canada, Mexico, and New  Zealand can currently export b ovine animals. Federal Register  
(2020), Vol.  85, No.  181, 17  September. Viewed at: https://www.federalregister.gov/d/2020 -20552 . 
371 Federal Register  (2020), Vol. 86, No.  230, 3  December, p. 68728. Viewed at: 
https://www.federalregister.gov/d/2021 -25716 . 
372 The current number of pests on the list is 59, but that the list can grow as necessary. APHIS, Animal 
and Plant Dise ases and Pests of Concern . Viewed at: https://www.aphis.usda.gov/aphis/resources/farmbill/fb -
pests/farmbill -pest-list. 
373 For instance, FSIS, FSIS Strategic Plan  2017-2021. Viewed at: https://www.fsis.usda.gov/about -
fsis/strategic -planning ; and APHIS, APHIS Strategic Plan FY 2019 -2023. Viewed at: 
https://www.aphis.usda.gov/about_aphis/downloads/aphis -strategic -plan.pdf . 
374 APHIS. Viewed at: https://efile.aphis.usda.gov/s/vs -permitting -assistant . 
375 The U.S. exchanges ePhyto certificates with the following trading partners: 
https://www.aphis.usda.gov/aphis/ourfocus/planthealth/sa_e xport/ephyto -participating -countries . 
376 USDA (2020), APHIS Plant Protection and Quarantine Provides an Update on Import and Export 
Activities for Plants and Plant Products . Viewed at: https://www.aphis.usda.gov/aphis/newsroom/stakeholder -
info/stakeholder -messages/plant -health -news/import -export -activities -plants -plant-products -update . WT/TPR/S/434 /Rev.1  • United States  
 
- 141 - 
 
  3.260.   In September  2020, FDA launched a renewed Food Safety Partnership with its Mexican 
counterparts, i.e. the National Service of Agro -Alimentary Health, Safety and Quality (SENASICA) 
and the Federal Commission for Protecti on against Sanitary Risk (COFEPRIS), which builds upon a 
pre-existing partnership on fresh produce safety established in 2014 and extends the scope of 
covered products to all human foods.377 In this framework, authorities aim at enabling core elements 
of tech-enabled traceability and increasing data sharing to improve cross -border responses to 
outbreaks of foodborne illnesses.  
3.261.   The Multilateral Affairs Division at USDA 's Foreign Agricultural Service serves as the national 
enquiry point and notification author ity under the WTO SPS  Agreement.378 The U.S. Codex Office, 
housed in USDA's Trade and Foreign Agricultural Affairs, coordinates the U.S. representation at the 
Codex Alimentarius Commission379, while APHIS is the contact point for the World Organisation for 
Animal Health (OIE) and the International Plant Protection Convention (IPPC).  
3.262.   During the period July  2018-March  2022, the United  States submitted 365 SPS notifications 
to the WTO (including 6 corrigenda to earlier notifications) and 65 emergency notificatio ns (including 
50 addenda to earlier notifications). The main objective or rationale for notifications remain food 
safety (80.0%) and plant protection (14.5%).380 One of every seven notifications (14%) indicates a 
related international standard or guideline381; however, harmonization with international standards 
is not always reported, as was the case for example of 2021 EPA regulations related to the Codex 
Alimentarius Commission.382 
3.263.   During the period under review, three new specific trade concerns (STCs) were  raised in the 
WTO SPS Committee relating to measures maintained by the United  States.383 In addition, three 
previously raised concerns continued to be discussed in the SPS Committee; one of them raised by 
the European  Union concerning beef exports was repo rted as partially resolved.384 During the same 
period, the United  States used the SPS Committee to raise or support 20 new STCs regarding 
measures maintained by other Members. In February  2018, the SPS  Agreement was cited in a 
request for consultation conce rning U.S.  measures on pangasius seafood products.385 The 
United  States takes part as a third party of two  dispute settlement proceedings with reference to 
the SPS  Agreement initiated during the review period.386 
3.3.4   Competition policy  
3.264.   The core of U.S. competiti on (antitrust) policy framework remains defined by the Sherman 
Act (1890), which outlaws monopolization and restraints of trade; the Clayton Act (1914) prohibiting 
mergers and acquisitions reducing competition; the Robinson Patman Act (1936) prohibiting ce rtain 
 
377 FDA. Viewed at: https://www.fda.gov/food/international -cooperation -food-safety/fda -senasica -
cofepris -food-safety -partnership . 
378 WTO ePin g SPS and TBT Platform, Enquiry Points/Notification Authorities . Viewed at: 
https://epingalert.org/en/EnquiryPoint/sps -nna. 
379 Federal agencies representing the United  States in committees include USDA,  FDA, EPA, and USDOC.  
380 Animal health, zoonoses, and territory protection account for 5.8%, 2.7%, and 1.6% of the notified 
measures, respectively; 16 notifications indicate more th an a single objective or rationale.  
381 In further detail, the following standards or guidelines were reported during the review period: the 
Codex Alimentarius Commission (9.0%), World Organisation for Animal Health (1.4%), and International Plant 
Protectio n Convention (3.8%).  
382 For instance, the tolerance for difenoconazole in/on pome fruit differs from the Codex MRL. 
Difenoconazole; Pesticide Tolerances. A Rule by the Environmental Protection Agency. Federal Register  (2021), 
Vol. 86, No.  105, 3  June. Viewe d at: https://www.federalregister.gov/d/2021 -11636 . 
383 In June  2020, the European  Union raised a concern about the recognition of the pest free status in 
the European  Union for Asian and Citrus lo nghorn beetles. In November  2020, the European  Union raised an 
STC related to the delay in the publication of a final rule on importation of sheep, goats, and certain other 
ruminants. In March  2022, Brazil raised a concern related to delays in the opening of the U.S. citrus market.  
384 The concerns relate to the acceptance of the OIE standards for Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy 
(raised by the European  Union), U.S. import restrictions on apples and pears (by the European  Union), and the 
U.S. Seafood Import M onitoring Program (raised by China and supported by Chile, Ecuador, the Philippines, 
and the Russian  Federation). Further information is available at: 
https://epingalert .org/en/TradeConcerns/details?imsId=193&domainId=SPS ; 
https://epingalert.org/en/TradeConcerns/details?imsId=415&domainId=SPS ; and 
https://epingalert.org/en/TradeConcerns/details?imsId=439&domainId=SPS . 
385 DS540: United  States – Certain Measures Concerning Pangasius Seafood Products from Viet  Nam. 
386 DS589: China – Measures Concerning the Importation of Canola Seed from Canada ; and DS599: 
Panama – Measures concerning the Importation of Certain Products from Costa  Rica. WT/TPR/S/434 /Rev.1  • United States  
 
- 142 - 
 
  discriminatory practices; the Celler -Kefauver Act (1950) expanding the Clayton Act to include asset 
acquisitions and to acquisitions involving firms other than direct competitors387; and the Federal 
Trade Commission Act  (1914) prohibiting unfair compe tition methods, and unfair or deceptive 
practices. The Clayton Act provides the legal basis for private antitrust litigants to bring stand -alone 
actions and addresses specific practices not previously defined, such as interlocking directorates.388 
In additi on to federal laws, most states have antitrust laws, often modelled after the federal laws. 
In general, changes in the competition policy framework are implemented through legislation, 
judicial decisions, and administrative proceedings providing for interp retation of the statutes.  
3.265.   Regarding international trade, the Wilson Tariff Act prohibits any arrangements by importers 
whose aim is to restrain trade or to increase the price of imported goods. The Webb -Pomerene 
Export Trade Act allows businesses to form e xport trade associations to engage in the collective 
exports of goods provided there are no anti -competitive effects, or injury to competitors, within the 
United  States. The Export Trading Company Act creates a procedure whereby persons engaged in 
export m ay obtain, under certain circumstances, an export certificate of review providing, inter alia, 
for limited antitrust immunity. The Foreign Trade Antitrust Improvements Act provides that the 
Sherman Act and the FTC Act apply to conduct involving non -import foreign trade with a direct, 
substantial, and reasonably foreseeable effect on trade or commerce activities of a person in the 
United  States . 
3.266.   Recent legislative developments include the permanent extension of the Antitrust Criminal 
Penalty Enhancement and Reform Act (ACPERA) of 2004, P.L. 108-237,389 and the enactment of the 
Criminal Antitrust Anti -Retaliation Act (CAARA, P.L. 116-257). The ACPERA  provides incentives for 
corporations, such as limitations on civil liability, to self -report their involvement in criminal antitrust 
conspiracies and to cooperate with investigations. The Antitrust Criminal Penalty Enhancement and 
Reform Permanent Extensi on Act, Title III of Division D of the Continuing Appropriations Act of 2021 
and Other Extensions Act of 1  October  2020 (P.L.  116-159), repealed the sunset provisions of the 
ACPERA and made the scope of the Act permanent.390 Enacted in December2020, the CAA RA 
enhances the protections for employees denouncing criminal antitrust violations ("whistle -blowers") 
or assisting the Federal Government in any investigation or proceeding related to a criminal antitrust 
violation. Notably, punitive or retaliatory action s by employers against employees are prohibited. 
Whistle -blowers are excluded from protection under CAARA if they were involved in planning and 
initiation of antitrust violations, and the law does not provide for any monetary award.  
3.267.   The Federal Trade Commi ssion (FTC) and the Antitrust Division of the Department of Justice 
(DOJ) enforce federal antitrust laws.391 The Antitrust Division of the D OJ enforces the Sherman Act, 
and FTC enforces the Federal Trade Commission Act and the Robinson Patman Act. Both agen cies 
are involved in the enforcement of the Clayton Act and the Cellar -Kefauver Act, and transactions are 
typically reviewed by only one agency decided  on the basis of the agency's expertise in the industry 
or sector involved in each transaction. The two a gencies are also involved in the formulation and 
implementation of U.S. international trade and investment policy, including trade agreements, as 
they concern competition policy.  Government acts and institutions, including those involved in 
commercial acti vity, are exempted from federal antitrust legislation when authorized by state policy. 
Limited immunity also applies to specific aspects of agriculture, fisheries, newspapers, insurance, 
shipping, and transport.392 
 
387 The Hart -Scott-Rodino Antitrust Improvements Act (1976) amended the Clayton Act by requiring 
detailed filing of transacti ons in larger mergers and acquisitions (pre -merger notifications). In 2021, the 
threshold for transactions for proposed mergers and acquisitions requiring to be reported was fixed at 
USD 92 million. FTC (2021), "FTC Announces Annual Update of Size of Trans action Thresholds for Premerger 
Notification Files and Interlocking Directorates", 5  February. Viewed at: https://www.f tc.gov/news -
events/press -releases/2021/02/ftc -announces -annual -update -size-transaction -thresholds -premerger . 
388 Besides these three core laws, the FTC alone has enforcement responsibilities under 23 laws related 
to competition. Viewed at: https://www.ftc.gov/enforcement/statutes?title=&field_mission_tid%5B%5D=2974 . 
389 Subsequently amended to extend its application. The permanent extension is part of th e Continuing 
Appropriations Act of 2021 and Other Extensions Act (P.L.  116-159) which became law on 1  October  2020.  
390 Continuing Appropriations Act of 2021 and Other Extensions Act (P.L.  116-159). Viewed at: 
https://www.congress.gov/116/plaws/publ159/PLAW -116publ159.pdf .  
391 State attorneys general also contribute to the enforcement of antitrust regulations.  
392 Legislation in this regard includes the Capper -Volstead Act, the Chari table Donation Antitrust 
Immunity Act, the Defense  Production Act, the McCarran -Ferguson Act, the Newspaper Preservation Act, the 
Shipping Act, and the Sports Broadcasting Act. Under certain conditions, the Department of Transportation 
 WT/TPR/S/434 /Rev.1  • United States  
 
- 143 - 
 
  3.268.   Price fixing, bid rigging, and market allocation between competitors are unlawful under the 
Sherman Act. Considered per se  as illegal, horizontal violations by both corporations and individuals 
are prosecuted through criminal or civil prosecution by the An titrust Division or challenged by FTC 
in civil proceedings under the FTC Act. Regarding vertical arrangements and other conducts related 
to competition, a "rule of reason" standard is ordinarily applied to examine both the positive and 
negative effects of any agreement before determining whether it violates antitrust laws. Criminal 
prosecutions are typically limited to intentional and clear violations, such as fixing prices or rigging 
bids, and only D OJ can obtain criminal sanctions. Criminal penalties may reach up to USD  100 million 
per offence for corporations, and USD  1 million for an individual, along with up to 10 years in prison. 
In November  2021, FTC issued a statement committing itself to expand  its criminal referral program 
to stop and deter corpora te crime.393 As the Clayton and FTC Acts do not carry criminal penalties, 
most antitrust legislation enforcement actions follow civil proceedings.  
3.269.   E.O. 14036 of 9  July 2021394 adopted a "whole -of-government" approach to fostering 
competition in U.S. markets.  It provided directives focusing competition policy enforcement efforts 
on labor markets, agricultural markets, healthcare markets, and the technology sector (including 
mergers by dominant Internet platforms) and called for enforcement agencies to vigorous ly enforce 
the antitrust laws. In addition, E.O. 14036 also established the White House Competition Council to 
monitor progress on competition initiatives in the Order; however, this Council is not directly 
involved in enforcement actions.  
3.270.   In June  2020, a joint FTC/D OJ Guidelines on Vertical Mergers were issued.395 FTC withdrew 
its approval of the guidelines in September  2021, and in response to E.O.  14036, the U.S.  antitrust 
agencies announced in January  2022 a project to revise both the Vertical Me rger Guidelines and 
the 2010 Horizontal Merger Guidelines so as to better detect and prevent anti -competitive 
transactions. Recent changes in the implementation of procedures include changes in the form for 
pre-merger notification filings introduced in 201 8 and 2019396, and the temporary implementation 
of an e -filing system for pre -merger notifications since March  2020.397 In July  2021, FTC issued a 
final rule amending its rules of practice, which implies a modernization of its procedures for 
rulemaking to de fine unfair or deceptive acts or practices under the FTC Act.398 
3.271.   Pre-merger notification filings pursuant to  the Hart -Scott-Rodino (HSR) Antitrust 
Improvements Act of 1976 , P.L. 94-435399 may be investigated at the request of consumers or 
businesses . Every y ear, close to 2,000  pre-merger notifications are screened by both agencies 
(Table  3.27) leading to the initiation of approximately 50  investigations. In FY2021, the agencies 
received 3,527 pre -merger filings and initiated 67  investigations. Additionally, b oth agencies conduct 
additional investigations related to the enforcement of the antitrust laws according to their 
enforcement responsibilities.  
3.272.   Both agencies challenged several mergers and acquisitions during the review period. FTC 
and D OJ blocked the mer ger of Peabody Energy Corporation and Arch Coal Incorporated (coal 
production), the acquisition of Billie Incorporated by Procter & Gamble (cosmetics and personal 
care); the acquisition of Plaid Inc . by Visa Inc . (online debit business); the merger between  Aon plc 
and Willis Towers Watson (insurance brokers); and acquisitions of hospital services in New Jersey 
 
may approve marketin g alliances between domestic and foreign airlines (See further details in Table  3.16 of 
WTO document WT/TPR/S/307/Rev.1, 13  March  2015).  
393 FTC, Commission Statement Regarding Criminal Referral and Partnership Process , Commission File 
No. P094207, 18  November  2021. Viewed at: 
https://www.ftc.g ov/system/files/documents/public_statements/1598439/commission_statement_regarding_cr
iminal_referrals_and_partnership_process_updated_p094207.pdf . 
394 E.O. on Promoting Competition in the American Economy, Federal Register  (2021), Vol.  86, No.  132, 
14 July, p. 36987. Viewed at: https://www.federalregister.gov/d/2021 -15069 . 
395 FTC, Competition Guidance . Viewed at: https://www.ftc.gov /tips-advice/competition -guidance .  
396 Federal Register  (2018), Vol. 83, No.  136, 16  July, p. 32768; and Federal Register  (2019), Vol. 84, 
No. 124, 27  June, p. 30595.  
397 FTC, Premerger Notification Office Implements Temporary e -Filing System . Viewed at: 
https://www.ftc.gov/news -events/press -releases/2020/03/premerger -notification -office -implements -
temporary -e-filing. 
398 Revisions to Rules of Practices, Federal Register  (2021), Vol. 86, No.  138, 22  July, p.  38542. Viewed 
at: https://www.federalregister.gov/d/2021 -15313 . 
399 Violations to the notification requ irements as well as other antitrust requirements carry civil penalties 
whose maxima are adjusted every year by the FTC (Adjustments to Civil Penalty Amounts). Federal Register  
(2022), Vol. 87, No.  6, 10 January, p. 1070. Viewed at: https://www.federalregister.gov/d/2022 -00213 . WT/TPR/S/434 /Rev.1  • United States  
 
- 144 - 
 
  and in the Memphis, Tennessee metropolitan region. Settled agreements, where negotiated 
divestitures and other conditions apply, were achieved in the  acquisition of GE Biopharma by the 
Danaher Corporation, in the merger of Eldorado Resorts, Inc . and Caesars Entertainment 
Corporation, which created the largest U.S. gaming company, the purchase of Craft Brew Alliance, 
Inc. by Anheuser -Busch InBev SA/NV, the merger of CVS Corporation and Aetna (the largest health 
care merger in U.S. history), the merger of T -Mobile and Sprint, and the acquisition of Morton Salt 
by Stone Canyon Industries Holdings, as well as on acquisitions and mergers between hospital 
services providers and medical devices producers.  
3.273.   In the period between FY2018 and FY2021, D OJ initiated 187 Sherman Act 1 (restraint of 
trade investigations), 10 Sherman Act 2 (monopolistic practices), 271 Clayton Act investigations, 
and 228 HSR investigatio ns, out of a total of 9,364  pre-merger notifications received (2.4% of the 
total). During FY2021, when 3,527  transactions were reported under the HSR Act (Table  3.27), a 
substantial increase compared to the FY2020, the Antitrust Division challenged 11 merg er 
transactions.400 The mergers challenged by D OJ in FY2020 were in a variety of industries, including 
healthcare, defense , financial services, food, commercial vehicle manufacturing, and education. The 
DOJ resolved horizontal and vertical concerns raised by the merger of United Technologies 
Corporation and Raytheon Company by requiring the parties to divest three separate business units, 
while competitive concerns raised by the proposed acquisition by Comm unications and Power 
Industries LLC's of General Dynamics SATCOM Technologies Inc. were resolved by divestment. 
Another prominent case was the divestiture in a banking merger between BB&T Corporation and 
SunTrust Banks Inc. that would have substantially le ssened competition in seven markets for retail 
banking and/or small business banking. The banks agreed to divest 28 branches in 3 different states 
with approximately USD  2.3 billion in deposits.401 
Table  3.27 DOJ actions against anti -competitive practices, FY2018 -21 
 FY2018  FY2019  FY2020  FY2021  
Hart-Scott -Rodino (HSR) pre -merger notifications  
Received  2,111  2,089  1,637  3,527  
HSR investigations initiated  51 64 46 67 
Number of cases filed  8 11 7 11 
Total investigations initiated, by primary type of conducta 
Sherman 1 – Restraint of Tradeb 44 52 49 42 
Sherman 2 – Monopoly  0 6 2 2 
Clayton 7 – Mergers  65 72 59 75 
Othersc 5 4 11 9 
Antitrust Division Cases – Civil cases  
Filed 10 19 10 15 
Terminated  10 19 10 13 
Antitrust Division Cases – Criminal cases  
Filed 18 26 20 25 
Terminated  .. .. .. .. 
Antitrust Division Cases – Courts of Appeals  
Filed 10 0 2 1 
Terminated  9 5 6 1 
Antitrust Division Cases – Supreme Court  
Filed 0 1 0 0 
Terminated  0 0 1 0 
Criminal Fines and Penalties Imposed  
Total individual fines (USD  million)  10.8 2.1 1.1 0.5 
Number of individuals fined  53 22 13 6 
Total corporate fines (USD  million)  189 255 633 151 
Number of corporations fined  9 10 12 8 
Total fines imposed (USD  million)  199 257 634 151 
 
400 Of the HSR transaction s reported in FY2020, 1.7% had a value of between USD  50 million and 
USD 100 million; 15.8% were of between USD  100 million and USD  150 million; 17.0 % were between 
USD 150 million and USD  200 million; 12.0% were between USD  200 million and USD  300 million; 13.3% were 
between USD  300 million and USD  500 million; 25.3% were between USD  500 million and USD  1 billion; and 
14.8% had a value of over USD  1 billion. FTC, Bureau of Competition, and Department of Justice, Antitrust 
Division (2021), Hart-Scott-Rodino Annual Report Fiscal Year 2020, Section  7A of the Clayton Act, Hart -Scott-
Rodino Antitrust Improvements Act of 1976 (Forty -Third Annual Report) . View ed at: 
https://www.ftc.gov/system/files/documents/reports/hart -scott-rodino -annual -report -fiscal-year-
2020/fy2020_ -_hsr_annual_report_ -_final.pdf . 
401 FTC, Bureau of Competition, and Department of Justice, Antitrust Division (2021), Hart-Scott-Rodino 
Annual Report Fiscal Year 2020, Section  7A of the Clayton Act, Hart -Scott-Rodino Antitrust Improvements Act 
of 1976 (Forty -Third Annual Report) . Viewed at: https://www.ftc.gov/system/files/documents/reports/ha rt-
scott-rodino -annual -report -fiscal-year-2020/fy2020_ -_hsr_annual_report_ -_final.pdf . WT/TPR/S/434 /Rev.1  • United States  
 
- 145 - 
 
   FY2018  FY2019  FY2020  FY2021  
Incarceration  
Number of individuals sentenced  59 25 14 6 
Number of individuals sentenced to incarceration time  21 22 7 0 
Average number of days of incarceration  285 179 448 0 
.. Not available.  
a Primary type of conduct under investigation at the outset of the investigation.  
b This category reflects both civil and criminal investigations.  
c This category includes investigations of potential violations of, among other statutes, Sections  3, 7A, 
or 8 of the Clayton Act, and Title 18 of the Robinson -Patman Act.  
Source:  DOJ, Antitrust Division Workload Statistics, FY2010 -2019. Viewed at: 
https://www.justice.gov/atr/file/788426/download ; and information provided by the  DOJ. 
3.274.   Regarding criminal cases filed by D OJ, fines imposed on individuals did not exceed, on 
average, USD  200,000 per person in recent years; total corporate fines amount ed to 
USD 1.25 billion over the review period (Table  3.28). The highest fine in the FY2018 -21 period was 
USD 205 million. Following the adoption of the Antitrust Guidance for Human Resource Professionals 
in 2016, D OJ brought its first criminal indictments for wage -fixing and no -poach arrangements in 
2021. Since 2016, the Antitrust Division has sustained a solid record of winning criminal cases at 
the Courts of Appeals (18 out of 21 cases), and the U.S. Supreme Court has declined to hear further 
appeals (3 o ut of 3). By July  2021, D OJ reported the highest number of active trials since 1993 
(17 trials against 9 companies and 31 individuals). The merger and non -merger enforcement 
activities by D OJ in FY2020 and FY2019 resulted in estimated savings to U.S.  consu mers of 
USD 0.7 billion and USD  3.9 billion, respectively.402 
3.275.   During the review period, D OJ launched initiatives aimed at enhancing actions and activities 
against anti -competitive practices. In November  2019, the Procurement Collusion Strike Force 
(PCSF) wa s created to investigate and prosecute antitrust and other crimes that undermine 
competition in government procurement, grant, and program funding. PCSF has prosecuted collusion 
in security services contracts to U.S. and NATO military installations. The Ju dgment Termination 
Initiative, announced in May  2018, seeks to terminate antitrust judgments that no longer protect 
competition through a review and a consultation procedure with the public.  
Table  3.28 Sherman Act violations yielding a corporate fine of USD  10 million or more in 
FY2018 -21 
FY Defendant  Product  Fine (USD  
million)  Country  
2018 BNP Paribas USA, Inc.  Foreign currency exchange  90.0 United  States  
2018 Nichicon Corporation  Capacitors  54.6 Japan  
2018 Hoegh Autoliners AS  Ocean shipping roll on, roll off cargo – 
deep-sea freight transportation  21.0 Norway  
2018 Maruyasu Industries Co., Ltd  Automobile parts – steel tubes  12.0 Japan  
2019 Starkist Co.  Packaged seafood  100.0  United  States  
2019 Nippon Chemi -Con Corporation  Capacitors  60.0 Japan  
2019 GS Caltex Corporation  Defense  fuel supply  35.0 Korea, Republic of  
2019 SK Energy Co., Ltd  Defense  fuel supply  34.0 Korea, Republic of  
2019 NHK Spring Co., Ltd  Suspension assemblies  28.5 Japan  
2020 Taro Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc.  Generics  205.7  United  States  
2020 Sandoz, Inc.  Generics  195.0  United  States  
2020 Florida Cancer Specialists & 
Research Institute, LLC  Oncology treatment  100.0  United  States  
2020 Hyundai Oilbank Co.  Fuel supply  46.2 Korea, Republic of  
2020 S-Oil Corporation  Fuel supply  30.6 Korea, Republic of  
2020 Apotex Corp.  Generics  24.0 United  States  
2021 Pilgrim's Pride Corporation  Broiler chicken products  107.9  United  States  
2021 Argos USA LLC, aka Argos Ready 
Mix LLC  Ready mix concrete  20.0 United  States  
2021 G4S Secure Solutions NV  Security services  15.0 Belgium  
Source:  DOJ, Sherman Act Violations Resulting in Criminal Fines & Penalties $10 Million or More. Viewed  at: 
https://www.justice.gov/atr/sherman -act-violations -yielding -corporate -fine-10-million -or-more. 
3.276.   FTC may seek to stop an entire transaction by filing for a preliminary injunction in federal 
court pending an administrative trial on the merits. Final decisions by these instances can be 
 
402 DOJ, Antitrust Division, Congressional Submission FY  2022 Performance Budget . Viewed at: 
https:/ /www.justice.gov/jmd/page/file/1398291/download . WT/TPR/S/434 /Rev.1  • United States  
 
- 146 - 
 
  appealed to U.S. Courts of Appeals and, ultimately, to the U.S.  Supreme Court. Between FY2018 
and F Y2021, FTC analy zed 89 merger enforcement challenges. During FY2021, FTC brought 
18 merger enforcement challenges, of which 5 resulted in a final consent order requiring divestitures, 
another six were subject to federal injunction, and another 7 were aband oned or restructured as a 
result of antitrust concerns raised during the investigation (Table  3.29). According to FTC, these 
actions halted unlawful mergers in numerous sectors of the economy, including consumer goods and 
services, pharmaceuticals, healthc are, high tech and industrial goods, and energy.403 
Table  3.29 FTC actions against anti -competitive practices, FY2018 -21 
(Number)  
 FY2018  FY2019  FY2020  FY2021  
HSR pre-merger notifications received  2,111  2,089  1,637  3,527  
Merger investigations  22 21 28 18 
Consents  12 10 10 5 
Federal injunctions  3 2 5 6 
Administrative complaints  2 0 2 0 
Abandoned/restructured  5 9 11 7 
Horizontal agreements settled by FTC  0 0 0 0 
Clayton Act Section  7A actions  0 3 0 1 
Civil penalty actions: order violations  1 0 1 0 
Non-merger enforcement actions  3 2 2 4 
 Consents  0 0 1 2 
 Federal Injunctions  0 2 1 2 
 Admin. Complaints  1 0 0 0 
Order violations  0 0 0 0 
Source:  FTC, Competition Enforcement Database . Viewed at: https://www.ftc.gov/competition -enforcement -
database ; and information provided by FTC.  
3.277.   With respect to non -merger enforcement, on 9  December  2020, FTC sued Facebook for 
maintaining its personal social networking monopoly by systematically acquiring and imposing 
anti-competitive conditions on software developers.404 During the review period, FTC also issued 
complaints charging companies (Qualcomm Incorporated and Broadcom Incorporated) in the 
semiconductor industry for their use of anti -competitive tactics. FTC 's merger and non -merger 
enforcement activities in FY2021, FY2020, and FY2019 resulted in estimated savings to 
U.S. consumers of USD  2.4 billion, USD  2.1 billion, and USD  6.2 billion, respectively.405 Despite 
strong enforcement action, D OJ and FTC together are parties in only a small share (less than 5%) 
of the approximately 600 civil cases initiated every year on antitrust matters in U.S. fede ral courts.406 
On average, DOJ has filed 15 civil cases per year since 2016, while FTC made less than 10 filings 
per year over the same period.  
3.278.   Competition policy in international trade agreements benefits from the engagement of 
U.S. antitrust agencies. For  instance, the USMCA, which entered into force on 1  July 2020, has a 
competition chapter ensuring the most extensive procedural fairness provisions in all U.S. trade 
agreements. These provisions cover transparency and non -discrimination while aiming to pro vide 
detailed minimum procedural fairness. U.S. antitrust agencies have subscribed agreements on 
competition matters with 18 trading partners.407 In September  2020, U.S. antitrust agencies signed 
 
403 FTC, Bureau of Competition, and Department of Justice, Antitrust Division (2021), Hart-Scott-Rodino 
Annual Report Fiscal Year 2020, Section  7A of the Clayton Act, Hart -Scott-Rodino Antitrust Improvements A ct 
of 1976 (Forty -Third Annual Report) . Viewed at: https://www.ftc.gov/system/files/documents/reports /hart-
scott-rodino -annual -report -fiscal-year-2020/fy2020_ -_hsr_annual_report_ -_final.pdf . 
404 FTC, FTC v. Facebook, Inc . Viewed at: https://www.ftc.gov/enforcement/cases -proceedings/191 -
0134/facebook -inc-ftc-v. In 2019, the FTC imposed a USD  5 billion penalty against Facebook, the largest ever 
imposed on any company, for violating consumers' privacy.  
405 FTC, Agency Financial Reports for Fiscal Year 2021, 2020, and 2019 . Viewed at: 
https://www.ftc.gov/system/files/documents/reports/agency -financial -report -
fy2021/ftc_fy2021_agency_financial_final.pdf . 
406 United  States Courts, Table  C-2A. Viewed at: https://www.uscourts.gov/data -table-numbers/c -2a. 
407 U.S. antitrust agencies have subscribed Cooperation agreements with agencies from: Australia 
(June  1982), Brazil (October  1999), Canada (August  1995), Chile (March  2011), Colombia (September  2014), 
Germany (Ju ne 1976), the European Commission (September  1991), Israel (  March  1999), Japan 
(October  1999), Mexico (July  2000), and Peru (May  2016). They have also subscribed a Memorandum of 
understanding with agencies from: China (July  2011), India (September  2012), Republic of Korea 
(September  2015), and Russian  Federation (November  2009). Finally, they have entered into a Mutual 
assistance framework with agencies from: Australia (April  1999); and Australia, Canada, New  Zealand, and the 
United  Kingdom (September  2020). The following U.S. Trade agreements contain competition chapters: 
 WT/TPR/S/434 /Rev.1  • United States  
 
- 147 - 
 
  the Multilateral Mutual Assistance and Cooperation (MMAC) Fra mework for Competition 
Authorities408 with counterparts of Australia, Canada, New  Zealand, and the United  Kingdom. The 
Framework provides the basis for bilateral agreements on investigative assistance, including sharing 
confidential information and cross -border evidence gathering. It includes a memorandum of 
understanding designed to reinforce and improve existing case coordination and collaboration tools 
among the agencies, and a model agreement. In collaboration with G7 counterparts, 
U.S. representatives r eleased a Common Understanding of G7 Competition Authorities on 
Competition and the Digital Economy (Common Understanding) in July  2019.  
3.279.   U.S. antitrust agencies have also actively participate d in international bodies, such as the 
International Competition Network (ICN), the Competition Committee of the OECD, UNCTAD, and 
the Competition Policy and Law Group of APEC. D OJ successfully launched the ICN -sponsored 
Framework on Competition Agency Procedures (CAP) in May  2019, which aims to promote due 
process, and fair and effective procedures, in investigations by competition authorities. Over 
70 competition agencies have already signed on to the CAP.  
3.3.5   State trading, state -owned enterprises, and privatization  
3.280.   Governmental ownership or control over enterprises that engage in commercial activities are 
exceptions to the rule in the United  States. The Federal Government does not have a general 
incorporation statute, and each entity is thus chartered through an act of Congress with a clear and 
transparen t mandate to perform a public purpose and in many cases not to compete with private 
enterprises. Many present -day government corporations were originally created in the 1930s and 
1940s (Table  3.30). Their legal personality is separate from the Federal Gove rnment, but they may 
receive federal appropriations to complement their own sources of revenue.409 At the sub -federal 
level, states, municipalities, and tribal governments have the power to charter corporations that 
they own, control, fund, or regulate. For  example, 45 states and 3 territories organize lotteries, and 
some widely offered games are de facto  run as national lotteries.  
Table  3.30 Government corporations and independent establishments, 2022  
Governmen t corporation  Legal reference  Area of operation  
Commodity Credit Corporation  15 U.S.C. 714  Commodity credit financing  
Community Development Financial Institutions Fund  12 U.S.C. 4701  Banking  
Corporation for National and Community Service  42 U.S.C. 12651  National and community services  
EXIM Bank  12 U.S.C. 635  Export financing  
Federal Crop Insurance Corporation  7 U.S.C. 1501  Agricultural insurance  
Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation  12 U.S.C. 1811  Bank resolution and deposit insurance  
Federal Financing Bank  12 U.S.C. 2281  Financing  
Federal Home Loan Banks  12 U.S.C. Ch. 11  Banking  
Federal Prison Industries (UNICOR)  18 U.S.C. 4121  Prison services  
Financing Corporationa 12 U.S.C. 1441  Financing  
Government National Mortgage Association  12 U.S.C. 1717  Mortgages  
International Clean Energy Foundation  42 U.S.C. 17352  Foreign assistance for greenhouse gas 
reduction  
Millennium Challenge Corporation  22 U.S.C. 7703  Foreign assistance  
National Credit Union Administration Central Liquidity 
Facility  12 U.S.C. 1795b  Credit unions  
National Railroad Passenger Corporation (AMTRAK)  49 U.S.C. 24301  Passenger rail services  
U.S. International Development Finance Corporation  22 U.S.C. 103  International investment and  financing  
Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation  29 U.S.C. 1301  Pensions  
Presidio Trust of San Francisco  16 U.S.C. 460bb  Parks and recreation  
Resolution Funding Corporation  12 U.S.C. 1441(b)  Financing of the former Resolution Trust 
Corporation  
Great Lakes St. Lawrence Seaway Development 
Corporation  33 U.S.C. 981  Marine transport  
 
Australia (January  2005); Chile (January  2004); Colombia (May  2012); Republic of  Korea (March  2012); 
United  States –Mexico –Canada Agreement (USMCA) (July  2020); Peru (February  2009); and Singapore 
(January  2004).  
408 DOJ (2020), "Assistant Attorney General Makan Delrahim Signs Antitrust Cooperation Framework 
with Australia, Canada, New  Zealand, and United  Kingdom", 2  September. Viewed at: 
https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/assistant -attorney -general -makan -delrahim -signs-antitrust -cooperation -
framework -australia . 
409 5 U.S.C. 103 defines a government corporatio n as a corporation owned or controlled by the 
Government of the United  States. The Government Corporation Control Act (31  U.S.C.  9101-10) distinguishes 
between mixed -ownership government corporations and wholly owned government corporations.  WT/TPR/S/434 /Rev.1  • United States  
 
- 148 - 
 
  Governmen t corporation  Legal reference  Area of operation  
Tennessee Valley Authority  16 U.S.C. 831  Navigation, flood control, electricity, 
manufacturing  
U.S. Postal Serviceb 39 U.S.C. 101  Mail services  
a No longer writing new business; current outstanding obligations expired in 2019.  
b An independent establishment of the federal executive branch.  
Source:  Kosar, K. (2011), Federal Government Corporations: An Overview , CRS, RL30365, 8  June. Viewed 
at: http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/RL30365.pdf ; Government Corporation Control Act, 
31 U.S.C.  9101; 16  U.S.C. 698v -11, Section  (c)(4); and information provided by the authorities.  
Table  3.31 Government -sponsored enterprises  
(USD million)  
GSE Area of operation  Total assets (USD  million) 
(end -September  2021)  
Federal National Mortgage 
Association (Fannie Mae)a Residential and multi -family mortgages  4,209,209  
Federal Home Loan Mortgage 
Corporation (Freddie Mac)a Residential and multi -family mortgages  2,937,984  
Federal Agricultural Mortgage 
Corporation (Farmer Mac)  Creates a secondary market for agricultural, rural 
housing, and rural utility loans  24,744  
Federal Home Loan Bank System  Provides funding to member banks so they can 
provide community development credit  712,089  
Farm Credit Systemb Guarantees payments as to principal and interest on 
securities issued by member banks  410,589  
a In conservatorship since 6  September  2008; the Department of the Treasury entered into Senior 
Preferred Stock Purchase Agreements (PSPAs) to make investments in senior preferred stock.  
b The Farm Credit System banks are AgFirst Farm Credit Bank, AgriBank, CoB ank, and Farm Credit 
Bank of Texas.  
Source:  Financial statements and related information. Viewed at: 
https://www.fanniemae.com/media/41811/display ; 
http://www.freddiemac.com/investors/financials/pdf/2021er -3q21_release.pdf ; 
https://www.farmermac.com/wp -content/uploads/2021 -Q3-Press -Release_Final.pdf ; 
https://fhlbanks.com/ea rnings/q3 -2021-earnings/ ; and 
https://www.farmcreditfunding.com/ffcb_live/investorResources/informationStatements.html . 
3.281.   In the financial sector, five government -sponsored enterprises (GSEs) were established and 
chartered by the Federal Government for public policy purposes (Table  3.31).  
3.282.   The Federal National Mortgage Association (Fannie Mae) and the Federal Home Loan 
Mortgage Corporation (Freddie Mac) pro vide assistance to the secondary market for residential 
mortgages. The Federal Home Loan Banks provide loans ("advances") and other credit products and 
services to nearly 7,000 commercial banks, savings associations, insurance companies, and credit 
unions.  The Farm Credit System provides privately financed credit to agricultural and rural 
communities. The Federal Agricultural Mortgage Corporation (Farmer Mac) is also an institution of 
the Farm Credit System. As private companies, GSEs are not included in th e Federal Budget, and 
their debt is not fully backed by the Federal Government.  
3.283.   The United  States notifies the WTO on a regular basis of entities that it considers 
state-trading enterprises according to Article  XVII:4(a) and paragraph  1 of the Understandin g on 
the Interpretation of Article  XVII, i.e. the Commodity Credit Corporation (CCC), the Isotope 
Production and Distribution Program Fund, certain Power Marketing Administrations, and the 
Strategic Petroleum Reserve. The most recent notification (June  2020) provided statistical 
information about the trading activities of these enterprises during 2017, 2018, and 2019, except 
for the CCC.410 The CCC is not engaged in import activity, and although the CCC is authorized to 
export commodities from its inventorie s, it has not done so since 1995.  
3.3.6   Government procurement  
3.3.6.1   Institutional framework and general policies  
3.284.   Government procurement at the federal and state levels is decentralized. At the federal level, 
procurement is carried out through the procurement systems of the various executive agencies. 
 
410 WTO document  G/STR/N/18/USA, 15  June 2020.  WT/TPR/S/434 /Rev.1  • United States  
 
- 149 - 
 
  Despite being decentralized, federal procurement follows general guidelines and is overseen and 
coordinated by the OMB through the Office of Federal Procurement Policy (OFPP). In accordance 
with E.O. 12866 of 30  September  1993, coordinated review of agency rulemaking is necessary to 
ensure that regulations are consistent with applicable law. Within OMB, the Office of Information 
and Regulatory Affairs (OIRA) is the repository of expertise concerning regulatory issues, incl uding 
methodologies and procedures that affect more than one agency, and the President's regulatory 
policies. OMB provides guidance to agencies and assists the President, the Vice President, and other 
policy advisors to the President in regulatory planning  and reviews individual regulations.411 The 
OFPP, headed by an Administrator, provides overall direction for government -wide procurement 
policies and plays a central role in shaping the policies and practices used by federal agencies to 
acquire goods and se rvices; it also reviews proposed regulations for compliance with policy 
guidance.412 The OFPP Administrator may prescribe government -wide procurement policies and may 
issue policy letters stating principles that must be followed by the agencies; implementat ion takes 
place through the Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR).413 The OFPP also prescribes policies through 
the OFPP  Memoranda. In 2021, the Made in America Office was created within OMB, and memoranda 
were issued with respect to "Made in America" waivers and deviation.414 
3.285.   In accordance with the OFPP Act, the Federal Acquisition Regulatory Council (FAR Council) 
assists i n the direction and coordination of Government -wide procurement policy and regulatory 
activities in the Federal Government. The FAR Council membership consists of the OFPP 
Administrator, the Secretary of Defense, the Administrator of National Aeronautics a nd Space 
(NASA), and the Administrator of General Services. The Council manages, coordinates, controls, and 
monitors the maintenance and issuance of changes in the FAR. The OFPP Administrator, in 
consultation with the FAR Council, must ensure that procurem ent regulations promulgated by 
executive agencies, are consistent with the FAR.415 
3.286.   The general policy with respect to federal government procurement is contained in the FAR, 
which include s all regulations pertinent to U.S. participation in the WTO  Agreement  on Government 
Procurement (GPA), the USMCA, and other international agreements where government 
procurement is covered. For legal purposes, the phrase "Made in America Laws" refers to all statutes, 
regulations, rules, and E.O.s relating to federal financi al assistance awards or federal procurement, 
including those that refer to "Buy America" or "Buy American", that require, or provide a preference 
for, the purchase or acquisition of goods, products, or materials produced in the United  States, 
including iro n, steel, and manufactured goods offered in the United  States. Made in America Laws 
include laws requiring domestic preference for maritime transport, including the Merchant Marine 
Act of 1920 (P.L.  66-261), also known as the Jones Act.  
3.287.   Regulatory changes to procurement were introduced by E.O. 14005 of 25  January  2021, 
which put in place the new Made in America initiative and established the Made in America Office 
(MIAO) within the OMB (Box  3.3).416 The E.O. also established a requirement for agencies to sub mit 
applicable waivers to the MIAO for review and directed the creation of a new website for public 
transparency. This review of waivers does not affect the existing waivers already granted under the 
Trade Agreements Act for GPA parties and certain trade a greements. The OMB subsequently issued 
guidance on how to implement the Made in America E.O. Regulatory actions related to this E.O. are 
 
411 Executive Order 12866 of September  30 1993, Federal Register  (1993), Vol.  58, No.  190, 4  October. 
Viewed at: https://www.archiv es.gov/files/federal -register/executive -orders/pdf/12866.pdf .  
412 OFPP. Viewed at: https://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/management/office -federal -procurement -
policy/ . 
413 Government Publishing Office (GPO). Viewed at: https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/USCODE -2011-
title41/pdf/USCODE -2011-title41 -subtitleI -divsnB -chap11 -subchapI -sec1101.pdf . 
414 The memoranda issued included: Improving the Transparency of Made in America (MIA) Waivers  
(26 October  2021); FAR Council Memo on Executive Order 14005 MIA Deviation  (15 November  2021); FAR 
Council Guidance on  Agency Issuance of Deviations to Implement Executive Order 14042  
(30 September  2021); Reducing Procurement Administrative Lead Time Using Modern Business Practices  
(15 January  2020); Increasing the Participation of Americans with Disabilities in Federal C ontracting; "Myth -
Busting #4" Strengthening Engagement with Industry Partners through Innovative Business Practices  
(2 May 2019). Viewed at: https://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/management/office -federal -procurement -
policy/#memoranda .  
415 Acquisition.gov information. Viewed at: https://www.acquisition.gov/far -council .  
416 E.O. 14005 of 25  January  2021. Federal Register , Vol. 86, No.  17, 28  January  2021, Presidential 
Documents 7475.Viewed at: https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR -2021-01-28/pdf/2021 -02038.pdf .  WT/TPR/S/434 /Rev.1  • United States  
 
- 150 - 
 
  publicly available on the Acquisition.gov website. The new policy aims at increasing procurement 
from domestic sources and reducing the number of waivers by making them subject to review.  
Box 3.3 E.O. 14005 of 25  January  2021  
On 25  January  2021, the President issued E.O. 14005, Ensuring the Future Is Made in All of America by Al l of 
America's Workers.  
The Executive Order defines the Administration's policy as follows:  
- It is the policy of the U.S. Government to maximize the use of goods, products, and materials produced in, and 
services offered in, the United  States should, and consistent with applicable law, use terms and conditions of Federal 
financial assistance awards and Federal procurements.  
- The U.S. Government should, whenever possible, procure goods, products, materials, and services from 
 sources that will help U.S. bu sinesses compete in strategic industries.  
- To promote an accountable and transparent procurement policy, each agency should vest waiver issuance 
 authority in senior agency leadership, where appropriate and consistent with applicable law.  
To apply the pol icy, the Executive Order:  
- establishes within OMB the Made in America Office to centralize the Made in America Waiver Process;  
- mandates a review of agency action inconsistent with the Administration Policy;  
- calls for agencies to provide the Made in Am erica Director with a description of proposed waivers and a justification 
for the use of goods, products, or materials that have not been mined, produced, or manufactured in the 
United  States, before granting a waiver;  
- establishes that the Made in Americ a Director must notify the head of the agency in writing 15 business days of the 
result of the review of a waiver request;  
- requires that before granting a waiver in the public interest, the agency shall assess whether a significant portion 
of the cost ad vantage of a foreign -sourced product is the result of the use of dumped steel, iron, or manufactured 
goods or the use of injuriously subsidized steel, iron, or manufactured goods;  
- creates the Made in America website, w ith information on all proposed and granted waivers;  
- encourages agencies to identify U.S. companies, including SMEs, able to produce goods, products, and materials in 
the United  States that meet Federal procurement needs;  
- calls for amending the provisions  in the FAR, Title 48, C.F.R., to promot e enforcement of the Buy American Act, by:  
(i) replac ing the "component test" used to identify domestic end products and domestic construction materials 
with a test under which domestic content is measured by the val ue that is added to the product through 
U.S.-based production or U.S. job -supporting economic activity;  
(ii) increas ing the threshold for domestic content requirements for end products and construction materials; and  
(iii) increas ing the price preferences for domestic end products and domestic construction materials.  
- requires updates to the List of Nonavailable Articles by the FAR Council;  
- requires the FAR Council to review existing constraints on the extension of the requirements in Made in America 
Laws to information technology and to develop recommendations for lifting the m; 
- requires the head of each agency to submit a n initial  report on use of Made in America Laws  and, thereafter, a 
Bi-Annual Report on Made in America Laws, including on compliance with the laws  and waivers;  
- requires the GSA to submit to the Made in America Director recommendations for ensuring that products offered to 
the general public on federal property are procured in accordance with the policy;  
- revokes E.O. 13788  of 18  April 2017 (Buy American and Hire American); Section  5 of E.O. 13858 of 
31 January  2019 (Strengthening Buy -American Preferences for Infrastructure Projects); and E.O. 13975 of 
14 January  2021 (Encouraging Buy American Policies for the United  States Postal Service); and  supersedes 
E.O. 10582 of 17  December  1954 (Prescribing Uniform Procedures for Certain Determinations  Under the 
Buy-America Act), and E.O. 13881 of 15  July 2019 (Maximizing Use of American -Made Goods, Products, and 
Materials), to the ex tent that they are inconsistent with E.O. 14005.  
Source:  Executive Order 14005 of 25  January  2021, Federal Register  (2021), Vol. 86, No.  17, 28  January. 
Viewed at: https: //www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR -2021-01-28/pdf/2021 -02038.pdf . 
3.288.   To implement the new policy and encourage domestic sourcing for procurement not covered 
by the GPA or other agreements, the OMB issued Memorandum M -21-26, Increasing Opportunities 
for Domestic  Sourcing and Reducing the Need for Waivers from Made in America Laws, in June  2021. 
The Memorandum outlined initial management steps to help agencies prepare for and support a 
centralized strategic waiver review process by OMB's MIAO, as required by E.O. 14005. 
Memorandum M -21-26 identified information that agencies must report to establish non -availability 
of domestically sourced products, including a description of the market research and outreach 
conducted. It also directed Senior Accountable Officials (SAOs) for Domestic Sourcing to take action 
to ensure any non -availability waivers under consideration reflect this information and are justified.  
3.289.   In October  2021, the OMB issued a Memorandum providing specific guidance on the use of 
a digital waiver porta l to submit proposed Made in America waivers to MIAO. In accordance with the 
new guidelines, proposed waivers will be posted to MadeinAmerica.gov prior to agencies making 
awards, beginning with waivers for procurement non -availability; later phases will co ver additional WT/TPR/S/434 /Rev.1  • United States  
 
- 151 - 
 
  types of waivers.417 The website seeks to establish a domestic supplier base, reducing the need for 
waivers. Starting 1  January  2022, all agencies covered by E.O.  14005 must submit proposed waivers 
via the site SAM.gov. Agencies must not make an award until they have received  confirmation that 
MIAO has completed its review of the proposed waiver, has waived the requirement for a review, or 
an exception applies; they must ensure that the proposed waiver is necessary, and secure approval 
at a level not lower than the head of the  contracting activity if the waiver is for an acquisition above 
USD 25,000. Since its establishment until the beginning of February  2022, 25  requests for 
non-availability Made in America waivers have been presented, and 20  determinations have been 
made. In  all cases the waiver was granted as the requests were found to be consistent with policy. 
The length of the waiver varied between instant delivery and more than five years.418 
3.290.   The Cost Accounting Standards Board (CAS Board) has the exclusive authority to m ake, 
promulgate, and amend standards and interpretations designed to achieve uniformity and 
consistency in the cost accounting practices governing contracts with the U.S.  Government. CAS 
Board regulations are codified at 48 C.F.R., Chapter 99; its standard s are mandatory for use by all 
executive agencies and by contractors and subcontractors in all covered contract and subcontract 
procurements with the U.S. Government. Covered contracts and subcontracts are those in excess of 
USD 2 million, provided that, a t the time of award, the contractor or subcontractor is performing a 
CAS-covered contract or subcontract valued at USD  7.5 million or greater.419 
3.291.   The General Services Administration (GSA) develops government -wide regulations to 
encourage federal agencies to  use cost -effective management practices and works with them in their 
procurement processes. The GSA's acquisition policy supports and promotes the achievement of 
federal business goals and strategies; it aims at reducing federal overhead costs. The GSA's Office 
of Acquisition Policy (OAP) conducts various aspects of acquisition management ; its mission is to 
strengthen federal acquisition policy and operations, and to lead change in acquisition policy through 
its role on the FAR Council as well as through g uidance.420 Hosted by OAP, t he Federal Acquisition 
Institute (FAI)  is charged with promoting the development of a federal acquisition workforce.421 
3.292.   The GSA maintains a General Services Administration Acquisition Manual (GSAM) that 
provides procurement guidel ines for goods and services.422 The GSAM incorporates the General 
Services Administration Acquisition Regulation (GSAR) as well as internal agency acquisition policy. 
The GSA also manages the GSA Schedules, also known as Multiple Award Schedules (MAS) or Fe deral 
Supply Schedules. The GSA Schedule is a long -term government -wide contract with commercial 
firms providing federal, state, and local government buyers with access to products and services at 
volume discount pricing. Traditionally, GSA Schedules were organized by specific supply and service 
types, and each Schedule was then divided into more specific supply and service subcategories called 
Special Item Numbers (SIN).423 In FY2020, the 24 existing Schedules were consolidated into a single 
Schedule, broke n down into 12 large categories. GSA's new single Schedule includes both national 
and foreign suppliers from parties to the GPA or other international agreements. Interested suppliers 
can apply for inclusion on the Schedule at any time. Schedule policy and  procedures are guided by 
the FAR and the GSAM.424 
 
417 OMB (2021), Memorandum on "Improving the Transparency of Made in America Waivers", 
26 October. Viewed at: https://w ww.whitehouse.gov/wp -content/uploads/2021/10/Guidance -Memo -
Improving -the-Transparency -of-Made -in-America -Waivers.pdf .  
418 Made in America, Nonavailability Waivers. Viewed at: https://www.madeinamerica.g ov/waivers/   
419 As a result of changes made by Section  811 the National Defense Authorization Act for FY2018, the 
original USD  750,000 threshold was raised to USD  2 million for contracts awarded after 30  June 2018. OMB, 
Office of Federal Procurement Policy Guides . Viewed at: 
https://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/management/office -federal -procurement -policy/#guides .  
420 GSA, Office of Acquisition Policy . Viewed at: https://www.gsa.gov/policy -
regulations/ policy/acquisition -policy/office -of-acquisition -policy .  
421 GSA, Federal Acquisition Institute . Viewed at: https://ww w.gsa.gov/policy -
regulations/policy/acquisition -policy/office -of-acquisition -policy/federal -acquisition -institute .  
422 GSA, General Services Acquisition Manual (GSAM) . Viewed at: 
https://www.acquisition.gov/browsegsam . 
423 The available categories of supplies and services are facilities and construction; human capital; 
industrial products and services; information technology; medic al; office management; professional services; 
security and protection; and travel, transportation, and logistics. The full list of GSA schedules may be found 
at: http://www.gsaelibrary .gsa.gov/ElibMain/scheduleList.do . 
424 GSA, About GSA Schedule . Viewed at: https://www.gsa.gov/buying -selling/purchasing -
programs/gsa -schedule/about -gsa-schedule .  WT/TPR/S/434 /Rev.1  • United States  
 
- 152 - 
 
  3.293.   The list of GSA Schedule contractors is available publicly on the GSA Advantage! website.425 
Only authorized users may purchase directly from the Schedule. Contracting through the Schedule 
allows a number of  flexibilities.426 GSA Schedule users may simplify the acquisition process by 
making use of Blanket Purchase Agreements (BPAs), which are agreements established by a 
government buyer with a Schedule contractor to fill repetitive needs for supplies or servic es 
(FAR 8.405 -3). Schedule contractors may also benefit from Contractor Team Arrangements 
(CTAs)427, which allow providing a single solution for a wide range of requirements. They can also 
engage in Order Level Materials (OLMs)428 to complete a Schedule orde r with products that do not 
fall under the Schedule, as the OLM rule gives buyers the authority to acquire OLMs when buying 
from the Schedule. Contracts under the GSA Schedule are awarded at fixed ceiling prices for 
supplies, while services are priced at e ither hourly rates or at fixed prices for specific tasks. The GSA 
Schedule Contracting Officer determines this pricing before awarding the contract.429 
3.294.   Several federal agencies, such as NASA and the Department of Health and Human Services, 
have been designa ted by OFPP to manage government -wide acquisition contracts that leverage 
federal buying of common goods and services. D OD has its own procurement regulations. D OD's 
Defense Pricing and Contracting (DPC) is responsible for all pricing, contracting, and pro curement 
policy matters. DPC executes policy through the update of the Defense Federal Acquisition Regulation 
Supplement (DFARS) and of Procedures, Guidance, and Information (PGI).430 The Defense 
Acquisition Regulations System (DARS) develops and maintains DOD acquisition regulations. The 
DPC utilizes the DARS office to create and maintain the FAR and the DFARS.431 
3.3.6.2   Legal and regulatory framework  
3.295.   The United  States is a party to the WTO  GPA. Annex  1 of Appendix  I to the GPA lists central 
government agencies cov ered by the GPA, while Annexes 2 and 3 list the 37 states and other entities 
applying the GPA.432 The Protocol amending the Agreement on Government Procurement entered 
into force for the United  States on 6  April 2014. The USTR revises GPA thresholds in U.S.  dollars 
every two years; threshold values as expressed in Special Drawing Rights (SDR) are the same under 
the revised and the 1994 Agreements. The United  States notified to the WTO its basic procurement 
legislation and GPA -implementing legislation in 1998 .433 The GPA is implemented at the federal level 
primarily through the Trade Agreements Act (TAA) of 1979, as amended. At the state level, the GPA 
is implemented through laws and regulations in each of the 37  states participating in it.  In 
November  2020, the United  States notified the parties to the GPA proposed modifications to 
Appendix  I of the United  States under the 1994 GPA.434 The modification consisted in the insertion 
of a paragraph excluding from the coverage of the GPA, for all federal agencies, p rocurement of any 
goods that are deemed necessary to respond to chemical, biological, radiological, and nuclear 
(CBRN) threats and public health emergencies, including emerging infectious diseases such as 
COVID -19. The list of these goods may be found on t he FDA website.435 The modifications were 
 
425 GSA, GSA Multiple Award Schedule . Viewed at: http://www.gsa.gov/schedules . 
426 GSA, Schedule Flexibilities . Viewed at: https://www.gsa.gov/buying -selling/purchasing -
programs/gsa -schedule/schedule -features/schedule -flexibilities .  
427 In a GSA Schedule Contractor Team Arrangement (CTA), two or more GSA Schedule contractors 
team togeth er to provide a total solution to meet a customer's needs. Schedule CTAs allow teams to compete 
for orders for which they may not qualify independently. The GSA encourages the use of CTAs to meet buyer's 
requirements. GSA, Contractor Team Arrangements . Viewed at: https://www.gsa.gov/buying -
selling/purchasing -programs/gsa -multiple -award -schedule/schedule -features/c ontractor -team-arrangements . 
428 OLMs allow for supplies and/or services to be acquired in direct support of an individual task or 
delivery order placed against a Schedule contract or BPA. OLM pricing is not established at the Schedule 
contract or BPA level,  but at the order level.  
429 GSA, Schedule Pricing . Viewed at: https://www.gsa.gov/buying -selling/purchasing -programs/gsa -
schedule/schedule -features/schedule -pricing .  
430 DOD, Defense Federal Acquisition Regulation Supplement (DFARS) and Procedures, Guidance, and 
Information (PGI) . Viewed at: https://www.acq.osd.mil/ dpap/dars/dfarspgi/current/index.html . 
431 DOD, About Defense Acquisition Regulations System . Viewed at: 
https://www.acq.osd.mil/dpap/dars/about.html . 
432 WTO document GPA/113, 2  April 2012.  
433 WTO document GPA/23, 15  July 1998.  
434 Proposed Modifications to Appendix  I of the United  States under the 1994 Agreement on Government 
Procurement. Communication from the United  States Pursuant to Article  XXIV:6(A) of the 1994 GPA. 
WTO documents GPA/MOD/US A/17 and GPA/MOD/USA/18, 27  November  2020.  
435 FDA, Executive Order 13944 List of Essential Medicines, Medical Countermeasures, and Critical 
Inputs . Viewed at: https://www.fda.gov/about -fda/reports/executive -order -13944 -list-essential -medicines -
medical -countermeasures -and-critical -inputs .  WT/TPR/S/434 /Rev.1  • United States  
 
- 153 - 
 
  made to implement E.O.  13944 on Ensuring Essential Medicines, Medical Countermeasures, and 
Critical Inputs Are Made in the United  States, issued on 6  August  2020. Several GPA parties 
requested more information with respect to the modifications. On 16  April 2021, the United  States 
notified the withdrawal of the notifications in WTO  documents GPA/MOD/USA/17 and 
GPA/MOD/USA/18, effective immediately.436 
3.296.   The Buy American Act of 1933 (BAA) and the Trade Agreements Act of 1979 (TAA) re main 
the main U.S. laws regarding government procurement. Other laws containing legislation on 
procurement include the Federal Property and Administrative Services Act of 1949 (FPASA), the 
Competition in Contracting Act of 19 84 (CICA), the Federal Acquisition Streamlining Act of 1994 
(FASA), the Clinger -Cohen Act of  1996, the Small Business Act of 1985, and the Services Acquisition 
Reform Act. The BAA requires the Federal Government to purchase domestic goods, while the TAA 
provides authority for the President to waive purchasing requirements, such as those contained in 
the BAA, designate eligible countries, and bar procurement from non -designated countries.  Federal 
agencies may waive domestic procurement requirements in U.S. l aw under certain conditions, which 
have been recently tightened. Buy American restrictions do not apply to acquisitions subject to 
certain trade agreements , including the GPA  (FAR Subpart 25.4). For the acquisitions covered under 
these agreements, end prod ucts and construction materials receive non -discriminatory treatment 
when evaluated alongside domestic offers. In 2021, the GPA applied to acquisitions starting at 
USD 182,000 for goods and services contracts, and at USD  7,008,000 for construction services  
contracts. Exceptions to the applicability of trade agreements are described in FAR Subpart 25.4. 
The percentages for the domestic content test and the price preference were increased in the FAR 
on 19  January  2021.  
3.297.   Federal government agencies' acquisition s of supplies and services with appropriated funds 
are regulated by the FAR, Chapter 1 of 48 C.F.R. D OD, GSA, and NASA jointly issue the FAR for use 
by executive agencies in acquiring goods and services; they are also responsible for any 
amendments or upda tes to it. The FAR regulates the procurement process in detail and contains the 
general guidelines, but the system allows executive agencies and their sub -agencies to develop their 
own specific internal guidelines. The FAR is updated regularly through  Federal Acquisition Circulars 
(FACs)  to reflect changes in procurement procedures, the effect of trade agreements, and other 
changes. Proposed regulations are published in the Federal Register,  and are open to public 
comments. The heads of major purchasing ent ities, i.e. the Secretary of Defense, the Administrator 
of General Services, and the Administrator of NASA, have the authority to issue regulations in the 
context of the FAR, following approval by the OMB. Rules and regulations with respect to government 
procurement are also contained in agency supplements to the FAR.  
3.298.   E.O. 13881 of 15  July 2019, Maximizing Use of American -Made Goods, Products, and 
Materials, instructed the FAR Council to issue Proposed Rules within 180 days to amend the FAR 
Rules to promote  the principles underlying the Buy American Act  by reviewing foreign origin 
thresholds and preferences offered .437 In January  2021, the FAR published a Final Rule to implement 
E.O. 13881, which modified FAR clauses implementing the BAA by increasing the dom estic content 
requirements, and the margin of price preference for domestic products.438 In accordance with the 
Final Rule, foreign iron and steel for iron and steel products must be less than 5% of the cost of all 
components in the product. For everything else, the domestic content requirement increased from 
50% to more than 55% of the cost of all components. The Final Rule increased the price preference 
for domestic end products and construction material contained in the BAA from 6% to 20% for large 
busine sses, and from 12% to 30% for small businesses.439 The E.O. did not change the price 
preference for end products for D OD procurement, which is 50% for both large and small businesses.  
3.299.   On 25  January  2021, the President signed E.O.  14005, which defined a new procurement 
policy (Box  3.3). Section  8 of E.O. 14005 requires the FAR Council to amend the FAR to: (i)  replace 
the component test used to identify domestic end products and domestic construction materials with 
 
436 WTO documents GPA/MOD/USA/17/Add.1 and GPA/MOD/USA/18/Add.1, 16  April 2021.  
437 Executive Order 13881 of 15  July 2019, Maximizing Use of American -Made Goods, Products, and 
Materials. Federal Register  (2019), Vol. 84, No.  138, 18  July. Viewed at: 
https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR -2019-07-18/pdf/2019 -15449.pdf .  
438 Federal Register  (2021), Vol. 86, No.  11, 19  January, p.  6181. Viewed at: 
https://www.govinfo.gov/co ntent/pkg/FR -2021-01-19/pdf/2021 -00710.pdf .  
439 Domestic end product means, for an end product that does not consist wholly or predominantly of 
iron or steel or a combination of both: (i)  an unmanufactured end product mined or produced in the 
United  States;  (ii) an end product manufactured in the United  States, meeting the new content criteria.  WT/TPR/S/434 /Rev.1  • United States  
 
- 154 - 
 
  a test under which domestic content is measured by the value that is added to the product through 
U.S.-based production or U.S.  job-supporting economic activity; (ii)  increase the threshold for the 
domestic content requirement; and (iii)  increase the price preferences for domestic end products 
and domestic construction materials. In response, the FAR Council issued a Proposed Rule in 
March  2022.440 In July  2022, a Final Rule was issued, which entered into force on 
22 October  2022.441 The Final Rule increases the domestic content threshold initiall y from 55% to 
60%, then to 65% in calendar year 2024 and to 75% in calendar year 2029. The initial increase to 
60% will occur several months from publication of the final rule, to allow industry time to plan for 
the new threshold and to provide workforce t raining on the new fallback threshold.442 The rule also 
has a fallback clause that allows, until one year after the increase of the domestic content threshold 
to 75%, for the use of the 55% domestic content threshold in instances where an agency has 
determi ned that there are no end products or construction materials that meet the new domestic 
content threshold or such products are of unreasonable cost after application of the price preference. 
The fallback threshold requires offerors to indicate which of the ir foreign end products exceed 55% 
domestic content and only applies to construction material that does not consist wholly or 
predominantly of iron or steel or a combination of both and that are not commercially available off -
the-shelf (COTS) items, as wel l as to end products that do not consist wholly or predominantly of 
iron or steel or a combination of both and that are not COTS items.  
3.300.   The Final Rule provide for a framework through which higher price preferences will be applied 
to end products and constr uction material deemed to be critical or made up of critical components. 
The definitions for critical component and/or critical item are added to the FAR: critical component 
is defined as a component that is mined, produced, or manufactured in the United  States and 
deemed critical to the U.S. supply chain; critical item means a domestic construction material or 
domestic end product that is deemed critical to the U.S. supply chain. The list of critical items and 
components will be added to newly designated F AR 25.105. The products that will receive a price 
preference will be determined in a separate rule. Once the list is established in the FAR, it will be 
published in the Federal Register for public comment no less frequently than once every four years 
to reflect changes. For end products that are critical items or contain critical components, the 
reasonableness of the cost of the domestic offer is determined by adding to the price of the low 
offer, inclusive of duty, 20% plus the additional preference factor  identified for the critical item or 
end product containing critical components, if the lowest domestic offer is from a large business 
concern, or 30% plus the additional preference factor if the lowest domestic offer is from a small 
business concern.443 The Final Rule did not replace the component test in FAR Part 25. Instead, the 
FAR Council decided to seek additional information regarding the current component test and 
requested public comment. Currently, under FAR Part 25, the determination of whether a 
manufactured end product or construction material qualifies as domestic is made using a two -part 
test: (i)  the end product or construction material must be manufactured in the United  States; and 
(ii) a certain percentage of all component parts (determined by cost of the components) must also 
 
440 DOD, GSA, and NASA, Ensuring the Future Is Made in All of America by All of America's Workers 
(86 FR 7475, 28  January  2021). Federal Register  (2021), Vol. 86, No.  144, 30  July, p.  40981. Viewed at: 
https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR -2021-07-30/pdf/2021 -15881.pdf .  
441 Federal Register  (2022), Vol. 87, No.  44, 7 March. Rules and Reg ulations. Viewed at: 
https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR -2022-03-07/pdf/2022 -04173.pdf . 
442 A supplier awarded a contract to be implemented in a period that spans the schedule of domestic 
content threshold increases will be required to comply with each increased threshold for the items in the year 
of delivery. However, if this is not be feasible  for a particular contract, the application of an alternate domestic 
content test in defining "domestic end product " or "domestic construction material " after consultation with 
MIAO may be approved, allowing the supplier to comply with the domestic content  threshold that applies at the 
time of contract award, for the entire period of performance for that contract.  
443 The price of the domestic offer is reasonable if it does not exceed the evaluated price of the low offer 
after addition of the appropriate eval uation factor. For end products that do not consist wholly or 
predominantly of iron or steel or a combination of both, if an unreasonable cost determination is made for the 
domestic offer or there is no domestic offer received, and the low offer is for a f oreign end product that does 
not exceed 55% domestic content, the contracting officer shall treat the lowest offer of a foreign end product 
that is manufactured in the United  States and exceeds 55% domestic content as a domestic offer, and 
determine the re asonableness of the cost of this offer by applying the evaluation factors to the low offer. These 
procedures will no longer apply after 1  January  2030.  WT/TPR/S/434 /Rev.1  • United States  
 
- 155 - 
 
  be mined, produced, or manufactured in the United  States; this requirement was known as the 
''component test'' until early 2021, when it was redesignated as the ''domestic content test''.444 
3.301.   The publication of notices of  proposed procurement in the SAM.gov website is required for 
federal government agency contracts above the Simplified Acquisition Threshold (SAT) (currently 
USD 250,000), with some exceptions. These notices must be published at least 15  days before a 
reque st for bids, and prospective suppliers have at least 30  days from that date to submit bids. 
Shorter timeframes and simplified procedures may be established for procurement valued at or 
below the SAT. For procurement falling within the scope of the GPA or a n FTA, a period of not less 
than 40 days must generally be granted. States covered by the GPA are required to publish 
invitations to tender in their own publications and must conform to GPA deadlines.  
3.302.   The Competition in Contracting Act (CICA) of 1984 (41 U .S.C. 253) requires that, bar legal 
exceptions, an executive agency in conducting a procurement for property or services use 
competitive procedures in accordance with the requirements of 41  U.S.C. and the FAR. All 
procurements with an estimated value excee ding the SAT must be advertised for at least 15 days 
on SAM.gov before issuance of a solicitation (FAR 5.203(a)). The CICA also requires minimum 
response times (30 to 45 days) for receipt of bids or proposals from the date of issuance of a 
solicitation. Un der the CICA, agencies are required to review any procurement that limits 
competition. The CICA does not apply to orders placed under single -award requirement contracts or 
definite -quantity contracts, among others445, nor to contracts awarded using simplifi ed acquisition 
procedures. Sole-source procurement is not allowed unless the written authorization of the agency 
head is obtained, and specific statutory or regulatory authority exists for sole source. Deviations 
from the requirement for full and open comp etition must be documented in writing and authorized. 
Awards must be generally made on the basis of price, although there are some exceptions. The CICA 
provides for simplified procedures for small purchases.  
3.303.   Implementing the requirements of the CICA, the F AR specifies that the procedures available 
for use to fulfil the requirement for full and open competition are: (i)  sealed bids, (ii)  competitive 
proposals; (iii)  a combination of competitive procedures, such as two -step sealed bidding; or 
(iv) other compe titive procedures. In accordance with FAR 6.102(d)(3), use of the GSA Schedule is 
considered a "competitive procedure" under the CICA. The two most commonly used types of 
competitive bidding procedures are sealed bidding and contracting by negotiation. Sea led bidding 
requires that the final decision by agencies be based only on price and the price -related factors 
included in the invitation. Two -step sealed bidding may be used when more information from 
suppliers is needed before the sealed bidding process i s initiated. Contracting by negotiation is used 
when sealed bidding is not applicable, for instance, when the evaluation factors other than price and 
price-related factors is required. Exclusions to the CICA principles apply for set -asides for small 
busine ss concerns, and other special procurement programs (see below). Set -asides may also be 
used for local firms during a major disaster or emergency.  
3.304.   The Federal Acquisition Streamlining Act of 1994 (FASA) ( P.L. 103-355) provides for a 
streamlining of the acq uisition process , including simplified acquisition procedures and a simplified 
acquisition threshold, the SAT . The Act  also exempts purchases valued below the micro -purchase 
threshold from BAA requirements and allows them to be made without obtaining competitive 
quotations if the contracting officer determines that the purchase price is reasonable.446 The FAR 
Part 13.000 p rescribes policies and procedures for the acquisition of supplies and services, including 
construction, R&D, and commercial items, the aggregate amount of which does not exceed the SAT. 
The SAT in 2021 was USD  250,000 in most cases but can vary depending o n the acquisition. For 
acquisitions of supplies or services for supporting a contingency operation or facilitating defense  
 
444 As previously noted, for an end product that does not consist wholly or predominantly of iron or steel  
or a combination of both, the cost of domestic components must currently exceed 55% of the cost of all 
components, to be increased when the Final Rules come into effect to 60%, 65% (2024 through 2028), and 
75% for items delivered starting in 2029. The tes t is waived for acquisitions of commercially available 
off-the-shelf (COTS) items; the test is not waived for iron and steel COTS items, except for COTS fasteners.  
445 Under Subpart 6.3 of the FAR, contracting without full and open competition  is permitted w hen: 
(i) only one responsible source satisf ies agency requirements; (ii)  unusual and compelling urgency; 
(iii) industrial mobilization; engineering, developmental, or research capability; or expert services; 
(iv) international agreement; (v)  authorized or required by statute; (vi) national security; and (vii)  public 
interest.  
446 The threshold adjustment process is governed by 41 U.S.C. 1908, which requires mandatory review 
and adjustment of certain statutory acquisition -related thresholds for inflation using  the CPI.  WT/TPR/S/434 /Rev.1  • United States  
 
- 156 - 
 
  against or recovery from nuclear, biological, chemical, or radiological attack, the SAT is USD  800,000 
for contracts awarded and perf ormed, or purchases made, inside the United  States; USD  500,000 
for contracts awarded and performed, or purchases made, outside the United  States; and 
USD 1.5 million for contracts awarded and performed, or purchases made, outside the 
United  States. FAR Su bpart 13.5 provides special authority for acquisitions of commercial items 
exceeding the SAT but not exceeding USD  7.5 million (USD  15 million for certain acquisitions).  
3.305.   The SAT policy  requires  that agencies use simplified acquisition procedures to the max imum 
extent practicable for all purchases of supplies or services not exceeding the SAT. This policy does 
not apply if an agency can meet its requirement using required sources of supply; or in case of 
existing indefinite delivery/indefinite quantity contr acts or other established contracts. The SAT 
policy mandates that acquisitions of supplies or services that have an anticipated dollar value above 
the micro -purchase threshold, but at or below the SAT, be set aside for small business concerns. In 
2021, the  micro -purchase threshold was USD  10,000, except for contracts for contingency 
operations or facilitating defense  against or recovery from nuclear, biological, chemical, or 
radiological attack inside the United  States (USD  20,000) or outside them (USD  35,000).447 
Micro -purchase awards may be made under the  different set -aside programs.  Contracting officers 
making purchases in the simplified manner must consider all quotations or offers timely received.  
3.306.   There are three main simplified acquisition methods: (i)  the government -wide commercial 
purchase card, authorized for use in making and/or paying for purchases of supplies, services, or 
construction, when they are micro -purchases and the contractor agrees to accept payment by the 
card; (ii)  purchase orders, gen erally issued on a fixed -price basis for acquisition of commercial 
items; and (iii)  unpriced purchase orders, for which the price is not established at the time of their 
issuance; they may be used only for orders for repairs to equipment when it is impract ical to obtain 
pricing in advance; when the material is available from only one source for which cost cannot readily 
be established; or for supplies or services for which prices are competitive, but not exactly known.  
3.307.   Recourse to GSA Schedule Blanket Purch ase Agreements (BPA) is available to all federal 
agencies. A buyer must generally receive quotes from at least three sources and seek price 
reductions before establishing a GSA Schedule BPA. Agencies must prepare a Determination of Best 
Procurement Approac h for Schedule BPA orders that exceed USD  550,000. No single -award BPA with 
an estimated value exceeding USD  112 million may be awarded, unless the BPA provides for only 
firm-fixed price orders, which are integrally related, and can only be performed by on e source at a 
reasonable price. A single -award BPA must not exceed one year in duration but may have up to four 
one-year options. Multiple -Award BPAs should not exceed five years in length but may do so to meet 
program requirements (FAR 8.405 -3(d)(1)).  
3.308.   Procurement at the sub -federal level is governed by state or other sub -federal government 
laws and procurement regulations. Where procurement  is funded with federal money, states must 
comply with certain federal statutory requirements. Local governments have their own procurement 
agencies, as well as their own procurement policies. The Cooperative Purchasing Program allows 
state, local, and tribal governments to purchase IT, security, and law enforcement products and 
services offered through specific Schedule contracts. The program allows eligible entities to purchase 
from approved industry partners, at any time, for any reason, using any funds available.448 
3.3.6.3   Transparency  
3.309.   The USAspending.gov website, created following the requirements of the Federal Funding 
Accountability and Transparency Act of 2006 (FFATA), provides information on total federal 
government spending, principally in relation to federal contracts, grants, loans, and other financial 
assistance awards of more than USD  25,000. The Digital Accountability and Transparency Act of 
9 May 2014 (DATA  Act) ( P.L. 113-101) expanded the scope of the FFATA by requiring the disclosure 
 
447 Thresholds have been modified four times since 2004, the last one in October  2020. D OD, GSA, and 
NASA, Federal Acquisition Regulation: Inflation Adjustment of Acquisition -Related Thresholds. Federal Register  
(2020), Vol.  85, No.  192, 2  October.  Viewed at: 
https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2020/10/02/2020 -21690/federal -acquis ition-regulation -inflation -
adjustment -of-acquisition -related -thresholds .  
448 The legal basis is P.L.  107-347 and P.L.  110-248. GSA, Cooperative Purchasing . Viewed at: 
https://www.gsa.gov/acquisition/purchasing -programs/gsa -schedules/schedule -buyers/state -and-local-
governments /cooperative -purchasing . WT/TPR/S/434 /Rev.1  • United States  
 
- 157 - 
 
  of direct agency expenditures and linking federal contract, loan, and grant spending information to 
federal agency progr ams, and improving the quality of data submitted to USAspending.gov.  
3.310.   Federal agencies submit contract, grant, loan, direct payment, and other award data at least 
twice a month, to be published on USAspending.gov. Data are uploaded quarterly. However, since  
June 2020, agencies with COVID -19 relief funding must submit their account data to the Treasury 
DATA Act Broker monthly. Beginning in FY2022, the remaining agencies must report monthly. Data 
are also pulled or derived from other government systems, such a s GSA's Federal Procurement Data 
System Next Generation (FPDS -NG), and the Financial Assistance Broker Submission system (FABS). 
Entities receiving awards directly from federal agencies submit data on their subawards to the FFATA 
Sub-award Reporting System  (FSRS).449 Procurement data from FPDS is generally made available 
on USAspending.gov within five days after a contract award or modification; contracting officers 
must report action to the FPDS within three business days, except D OD and the U.S. Army Corps  of 
Engineers (USACE), for which reporting is delayed 90 days; and for procurement under unusual and 
compelling urgency, for which a report must be submitted within 30 days of the contract award. 
Assistance awards are reported to the Treasury DATA Act Brok er within two weeks of issuance or 
modification, except loan awards, reported within 30 days. Subawards are reported by prime award 
recipients to FSRS by the end of the following month. To ensure  data accuracy, OMB issues the 
Federal Government Procurement Data Quality Summary  with data submitted to FPDS.  
3.3.6.4   U.S. government procurement market  
3.311.   In FY2021, total federal spending was USD  10.1 trillion , up from USD  9.1 trillion  in FY2020, 
USD 6.6 trillion in FY2019, and USD  6.3 trillion  in FY2018. The much higher outlays in FY2020 and 
FY2021 reflect, to a lar ge extent, the cost of the COVID -19 pandemic for the Government. Of the 
USD 10.1 trillion  spending in FY2021, USD  2.4 trillion  (23.4%) was by the Department of Health and 
Human Services; USD  2.2 trillion  by the Department of the Treasury (2 1.8%); USD  1.2 trillion  
(12.4%) by the Social Security Administration; USD  1.1 trillion  (11.4%) by the D OD; 
USD 648.6  billion (6. 5%) by the Department of Labor; USD  457.2  billion  (4.5%) by the Department 
of Education; USD  338.4  billion (3. 5%) by the SBA; and the rest by o ther agencies (Table  3.32). 
The pandemic resulted in large outlays to agencies that were not traditionally among the main 
recipients, such as the SBA.450 
Table  3.32 Government spending by main agency, FY2018 -21 
(USD and % of the total)  
Agency  FY2018  FY2019  FY2020  FY2021  
Total  6.3 trillion  6.6 trillion  9.1 trillion  10.1 trillion  
Department of Health and Human Services  26.6%  27.3%  24.1%  23.4%  
Department of the Treasury  16.5%  16.2%  17.2%  21.8%  
Social Security Administration  17.4%  17.5%  13.3%  12.4%  
Department of Defense  17.3%  17.39%  12.4%  11.4%  
Department of Labor  0.8%  0.8%  6.6%  6.5%  
Department of Education  1.5%  1.81%  3.2%  4.5%  
Small Business Administration  0.04%  0.02%  6.5%  3.5%  
Department of Agriculture  2.9%  3.1%  2.7%  2.6%  
Department of Veteran Affairs  3.2%  3.3%  2.7%  2.6%  
Office of Personnel Management  3.2%  3.2%  2.3%  2.2%  
Department of Transportation  1.5%  1.5%  1.8%  1.6%  
Department of Homeland Security  1.7%  1.4%  1.6%  1.4%  
Other agencies  6.6%  8.3%  6.9%  6.5%  
Unreported data  0.7%  0.5%  0.7%  1.3%  
Source:  USASpending .gov. Viewed at: https://www.usaspending.gov/explorer/agency . 
3.312.   In October  2021, the United  States notified fully reported statistics for FY2015 and partially 
reported statistics for FY2019 under Article  XIV:4 of the revised GPA. The partially reported FY2019 
statistics will be updated in 2025 to reflect the full value of open procurement. For federal 
procurement, the notified values are broken down in open and limited procedures for covered goods, 
services, and constr uction services; the partial total notified reached USD  62.385  billion for covered 
goods and services above or equal to the GPA threshold and USD  18.321  billion for covered 
construction services.451 For subcentral entities, namely the 37 states implementing  the GPA, the 
 
449 USASpending.gov, About . Viewed at: https://www.usaspending.gov/#/about . 
450 Until early December  2021, the Federal Government had spent USD  3.46 trillion  in response to 
COVID -19. Information can be viewed at: https://www.usaspending.gov/ . 
451 WTO document GPA/STAT(19)/USA/1, 5  October  2021.  WT/TPR/S/434 /Rev.1  • United States  
 
- 158 - 
 
  estimated total state procurement was USD  681,015.60  million; for the other entities covered in 
Annex  3, the total estimated procurement amounted to USD  18,805  million.  
3.3.6.5   Market access conditions for trading partners  
3.313.   U.S. government procurement policy is based on reciprocity  with respect to market access; 
it is governed by specific trade agreements, including the GPA. Domestic purchasing requirements 
are maintained for procurement not covered by the GPA, the WTO pluril ateral Agreement on Trade 
in Civil Aircraft, or preferential trade agreements. The Trade Agreements Act of 1979 generally 
prohibits federal agencies from purchasing goods and services from countries not party to the GPA 
or other trade agreements that cover  government procurement (non -designated countries).  Under 
E.O. 12260, the USTR is required to set the U.S.  dollar thresholds for the WTO GPA and other FTAs. 
U.S. obligations under these agreements apply to covered procurement valued at or above the 
specifi ed USD  thresholds. Thresholds are adjusted every two years (Table  3.33).452 
Table  3.33 U.S. thresholds in Appendix  I to the GPA, in SDR and in USD, 2020 -21 and 
2022 -23 
Level of g overnment  Goods and services  Construction  
SDR USD 
2020 -21 USD 
2022 -23 SDR USD 
2020 -21 USD 
2022 -23 
Annex  1 – Central Government  130,000  182,000  183,000  5,000,000  7,008,000  7,032,000  
Annex  2 – Subcentral Government  355,000  498,000  499,00 0 5,000,000  7,008,000  7,032,000  
Annex  3 – Other entities     5,000,000  7,008,000  7,032,000  
 List A  - 250,000  250,000     
 List B  400,000  561,000  563,000     
- Nil. 
Source:  WTO documents GPA/THR/USA/2, 8  January  2020; and GPA/THR/USA/3, 3  December  2021.  
3.314.   In December  2021, the United  States notified t hresholds in Appendix  I of the GPA  2012 as 
expressed in national currencies for 2022 -23.453 The threshold for Central Government Entities is 
USD 183,000 (SDR  130,000) for goo ds and services, and USD  7,032,000 (SDR  5 million) for 
construction services. For Subcentral Government Entities, the values are USD  499,000 
(SDR 355,000) for goods and services; and USD  7,032,000 for construction services. The threshold 
levels provided ab ove apply to the 1  January  2022 to 31  December  2023 period.  
3.315.   The Trade Agreements Act of 1979 waives the application of the BAA in the case of a trade 
agreement that covers procurement. The waiver is granted to the end products of designated 
countries, whic h include the parties to the GPA, bilateral agreements that cover government 
procurement, CBERA beneficiaries, and LDCs.  CBERA and LDCs face GPA thresholds. For the other 
trading partners beneficiaries of a preferential agreement, the thresholds are as sho wn in Table  3.34. 
Eligible products are granted non -discriminatory treatment. Exceptions to the BAA may also be 
granted if the domestic preference is inconsistent with the public interest, in case of 
U.S. non-availability of a supply or material, or for reasonableness of cost. Non -availability may be 
determined following FAR 25.104; the list is open to comments every five years.454 
Table  3.34 Procurement thresholds for trade agreements, 2020 -21 and 2022 -23 
(USD)  
Trade agreement  Procurement of  
goods and services  Procurement of  
construction services  
 2020 -21 2022 -23 2020 -21 2022 -23 
U.S.- Australia FTA      
Annex  1 – Central Government  83,099  92,319  7,008,000  7,032,000  
Annex  2 – Subcentral Government  498,000  499,000  7,008,000  7,032,000  
Annex  3 – Other entities List A  415,495  461,594  7,008,000  7,032,000  
Annex  3 – Other entities List B  561,000  563,000  7,008,000  7,032,000  
U.S.-Bahrain FTA      
Central Government Entities  182,000  183,000  10,802,884  12,001,460  
List B entities  561,000  563,000  13,296,478  14,771,718  
 
452 WTO document GPA/THR/USA/2, 8  January  2020;  USTR, Thresholds . Viewed at: 
https://ustr.gov/issue -areas/government -procurement/thresholds . 
453 WTO document GPA/THR/USA/3, 3  December  2021.  
454 FAR Subpart 25.104, Non -available articles. The lis t of non -available products may be viewed at: 
https://www.acquisition.gov/far/25.104#:~:text=Books%2C %20trade%2C%20text%2C%20technical,domesti
c%20editions%20are%20not%20available .  WT/TPR/S/434 /Rev.1  • United States  
 
- 159 - 
 
  Trade agreement  Procurement of  
goods and services  Procurement of  
construction services  
U.S.-Chile FTA      
Central Government  83,099  92,319  7,008,000  7,032,000  
Subcentral Government  498,000  499,000  7,008,000  7,032,000  
Other entities List A  415,495  461,594  7,008,000  7,032,000  
Other entities List B  561,000  563,000  7,008,000  7,032,000  
U.S.-Colombia FTA     7,032,000  
Central Government  83,099  92,319  7,008,000  7,032,000  
Subcentral Government  498,000  499,000  7,008,000  7,032,000  
Other entities List B  561,000  563,000  7,008,000  7,032,000  
Dominican  Republic -Central America -U.S. FTA  
Central Government  83,099  92,319  7,008,000  7,032,000  
Subcentral Government  498,000  499,000  7,008,000  7,032,000  
Other entities List B  561,000  563,000  7,008,000  7,032,000  
U.S.-Israel FTA (goods)  50,000  - n.a.  
U.S.-Korea FTA  182,000  183,000  7,008,000  7,032,000  
U.S.-Morocco FTA      
Central Government  182,000  183,000  7,008,000  7,032,000  
Subcentral Government  498,000  499,000  7,008,000  7,032,000  
Other entities List B  561,000  563,000  7,008,000  7,032,000  
USMCA      
Central Government  83,099  92,319  10,802,884  12,001,460  
Other entities List A  415,495  461,594  7,008,000  7,032,000  
U.S.-Oman FTA      
Central Government Entities  182,000  183,000  10,802,884  12,001,460  
List B entities  561,000  563,000  13,296,478  14,771,718  
U.S.-Panama FTA      
Central Government  182,000  183,000  7,008,000  7,032,000  
Subcentral Government  498,000  499,000  7,008,000  7,032,000  
Other entities List B  561,000  563,000  7,008,000  7,032,000  
U.S.-Peru FTA      
Central Government  182,000  183,000  7,008,000  7,032,000  
Subcentral Government  498,000  499,000  7,008,000  7,032,000  
Other entities List B  561,000  563,000  7,008,000  7,032,000  
U.S.-Singapore FTA     7,032,000  
Central Government  83,099  92,319  7,008,000  7,032,000  
Subcentral Government  498,000  499,000  7,008,000  7,032,000  
Other entities List B  561,000  563,000  7,008,000  7,032,000  
- Nil. 
n.a. Not applicable .  
Source:  Federal Register  (2019), Vol. 84, No.  246, 23  December. Viewed at: 
https://ustr.gov/sites/default/files/2020 -2021_Thresholds_FR_Notice.pdf ; and Federal Register  
(2021), Vol.  86, No. 225, 26  November. Viewed at: https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR -2021-
11-26/pdf/2021 -25821.pdf . 
3.316.   As noted above, E.O. 14005 of 25  January  2021 resulted in some cha nges in the FAR in this 
respect, mainly geared at reducing the number of waivers. MIAO, created within OMB, is in charge 
of receiving and reviewing proposed waivers. The provisions of the BAA are also waived for civil 
aircraft and related articles that mee t the substantial transformation test of the Act and originate in 
parties to the Agreement on Trade in Civil Aircraft. Under the Balance -of-Payments Program, D OD 
may apply provisions similar to those required under the BAA, to contracts over the SAT for en d 
products for use outside the United  States. DOD waives the restrictions of the 
BAA/Balance -of-Payments Program  for eligible goods (those covered by the United  States under the 
WTO GPA or an FTA) . For other goods, D OD waives the restrictions for equipment  produced in a 
"qualifying country" (with which there is a reciprocal procurement agreement or MOU).  
3.317.   In general terms, imported goods brought into the United  States by government agencies 
are subject to the tariff rate corresponding to its HTSUS classifica tion. However, the FAR provides 
that imported supplies for use by government agencies may be exempted from customs duties in 
certain cases. Agencies must use these exemptions when the anticipated savings to appropriated 
funds are estimated to outweigh the administrative costs associated with processing required 
documentation. Subchapter VIII of Chapter 98 of the HTSUS (19  U.S.C. 1202) lists supplies for 
which exemptions from duty may be obtained when imported into the customs territory of the 
United  States under a government contract. Some goods may be imported free of duty by any 
agency (etchings, video tapes, etc.), while others are duty -free if imported for use by a specific 
agency (CBP, Department of State, Department of Agriculture, Department of Energy , military 
departments, NASA, Commodity Credit Corporation). For certain of these supplies, the contracting 
agency must certify that they are for the purpose stated in the HTSUS. Supplies (excluding WT/TPR/S/434 /Rev.1  • United States  
 
- 160 - 
 
  equipment) for government -operated vessels or aircraft ma y be imported free of duties; they are 
also free from internal revenue tax.455 
3.318.   In addition to any tariff if applicable, under Title III  of P.L. 111-347, a federal excise tax of 
2% is applied to government purchases of goods and services from foreign persons, entered on or 
after 2  January  2011 (FAR Section  52.229 -12). Payments for purchases under the simplified 
acquisition procedures that do not exceed the  SAT are exempted from the tax, as are emergency 
acquisitions and certain foreign humanitarian assistance contracts. Final regulations implementing 
the Title were issued in August  2016.456 The Government will withhold a full 2% of each payment 
unless the fo reign contractor claims an exemption ; this clause applies only to foreign persons.  
3.3.6.6   Set-asides and preferences  
3.319.   U.S. procurement policy makes use of set -aside programs to foster the participation of small 
businesses, veteran -owned small businesses, small -disadvantaged businesses (SDBs), HUBZone 
businesses, and women -owned small businesses  in the procurement process.457 Under the Small 
Business Act (P.L.  85-536), as amended, most recently through P.L.  117-6, enacted on 
30 March  2021, govern ment purchases within certain thresholds, are to be automatically and 
exclusively set aside for small businesses, while others are subject to set -aside requirements 
provided there are at least two or more (Rule of Two) small business concerns that are comp etitive 
in terms of market prices, quality, and delivery.458 If market research determines that there are 
fewer than two small business offerors, recourse to sole -source contract may be made, or otherwise 
the contract may be subject to full and open competi tion. The relevant set -aside programs are 
referenced in the U.S. schedules under the GPA.459 
3.320.   The SBA is in charge of overseeing and encouraging federal government procurement with 
small businesses whenever possible. Contracting officials are encouraged to u se small business 
set-aside and sole -source contracts to help their agencies meet their small business contracting 
goals.460 Under the Small Business Act (P.L.  85-536), as amended, government purchases with an 
anticipated value above the micro -purchase thre shold of USD  10,000, and up to the SAT of 
USD 250,000, are to be automatically and exclusively set aside for small businesses, provided there 
are at least two or more (Rule of Two) small business concerns that are competitive in terms of 
market prices, qua lity, and delivery . Preference is given to socio -economic programs (see below). 
Non-construction contracts with a value of USD  700,000 or more, if not set aside for small business, 
must have a subcontracting plan that includes small businesses, if awarded to a non -small business. 
The same applies for construction contracts with a value of USD  1.5 million or more.  
3.321.   To qualify for set -aside or sole -source supply contracts, a small business must manufacture 
the product itself, or abide by the non -manufacturer r ule. This rule applies to all small business 
set-aside contracts; it does not apply to small business set -aside contracts between the 
micro -purchase and simplified acquisition thresholds.461 The non -manufacturer rule requires that, if 
a small business recei ves a set -aside award but does not manufacture the products it sells to the 
Government, it must supply the products of another small business that are manufactured in the 
United  States.462 SBA waivers to the non -manufacturer rule can be granted if it is not  possible to 
use a small business' product. The waiver may be a class waiver, when no small business 
 
455 FAR Subpart 25.9. Viewed at: https://www.acquisition.gov/far/html/Subpart%2025_9.html .  
456 Federal Reg ister (2016), Vol.  81, No.  160, 18  August, p. 55133. Viewed at: 
https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR -2016-08-18/pdf/2016 -19452.pdf . 
457 SBA, Types of Contracts. Viewed at: https://www.sba.gov/contracting/government -contracting -
programs/what -small-business -set-aside. 
458 Federal Regulations provides for the Rule of Two in 48 C .F.R. 19.502 -2 and 13 C.F.R. 125.1.  
459 WTO. Viewed at: https://www.wto.org/english/tratop_e/gproc_e/rev_usa7e.doc . 
460 SBA, Set-Aside Procurement . Viewed at: https://www.sba.gov/partners/contracting -officials/small -
business -procurement/set -aside-procurement .  
461 See FAR Part 2.101 for full definition s of micro -purchase threshold and simplified acquisition 
threshold. The values of these thresholds vary depending on the type of work procured.  
462 The non -manufacturer rule is contained in 13 C.F.R. 121.406. Under SBA rules, a business may 
qualify as a non -manufacturer if it does not exceed the 500 -employee alternative size standard for 
nonmanufacturers; is primarily engaged in the retail or wholesale trade and normally sells the type of products 
being supplied; takes ownership or possession of the item(s) w ith its personnel, equipment, or facilities in a 
manner consistent with industry practice; and supplies the end products of a small business manufacturer or 
processor made in the United  States, or obtains a waiver of such requirement.  WT/TPR/S/434 /Rev.1  • United States  
 
- 161 - 
 
  manufacturer has submitted, performed, or been awarded an offer on a solicitation for a class of 
products within the previous two years, or a procurement s pecific waiver.  
3.322.   The SBA is responsible for defining the specific size standards for each industry, to determine 
which businesses qualify as small. For the most part, size standards are the average annual receipts 
or the average annual employment of a firm.463 Both the SBA's regulations and the FAR require 
agencies to consider SBA socio -economic programs first for set -aside and sole -source contracts 
worth USD  150,000 or more. There is no order of preference among the programs. SBA socio -
economic programs – the Women -Owned Small Business Federal Contracting Program ( WOSB ), the 
8(a) Business Development Program ; the HUBZone Program; and the Service -Disabled Veteran -
Owned Small Businesses (SDVOS B Program464 – seek to promote the ability of small businesses to 
compete for federal procurement contracts . The programs are subject to the conditions presented 
in Table  3.35. 
Table  3.35 Socio -economic procurement small business procurement programs  
Program  Requirements/conditions  
Small business   
8(a) Business 
Development Program  To be certified as a small disadvantaged business (SDB), a business must be at least 51% 
owned and controlled by socially and economically disadvantaged individuals; owned by 
someone whose personal net worth is USD  750,000 or less, and have an average adjusted 
gross income for three years of USD  350,000 or less and assets of US D 6 million or less . 
WOSB (P.L. 106-554) To be eligible to participate in procurement for the WOSB Program, a business must: (i)  be a 
small business; (ii)  be at least 51% owned and controlled by women who are U.S. citizens; 
and (iii)  have women manage day -to-day operations and make long -term decisions.  
EDWOSB  To qualify as an EDWOSB, the business must meet all the requirements of the WOSB 
Contracting Program, and be owned and controlled by one or more women, each with a 
personal net worth less than USD  750,000, adjusted gross income averaged over the previous 
three years of USD  350,000 or less, and with personal assets of USD  6 million or less.  
SDVOSB  To be able to qualify for the SDVOSB  Program, a business must be small within the size 
standard corresponding to the NAICS code assigned to the contract; be at least 51% owned 
and controlled by one or more service -disabled veterans; and have one or more service -
disabled veterans manage day -to-day operations and make long -term decisions.  
Certified HUBZone small 
business  For eligibility the business must be: (i)  a small business by SBA standards and must have 
obtaining the corresponding certification; (ii)  at least 51% owned and controlled by 
U.S. citizens, or a Community Development Corporation, an agricultural cooperative, or a 
Native American tribe; (iii)  at least 35% of its employees must reside in a HUBZone; and 
(iv) its principal office must be located within a HUBZone.  
Source: WTO based on SBA information.  
3.323.   The WOSB Program is geared to help increase women's participation in federal government 
procurements  to 5% of the total . It consists of set -asides for WOSBs in procurement contracts and 
granting sole -source contracts unde r specific circumstances.465 Some contracts are restricted further 
to Economically Disadvantaged Women -Owned Small Business es (EDWOSBs ). The program's 
regulations were modified in 2020, to make SBA certification as a WOSB or EDWOSB a requirement; 
previously , self-certification was sufficient.466 The 8(a) Business Development Program is directed 
to SDBs. The 8(a) certification qualifies a business as eligible to compete for the program's 
sole-source and competitive set -aside contracts. Participation in this pr ogram by an SDB is limited 
to nine years.467 The SDVOSBC Program allows federal contracting officers, if certain criteria are 
met, to restrict competition in a procurement to SDVOSBCs and award a sole -source or set -aside 
contract.468 In the case of the HUBZo ne Program, the Government limits competition for certain 
contracts to businesses in historically underutilized business zones. It also gives HUBZone -certified 
 
463 SBA, Table  of Small  Business Size Standards Matched to North American Industry Classification 
System Codes . Viewed at: https://www.sba.g ov/sites/default/files/2019 -
08/SBA%20Table%20of%20Size%20Standards_Effective%20Aug%2019%2C%202019_Rev.pdf .  
464 SBA, Types of Contracts . Viewed at: https://www.sba.gov/contracting/government -contracting -
programs/what -small-business -set-aside. 
465 SBA, Women -Owned Small Business Federal Contracting Program . Viewed at: 
https://www.sba.gov/federal -contracting/contracting -assistance -programs/women -owned -small-business -
federal -contracting -program .  
466 Women -Owned Small Business and Economically Disadvantaged Women -Owned  Small Business 
Certification. A Rule by the Small Business Administration on 05/11/2020. Federal Register  (2020), Vol. 85, 
No. 91, 11  May. Viewed at: https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2020/05/11/2020 -09022/women -
owned -small-business -and-economically -disadvantaged -women -owned -small-business -certification .  
467 Pursuant to 13 C.F.R. 124.2(b), if an 8(a) small business concern participated in the program 
between 13  March  2020 and 9  September  2020, program participation may be extended by 1  year to 10 years.  
468 SBA, Veteran Assistance Programs . Viewed at: https://www.sba.gov/federal -contracting/contracting -
assistance -programs/veteran -assistance -programs .  WT/TPR/S/434 /Rev.1  • United States  
 
- 162 - 
 
  businesses a 10% price evaluation preference in full and open contract competitions, as well as 
subcontracting opportunities.  
3.324.   Set-aside contracts are subject to certain rules and limitations. The non -manufacturer rule, 
mentioned above, by which a small non -manufacturer business prime contractor must generally 
supply the product of a small business, a pplies to supply contracts. The limitations on subcontracting 
apply to small business set -aside and sole -source contracts for services or construction when the 
award amount exceeds the simplified acquisition thresholds and for all other set -aside or sole -source 
contracts under the 8(a), HUBZone, SDVOSB, or WOSB program s. In these cases, under set -aside 
award conditions, small businesses are required to limit the amounts they spend on subcontractors 
that are not considered similarly situated as the prime con tractor.  
3.325.   A government -wide procurement goal stipulates that at least 23% of all federal government 
contracting dollars should be awarded to small businesses. As part of this general goal, there are 
targeted sub -goals for the following small business categories: WOSB: 6%; SDB: 11%; 
SDVOSBC:  3%; and HUBZone: 3% . These sub -goals are not in addition to the 23% but are counted 
as part of the overall goals. Goals previously set were met overall in FY2017 to FY2020; for  SDBs 
and SDVOSBCs, the goal was amply exceeded, but for the women -owned and HUBZone programs, 
they have generally not been met (Table  3.36). The goals for subcontracting were also achieved.  
The goal for small business sub -contracting is 29.43%; the result s achieved were 33.27% in FY2019 
and 32.46% in FY2020, for a total of USD  82.8 billion.469 
Table  3.36 Government -wide small business procurement goals and results, FY2017 -20 
Goal category  Goal 
% Actual 
% 
FY2017  Actual 
% 
FY2018  Actual % 
FY2019  Actual 
% 
FY2020  Value of 
procurement 
(USD  billion)  
Small business  23 23.80  25.05  26.50  26.02  145.7  
8(a) Business Development Program and 
other Small Disadvantaged Business  5 9.10 9.65 10.29  10.54  59.0 
WOSB  5 4.70 4.75  5.19 4.85 27.1 
SDVOSBC  3 4.10 4.27 4.49 4.28 23.9 
Certified HUBZone small business  3 1.70 2.05 2.28 2.44 13.6 
Source:  SBA, Government -Wide Performance: FY2020 Small Business Procurement Scorecard . Viewed at: 
https://www.sba.gov/sites/default/files/2021 -07/GW -508.pdf . 
3.326.   The AbilityOne Program, administered by the U.S. AbilityOne Commission, an independent 
federal agency, employs people who a re blind or have significant disabilities in the manufacture and 
delivery of products and services to the Federal Government. The Program employs some 
42,000  people and operates nationwide with some 500  non-profit agencies representing 
40 government agenci es. The Program supplied USD  3.9 billion in products and services to the 
Federal Government in FY2020, of which USD  2.3 billion in products and services annually to D OD, 
the largest customer of the AbilityOne Program.470 Procurement under the Program has be en 
particularly important during the COVID -19 pandemic.471 
3.3.6.7   Enforcement  
3.327.   Federal statutes such as the Competition in Contracting Act of 1984 and the Federal Courts 
Improvement Act of 1982 govern bid protests before and after awards. They may be taken to the 
Government Accountability Office (GAO) or the U.S. Court of Federal Claims (COFC). GAO provides 
a forum for the resolution of disputes concerning the awards of federal contracts. GAO's Procurement 
Law Division adjudicates these bid protests.472 GAO has a web -based electronic bid protest filing 
system for all new protests (excluding those that include classified material) that are filed on or after 
 
469 SBA, Government -Wide Performance: FY2020 Small Business Procu rement Scorecard . Viewed at: 
https://www.sba.gov/sites/default/files/2021 -07/GW -508.pdf .  
470 U.S. AbilityOne Commission, AbilityOne Program Factsheet . Viewed at: 
https://www.abilityone.gov/media_room/documents/2021_AbilityOne_Fact_Sheet_v20210902.pdf .  
471 OMB, Office of Federal Procurement Policy (2020), Memorandum  on "Increasing the Participation of 
Americans with Disabilities in Federal Contracting", 30  October. Viewed at: https://www.whitehouse.gov/wp -
content/uploads/2020/10/Increasing -the-Participation -of-Americans -with-Disabilities -in-Federal -
Contracting.pdf .  
472 GAO, Bid Protests . Viewed at: https://www. gao.gov/legal/bid -protests .  WT/TPR/S/434 /Rev.1  • United States  
 
- 163 - 
 
  1 May 2018. A party dissatisfied with a decision by GAO may file a new protest with COFC, whose 
decisions may be appealed to the U.S.  Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit.  
3.3.7   Intellectual property rights  
3.3.7.1   Overview  
3.328.   The United  States is a top producer and exporter of goods and services that embody 
intellectual property (IP). It is estimated that IP is present in some 60% of U.S. goods exports and 
that IP -intensive industries account for over one  third of U.S. GDP.473 USDOC has designated 
81 industries, out of a total of 313 (25.9% of the total), as IP -intensive, which collectively accounted 
for some 40% of GDP. Acc ording to a 2018 study, the United  States accounts for 31% of global 
commercial knowledge and technology intensive services and is the largest global producer of 
high-technology manufactures (also 31%).474 During the period under review, the United  States h as 
continued to post its traditional balance -of-payments surplus in IP -related payments, as measured 
by the category "charges for the use of IP". In 2020, net receipts were USD  70.8 billion, with receipts 
totaling  USD 113.8  billion and payments reaching US D 43.0 billion.475 In the first three quarters of 
2021, receipts totaled  USD 91.0 billion, and payments were USD  34.7 billion, resulting in a 
USD 56.3 billion surplus.  
3.329.   As measured by BEA, IP products are R&D; software; and entertainment, literary, and artis tic 
originals. They are measured as fixed investments because they are used repeatedly in production 
processes and provide long -lasting service to the businesses, non -profit institutions, and government 
agencies that invest in them.476 According to this mea sure, private fixed investment in IP products 
reached USD  1.079  trillion  in 2020, or some 5.4% of total GDP. R&D represented the largest share 
of total private investment in IP products, with some 49.9% of the total in 2020; within this category, 
the contr ibution of manufacturing R&D is the largest, with 27.5% of the total. Investment in software 
represented 42% of the total in 2020, while investment in entertainment, literary, and artistic 
originals, accounted for some 8.1% of the total (Table  3.37).477 
Table 3.37 Private fixed investment in IP products by type, 2017 -20 
(USD billion)  
  2017  2018  2019  2020  
Private fixed investment in IP products  875.0  956.7  1,034.8  1,078.5  
Software  365.7  401.3  427.7  453.4  
 Prepackageda 152.8  172.3  188.5  212.5  
 Custom  148.6  162.3  167.1  165.5  
 Own account  64.3 66.7 72.1 75.4 
Research and developmentb 423.5  465.6  514.4  537.7  
 Business  398.5  439 488.4  511 
 Manufacturing  254.5  270.6  289.1  295.7  
 Pharmaceutical and medicine manufacturing  70.7 80.7 96.2 105.7  
 Chemicals, excluding pharmaceutical and medicine  10.5 10.7 10.9 10.3 
 Semiconductor and other electronic component  33.4 34.1 37.8 39.4 
 Other computer and electronic product manufacturing  45.5 46.8 45.4 47.3 
 Motor vehicles, bodies and trailers, and parts  24.7 26.3 25.6 23.6 
 Aerospace products and parts manufacturing  14.8 13.6 10.4 9.0 
 Other manufacturing  55.0 58.2 62.7 60.5 
 Nonmanufacturing  144.0  168.4  199.3  215.3  
 Scientific R&D development services  9.7 10.4 11.7 10.8 
 All other nonmanufacturing  134.3  158 187.6  204.5  
 Software publishers  38.7 36.7 35.8 37.6 
 Financial and real estate services  8.5 8.8 10.8 11.8 
 Computer systems design and related services  12.6 16.2 21.3 21.7 
 Other nonmanufacturing  74.4 96.4 119.7  133.3  
 Non-profit institutions serving households  25 26.6 26.1 26.7 
 
473 Economic and Statistics Administration (ESA) and U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) (2016), 
Intellectual Property and the U.S. Economy: 2016 Update . Viewed at: 
https://www.uspto.gov/sites/default/files/documents/IPandtheUSEconomySept2016.pdf . 
474 National Science Foundation, Science and Engineering Indicators 2018 . Viewed at: 
https://www.nsf.gov/statistics/2018/nsb20181/report/sections/industry -technology -and-the-global -
marketplace/highlights . 
475 BEA, International Data . Viewed at: 
http://www.bea.gov/iTable/iTable.cfm?ReqID=62&step=1#reqid=62&step=6&isuri=1&6210=1&6200=2 . 
476 BEA, Intellectual Property . Viewed at: https://www.bea.gov/data/special -topics/intellectual -property .  
477 BEA, National Data . Viewed at: 
https://apps.bea.gov/iTable/iTable.cfm?reqid=19&step=3&isuri=1&nipa_table_list=331&categories=survey .  WT/TPR/S/434 /Rev.1  • United States  
 
- 164 - 
 
    2017  2018  2019  2020  
 Universities and collegesc 5.7 6 6.1 6.4 
 Other non -profit institutions  19.3 20.7 19.9 20.3 
Entertainment, literary, and artistic originals  85.8 89.8 92.7 87.4 
 Theatrical movies  17.5 18.2 18.7 17.9 
 Long-lived television programs  47.9 50.5 52.1 49.2 
 Books  9.8 9.7 9.5 9 
 Music  7.1 7.6 8.3 7.9 
 Other  3.6 3.8 4 3.4 
a Excludes software embedded, or bundled, in computers and other equipment.  
b Includes R&D expenditures for software.  
c Includes R&D investment by private universities and colleges.  
Source : BEA, National Data . Viewed at: 
https://apps.bea.gov/iTable/iTable.cfm?reqid=19&step=3&isuri=1&nipa_table_list=331&categories=
survey . 
3.330.   A major feature in recent years has bee n the increase in the number of patents linked to 
artificial intelligence (AI). A recent report by the United  States Patent Office (USPTO) shows that AI 
is increasingly important for invention, diffusing broadly across technologies, inventor -patentees, 
organizations, and geography. The report shows that, between 2002 and 2018, annual AI patent 
applications increased by more than 100%, rising from 30,000 to more than 60,000 annually, while 
the share of all patent applications that contain AI grew from 9% to nearly 16%. Also, patents 
containing AI appeared in about 42% of all technology subclasses used by USPTO in 2018 and the 
percentage of inventor -patentees who are active in AI was approximately 25%. There had also been 
an important growth in the percentage of organizations patenting in AI.478 
3.331.   The adequate and effective protection and enforcement of IP rights (IPRs) remains a trade 
policy priority for the U.S. Administration, as reflected in the 2021 Special 301 Report.479 A stated 
priority of the current Admin istration is to craft trade policy in service of U.S. workers, including 
those in innovation -driven export industries. The Administration seeks, by identifying opportunities 
and challenges facing U.S. innovative and creative industries in foreign markets, to promote job 
creation, economic development, and other benefits that effective IP protection and enforcement 
support. In addition, given the importance of innovation and IP in developing the advances necessary 
for fighting the ongoing COVID -19 crisis, th e Administration is committed to trade policies that 
ensure preparedness for the next one. Fighting piracy and counterfeiting and promoting market 
access for U.S. IP in sectors ranging from high technology to basic industries are also policy goals.480 
3.3.7.2   Gener al regulatory framework  
3.332.   The United  States is a member of the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) and 
participates in international conventions and treaties related to IPRs, including 19 instruments 
administered by WIPO.481 On 17  December  2005, t he United  States accepted the Protocol Amending 
the TRIPS  Agreement adopted by the General Council on 6  December  2005 (WTO document 
WT/L/641). During the review period, the United  States continued to systematically notify to the 
WTO its laws and regulation s on trade -related aspects of IPRs, including amendments to legislation 
or regulations. The most recent updates were made in 2020. Recent amendments to legislation 
notified to the WTO include: (i)  the legislation on undisclosed information of all 50 states  plus the 
District of Columbia and Puerto  Rico482; (ii) the implementation of the Study of Underrepresented 
Classes Chasing Engineering and Science Success Act of 2018 (SUCCESS Act) with respect to certain 
aspects of patent law (see below), which entered in to force on 31  October  2018483; (iii)  the 
implementation of the Orrin G. Hatch –Bob Goodlatte Music Modernization Act, or Music 
Modernization Act (MMA), signed into law on 11  October  2018, aimed at modernizing 
copyright -related issues for music and audio rec ordings due to new forms of technology like digital 
 
478 USPTO (2020), Inventing AI: Tracing the Diffusion of Artificial Intelligence with U.S. Patents , No. 5. 
Viewed at: https://www.uspto.gov/sites/default/files/documents/OCE -DH-AI.pdf .  
479 USTR, Special 301 . Viewed at: https://ustr.gov/issue -areas/intellectual -property/Special -301. 
480 USTR (2021),  2021 Special 301 Report. Viewed at: 
https://ustr.gov/sites/default/files/files/reports/2021/2021%20Special%20301%20Report%20(final).pdf .  
481 The full list may be found on WIPO's website, at: http://www .wipo.org . As at December  2021, the 
United  States had not yet submitted its instrument of ratification of the Beijing on Audiovisual Performances, 
which entered into force on 28  January  2020.  
482 WTO document IP/N/1/USA/U/56, IP/N/1/USA/60, 1  June 2018.  
483 WTO document IP/N/1/USA/61, IP/N/1/USA/P/15, 13  February  2019.  WT/TPR/S/434 /Rev.1  • United States  
 
- 165 - 
 
  streaming484; (iv) the implementation of the Marrakesh Treaty Implementation Act, signed into law 
on 10  October  2018, which modifies the copyright exceptions for blind or print disabled persons in 
17 U.S.C . 121, adds a new section 17  U.S.C. 121A regarding cross -border exchange of works made 
accessible to blind or print disabled persons, and implements the U.S. ratification of the Marrakesh 
Treaty to Facilitate Access to Published Works for Persons Who Are B lind, Visually Impaired or 
Otherwise Print Disabled485; and (v)  the modifications introduced by the Agriculture Improvement 
Act of 2018 ( P.L. 115-334) to the U.S. Plant Variety Protection Act to add asexually propagated 
plants, previously not available unde r the Act486; the regulations implementing the rule were also 
revised and the final rule was published on 6  January  2020.487 A snapshot of IPR protection in the 
United  States as of end -2021 is provided in Table  A3.6. 
3.333.   Led by USTR, the United  States makes use of several mechanisms and channels at the 
bilateral, plurilateral, or multilateral levels for addressing IP protection and enforcement issues with 
its trading partners. In this respect, the United  States seeks to secure binding IPR -related 
commitments as p art of bilateral and plurilateral FTAs, bilateral agreements and MOUs, bilateral 
investment treaties, and trade and investment framework agreements. The United  States has also 
actively pursued enhanced standards of IP protection through its engagement with  countries seeking 
accession to the WTO. Other instruments used by the United  States for IPR protection and 
enforcement include the annual "Special 301" review and report (see below) and IP dialogues with 
trading partners; multilateral engagement on IP iss ues through the WTO, WIPO, APEC, and other 
organizations; implementation of trade policy in support of U.S. innovations; and providing 
interagency trade policy leadership.488 
3.334.   USDOC also plays an important role on IP policy issues. The Under Secretary of Com merce 
for Intellectual Property and Director of USPTO, among other duties, advises the President, through 
the Secretary of Commerce, on national and certain international IP policy issues; advises federal 
departments and agencies on matters of IP policy in  the United  States and IP protection in other 
countries; provides guidance with respect to proposals by agencies to assist foreign governments 
and international intergovernmental organizations on matters of IP protection; and conducts 
programs, studies, or  exchanges of items or services regarding domestic and international IP law 
and the effectiveness of IP protection domestically and throughout the world.489 
3.335.   USPTO's Office of Policy and International Affairs (OPIA) leads the agency's efforts to 
formulate an d execute U.S. domestic and international policy regarding protection and enforcement 
of IPRs, nationally and internationally, and advocating improved and more effective means of 
obtaining and enforcing the IPRs of U.S. nationals. In particular, OPIA has t echnical and trade 
expertise in domestic and international patent and patent -related IPRs, represents the 
U.S. Government at WIPO, the five IP offices (IP5)490, the Industrial Design Forum (ID5)491, and the 
International Union for the Protection of New Varie ties of Plants (UPOV). OPIA deals with patent and 
patent -related policy encompassing a number of areas that are critical to responding to the many 
patent -related domestic and international issues that face U.S. rights holders, including domestic 
patent and  patent -related policy issues as they relate to international obligations, foreign law, and 
practice, as well as the development of U.S. practice and jurisprudence; treaty negotiation and 
monitoring the enforcement of patent -related international treaty pr ovisions; U.S. implementation 
of and adherence with international treaty obligations relating to patents, industrial designs, plant 
and plant varieties, and trade secret and regulatory data protection; technical assistance and training 
on patent -related ma tters for both U.S. and foreign officials.492 OPIA coordinates its work with 
USPTO's Patent Operations, including the Office of International Patent Cooperation, in implementing 
projects to improve the efficiency and quality of patent examination such as USPTO's Global IP 
 
484 WTO document IP/N/1/USA/62, IP/N/1/USA/C/7, 13  February  2019.  
485 WTO document IP/N/1/USA/63, IP/N/1/USA/C/8, 13  February  2019.  
486 WTO document IP/N/1/USA/64, IP/N/1/USA/P/16, 25  September  2020.  
487 WTO document IP/N/1/USA/65, IP/N/1/USA/P/17, 25  September  2020.  
488 USTR, Intellectual Property . Viewed at: https://ustr.gov/issue -areas/intellectual -property . 
489 35 USC Sections  2(b)(8) -(13); and 35 USC Section  3. 
490 The five patent offices are the USPTO, the European Patent Office (EPO), the Japan Patent Office 
(JPO), the Korean Intellectual Property Office (KIPO), and the National Intellectual Property Administra tion 
(CNIPA formerly SIPO) in China.  
491 The ID5 is an industrial design framework comprising the CNIPA, the European  Union Intellectual 
Property Office (EUIPO), the JPO, the KIPO and the USPTO.  
492 USPTO, Patent Policy . Viewed at: https://www.uspto.gov/ip -policy/patent -policy .  WT/TPR/S/434 /Rev.1  • United States  
 
- 166 - 
 
  Academy, the Patent Prosecution H ighway work sharing framework, the Cooperative Patent 
Classification system, and the Global Dossier Initiative.  
3.336.   The United  States Copyright Office assists Congress in developing and administering 
U.S. copyright laws and policy and in engaging on internatio nal copyright matters. The Copyright 
Office also provides information about copyrights to the public, including by answering questions, 
developing education programs, producing instructional materials, and maintaining a Public 
Information Office. The Copyr ight Office's Office of Policy and International Affairs (PIA) works on a 
wide variety of copyright matters with the executive branch agencies to deliver critical domestic and 
international policy analysis and advice. The Copyright Office's Office of Gener al Counsel (OGC) 
provides counsel to the courts when significant copyright questions arise in litigation.  
3.3.7.3   Patents  
3.337.   The main legislation with respect to patents is the Patent Law of the United  States, as 
incorporated in 35 U.S.C.  The Leahy -Smith America Invents Act (AIA) of 2011493 allowed 
transitioning the U.S. patent legislation to a first -to-file system and harmoniz ed U.S. law with 
international practice. The AIA provid ed an enhanced grace period for inventors to safeguard patent 
rights against disclosures made by inventors one year or less before the effective filing date  and 
modifi ed the definition of prior art to include non -printed disclosures,  among other changes .494 
3.338.   Patents may be granted for a process, machine, manufacture, or composition o f matter, or 
improvements thereof. The term of protection is 20 years from the filing date in the United  States 
or, in special cases, from the date an earlier related application was filed, subject to the payment of 
maintenance fees. The right conferred by  the patent grant is "the right to exclude others from 
making, using, offering for sale, or selling" the invention in the United  States or "importing" the 
invention into the United  States. Patents of invention are granted to eligible subject matter, and th e 
inventions are novel and non -obvious over the prior art. In accordance with 35  U.S.C. 101, "whoever 
invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, 
or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a p atent therefor". The novelty requirement 
specifies that a person is entitled to a patent unless the claimed invention was patented, described 
in a printed publication, in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective 
filing date of the claimed invention; or it was described in a patent issued, or in an application for 
patent published, in which the patent or application names another inventor and was effectively filed 
before the effective filing date of the claimed invention . Disclosures of the invention or the subject 
matter made one year or less before the effective filing date of the claimed invention are not 
considered to be prior art to the claimed invention.  
3.339.   USPTO, at USDOC, is the federal agency for granting U.S. paten ts and registering 
trademarks. USPTO administers the patent laws as they relate to the granting of patents for 
inventions and performs other duties relating to patents. USPTO advises the President, the Secretary 
of Commerce, and U.S. government agencies on  IP policy, protection, and enforcement, and it 
promotes the stronger and more effective IP protection around the world. USPTO works with USTR 
and other agencies to secure strong IP provisions in free trade and other international agreements. 
It also provi des training, education, and capacity -building programs designed to foster respect for 
IP and encourage the development of strong IP enforcement regimes by U.S. trading partners. 
USPTO is responsible for examining applications and granting patents on inven tions; it publishes and 
disseminates patent information, records assignments of patents, maintains search databases of 
U.S. and foreign patents, and keeps a search room for public use in examining issued patents and 
records. USPTO has no jurisdiction over infringement and enforcement of patents (35  U.S.C. 281).  
3.340.   USPTO publishes issued patents, publishes most patent applications 18 months from the 
earliest effective application filing date, and makes various other publications concerning patents. 
USPTO also r ecords assignments of patents (35  U.S.C. 261). U.S. law provides for the possibility of 
submitting a provisional application for a patent (35  U.S.C. 111(b)). The purpose of allowing 
provisional patent applications is to provide a lower -cost first patent fi ling in the United  States, and 
to give U.S.  applicants parity with foreign applicants. A provisional application provides the means 
to establish an early effective filing date in a patent application. The applicant would then have up 
 
493 P.L. 112 -29. Viewed at: http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/PLAW -112publ29/content -detail.html . 
494 USPTO, Global Impacts of the AIA.  Viewed at: http://www.uspto.gov/patent/laws -and-
regulations/america -invents -act-aia/global -impacts -aia. WT/TPR/S/434 /Rev.1  • United States  
 
- 167 - 
 
  to 12 months to file a  non-provisional application for patent. A provisional application is not examined 
on its merits. Applications for patents are examined by USPTO when the filing process is complete, 
and all required parts are received. The 12 -month pendency for a provision al application is not 
counted towards the 20 -year term of a patent granted on a subsequently filed non -provisional 
application. Provisional applications may not be filed for design inventions.  
3.341.   The American Inventors Protection Act (AIPA) of 1999 requires t hat most plant and utility 
patent applications filed on or after 29  November  2000 be published. A patent applicant may request 
that the application not be published, but only if the invention has not been, and will not be, the 
subject of an application fil ed in a foreign country that requires publication 18 months after filing (or 
earlier claimed priority date) or under the Patent Cooperation Treaty.495 
3.342.   The Patent and Trademark Law Amendments Act of 1980 (Bayh -Dole Act) ( P.L. 96-517) and 
the Stevenson -Wydler  Technology Innovation Act of 1980 (P.L.  96-480), as well as implementing 
regulations, define a framework for facilitating innovation through IP and R&D funding. The 
Bayh-Dole Act authorizes USDOC to create standard patent rights clauses to be included in federal 
funding agreements with non -profits, including universities, and small businesses. The authority to 
promulgate implementing regulations for Bayh -Dole was delegated to NIST. The Bayh -Dole Act and 
its regulations require any person, non -profit organi zation, small business firm, or large business to 
disclose each "subject invention" (performed under a funding agreement), within a reasonable time 
after the invention becomes known to the contractor; they mandate contractors to notify the federal 
funding agency whether or not they elect to retain the title to a subject invention within two years 
of disclosure, and file an initial patent application on a subject invention to which the contractor 
elects to retain title within one year after election or befor e the end of any statutory period for 
obtaining patent protection. The patent application must include a statement that the invention was 
made with government support under the grant or contract awarded by the federal agency, and that 
the Government has ce rtain rights in the invention. A contractor is obligated to submit periodic 
reports on the utilization of a subject invention ; and to agree not to grant the exclusive right to use 
or sell any subject inventions in the United  States unless any products embo dying it or produced by 
using it are manufactured substantially in the United  States, subject to waiver. Recipients of federal 
funding and federal laboratories are also expected to give small businesses preference over other 
applicants for licenses  and mus t grant or reserve a license  to the Federal Government to use the 
invention on or on behalf of the United  States. Bayh -Dole and its regulations also specify certain 
conditions applicable to licenses  granted by federal agencies in any federally owned invent ion. 
3.343.   NIST rule changes with respect to the Bayh -Dole Act went into effect on 14  May 2018 to 
reduce regulatory burdens on recipients of federal R&D funding. NIST issued updates to sections of 
the C .F.R. that implement the 1980 Bayh -Dole Act (37  C.F.R. Parts 401 and 404).496 The changes 
clarify certain definitions, reduce compliance burdens, address co -inventions between funding 
recipients and federal agencies, and simplify the electronic reporting process. They also provide for 
automatic extensions of the req uirement to file non -provisional patent applications and permit a 
business, university or other collaborator to rely on its Cooperative Research and Development 
Agreement (CRADA) with a federal laboratory to support an application for a license  to a federa l 
invention developed under that CRADA.497 In January  2021, NIST issued a notice of a proposed 
rulemaking to further streamline and reduce regulatory burdens, improve compliance, enhance a 
contractor's ability to commercialize subject inventions, and increase the return on investment of 
federal funding.498 The Stevenson -Wydler Technology Innovation Act of 1980 ( P.L. 96-48021), as 
amended through Title II -Research, Development, Test, and Evaluation, of the National Defense 
Authorization Act for Fiscal Ye ar 2020 ( P.L. 116-92), enacted 20  December  2019, requires federal 
laboratories to actively participate in and budget for, technology transfer activities, understood as 
passing information from federal agencies to the public to encourage the practical and c ommercial 
application of R&D. The law requires laboratories to set apart a percentage of the laboratory budget 
 
495 USPTO, Patent Basics . Viewed at: https://www.uspto.gov/patents -getting -started/general -
information -concerning -patents#heading -1. 
496 37 C.F.R. Part 401 , "Rights to Inventions Made by Nonprofit Organizations and Small Business Firms 
under Government Grants, Contracts, and Co -operative Agreements", applies to all federal agencies, and all 
subject inventions under Bayh -Dole, even if the Federal Government i s not the sole source of funding.  
497 NIST, 2018 Bayh -Dole Updates . Viewed at: https://www.nist.gov/tpo/bayh -dole/2018 -bayh-dole-
updates .  
498 NIST, Rights to Federally Funded Inventions  and Licensing of Government Owned Inventions. A 
Proposed Rule by the National Institute of Standards and Technology. Federal Register  (2021), Vol. 86, No.  1, 
4 January. Viewed at: https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR -2021-01-04/pdf/2020 -27581.pdf .  WT/TPR/S/434 /Rev.1  • United States  
 
- 168 - 
 
  specifically for technology transfer activities. P.L. 116-92 introduced amendments regarding regional 
public or non -profit innovation initiatives , in order to promote innovation -driven industry, strengthen 
its competitiveness through new product innovation and new technology adoption, accelerate the 
pace of commercialization of innovative research, and stimulate and enhance the overall innovation 
capacity and long -term resilience of a region. To this end, NIST's Technology Partnerships Office 
(TPO) works with stakeholders on prioritizing technology transfer issues and improving the process 
to enhance innovation, and technology commercialization.499 
3.344.   The Study of Underrepresented Classes Chasing Engineering and Science Success Act of 
2018 (SUCCESS Act)500 directs the Director of USPTO, in consultation with the Administrator of the 
SBA, to provide recommendations to promote the participation of women, min orities, and veterans 
in entrepreneurship activities and the patent system. In its report pursuant to the requirements of 
the SUCCESS Act, USPTO submitted a number of legislative recommendations for increasing the 
participation of women, minorities, and ve terans as inventor -patentees and entrepreneurs.501 
3.345.   Patent validity may be challenged by filing a petition before the Patent Trial and Appeal 
Board (PTAB), an administrative court of USPTO. The petitioner may request to cancel as 
unpatentable one or more cla ims of a patent. PTAB conducts trials, including inter partes , post -grant, 
and covered business method patent reviews and derivation proceedings; hears appeals from 
adverse examiner decisions in patent applications and re -examination proceedings; and rende rs 
decisions in interferences. There are two main options for challenging validity before PTAB: 
Post-Grant Review (PGR)502, limited to within nine months of issuance; or Inter Partes Review, which 
may be solicited at any time after nine months of issuance o r reissue of a patent, or the conclusion 
of a PGR proceeding.503 Until 16  September  2020, trial types included also the Covered Business 
Method (CBM). PTAB also conducts derivation proceedings to determine whether an inventor named 
in an earlier application  derived the claimed invention from an inventor named in the petitioner's 
application, and the earlier application claiming such invention was filed without authorization.504 
3.346.   In FY2021, there were 1,401 AIA petitions, of which 1,308 were Inter Partes Review s and 
93 were PGRs. Of these 65% related to Electrical/Computer Technology; 23% to Mechanical & 
Business Method; 6% to Chemical; 7% to Bio/Pharma; and less than 1% to Design. Some 59% of 
petitions were instituted in FY2021; 32% of petitions were settled.505 
3.347.   USPTO's Strategic Plan for FY2018/22 contains the main elements with respect to current 
and future IP policy.506 The Plan maintains the three goals set for the 2014 -18 period: optimizing 
patent quality and timeliness; optimizing trademark quality and timel iness; and providing domestic 
and global leadership to improve IP policy, protection, and enforcement. It identifies a role for USPTO 
in the strengthening of IP protection, both in the United  States and abroad. USPTO's Strategic Plan 
aims to continue to im prove the quality of issued patents and registered trademarks, and shorten 
 
499 NIST, Technology Partnerships Office. Viewed at: https://www.nist.gov/tpo .  
500 P.L. 115-273 of 31  October  2018. Viewed at: https://www.congress.gov/115/plaws/publ273/PLAW -
115publ273.pdf . It was notified to the WTO in WTO document IP/N/1/USA/P/5, 13  February  2019.  
501 USPTO (2019), Report to Congress Pursuant to P.L. 115-273, the SUCCESS Act , October. Viewed at: 
https://www.uspto.gov/sites/default/files/documents/USPTOSuccessAct.pdf . 
502 PGR is a trial  proceeding to review the patentability of one or more claims in a patent on any ground 
that could be raised. The procedure for conducting a PGR generally applies to patents issuing from applications 
subject to first -inventor -to-file provisions of the AIA.  
503 Inter Partes Review is a trial proceeding conducted to review the patentability of one or more claims 
in a patent only on a ground of novelty or non -obvious subject matter, and only on the basis of prior art 
consisting of patents or printed publications . As for the PGR, a final determination will be issued within a year 
(extendable by six months). USPTO, Inter Partes Review . Viewed at: 
https://www.uspto.gov/patents/ptab/trials/ inter-partes -review .  
504 Derivation proceeding petitions may be filed by an applicant subject to the first -inventor -to-file 
provisions only within one year of the first publication of a claim to an invention that is the same or 
substantially the same as the earlier application's claim to the invention. The petition must be supported by 
substantial evidence that the claimed invention was derived from an inventor named in the petitioner's 
application. The procedure for derivation took effect on 16  March  2013. USPTO, Derivation Proce eding . 
Viewed  at: https://www.uspto.gov/patents/ptab/trials/derivation -proceeding .  
505 USPTO (2021), PTAB Trial Statistics FY21 End of Year Outcome Roundup IPR, PGR, CBM. Patent  Trial 
and Appeal Board. Fiscal Year 2021 . Viewed at: 
https://www.uspto.gov/sites/default/files/documents/ptab_aia_fy2021__roundup.pdf .  
506 USPTO (2018 ), Strate gic Plan 2018 -2022. Viewed at: 
https://www.uspto.gov/sites/default/files/documents/USPTO_2018 -2022_Strategic_Plan.pdf.   WT/TPR/S/434 /Rev.1  • United States  
 
- 169 - 
 
  the time it takes to get a patent. To enhance patent quality, USPTO has introduced a new patent 
search system that provides examiners with increased access to prior art. It has also  implemented 
a number of AI updates that more closely align the time allotted for the examination of patent 
applications with the technology described in the application and its specific attributes.507 
3.348.   USPTO received 650,654 patent applications in FY2021, down from 653,311 in FY2020 and 
666,843 in FY2019, mainly due to the negative effects on economic activity of COVID -19. During 
the review period, USPTO continued to make progress towards addressing some of the concerns 
identified in previous years,  with respect to the pendency period for patent applications and the need 
to improve the quality of patent applications. In this respect, Goal I within its Strategic Performance 
Framework aims to reduce the average time from filing until an examiner's init ial determination on 
patentability to 10 months, and average total pendency to 20 months. Following these guidelines, 
and despite the difficulties arising from the effects of available staff due to COVID -19, the pendency 
time continued to fall during the p eriod under review. In FY2020 and FY2021, total pendency time 
was on average 23.3 months, faster than in FY2018 and FY2019, when it was 23.8 months, and 
compared to 24.2 months in FY2017. The result achieved in FY2020 and FY2021 more than met the 
goal set in the Strategic Performance Framework for FY2020, which was a pendency time of 
23.7 months.508 Also in FY2020, average first action pendency was 14.8 months, below the 
15-month goal set in the Framework.509 However, it increased to 16.9 months in FY2021, pa rtly as 
a result of the disruption caused by the pandemic. During the review period, the number of patents 
issued by U SPTO continued to increase. In FY2021, USPTO issued a total of 338,335 utility patents, 
down from 360,784 in FY2020, but up from 336,846 i n FY2019. The number of industrial design 
patents also rose, from 31,830 in FY2019 to 36,313 in FY2020, but declined to 33,914 in FY2021. 
The number of plant patents rose to 1,350 in FY2020 but declined to 1,256 in FY2021. The number 
of patent reissues als o increased in FY2020 but fell in 2021 (Table  3.38).  
Table  3.38 Patent applications, grants, and pendencies, FY2017 -21 
 FY2017  FY2018  FY2019  FY2020  FY2021  
Patent applications filed, total  650,350  647,572  666,843  653,311  650,654  
Utility  604,298  599,174  619,017  603,669  593,294  
Reissue  1,049  989  1,096  1,153  1,140  
Plant 1,071  1,049  1,159  1,050  964 
Design  43,932  46,360  45,571  46,105  54,201  
Provisional applications filed  166,885  168,427  169,514  174,464  158,346  
First actions       
Design  40,415  41,587  40,098  42,219  40,263  
Utility, Plant, and Reissue  611,280  597,509  582,917  578,768  520,233  
Patent Cooperation Treaty (PCT)/Chapter  20,353  20,932  21,559  21,903  20,323  
Patent application disposals, total  676,002  680,467  682,134  657,948  623,467  
Allowed patent applications, total  373,093  368,877  406,678  405,884  385,433  
Design  32,705  34,078  35,450  36,350  35,516  
Utility, Plant, and Reissue  340,388  334,799  371,228  369,534  349,917  
Abandoned, total  302,452  282,374  275,470  251,029  237,209  
Design  5,894  6,197  6,529  5,807  5,886  
Utility, Plant, and Reissue  296,558  276,177  268,941  245,222  231,323  
Patents issued  347,372  339,512  370,423  399,055  374,066  
Utility  315,367  306,912  336,846  360,784  338,335  
Reissue  392  500  554  608  501 
Plant  1,246  1,251  1,193  1,350  1,256  
Design  30,367  30,849  31,830  36,313  33,914  
Pendency Time of Average Patent Application  24.2  23.8  23.8  23.3  23.3 
PCT International Applications Received by the USPTO 
as Receiving Office  56,840  55,849  55,692  56,982  56,602  
Patents Renewed under P.L.  102-2049  424,574  490,132  479,839  590,199  447,297  
Patents Expired under P.L. 102-2049  99,047  118,709  129,466  133,240  145,807  
Source:  USPTO,  FY2021 Performance and Accountability Report . Viewed at: 
https://www.uspto.gov/sites/default/files/documents/USPTOFY21PAR.pdf.  
 
507 USPTO (2022), FY2021 Performance and Accountability Report . Viewed at: 
https://www.uspto.gov/sites/default/files/documents/USPTOFY21PAR.pdf . 
508 USPTO (2022), FY2021 Performance and Accountabili ty Report . Performance Highlights. Viewed at: 
https://www.uspto.gov/sites/default/files/documents/USPTOFY21PAR.pdf.  
509 First action pendency measures the time from when an application is filed until it receives an initial 
determination of patentability by the patent examiner. Total pendency measures the time from filing until an 
application is either issued as a patent or abandoned.  WT/TPR/S/434 /Rev.1  • United States  
 
- 170 - 
 
  3.349.   The share of patents of foreign origin issued by the USPTO increased somewhat during the 
period under r eview, from 52.3% of the total in FY2018 to 53.1% in FY2021.510 Among foreign 
countries, the largest share was held by Japan (26.7% of patents issued to foreign residents), 
followed by the Republic of Korea (11.0%), Germany (8.8%) , and China (5.5%) (Table  3.39). 
Table  3.39 Patents issued by the United  States to residents of foreign countries and 
territories, FY2017 -21 
(Number)  
Residence  FY2017  FY2018  FY2019  FY2020  FY2021  
Total  180,287  177,550  193,373  180,275  198,730  
Australia  1,964  1,966  2,136  2,298  1,888  
Austria  1,615  1,528  1,618  1,650  1,416  
Belgium  1,358  1,408  1,447  1,537  1,315  
Canada  7,539  7,225  7,790  8,179  7,260 
China  14,154  16,315  20,836  26,176  10,993  
Denmark  1,249  1,270  1,320  1,425  1,221  
Finland  1,730  1,601  1,545  1,641  1,605  
France  7,365  6,991  7,532  7,981  6,907  
Germany  17,994  17,434  18,758  19,799  17,569  
India 4,207  4,248  5,075  5,888  3,685  
Israel  4,304  4,168  4,630  5,011  3,820  
Italy 3,209  3,247  3,718  3,913  3,158  
Japan  51,741  50,012  53,172  55,899  53,044  
Korea, Republic of  22,689  22,054  22,427  24,218  21,867  
Netherlands  3,132  3,215  3,340  3,552  2,941  
Sweden  3,327  3,164  3,321  3,495  3,044  
Switzerland  3,024  2,893  3,197  3,394  2,905  
Chinese  Taipei  12,535  11,424  11,857  13,390  12,735  
United Kingdom  7,636  7,549  8,494  8,834  7,289  
Other  12,350  9,500  19,723  30,420  34,068  
Note:  Includes utility, design, plant, and reissue patents.  
Source:  USPTO, FY 2021 Performance and Accountability Report . Viewed at: 
https://www.uspto.gov/sites/default/files/documents/USPTOFY21PAR.pdf . 
3.350.   The share of utility patents granted to small and micro businesses increased during the 
period under review: from 2.33% of the total in FY2017 to 2.48% in FY2021 for micro entities, and 
from 19.54% to 20.76% for small entities (Table  3.40).  
Table  3.40 Percentage of utility patents issued to micro , small, and large entities, 
FY2017 -21 
(%) 
Residence  FY2017  FY2018  FY2019  FY2020  FY2021  
All origins       
Micro entity  2.33 2.48 2.49 2.50 2.48 
Small entity  19.54  19.86  19.94  19.98  20.76  
Large entity  78.13  77.66  77.57  77.52  76.75  
U.S. origin       
Micro entity  4.06 4.34 4.22 4.20 4.23 
Small entity  25.68  25.91  25.82  25.92  27.02  
Large entity  70.26  69.75  69.97  69.88  68.75  
Foreign origin       
Micro entity  0.77 0.84 0.94 1.01 1.01 
Small entity  14.02  14.49  14.67  14.74  14.74  
Large entity  85.21  84.67  84.39  84.25  83.57  
Source:  USPTO, FY 2021 Performance and Accountability Report . Viewed at: 
https://www.uspto.gov/sites/default/files/documents/USPTOFY21PAR.pdf . 
3.351.   Apart from PGRs and Inter Partes Reviews , PTAB  also oversees appeals during the course of 
patent examination ( ex parte  appeals ), and implements  the patent dispute resolution portions of the 
AIA that were noted above . In FY2021 5,550 ex parte  appeal cases  were filed, down from 6,772  in 
FY2020; PTAB dec ided 7,872 ex parte  appeals in FY2020 and 7,340 in FY2021. At the end of FY20 21, 
there were 5,692  appeal cases pending, compared to 1 1,021  at the end of FY201 8.511 During the 
 
510 USPTO, U.S. Patent Statistics Chart: Cal endar Years 1963 -2020. Viewed at: 
http://www.uspto.gov/web/offices/ac/ido/oeip/taf/us_stat.htm . 
511 USPTO (2021), Appeal and Interference Statistics: Patent Trial and Appeal Board , 30 September.  
Viewed at: 
https://www.uspto.gov/sites/default/files/documents/appeal_and_interference_statistics_september2021 . WT/TPR/S/434 /Rev.1  • United States  
 
- 171 - 
 
  review period there was a reduction in the time of pendency for PTAB trials. PTAB pendency of 
decided appeals declined from 29.8 months in FY2015 to 13.4  months in FY2020, and 12.7 months 
in FY2021; this was better than the target of 14.2 months for FY2021.512 
3.3.7.4   Industrial designs  
3.352.   Industrial designs understood as any new, original, and orn amental design for an article of 
manufacture, are usually protected by design patents. The Patent Law Treaties Implementation Act 
of 2012 introduced modifications to the Patent Law and established the legal basis to implement the 
Geneva Act of The Hague Ag reement Concerning the International Registration of Industrial Designs 
(Hague Agreement), which entered into force with respect to the United  States on 13  May 2015. 
This also enabled the United  States to join the WIPO -administered system. Since the Patent  Law 
Treaties Implementation Act of 2012 came into force, U.S. applicants  can file international design  
applications through USPTO as an office of indirect filing , and applicants  filing international  design  
applications  can designate  the United  States  for design  protection . The term of protection for 
applications filed on or after 13  May 2015 is 15  years from the date of grant; applications filed before 
13 May 2015 have a term of protect ion of 14  years from the date of grant.  
3.353.   During the period under review, the  number of patents granted for industrial designs 
continued to follow an upward trend, although it declined in FY2021 as activity was disrupted by the 
pandemic. USPTO issued 33,914 design patents in FY2021, up from 30,849 granted in FY2018, but 
below the 36,313 patents issued in FY2020.513 
3.354.   USPTO has traditionally considered that design patents provide protection for designs 
embodied in or applied to an article of manufacture (or porti on thereof) and not for the article itself; 
applicants have been required to show the design as applied to or embodied in an article of 
manufacture. To be eligible for protection, USPTO currently requires that a design for a 
computer -generated icon be: (i)  embodied in a computer screen, monitor, other display panel, or 
portion thereof; (ii)  more than a mere picture on a screen; and (iii)  integral to the operation of the 
computer displaying the design. However, recent technological advances have allowed the 
development of designs that are not applied to or embodied in a physical product but can perform a 
utilitarian function, rather than just serving as merely a displayed picture. New designs in the digital 
economy in the forms of projections, holograms, and virtual and augmented reality (PHVAR) present 
new challenges for industrial design protection systems as they do not require a physical display 
screen or other tangible article to be viewable. To deal with this issue, on 21  December  2020, USPTO 
published a  Federal Register Notice seeking public input on whether USPTO's interpretation of the 
"article of manufacture" requirement in 35 U.S.C. 171 should be revised to protect digital designs 
that encompass new and emerging technologies.514 
3.3.7.5   Trademarks  
3.355.   The Tradema rks organization within USPTO registers marks, including trademarks, service 
marks, certification marks, collective marks, and collective membership marks, that meet the 
requirements of the Trademark Act of 1946, as amended. It also provides notice to the public and 
businesses of the trademark rights claimed in pending applications and existing registrations. The 
main function of the Trademarks organization is examining applications and reviewing  maintenance  
filings  for trademark registration. Trademark leg islation is mainly contained in  the Lanham Act of 
1946 (Trademark Act), as amended (15  U.S.C. 1051 et seq.), most recently by the Trademarks 
Modernization Act of 2020 (see below). The Rules of Practice in Trademark Cases, (37 C.F.R. Part  2) 
(U.S. Trademark  Rules), most recently modified in December  2021, the Trademark Manual of 
Examining Procedure (TMEP) (July  2021 edition), and state laws, contain the main regulations and 
policies. A trademark is always connected to specific goods or services sold to custo mers.  
 
512 USPTO (2022), FY2021 Performance and Accountability Report . Viewed at: 
https://www.uspto.gov/sites/default/files/documents/USPTOFY21PAR.pdf .  
513 USPTO (2022), FY 2021 Performance  and Accountability Report . Viewed at: 
https://www.uspto.gov/sites/default/files/documents/USPTOFY21PAR.pdf . 
514 USPTO, The Article  of Manufacture Requirement. Request for i nformation . Federal Register , Vol. 85, 
No. 245, 21  December  2020, Notice. Viewed at: https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR -2020-12-
21/pdf/2020 -28110.pdf .  WT/TPR/S/434 /Rev.1  • United States  
 
- 172 - 
 
  3.356.   Trademark protection arises from federal registration with USPTO, from the actual use of 
the mark in commerce, and from federal unfair competition laws. Federal registration of a mark is 
not required to establish rights in a trademark. Common law rig hts arise from actual use of a mark 
and may allow the common law user to successfully challenge a registration or application. However, 
federal registration on the Principal Register grants the holder additional rights, such as the legal 
presumption of own ership, validity, and the entitlement to use the mark in connection with the goods 
or services identified in the registration. A state registration is also possible, but it only provides 
rights within the borders of that particular state, and common law ri ghts exist only for the specific 
area where the mark is used. Federal registration also ensures that a Public Notice of claim of 
ownership of the mark is published and listed in USPTO's online databases. Federally registered 
marks may be recorded with CBP to prevent importation of infringing goods. Other advantages of 
federal registration include the ability to bring an action concerning the mark in federal court; and 
the possibility of using the U.S. registration as a basis to obtain registration in foreig n countries.515 
Trademark protection has a renewable term of 10 years, for as long as the mark is in use or sufficient 
showing of excusable non -use. The protection granted to a mark may be cancelled if an affidavit of 
use or excusable non -use is not provide d between the fifth and sixth year of use, the ninth and tenth 
year of use, and each 10 -year period thereafter.516 
3.357.   The filing of an application for federal trademark  registration can be based on: use of the 
mark in the ordinary course of U.S. trade; a bona fide intention to use the mark in the ordinary 
course of U.S. trade; a country of origin registration through the Paris Convention; or an 
international registration through the Madrid Protocol. USPTO reviews trademark applications and 
determines whether th e applied -for mark meets the requirements for federal registration but does 
not make any determination of the right to use a mark, which must be decided by a court. USPTO 
does not conduct trademark searches for the public, nor will it comment on the validi ty of registered 
marks. USPTO does not answer questions prior to filing on whether a particular mark or type of mark 
is eligible for trademark registration or offer legal advice or opinions about common law trademark 
rights, state registrations, or tradema rk infringement claims.517 
3.358.   The first to use the mark in commerce can prevent registration of a mark with a later filing 
date or later use in commerce. For applications filed by U.S. applicants, the trademark must be used 
in U.S.  commerce before federal registration is issued. Applications filed by foreign applicants under 
the Paris Convention or the Madrid Protocol do not require use of the mark in U.S. commerce before 
registration but must include a declaration of bona fide intention to use the mark in commerce and 
use is required to maintain the registration. Use of a mark in promotion or advertising before the 
product or service is actually provided under the mark does not qualify as use in commerce. Pursuant 
to the Madrid Protocol, a trademark  owner with an application filed with, or a registration issued by, 
USPTO and who is a national of, has domicile in, or has an industrial or commercial establishment 
in the United  States may also file an international application with USPTO. Holders of int ernational 
registrations based on U.S. applications or registrations may request extensions of protection in 
other Madrid Protocol members. Notices of marks approved for registration are published in the 
USPTO's Official Gazette. A  trademark registration c an be cancelled at any time if the registered 
mark has been abandoned.518 Registration with USPTO provides protection for the mark only in the 
United  States and its territories.  
 
515 USPTO (2020), Protecting Your Trademark: Enhancing Your Rights Through Federal Registration , 
September. Viewed at: https://www.uspto.gov/sites/default/files/docume nts/Basic -Facts-Booklet.pdf . 
516 The TTAB or a federal court determines abandonment of a registered mark. Non -use for three 
consecutive years is prima facie  evidence of abandonment. The expungement proceeding may be utilized 
between 3 and 10 years following the date of registration. However, under Section  2.91(b)(1) of the 
Trademark Modernization Act (see below), until 27  December  2023, an expungement proceeding may be 
instituted for a registration that is at least 3 years old, regardless of the 10 -year limit . In the case of non -use 
where use of the trademark failed to commence by a certain relevant date, this would fall under a 
re-examination proceeding. The same sequence concerning determinations and appeals for expungements 
applies to re -examinations. A pet ition for re -examination must be filed within the first five years 
post-registration.  
517 USPTO (2020),  Protecting Your Trademark: Enhancing Your Rights Through Federal Registration , 
September. Viewed at: https://www.uspto.gov/sites/default/files/documents/Basic -Facts-Booklet.pdf . 
518 A Declaration of use and/or excusable non -use (Section  8 declaration) must be submitted to prove 
use. USPTO, Definitions for Maintaining a  Trademark Registration . Viewed at: 
https://www.uspto.gov/trademarks/maintain/forms -file/definitions -maintaining -trademark#Section%208 . 
Examples of excusable non -use include trade embargo or other circumstance beyond owner's control; the sale 
of a business; retooling of a plant or equipment; or illness, fire, and other catastrophes.  WT/TPR/S/434 /Rev.1  • United States  
 
- 173 - 
 
  3.359.   The Trademark Modernization Act of 2020 modified a number of aspects of tradema rk law, 
including providing for third -party submission of evidence during examination, flexible response 
periods, ex parte  expungement and re -examination, new grounds for cancellation, rebuttable 
presumption of irreparable harm, decluttering initiatives, a nd amendments to confirm authority of 
the Under Secretary of Commerce for Intellectual Property and Director of USPTO. The main points 
of the Act are summarized in Box  3.4. The expungement, re -examination, and new grounds for 
cancellation provisions of the Act entered into effect on 18  December  2021, when a final rule issued 
by USPTO became effective (see below).  
Box 3.4 The Trademark Modernization Act of 2020  
The Trademark Modernization Act of 2 020 (TM Act of 2020), Subtitle B —Trademarks, of Title II, Intellectual Property of 
Division Q —Financial Services Provisions and Intellectual Property of the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2021, introduced 
a number of amendments to the Trademark Act of 19 46. Some of the main provisions amended included:  
• Providing for Third -Party Submission of Evidence During Examination: Section  1 of the Trademark Act of 1946 
(15 U.S.C. 1051) was amended by adding that a third party may submit for consideration for incl usion in the record of an 
application evidence relevant to a ground for refusal of registration. The determination by the Director of USPTO to include 
or not evidence in the record of an application is final and non -reviewable. The changes, which take effe ct one year after the 
date of enactment of the Act (on 21  December  2021).  
• Providing for Flexible Response Periods: Section  12(b) of the Trademark Act of 1946 (153  U.S.C.  1062(b)) was 
amended to provide for more flexible response periods after a trademar k applicant is notified by USPTO of the reasons why 
their mark is found not entitled to registration. After notification, the applicant shall have a period of 6 months to reply or 
amend the application.   
• Ex Parte Expungement: The Trademark Act of 1946 w as amended by adding a new Section  16A Ex Parte  
Expungement (15  U.S.C. 1066a) allowing any person to file a petition to expunge a registration of a mark on the basis it has 
never been used in commerce on or in connection with some or all of the goods or se rvices recited in the registration. If the 
petition meets all the requirements, USPTO institutes an ex parte  expungement proceeding for each good or service for which 
it determines that a prima facie case has been set forth. Any determination by the USPTO whether or not to institute a 
proceeding is final and non -reviewable . 
The registrant may offer evidence showing that any non -use is due to special circumstances that excuse it.  
In case of a finding of non -use in commerce, USPTO  may cancel the registration for each good or service for which it is 
determined that a mark has never been used.  
A petition for ex parte  expungement of a registration may be filed at any time following the expiration of 3  years after the 
date of registration and before the expiration  of 10 years following the date of registration.  
• New Grounds for Cancellation. The Act provided for expungement as a new ground in which a registered mark may 
be cancelled. Section  14 of the Trademark Act of 1946 (15  U.S.C. 1064) was amended by inserting a new paragraph (6): "At 
any time after the 3 -year period following the date of registration, if the registered mark has never been used in commerce 
on or in connection with some or all of the goods or services recited in the registration.''  
• Ex Parte Reexamination. A new Section  16B (15  U.S.C. 1066b) w as added to the Trademark Act, stating that any 
person may file a petition to re -examine a registration of a mark on the basis that it was not in use in commerce on or in 
connection with some or all of the goods or services recited in the registration on o r before the date when a mark was initially 
filed. The requirements are the same as for an ex parte  expungement. A petition for ex parte  re-examination may be filed at 
any time not later than five years after the date of registration of a mark.  
• Appeal to Trademark Trial and Appeal Board (TTAB). Section  20 of the Trademark Act of 1946 (15  U.S.C.  1070) was 
amended to allow appeals to the TTAB of any final decision by an examiner in an ex parte  expungement proceeding or 
ex parte  re-examination proce eding.  
• Appeal to Courts. Section  21(a)(1) of the Trademark Act of 1946 (15  U.S.C. 1071(a)(1)) was amended to include the 
new provisions on ex parte  expungement and re -examination.  
• Rebuttable Presumption of Irreparable Harm. The Act introduced specifi c language referring to presumption of 
damage to the plaintiff by non -use of the mark by the registrant. Section  34(a) of the Trademark Act of 1946 
(15 U.S.C.  1116(a)) was amended.  
• Report on Decluttering Initiatives. The Act calls USPTO to conduct a stu dy during the period beginning 12 months 
and ending 30 months after the date of enactment of the Act (21  December  2020) to address inaccurate and false claims of 
use in trademark applications and registrations.  
• Amendments to Confirm Authority of the Dir ector (of USPTO). Section  18 of the Trademark Act of 1946 
(15 U.S.C.  1068) was amended by granting the Director the authority to reconsider, and modify or set aside, a decision of 
the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board.  
Source:  WTO Secretariat, based on the  TM Act of 2020.  
3.360.   Following the dispositions of the Trademark Modernization Act of 2020, USPTO proposed in 
May 2021 to amend the rules of practice in trademark cases to implement its provisions.519 USPTO 
issued a Final Rule in November  2021 (Regulations impl ementing the Trademark Modernization Act 
 
519 Federal Register  (2021), Vol. 86, No.  94, 18  May. Viewe d at: 
https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR -2021-05-18/pdf/2021 -10116.pdf .  WT/TPR/S/434 /Rev.1  • United States  
 
- 174 - 
 
  of 2020), which entered into effect on 18  December  2021.520 The Final Rule introduced new 
procedures for ex parte  proceedings to cancel unused registered trademarks from the Federal 
Trademark Register, as an alternative to a contested inter partes  cancellation proceeding at the 
Trademark Trial and Appeal Board (TTAB). Under the new ex parte  expungement proceeding, an y 
party may request cancellation of some or all of the goods or services in a registration because the 
registrant never used the trademark in commerce with those goods or services. This proceeding 
must be requested between 3 and 10  years after the registra tion date; however, until 
27 December  2023, a proceeding may be requested by a third party or instituted ex officio  for any 
registration that is at least 3 years old, regardless of the 10 -year limit.  
3.361.   With respect to the re -examination proceeding, any party  may also request cancellation of 
some or all of the goods or services in a use -based registration on the basis that the trademark was 
not in use in commerce on or before a particular relevant date. This new procedure must be 
requested within the first fiv e years after the registration date. The Final Rule has resulted in a new 
ground of expungement for TTAB cancellation proceedings. Now parties may request the cancellation 
of a registered trademark through TTAB on the new grounds that a registered trademar k has never 
been used in commerce at any time after the first three years from the registration date and is 
added to the existing grounds for cancellation of non -use and abandonment. The Final Rule also 
implemented the Act's shorter response period for USP TO actions: applicants or registrants must 
now respond within three months to USPTO actions; a single three -month extension may be 
requested for a fee of USD  125. The Final Rule went into effect on 18  December  2021, except for 
the implementation of the sho rter response period for office actions that will go into effect on 
1 December  2022. Petitions requesting institution of proceedings for re -examination or 
expungement are accepted as of 27  December  2021.521 
3.362.   USPTO's TTAB deals with inter partes  disputes rega rding trademark registrability through an 
opposition or cancellation proceeding, or, since December  2021, expungement and re -examination 
procedures through ex parte  proceedings. Disputes may also be taken to court. Opposition to 
issuance of a registration for a mark may be filed up to 30 days after publication in the USPTO's 
Official Gazette; this period may be extended for up to six months. In cases of conflict between two 
marks, the USPTO determines the likelihood of confusion as a result of the use of th e marks at issue 
by both parties. The TTAB's amended Rules of Practice in Trademark Cases became effective in 
January  2017; since then, the USPTO has issued several orders that clarify and interpret certain 
aspects of the rules. The Trademark Trial and App eal Board Manual of Procedure (TBMP) (June  2021 
edition) describes current practice and procedure under the applicable authority and incorporates 
amendments to Board procedures, the U.S.  Trademark Rules of Practice, Trademark Act and 
relevant Federal Rules  of Civil Procedure and Evidence, and updates in case law, where applicable.522 
3.363.   Trademark application filings continued to increase during the period under review, and 
applications for registration totaled  943,928 in FY2021. There were also 83,716 applicati ons for 
renewal of registration. Trademark registrations totaled  434,810 in FY2021, of which 337,814 were 
new registrations, and 65,063 were renewals of existing trademarks (Table  3.41). The average 
pendency time for processing a new trademark application FY2021 was 11.2 months, compared to 
a goal of 12 months. Trademark average first action pendency was 6.3 months, against a goal of 
2.5-4.5 months. The trademark renewal rate was 22.8% in FY2021, below the 26.3% rate posted 
in FY2020. Earned revenue for tra demark filings rose from USD  178.3  million in FY2020 to 
USD 204.2  million in FY2021.523 
Table  3.41 Trademarks registered, renewed, and published, FY2015 -21 
Fiscal year  Certificates of registration issued  Renewed  Registrations (incl. classes)  
2015 208,660  58,284  282,091  
2016 227,407  62,604  309,188  
2017 242,709  84,727  327,314  
 
520 USPTO, Changes to Implement Provisions of the Trademark Modernization Act of 2020. Final rul e. 
Federal Register  (2021), Vol. 86, No.  219, 17  November. Viewed at: https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR -
2021-11-17/pdf/2021 -24926.pdf . 
521 USPTO, USPTO implements the T rademark Modernization Act . Viewed at: 
https://www.uspto.gov/trademarks/laws/2020 -modernization -act. 
522 USPTO (2021), Trademark Trial and Appeal Board Manual of Procedure  (TBMP) , June. Viewed at: 
https://www.uspto.gov/sites/default/files/documents/tbmp -Master_June2021.pdf  
523 USPTO (2022), FY 2021 Performance and Accountability Report . Viewed at: 
https://www.uspto.gov/sites/default/files/documents/USPTOFY21PAR.pdf . WT/TPR/S/434 /Rev.1  • United States  
 
- 175 - 
 
  Fiscal year  Certificates of registration issued  Renewed  Registrations (incl. classes)  
2018 273,808  90,192  367,382  
2019 297,774  72,270  396,836  
2020 295,728  71,575  400,298  
2021 337,814  65,063  434,810  
Source:  USPTO, FY 2021 Performance and Accountability Report . Viewed at: 
https://www.uspto.gov/sites/default/files/documents/USPTOFY21PAR.pdf . 
3.364.   There were 156,689 trademarks regist ered to residents of foreign countries in FY2021, more 
than 50% higher than in FY2020 (Table  3.42), and accounting for 36% of all trademark  registrations 
in FY2021. This was due to the large increase of registrations from residents of China, who accounted 
for 48.9% of registrations in FY2020, and 70.6% in FY2021, compared to 13.2% in FY2017, followed 
by residents from Canada, the United  Kingdom, Germany, Japan, and the Republic  of Korea.  
Table  3.42 Trademarks issued by the United  States to residents of foreign countries and 
territories, FY2017 -21 
Residence  FY2017  FY2018  FY2019  FY2020  FY2021  
Total  180,487  192,906  216,770  237,403  156,689  
Australia  2,016  2,388  2,733  2,971  2,623  
Austria  467 454  494 485 425 
Belgium  398 567 522  481 415 
British Virgin Islands  426 280  325  230 184 
Canada  4,739  4,827  5,131  5,610  5,004  
China  23,893  38,399  47,319  48,766  110,563  
Denmark  442 523 491 482 438 
France  2,455  2,697  2,563  2,639  2,082  
Germany  3,978  4,312  4,352  4,379  3,778  
Hong Kong, China  1,504  1,859  2,110  2,005  2,320  
India 386 480 584 668 557 
Ireland  346 444 495 444 414 
Israel  574 879 1,019  1,027  862 
Italy 1,928  2,309  2,363  2,320  1,972  
Japan  2,763  2,929  3,203  3,372  3,092  
Korea, Republic of  2,316  2,289  2,629  3,072  3,068  
Luxembourg  388 369 340 275 210 
Mexico  982 1,020  1,106  1,051  938 
New Zealand  353 434 472 505 510 
Netherlands  951 1,207  1,207  1,163  1,061  
Russian  Federation  215 322 356 435 419 
Singapore  431 524 524 611 681 
Spain  1,086  1,140  1,124  1,207  1,095  
Sweden  749 845 921 885 789 
Switzerland  1,775  1,961  2,012  2,222  1,869  
Chinese  Taipei  921 1,002  1,094  1,129  969 
Türkiye  350 360 508 498 492 
United Kingdom  4,552  5,020  4,969  5,045  4,623  
Other  114,851  107,724  120,211  137,720  5,236  
Source:  USPTO, FY 2021 Performance and Accountability Report . Viewed at: 
https://www.uspto.gov/sites/default/files/documents/USPTOFY21PAR.pdf . 
3.365.   The USPTO continues to encourage electronic filing through the Trademark Electronic 
Application Syst em (TEAS). The number of trademark applications processed completely 
electronically increased to 89% in FY2021, exceeding the 88% goal for that FY.524 
3.3.7.6   Geographical indications  
3.366.   The United  States provides protection to foreign and domestic geographical indica tions (GIs) 
through its trademark system for all classes of goods and services where a given quality, reputation, 
or other characteristic is essentially attributable to their geographic origin. Protection to GIs is usually 
granted in the form of certificat ion marks and collective marks indicating regional origin.525 GIs are 
considered a subset of trademarks, as in the U.S. view, they serve the same source -identifying 
functions as trademarks but are specific to geographic source identification and are guarant ees of 
quality, and valuable business interests. The U.S. GI system uses administrative trademark 
 
524 USPTO (2022), FY 2021 Performance and Accountability Report . Viewed at: 
https://www.uspto.gov/sites/default/files/documents/USPTOFY21PAR.pdf . 
525 USPTO, Geographical Indication Protection in the United  States . Viewed at: 
http://www.uspto.gov/sites/default/files/web/offices/dcom/olia/globalip/pdf/gi_system.pdf . WT/TPR/S/434 /Rev.1  • United States  
 
- 176 - 
 
  structures. USPTO's Trademark organization processes applications for GIs. USPTO examines 
applications for GIs as trademarks, or certification or collective m arks indicating regional origin. 
Applications for GIs at USPTO are published so that interested parties have an opportunity to oppose 
registration.  
3.367.   The Trademark Act provides that geographic names or signs can be registered as certification 
marks, understo od as any words, names, symbols, or devices used by a party or parties other than 
the owner of the mark to certify the origin and specific standards required of the third parties in 
order to place the certification mark of regional origin on their goods/se rvices. The Trademark Act 
differentiates certification marks with indications of regional origin from trademarks by two 
characteristics: (i)  a certification mark is not used by its owner; and (ii)  a certification mark does 
not indicate the commercial sourc e nor distinguish the goods or services of one person from those 
of another person, which implies that any entity that meets the certifying standards, is entitled to 
use the certification mark. A certification mark may only be used by entities other than t he owner 
of the mark, with authorization from the owner of the mark, who controls its use by others by taking 
steps to ensure that the mark is applied only to goods/services originating in the referenced 
geographic area and complying with the standards imp osed by the certifier.  
3.368.   Geographic names or signs may also be registered as collective marks or as trademarks. 
Although registration is preferable because of notice to the public and other benefits,  GIs may also 
be protected through common law without being  registered by USPTO if they are in use in the 
United  States and if they are a valid common law regional certification or collective mark (not a 
generic term). Collective trademarks or collective service marks indicating regional origin, adopted 
by a "coll ective" (an association, union, cooperative, etc.), are for use only by its members who 
comply with the requirement of the collective for using the mark to identify their goods or services 
and distinguish them from those of non -members. When GIs are regist ered as a collective mark 
indicating regional origin, the geographic term must be disclaimed, unless a showing of acquired 
distinctiveness can be made. If GIs are registered as trademarks, the geographic term must not be 
deceptive; the applicant must eithe r show acquired distinctiveness  in the geographic term or disclaim 
the exclusive right to use the geographic term. Under U.S. trademark law, geographic terms or signs 
are not registrable as trademarks unless, through substantially exclusive use, consumers associate 
the product with a specific geographic source.526 
3.369.   Protection is not granted to geographic terms or signs that are generic for goods or services, 
that is, signs that do not originate from one geographic source so that consumers view them as 
designa ting a category of the goods/services of the same type, rather than as a specific geographic 
origin. In addition to refusing protection for generic terms, the Trademark Act also provided for 
refusal of marks that are confusingly similar to a registered mar k. The owner of a prior mark has 
the exclusive right to prevent its use by unauthorized parties when such use would likely cause 
consumer confusion, mistake, or deception as to the source of the goods/services. A prior right 
holder has priority and exclusi vity over any later users of the same or similar sign on the same, 
similar, related, or in some cases unrelated goods/services. Supplementary protection is provided 
under the Federal Alcohol Administration Act and its implementing regulations for wine and distilled 
spirits of both domestic and foreign origin.  
3.370.   The enforcement of GIs is primarily the responsibility of mark owners because these are 
private rights. Mark owners are responsible for raising issues of infringement, for enjoining use of 
the GI due t o an authorized user's failure to comply with certification standards, and for monitoring 
USPTO's trademark register. The GI owner may assert grounds to oppose an application to register, 
or to cancel a registered mark, if that party believes that it will be damaged by the registration or 
continued existence of the registration. According to a recent report by WIPO, there were 606 GIs 
in force in the United  States as at late 2020.527 
3.3.7.7   Trade secret protection  
3.371.   Trade secrets are protected at both state and feder al levels. The main federal legislation 
with respect to the protection of trade secrets in the United  States is contained in the Economic 
 
526 USPTO, Geographical Indication Protection in the United  States . Viewed at: 
http://www.uspto.gov/sites/default/files/web/offices/dcom/olia/globalip/pdf/gi_system.pdf . 
527 WIPO (2021), World Intellectual Property Indicators 2021 . Viewed at: 
https://www.wipo.int/edocs/pubdocs/en/wipo_pub_941_2021.pdf .  WT/TPR/S/434 /Rev.1  • United States  
 
- 177 - 
 
  Espionage Act (EEA) of 1996 ( P.L. 104-294) (as amended by the Theft of Trade Secrets Clarification 
Act of 2012), and t he Defend Trade Secrets Act (DTSA) of 2016 ( P.L. 114-153). Since the passage 
of the DTSA in 2016, U.S. federal trade secret protection legislation focuses both on criminal acts 
and on civil enforcement of trade secret protection, which was previously addre ssed only through 
state law. The provisions of the EEA do not apply to lawful activity by government entities. The Theft 
of Trade Secrets Clarification Act of 2012 expanded the scope of the EEA to apply to products or 
services used, or intended for use, in  interstate or foreign commerce.  
3.372.   The EEA criminalizes economic espionage, and trade secret theft per se . Economic espionage 
refers to the theft of a trade secret intending or knowing that the offence will benefit any foreign 
government, foreign instrumentality, or foreign agent. The theft of trade secrets refers to theft 
related to a product or service used in or intended for use in interstate or foreign commerce, to the 
economic benefit of anyone other than the owner and intending or knowing tha t the offence will 
injure any owner of that trade secret. These crimes are prosecuted by the Department of Justice 
and are punishable by imprisonment and/or fines. Under the EEA, economic espionage for a foreign 
power, and the theft or misappropriation of a trade secret, are federal crimes. For economic 
espionage, the EEA provides for a fine up to USD  5 million and a prison term up to 15 years, or both, 
for individuals. For organizations, the fine is up to the greater of USD  10 million or three times the 
value of the stolen trade secret. In the case of theft of trade secrets, penalties for violation are a 
fine or imprisonment for up to 10 years, or both, for individuals. Organizations may be fined up to 
USD 5 million . The provisions  of the EEA have extraterr itorial jurisdiction in cases where the offender 
is a U.S. citizen or permanent resident, or if the offender is an organization organized under the laws 
of the United  States or any U.S. state, or if the offence was committed in the United  States.  
3.373.   The DTSA allows a trade secret owner to apply for, and a court to grant, a  seizure order to 
prevent dissemination of the trade secret if the court makes specific findings, including that an 
immediate and irreparable injury will occur if seizure is not ordered. The court must take custody of 
the seized materials and hold a seizure hearing within seven days.528 The DTSA leaves the choice to 
parties between bringing complaints in state or federal courts. State laws differ somewhat, but there 
is similarity among them bec ause almost all states have adopted the Uniform Trade Secrets Act 
(UTSA), with modifications.529 
3.374.   Section  1637 of the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) of 2015 ( 50 U.S.C. 1708),  
Actions to Address Economic  or Industrial Espionage in Cyberspace, directed the President to submit 
annually through 2020, a report on foreign economic and industrial espionage in cyberspace during 
the 12 -month period preceding the submission of the report, that identifies foreign c ountries that 
engage in economic or industrial espionage in cyberspace with respect to trade secrets or proprietary 
information owned by U.S. persons, as well as categories of technologies or proprietary information 
developed by U.S. persons that are targe ted for economic or industrial espionage in cyberspace. The 
NDAA also authorizes the President to prohibit all transactions in property of any (foreign) person 
who the President determines knowingly engages in economic or industrial espionage in cyberspace . 
The latest report prepared under the NDAA is the 2018 Foreign Economic Espionage in Cyberspace 
Report, which identified a number of "Targeted Technologies", including: energy/alternative energy; 
biotechnology; defense  technology; environmental protection ; high -end manufacturing; and 
information and communications technology.530 
3.3.7.8   Copyright  
3.375.   The Federal Government has jurisdiction over copyright protection, as spelled out in the 
Constitution. U.S. copyright law is contained in Chapters 1 -8, 10 -12, 14, and 15 o f Title 17 of the 
United  States Code. The Copyright Act of 1976 ( P.L. 94-553), as amended, which took effect on 
1 January  1978, provides the basic framework for the current copyright law. The Act pre -empts any 
state law that provides equivalent rights in c opyrightable subject matter. The Copyright Act provides 
 
528 DTSA. Viewed at: https://www.congress.gov/bill/114th -congress/senate -
bill/1890?q=%7B%22search%22%3A%5B%22trade+secret%22%5D%7D&resultIndex=1 . 
529 The UTSA, passed in 1979 and amended in 1985, is a model civil trade secrets law drafted by the 
National Conference of Commissioners on Uniform State Laws, with the  goal of making the state laws 
governing trade secrets uniform. The UTSA has been adopted by 48 states (the exceptions are New  York and 
North  Carolina, whose legislation is similar to the UTSA), the District of Columbia, Puerto  Rico, and the 
U.S. Virgin Islands.  
530 National Counterintelligence and Security Center , Foreign Economic Espionage in Cyberspace, 2018 . 
Viewed at: https://www.dni.gov/files/NCSC/documents/news/20180724 -economic -espionage -pub.pdf .  WT/TPR/S/434 /Rev.1  • United States  
 
- 178 - 
 
  for protection of authors' economic and moral rights in the artistic, literary, and scientific domains, 
including attribution and integrity rights for authors of works of visual art. Other federal and  state 
laws address additional parts of the protection for the attribution and integrity of other works and 
authors. To benefit from copyright protection, a work must be an original creation. Registration is 
not required for protection. The term of protect ion is life of author plus 70  years for works created 
on or after 1  January  1978. Anonymous and pseudonymous works and works made for hire are 
protected for 95 years after publication or 120 years after creation, whichever is shorter.  
3.376.   The United  States is a party to the Berne Convention for the Protection of Literary and Artistic 
Works (1989), the WIPO Copyright Treaty (2002), the WIPO Performances and Phonograms Treaty  
(2002) (WPPT), the Brussels Convention Relating to the Distribution of Program -Carrying Signals  
Transmitted by Satellite (1985), the Convention for the Protection of Producers of Phonograms 
Against Unauthorized Duplication of their Phonograms (1974), and the Marrakesh Treaty to Facilitate 
Access to Published Works for Persons Who Are Blind, V isually Impaired or Otherwise Print Disabled 
(2019). The United  States is not a party to the Rome Convention (17  U.S.C. Section  106).531 The 
United  States is also a party to the Geneva Phonograms Convention.  
3.377.   U.S. copyright legislation does not include the c oncept of neighboring  rights separate from 
copyright; these rights receive protection under copyright, via contract law, including collective 
bargaining rights, and under the telecommunications law. Sound recordings are considered works 
of authorship under  the Copyright Act but with a more limited scope of rights than other categories 
of works. Federal law provides protection against unauthorized recordings of live musical 
performances (17  U.S.C. 1101). The Audio Home Recording Act of 1992 requires that man ufacturers 
and importers of digital audio recorders and digital recording media pay fees that are distributed to 
recording artists and copyright owners on a national treatment basis. The Copyright Royalty and 
Distribution Reform Act of 2004 and the Copyrig ht Royalty Judges Program Technical Corrections 
Act of 2006 replaced Copyright Arbitration Royalty Panels with Copyright Royalty Judges (CRJs), who 
serve on the Copyright Royalty Board, part of the Library of Congress. U.S. copyright law protects 
the copyr ighted content contained within broadcast signals. Computer programs and compilations 
of data that are original works are protected as literary works. Owners of copyrighted works enjoy 
an exclusive right to create derivative works based on the copyrighted works.  
3.378.   The Copyright Act provides for several types of statutory licenses , consistent with the Berne 
Convention. Licenses  may be obtained for certain types of uses of certain types of copyrighted 
products if certain requirements are satisfied, for example for secondary transmissions by cable and 
satellite, the use of certain  works in connection with non -commercial broadcasting, the public 
performance of a sound recording by means of a digital audio transmission, and the making and 
distributing of phonorecor ds of nondramatic musical works. In the absence of a voluntary 
agreement, rates and terms of royalty payments for the Copyright Act's statutory licenses  are 
determined or adjusted by the CRJs. Since its enactment in 1976, the Copyright Act has been 
amended  on several occasions. During the period under review, amendments included those 
required to implement the Marrakesh Treaty (Table  3.43).  
Table  3.43 Main amendments to the Copyright Act since 2018  
Act Coverage  
Marrakesh Treaty 
Implementation Act 
(P.L. 115-261), 
10 September  2018. Enacted 
10 October  2018.  Amended Section  121 and added Section  121A of 17  U.S.C. to implement the 
Marrakesh Treaty to Facilitate Access to Published Works for Persons Who Are  Blind, 
Visually Impaired, or Otherwise Print Disabled. The Act makes limitations and 
exceptions to federal copyright infringement that allow published works to be 
reproduced and distributed in accessible formats for individuals with print disabilities 
applicable only to activities in the United  States ; and modifies certain terms and 
definitions to conform with the Marrakesh Treaty. It also allow s published works in 
accessible formats to be exported and imported for individuals with print disabilities, 
subject to certain conditions.  
Orrin G. Hatch –Bob Goodlatte 
Music Modernization Act 
(P.L. 115-264), enacted 
11 October  2018.  Amended Sections  114, 115, 301, 801, 803, and 804 of 17 U.S.C., added Chapter 14 to 
Title 17, and amended Section  137 of Title 28. This Act updates copyright law primarily 
by overhauling the compulsory licensing system for digital music services making and 
distributing sound recordings. It also provides for federal protection to sound recordings 
fixed before 15  February  1972, which we re previously only covered by certain state 
laws. It facilitates distributing royalties collected under statutory license to publicly 
perform a sound recording by means of a digital audio transmission to producers, 
mixers, and sound engineers.  
 
531 U.S. Copyright Office, Circular 38A, International Copyright Relations of the United  States,  
October  2021. Viewed at: https://www.copyright.gov/circs/circ38a.pdf . WT/TPR/S/434 /Rev.1  • United States  
 
- 179 - 
 
  Act Coverage  
National De fense Authorization 
Act for Fiscal Year 2020 
(P.L. 116-92), enacted 
20 December  2019.  Amended 17  U.S.C. Section  105, adding an exception to the general rule regarding 
copyright protection for works of the U.S. Government so that, subject to certain 
conditi ons, literary works produced by civilian faculty members for publication by a 
scholarly press or journal at certain U.S.  government -run academic institutions are 
protected by copyright. The copyright to these works is owned by the author(s), though 
the Sec retary of Defense may direct the author to provide the Federal Government with 
an irrevocable, royalty -free, worldwide non -exclusive license to reproduce, distribute, 
perform, or display the work for purposes of the U.S. Government.  
Satellite Television C ommunity 
Protection and Promotion Act of 
2019, Title XI of the Further 
Consolidated Appropriations Act 
of 2020 (P.L.  116-94), enacted 
20 December  2019.  Amended Sections  119 and 501 of 17 U.S.C. Permanently reauthorizes a provision that 
allows satellite tel evision providers to retransmit distant television signals to "unserved 
households" (a term that includes commercial truckers and recreational vehicle users) 
under a statutory license.  
To take advantage of the statutory license, a satellite provider must p rovide 
retransmissions of local television stations in all designated market areas (DMAs).  
Library of Congress Technical 
Corrections Act of 2019, Title 
XIV of the Further Consolidated 
Appropriations Act of 2020 
(P.L. 116-94), enacted 
20 December  2019.  Amended sections 701 (general responsibilities and organization of the Copyright 
Office), 802 (Copyright Royalty Judgeships; staff), and 803 (Proceedings of Copyright 
Royalty Judges) of Title 17, United  States Code, among other amendments not directly 
relate d to copyright.  
Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and 
Economic Security Act, 
(P.L. 116-136), enacted 
27 March  2020.  Added Section  710 (Emergency relief authority) to 17  U.S.C. Allows for emergency 
action if, on or before 31  December  2021, the Register of Copyrights determines that a 
national emergency declared by the President under the National Emergencies Act 
generally disrupts or suspends the ordinary functioning of the copyright system.  
Consolidated Appropriations Act 
of 2021 (P.L.  116-260), enacted 
27 December  2020.  Added section 2319C to Title 18, United  States Code, regarding criminal penalties for 
illicit digital transmissio n. 
Copyright Alternative in Small -
Claims Enforcement Act of 2020, 
Division Q, Title II, Subtitle A of 
the Consolidated Appropriations 
Act of 2021 ( P.L. 116-260), 
enacted 27  December  2020.  Establishes a Copyright Claims Board (CCB) within the Copyright Of fice, which was 
instructed to start the CCB's operations at the latest 18 months after enactment of the 
Act. The CCB is a voluntary, alternative forum to federal court for parties to seek 
resolution of copyright disputes with small claims, which have been defined as claims 
involving copyright infringement when no party is seeking more than USD  30,000 in 
total relief.  
Source:  WIPO; Government Publishing Office (GPO). Viewed at: https://www.gpo.gov/ ; and U.S. Copyright 
Office, Preface to Circular 92. Viewed at: https://www.copyright.gov/title17/preface.pdf . 
3.379.   Some of the main changes to copyright law during the period under review were intro duced 
by the Orrin G. Hatch –Bob Goodlatte Music Modernization Act (MMA) ( P.L. 115-264), 132 Stat. 3676, 
enacted 11  October  2018. The MMA updated U.S. copyright law primarily with respect to 
three  music -specific issues, each included in a different Title of  the MMA Act. The Act updated 
copyright law primarily by overhauling the Section  115 compulsory licensing system for digital music 
services that transmit sound recordings of nondramatic musical works. It also provided for federal 
protection to sound record ings fixed before 15  February  1972, which were previously only subject 
to certain state laws. The MMA also facilitated distribution to producers, mixers, and sound engineers 
of royalties collected under the Section  114 statutory license  to publicly perform  a sound recording 
by means of a digital audio transmission.  
3.380.   Title I of the MMA, the Musical Works Modernization Act, made significant changes to the 
compulsory "mechanical" license  for making and distributing phonorecords of nondramatic musical 
works. It did so by switching from a song -by-song licensing system to a blanket licensing regime 
with respect to making digital phonorecord deliveries of musical works (e.g. digital downloads and 
streams). The MMA established a new blanket license  that, as of 1  January 2021, is available to 
digital music providers to make digital phonorecord deliveries of eligible musical works.  A musical 
work is eligible for compulsory licensing in two cases: after phonorecords of the musical work have 
been publicly distributed in t he United  States under the authority of the musical work copyright 
owner; or where a digital music provider obtains the requisite authority from a sound recording 
copyright owner who in turn has appropriate authority from the musical work copyright owner. The 
new blanket license  covers all musical works available for compulsory licensing and includes the 
making and distribution of server, intermediate, archival, and incidental musical work reproductions 
that are reasonably necessary. As was the case previou sly, digital music providers and musical work 
copyright owners may enter into privately negotiated voluntary licenses  in lieu of using the 
compulsory license . Generally speaking, on 1  January  2021, a new blanket license  automatically 
replaced any compulsor y licenses  that a digital music service provider had previously obtained, while 
pre-existing voluntary licenses  remained in effect.  
3.381.   The MMA establishes a mechanical licensing collective (MLC) to administer the blanket 
license , collect and pay royalties under that license , and maintain a database of information relating 
to musical works, their owners, and the sound recordings in which they are embodied; the MLC will WT/TPR/S/434 /Rev.1  • United States  
 
- 180 - 
 
  be publicly available. The MLC may engage in certain enforceme nt activities and participate in 
proceedings before the CRJs to establish the administrative assessment fee paid by digital music 
providers to maintain and operate the MLC. The MLC must keep a searchable database with 
information including the title of the  recording, the copyright owners and the ownership percentages 
of each. The MMA directs the Register of Copyrights to designate an entity as the MLC and allows 
the Register to designate a digital licensee coordinator (DLC) to represent licensees in various  
capacities with respect to the blanket license , including in assessment proceedings before the CRJs. 
Both entities were designated by the Register in July  2019 and will be subject to a redesignation 
process every five years.  
3.382.   Digital music service provider s must submit a notice of license  to the MLC that specifies the 
particular relevant activities in which the provider seeks to engage. If not rejected by the MLC within 
30 days of receipt, the blanket license  is effective as of the date on which the notice of license  was 
sent by the digital music provider to the MLC; the MLC can only reject a notice of license  if the 
provider has had a blanket license  terminated in the past three years, or if the provider or notice 
fails to meet statutory or regulatory requi rements (in which case the provider has an opportunity to 
cure any deficiency). If a digital music provider makes and distributes recordings without a license , 
it shall be barred from getting a blanket license  for three years.  
3.383.   The MLC must collect and dist ribute royalties based on usage reports provided by the digital 
service providers. For recordings where a musical work copyright owner cannot be identified, the 
collective will place the collected royalties in an interest -bearing account for at least three  years, 
after which the royalties and accrued interest become eligible to be distributed to the known 
copyright holders in the database based on the relative market shares.532 The licensees must make 
monthly royalty payments to the MLC and submit reports about their usage of musical works covered 
by the blanket license . The CRJs hold proceedings to set the rates and terms for the Section  115 
blanket license . Under the MMA, the rate standard has changed from a set of policy factors to one 
that represents what would have been negotiated in the marketplace between a willing buyer and a 
willing seller. The MLC and DLC are barred from participating directly in the rate setting procee ding 
but may gather and provide applicable information for use in the proceeding.  
3.384.   Title II of the MMA, the Classics Protection and Access Act , provides federal protection for 
sound recordings fixed before 15  February  1972, which were previously only subjec t to certain state 
laws. In accordance with the Act, sound recordings first published before 1923 were protected 
through 2021, while recordings first published between 1923 and 1946 are protected through the 
end of the year that is 100 years from the year of first publication; recordings first published between 
1947 and 1956 are protected through the end of the year that is 110 years from the year of first 
publication; and all remaining recordings first fixed before 15  February  are protected until 
15 Februa ry 2067. Title III of the MMA, the Allocation for Music Producers Act or the AMP Act , 
facilitates distributing royalties collected under statutory license . The Act codifies a pre -existing 
industry practice wherein the non -profit collective designated by th e CRJs to collect and distribute 
royalties under the license  (Sound Exchange) can distribute those royalties directly to such parties 
under a letter of direction, rather than such royalties flowing first through other payees.533 
3.385.   The U.S. Copyright Office, a  part of the Library of Congress, administers U.S. copyright laws 
and provides advice and assistance to Congress, the courts, and federal agencies on copyright law 
and policy (17  U.S.C. 701(b)). The Office is headed by the Register of Copyrights, who is th e principal 
advisor to Congress on national and international copyright matters, testifying upon request and 
providing ongoing leadership and impartial expertise on copyright law and policy. The duties of the 
Office and the Register of Copyrights are presc ribed in, and governed by, the Copyright Act and the 
related chapters of Title 17 of the U.S. Code (17  U.S.C. 701 -702). The Office: (i)  examines and 
registers copyright claims and administers deposit requirements; (ii)  records transfers, assignments, 
licenses and other transactions; and (iii)  administers regulations, practices, and program s that 
explain the provisions of the law. The Copyright Office also administers provisions of law related to 
statutory licensing, helping manage and distribute royalties a s required by law. Registration is not 
 
532 U.S. Copyright Office, What You Need to Know about the Orrin G. Hatch –Bob Goodlatte Music 
Modernization Act.  Viewed at: https://www.copyright.gov/music -modernization/mma -title-1-overview.pdf . 
533 U.S. Copyright Office (2018), Amendments to the Copyright Act as a result of the Orrin G. Hatch –
Bob Goodlatte Music Modernization Act . Viewed at: https://www.copyright.gov/music -
modernization/amendments.pdf . WT/TPR/S/434 /Rev.1  • United States  
 
- 181 - 
 
  required for protection, but it  establish es a public record of the copyright claim  and has  additional 
benefits, including the availability of statutory damages.534 
3.386.   Congress has delegated authority to the Copyright Offi ce to develop regulations concerning 
several areas of copyright law, such as music licensing and circumvention of technological measures 
protecting copyrighted material. The Copyright Office also publishes the Compendium of 
U.S. Copyright Office Practices,  now in its third edition (2014), revised most recently on 
28 January  2021.535 The Copyright Office works on copyright matters with the courts and executive 
branch agencies, such as D OJ, the Department of State, USTR, and USDOC (including USPTO). The 
Copyri ght Office is currently in the process of implementing the Orrin G. Hatch –Bob Goodlatte Music 
Modernization Act, which it considers one of the most significant legislative reforms to U.S. copyright 
law in two decades.536 To that end, rules and regulations h ave been issued (Table  3.44).  
Table  3.44 Rules made by the Copyright Office to implement the Music Modernization 
Act, as of January  2022  
Title Last action  
Title I – Musical Works Modernization Act Related Rulemakings  
Protection of Confidential Information by the Mechanical Licensing 
Collective (MLC) and Digital Licensee Coordinator (DLC)  11 February  2021– Interim Rule  
Transition Period Cumulative Reporting and Transfer of Royalties to the 
Mechanical Licensing Collective  11 January  2021 – Final Rule  
The Public Musical Works Database and Transparency of the Mechanical 
Licensing Collective  31 December  2020 – Interim Rule  
Notices of License, Notices of Nonblanket Activity, Data Collection a nd 
Delivery Efforts, and Reports of Usage and Payment  5 March  2021 and 28  December  2020–
Supplemental Interim Rules; 
17 September  2020 – Interim Rule  
Reporting and Distribution of Royalties to Copyright Owners by the 
Mechanical Licensing Collective  17 September  2020 – Interim Rule  
Designation of Mechanical Licensing Collective and Digital Licensee 
Coordinator  8 July 2019 – Final Rule  
Technical Amendments to Section  115 Compulsory License Regulations  22 March  2019 – Final Rule  
Title II – Classics Protection and Access Act Related Rulemakings  
Final Rule Regarding the Noncommercial Use Exception to Unauthorized 
Uses of Pre -1972 Sound Recordings  9 April 2019 – Final Rule  
Rules Regarding Schedules of Pre -1972 Sound Recordings and Notices of 
Contact Information by Transmitting Entities  22 March  2019 – Final Rule  
Source:  U.S. Copyright Office, Music Modernization Act (MMA) Rulemakings and Ex  Parte Communications . 
Viewed at: https://www.copyright.gov/music -moderni zation/related -rulemakings.html . 
3.387.   Section  211 of Subtitle A of Title II of Division Q of the Consolidated Appropriations Act of 
2021 ( P.L. 116-260), enacted on 27  December  2020 amended the law regarding criminal penalties 
for copyright infringement, making certain acts of unauthorized streaming a felony. More specifically, 
the new provisions increase penalties for persons who willfully , and f or purposes of commercial 
advantage or private financial gain, offer or provide to the public a digital transmission service that 
is primarily designed or provided for the purpose of publicly performing copyrighted works without 
the authority of the copyri ght owner or the law. The penalties for the violation of the provisions 
include, in addition to any penalties provided for under Title 17: (i)  a fine, imprisonment of not more 
than 3 years, or both; (ii)  a fine, imprisonment of not more than 5 years, or bo th, if the offence was 
committed in connection with one or more works being prepared for commercial public performance, 
and the person knew or should have known that the work was being prepared for commercial public 
performance; and (iii)  a fine, imprisonm ent of not more than 10 years, or both, if the offence is a 
second or subsequent offence.  
3.388.   Amendments to copyright law were also introduced by Section  212 of Subtitle A of Title II 
of Division Q of the Consolidated Appropriations Act, also known as the Copy right Alternative in 
Small -Claims Enforcement Act of 2020 or the CASE Act of 2020. The CASE Act seeks to reduce the 
 
534 U.S. Copyright Office (2021), Circular 1: Copyrigh t Basics. Viewed at: 
https://www.copyright.gov/circs/circ01.pdf . Such benefits include the following. Registration establishes 
prima  facie evidence of the validity of the copyright. When registrati on is made prior to infringement, or within 
three months after publication of a work, the copyright owner is eligible for statutory damages, attorneys' fees, 
and costs. Before an infringement suit may be filed in court, registration (or refusal) is necessa ry for works of 
U.S. origin (this is not required for works of foreign origin).  
535 U.S. Copyright Office (2021), Compendium of U.S. Copyright Office Practices , Third ed., January. 
Viewed at: https://www.copyright.gov/comp3/docs/compendium.pdf . 
536 U.S. Copyright Office, Overview . Viewed at: https://www.copyright.gov/about/ . WT/TPR/S/434 /Rev.1  • United States  
 
- 182 - 
 
  cost of litigating copyright claims of a lower economic value (copyright small claims), and establishes 
the Copyright Claims Board (CCB) wit hin the Copyright Office. CCB is a voluntary, alternative forum 
to federal court to seek resolution of copyright disputes with a low economic value. Copyright small 
claims are limited to those under USD  30,000 in monetary relief. For works timely registere d with 
the Copyright Office, the maximum statutory damage award is USD  15,000 per work, which is still 
subject to the USD  30,000 per proceeding limitation, while eligible statutory damages for 
copyrighted works that were not timely registered are half thos e amounts. CCB also has a "smaller 
claims" track that limits total damages to USD  5,000.537 CCB may not issue injunctions but can order 
a party to cease infringement if the parties agree and can also award monetary relief. CCB's 
determinations may not be us ed in court or other CCB proceedings as a precedent. The CCB was 
expected to be operational during 2022; Congress directed CCB to begin operations by 
27 December  2021, with a possible extension of not more than 180 days, that is, until 25  June 2022.  
3.389.   The Co pyright Office has issued notices with Proposed and Final Rules for the implementation 
of the CASE Act. A Proposed Rule regarding expedited registration for works subject to a claim before 
the CCB was issued in April  2021 and became final in August  2021, with effect 
17 September  2021.538 The Final Rule amended U.S. Copyright Office's regulations to establish a 
new expedited registration option under the CASE Act of 2020 and to provide a technical update to 
the Office's Freedom of Information Act regul ations. A  Proposed Rule regarding small claims 
procedures for libraries and archives to pre -emptively opt out of CCB proceedings on a blanket basis 
and a rule related to class actions was issued in September  2021.539 A Proposed Rule for regulations 
for Init iation of Proceedings and Related Procedures was issued in September  2021.540 In 
December  2021, the U.S.  Copyright Office issued a notice of proposed rulemaking to establish 
procedures governing active proceedings before the CCB and certain post -determinati on 
procedures.541 
3.390.   In FY2020, the Copyright Office registered 443,911 claims for registration and recorded 
7,098 documents containing titles of 233,694 works. The Office continues to administer statutory 
licenses  that govern certain uses of copyright -protect ed materials, and to collect, manage, and 
disperse royalty fees paid. In FY2020, the Office collected more than USD  237 million in royalty fees 
and USD  1.6 million in filing fees and distributed more than USD  265 million in fiduciary assets to 
copyright ow ners whose works were used under these licenses . As of 30  September  2020, the Office 
managed over USD  1.4 billion in statutory license  fiduciary assets.542 
3.391.   U.S. copyright law has anti -circumvention rules contained in the Digital Millennium Copyright 
Act (DM CA). However, the DMCA allows possible temporary exemptions to its prohibition against 
circumvention of technological measures that control access to, or unauthorized use of, copyrighted 
works. 17 U.S.C. 1201 requires that the Librarian of Congress, upon t he recommendation of the 
Register of Copyrights, determine in a public rulemaking every three years whether to adopt any 
proposed exemptions to the prohibition on circumventing technological access controls. Petitioners 
 
537 The CASE Act precludes the CCB dealing with claims or counterclaims th at have been finally 
adjudicated by a court of competent jurisdiction or that are pending before a court, unless that court has 
granted a stay to permit that claim or counterclaim to proceed before the CCB.  
538 U.S. Copyright Office, 37 C .F.R. Parts 201, 203  and 221 (Docket No.  2021–2) Copyright Alternative 
in Small -Claims Enforcement (''CASE'') Act Regulations: Expedited Registration and FOIA. Final rule. 
Federal  Register  (2021), Vol. 86, No.  157, 18  August. Viewed at: https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR -
2021-08-18/pdf/2021 -17696.pdf . 
539 Copyright Office, 37 C .F.R. Part 223 (Docket No.  2021-4) Small Claims Procedures for Library and 
Archives Opt -Outs and Class Actions. Notice of proposed rulemaking. Federal Register  (2021), Vol. 86, 
No. 168, 2  September. Viewed at: https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR -2021-09-02/pdf/2021 -18567.pdf . 
540 Copyright Office, 37 C .F.R. Parts 201, 220, 222, 223, and 224 (Docket No.  2021-6) Copyright Claims 
Board: Initiation of Proceedings and Related Procedures. Notice of proposed ru lemaking. Federal Register  
(2021), Vol.  86, No.  186, 29  September. Viewed at: https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR -2021-09-
29/pdf/2021 -20303.pdf . 
541 Copyright Office, 37 C.F.R. Parts 201, 220, 222, 225, 226, 227, 228, 229, 230, 231, 232, and 233 
(Docket No.  2021-8) Copyright Claims Board: Active Proceedings and Evidence. Notice of proposed rulemaking. 
Federal Register  (2021), Vol. 86, No.  233, 8  December. Viewed at: https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR -
2021-12-08/pdf/2021 -26058.pdf . 
542 U.S. Copyright Office (2021), Fiscal 2020 Annual Report . Viewed at: 
https://www.copyright.gov/reports/annual/2020/ar2020.pdf . The Fiscal 2021 Annual Report will be released in 
early 2022.  WT/TPR/S/434 /Rev.1  • United States  
 
- 183 - 
 
  submit evidence and arguments for th e Copyright Office to consider. The Librarian reviews the 
recommendation before issuing any exemptions.543 
3.392.   The U.S. Copyright Office concluded its eighth triennial rulemaking proceeding under 
17 U.S.C.  1201.544 A final rule establishing temporary exemptions to the anti -circumvention 
provisions was issued in October  2021.545 Under this rule, circumvention to access motion pictures 
is permitted, with certain restrictions, for purposes of criticism or comment, lawful preservation, 
educational uses, educational ac cessibility for persons with disabilities, and text and data mining for 
scholarly research and teaching. Similarly, circumvention to access literary works is permitted for 
purposes of text and data mining for scholarly research and teaching and to access c ompilations of 
data generated by medical devices. The rule permits circumvention to access electronic literary and 
musical works fixed in the form of text or notation to make those works accessible for persons who 
are visually impaired. For computer progra ms, circumvention is allowed to enable unlocking.  
3.3.7.9   Enforcement  
3.3.7.9.1   Main provisions, institutions, and actions  
3.393.   Provisions with respect to enforcement of IPRs are contained in all main IP laws. Additionally, 
the Stop Counterfeiting in Manufactured Goods Act of 20 06 (P.L.  109-181) prohibits the trafficking 
in counterfeit goods and services, including labels or similar packaging of any type intended to be 
used on, or in connection with, the goods or services for which the genuine mark is registered. There 
are severa l agencies involved in the enforcement of IPRs and enforcement policy development of 
IPRs, including USDOC, in particular USPTO, DOJ, Treasury, Homeland Security, State, Agriculture, 
Health and Human Services, the Copyright Office, and the Office of the U. S. Intellectual Property 
Enforcement Coordinator (IPEC).  IPEC is a component in the Executive Office of the President, that 
engages with stakeholders and international partners to address IP issues, impacting infringement, 
market access, competition, digit al trade, cybersecurity, and rule of law concerns around the world. 
IPEC also works to expand coordination within the Government on IP enforcement, and chairs two 
interagency committees. In November  2020, in coordination with other U.S. government agencies  
involved with the enforcement of IPRs, IPEC issued the fourth Joint Strategic Plan on IP  Enforcement 
under Section  303 of the PRO  IP Act (15  U.S.C. 8113) for 2020 -23. The Plan is composed of four 
parts: (i)  engagement with U.S. trading partners; (ii)  effective use of all U.S. legal authorities, 
including trade tools; (iii)  expanded law enforcement action and cooperation; and (iv)  engagement 
and partnership with the private sector and other stakeholders.546 Additionally, under Section  304 
of the PRO  IP Act ( 15 U.S.C. 8114), IPEC issues an annual report focusing on the IP enforcement 
activities of the Federal Government. IPEC issued its annual report for FY2020 in January  2021.547 
3.394.   DOJ enforces IPRs through both criminal and civil actions. It investigates and prosecutes a 
wide range of IP crimes, including those involving copyright piracy, trademark counterfeiting, and 
trade secret theft. Primary investigative and prosecutorial responsibility within DOJ rests with the 
Federal Burea u of Investigation (FBI), the United  States Attorneys' Offices, the Computer Crime and 
Intellectual Property Section  (CCIPS) in the Criminal Division, the Counterintelligence and Export 
Control Section  (CES) in the National Security Division, and the Consu mer Protection Branch of the 
Civil Division with regard to offences arising under the Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act. DOJ also 
coordinates and supports the Computer Hacking and Intellectual Property Network, which consist s 
of prosecutors who are specially tr ained in the investigation and prosecution of IP and computer 
crimes. DOJ's Civil Division also deals with IPR  enforcement: the IP Section  brings affirmative cases 
 
543 U.S. Copyright Office, Section  1201 of Title 17: The Triennial Rulemaking Process. Viewed at: 
https://www.copyright.gov/1201/1201_rulemaking_slides.pdf . 
544 Federal Register  (2021), Vol. 86, No.  206, 28  October. Viewed at: 
https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR -2021-10-28/pdf/2021 -23311.pdf . 
545 See generally U.S. Copyright Office, Rulemaking Proceedings Under Section  1201 of Title 17. 
Viewed  at: https://www.copyright.gov/1201/ . 
546 IPEC (2020), United  States Joint Strategic Plan on Intellectual Property (2020 -2023) . Viewed at: 
https://trumpwhiteh ouse.archives.gov/wp -content/uploads/2020/11/IPEC -Joint-Strategic -Plan.pdf . 
547 IPEC (2021), Annual Intellectual Property Report to Congress, January  2021. Viewed at: 
https://trumpwhitehouse.archives.gov/wp -content/uploads/2021/01/IPEC -Annual -Intellectual -Property -Report -
January -2021.pdf . WT/TPR/S/434 /Rev.1  • United States  
 
- 184 - 
 
  when U.S. IP is infringed548; the National Courts Section  initiates civil actions to recover various 
penalties or customs duties arising from negligent or fraudulent import transactions, and defends 
CBP enforcement of USITC's exclusion orders under Section  337 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as 
amended (19  U.S.C. 1337); and the Consumer Protection Bran ch conducts civil and criminal 
litigation under the Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act. The PRO IP Act of 2008 (15  U.S.C. 8114) required 
the Attorney General to produce an annual report detailing actions D OJ has taken to implement 
Title IV of the Act549; the most  recent report was published for FY2020.550 
3.395.   The ICE -Homeland Security Investigations (HSI) -led National Intellectual Property Rights 
Coordination Center (IPR Center), plays a major role in the Government's response to global IP theft 
and enforcement of trad e laws.551 The IPR Center is responsible for investigating transnational crime 
and threats and leads the Government's response to investigating and preventing IPR violations, 
digital piracy, illicit trade, and customs fraud. The Center has a three -pronged a pproach to combat 
IP theft: (i)  investigation; (ii)  interdiction; and (iii)  outreach and training.  In FY2020, the IPR 
Center/HSI initiated 449 IP investigations, arrested 203 individuals, obtained 125 indictments, and 
received 98 convictions and 2,084 seiz ures worth USD  299.4  million related to IP. Also in FY2020, 
the IPR Center vetted 33,184 investigative leads.552 
3.396.   CBP focuses its trade enforcement efforts on seven Priority Trade Issues (PTIs) that 
represent high -risk areas that can cause significant revenue loss, harm the U.S. economy, or 
threaten the health and safety of the U.S. population. IPR protection is one of t hose seven PTIs. CBP 
made 26,503  seizures of counterfeit goods with an estimated manufacturer's suggested retail price 
(MSRP) of over USD  1.3 billion in FY2020, compared to some 27,599 seizures in FY2019.553 In 
FY2020 , by value, the main seizures were in: w atches/ jewelry  (USD 435.25  million, or 33% of the 
total); handbags/wallets (USD  282.70  million, or 22%); consumer electronics USD  162.23  million, 
12%); wearing apparel/accessories (USD  157.23  million, 12%); consumer products 
(USD  85.47  million, 7%); footwe ar (USD  63.15  million, 5%); pharmaceuticals (USD  20.41  million, 
2%); labels/tags (USD  19.82  million, 2%); batteries (USD  14.43  million, 1%); and other 
commodities USD  68.45  million, 5%).  
3.397.   The National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2020, Section  1281, created a 
continuously updated list of individuals and organizations that have a history of IP theft, technology 
transfer violations, and cyberespionage or pose a serious risk of improper technology transfer. The 
list includes individuals and organiz ations that operate under the direction of a foreign military or 
intelligence agency.  
3.398.   In FY2020, 70 national level IPR Trade Special Operations (TSOs) and 111 local IPR -TSOs 
were conducted; they targeted high -risk shipments across the United  States and res ulted in 
219 seizures of IPR -infringing goods which, if genuine, would have an estimated MSRP of 
USD 1.7 million, more than double the value in FY2019. As of 30  September  2020, CBP was 
enforcing 18,757 active recorded copyrights and trademarks. In FY2020, CBP's Office of Trade (OT) 
received and responded to 455 inquiries concerning IPR enforcement, a 20% increase from FY2019. 
CBP's enforcement of these orders resulted in 137  exclusion order administrative actions. In 
response to the increase in e -commerce, CBP has created an enforcement and facilitation framework 
for e-commerce through the administration of Section  321 Data Pilot and Entry Type 86 Test. 
 
548 The Intellectual Property (IP) Section  of the Commercial Litigation Branch represents the 
United  States in matte rs where a patent, copyright, trademark, or trade secret is at issue. Many of the cases 
the Section  handles involve complex technologies. DOJ, Intellectual Property Section. Viewed at: 
https://www.justice.gov/civil/intellectual -property -section . 
549 DOJ, PRO IP Act Reports . Viewed at: https://www.justice.gov/iptf/pro -ip-act-reports . 
550 DOJ, PRO IP Act Annual Report FY 2020 . Viewed at: https://www.justice.gov/criminal -
ccips/page/file/1460726/download . 
551 IPR Center, About the Center . Viewed at: https://www.iprcenter.gov/about . 
552 IPEC (2021), Annual Intellectual Property Report to Congress , January. Viewed at: 
https://www.iprcenter.gov/file -repository/ipec -2020-annual -intellectual -property -report -1.pdf/view ; and 
https://trumpwhitehouse.archives.gov/wp -content/uploads/2021/01/IPEC -Annual -Intellectual -Property -Report -
January -2021.pdf . 
553 CBP (2021), Intellectual Property Rights Seizure Statistics: Fiscal Year 2020 . Viewed at: 
https://www.cbp.gov/sites/default/files/assets/documents/2021 -
Sep/101808%20FY%202020% 20IPR%20Seizure%20Statistic%20Book%2017%20Final%20spreads%20ALT%
20TEXT_FINAL%20%28508%29%20REVISED.pdf . WT/TPR/S/434 /Rev.1  • United States  
 
- 185 - 
 
  Initiated in 2019, the voluntary Section  321 Data Pilot allows CBP to accept shipment -level 
information fr om online marketplaces and match it with information from traditional carriers.554 
3.3.7.9.2   Special 301  
3.399.   Under Section  182 of the Trade Act of 1974 (Trade Act, 19  U.S.C. 2242), as amended, also 
known as "Special 301" provisions, USTR conducts an annual review of the state of IPR  protection 
and enforcement in U.S. trading partners around the world, which is published as the Special 301 
Report. In the Special 301 Annual Review, a trading partner may be identified as a "Priority Foreign 
Country" (PFC) if it has the most onerous or egregious acts, policies, or practices that deny adequate 
and effective IPRs, or deny fair and equitable market access to U.S.  persons that rely on 
IP protection, whose acts, policies, or practices have the greatest adverse impact (actual or 
potential) on the relevant U.S. products, and is not "entering into good faith negotiations or making 
significant progress in bilateral or multilateral negotiations". Trading partners may also be identified 
on a Priority Watch List or Watch List, if they meet  some, but not all, of the criteria for designation 
as a PFC. For certain countries identified in USTR's Priority Watch List, the USTR is required to 
develop an action plan with benchmarks to assist the foreign country to achieve adequate and 
effective IPR protection and fair and equitable market access for U.S. persons that rely upon 
IPR protection.  
3.400.   As PFC is a statutory category, if a trading partner has been identified as such, the USTR is 
required to initiate a Section  301 investigation within 30 day s of when the country was identified, 
unless the USTR determines that the initiation of such an investigation would be detrimental to 
U.S. economic interests, or where the act, policy, or practice identified as the basis for the PFC 
identification is the s ubject of any other investigation or action under Section  301. The USTR must 
make a determination of actionability and decide what action to take, if any, within six months of 
the initiation of the investigation, or nine months under certain specific condi tions. This period may 
be extended to nine months if the issues involved are complex; the foreign country is making 
substantial progress in drafting or implementing legislation or administrative measures to provide 
adequate and effective IPR protection; or  it is undertaking enforcement measures to this end.  
3.401.   In its 2021 Special 301 Report, USTR identified a range of concerns, including: (i)  the 
deterioration in the effectiveness of IP protection and enforcement, and overall market access for 
persons relying on IP in a number of trading partner markets; (ii)  challenges with border and criminal 
enforcement against copyright piracy and the sale of counterfeit trademarked products, including in 
the online environment; (iii)  high levels of online and broadcast pir acy, including through illicit 
streaming devices; (iv)  inadequacies in trade secret protection and enforcement; (v)  indigenous 
innovation and forced technology transfer policies that may unfairly disadvantage U.S. right holders 
in markets abroad; (vi) addi tional market access barriers, including non -transparent, discriminatory 
or otherwise trade -restrictive, measures that appear to impede access to healthcare and 
copyright -protected content; and (vii) other ongoing, systemic issues regarding IP protection a nd 
enforcement, as well as market access, in many trading partners around the world. The 2021 Special 
301 report identified 32 trading partners as failing to provide adequate and effective IP protection, 
and fair and equitable market access to persons that  rely on such protection.555 No trading partner 
was identified as a PFC as a result of the review. Nine trading partners were placed on the Priority 
Watch List556, and 23 on the Watch List.557 In addition to identifying 32 countries on the Priority 
Watch List  and the Watch List, the report also mentioned areas of concern in several countries.558 
 
554 CBP (2021), Intellectual Property Righ ts Seizure Statistics: Fiscal Year 2020 . Viewed at: 
https://www.cbp.gov/sites/default/files/assets/documents/2021 -
Sep/101808%20FY%202020%20IPR%20Seizure%20Statistic%20Book%2017%20Final%20spreads%20ALT%
20TEXT_FINAL%20%28508%29%20REVISED.pdf .  
555 USTR,  2021 Special 301 Report. Viewed at: 
https://ustr.gov/sites/default/files/files/reports/2021/2021%20Special%20301%20Report%20(final).pdf . 
556 Argentina, Chile, China, India, Indones ia, the Russian  Federation, the Kingdom of Saudi  Arabia, 
Ukraine, and the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela.  
557 Algeria, Barbados, the Plurinational State of Bolivia, Brazil, Canada, Colombia, the 
Dominican  Republic, Ecuador, Egypt, Guatemala, the State of K uwait, Lebanon, Mexico, Pakistan, Paraguay, 
Peru, Romania, Thailand, Trinidad and Tobago, Türkiye , Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan, and Viet  Nam.  
558 USTR (2021),  2021 Special 301 Report. Viewed at: 
https://ustr.gov/sites/default/files/files/reports/2021/2021%20Special%20301%20Report%20(final).pdf . WT/TPR/S/434 /Rev.1  • United States  
 
- 186 - 
 
  3.402.   USTR also conducts out -of-cycle Notorious Markets reviews. The Review of Notorious 
Markets for Counterfeiting and Piracy, also known as the Notorious Markets List, iden tifies selected  
markets, including those on the Internet, that reportedly engage in and facilitate copyright piracy 
and trademark counterfeiting. The List is non -exhaustive, and may include previously identified 
markets where owners, operators, and governm ents have failed to address concerns. The List does 
not make findings of legal violations, nor does it reflect the U.S. Government's analysis of the general 
IP protection and enforcement climate in the countries connected with the listed markets.559 
The 2020 Notorious Markets List included for the first time a section addressing the role of Internet 
platforms in facilitating the importation of counterfeit and pirated goods into the United  States. The 
List highlighted 39 online markets, and 34 physical market s in 17  trading partners,  reported to be 
engaging in and facilitating substantial copyright piracy and trademark counterfeiting.560 
3.3.7.9.3   Section  337 investigations  
3.403.   Unfair import (Section  337) investigations are conducted by USITC as mandated by 
Section  337 of th e Tariff Act of 1930 (19  U.S.C. 1337). They most often involve claims regarding 
IPRs, including allegations of utility and design patent and trademark infringement by imported 
goods. Other forms of unfair competition involving imported products, such as in fringement of 
registered copyrights, mask works or boat hull designs, misappropriation of trade secrets or trade 
dress, passing off, and false advertising, may also be asserted. Antitrust claims relating to imported 
goods may also be asserted. The primary remedy available in Section  337 investigations is an 
exclusion order that directs CBP to stop infringing imports from entering the United  States. In 
addition, USITC may issue cease and desist orders against named importers and other persons 
engaged in unfa ir acts that violate Section  337. Expedited relief in the form of temporary exclusion 
orders and temporary cease and desist orders is also available in certain circumstances.  
3.404.   Section  337 investigations, which are conducted pursuant to 19  U.S.C. 1337 and th e 
Administrative Procedure Act, include trial proceedings before administrative law judges and review 
by the Commission. Section  337 of the Tariff Act of 1930 ( 19 U.S.C. 1337)  declares unlawful "unfair 
methods of competition and unfair acts in the importat ion and sale" of articles subject to satisfaction 
of a domestic  industry test. For some unfair acts, depending on the type of unfair  method of 
competition or act at issue, a showing of injury or threat of injury must also be made. USITC 
determines, upon re ceipt of a complaint alleging a violation of Section  337, whether the complaint 
satisfies the requirements of its rules, and if an investigation should be instituted. USITC is required, 
within 45 days after an investigation is instituted, to establish a ta rget date for issuing its final 
determination.561 If, at the completion of the investigation, USITC determines that Section  337 has 
been violated, it may issue exclusion orders barring the articles from entry into the United  States 
and/or directing the viol ating parties to cease and desist from certain actions. USITC orders are 
effective when issued, although imports are often allowed to continue subject to a bonding 
requirement; they become final 60 days after issuance unless disapproved for policy reasons by the 
USTR within that 60 -day period.  
3.405.   USITC -issued exclusion orders direct CBP either to bar entry into the United  States of 
infringing goods from whatever source (general exclusion orders) or to bar entry to imports from 
specifically identified entities (limited exclusion orders) . USITC may issue a general exclusion order 
applicable to imports from all countries if either a general exclusion order is necessary to prevent 
circumvention of an exclusion order limited to products of named persons, or there is  a pattern of 
violation of Section  337 and it is difficult to identify the source of infringing products. Instead of, or 
in addition to, exclusion orders, USITC may issue cease and desist orders against named importers 
and other persons engaged in unfair a cts that violate Section  337. Also, USITC  must consider the 
effects of a remedial order on the public health and welfare, competitive conditions in the 
U.S. economy, the production of like or directly competitive articles in the United  States, and 
 
559 USTR (2021), 2020 Review of Notorious Market s for Counterfeiting and Piracy . Viewed at: 
https://ustr.gov/sites/default/files/files/Press/Releases/2020%20Review%20of%20Notorious%20Markets%20f
or%20Counterfeiting%20and%20Piracy%20(final).pdf . 
560 Argentina, Brazil, Cambodia, China, Ecuador, India, Indonesia, Malaysia, Mexico, Paraguay, Peru, 
Philippines, the Russian  Federation, Türkiye , Ukraine, the United Arab Emirates, and Viet  Nam.  
561 USITC, About Section  337. Viewed at: 
https://usitc.gov/intellectual_property/about_section_337.htm . WT/TPR/S/434 /Rev.1  • United States  
 
- 187 - 
 
  U.S. consumers. It may refuse to issue an exclusion or cease and desist order after taking into 
account statutory public interest factors.562 
3.406.   In FY2018, FY2019, FY2020, and FY2021, 266  new Section  337 complaints were received 
by USITC, and 252 investigation s were completed.563 There were 135 active investigations during 
FY2021. The majority of the cases dealt with patent infringement; some cases dealt with copyright, 
trade secrets and trademarks, a combination of those IPRs, or some other unfair act, such as false 
advertising. Investigations covered products from some 40 trading partners and from the 
United  States. In the same period, USITC issued 61  exclusion orders, of which 38 were limited 
exclusion orders, and 23  were general exclusions, together with 130 cease and desist orders.564 The 
rest of the investigations ended in a settlement, or consent order, or the complaint was withdrawn 
(62% of the total in FY2021). As of 31  December  2021, 129 active  exclusion orders were in effect 
affecting imports of a range of products, including a utomotive/manufacturing/transportation 
products, chemical compositions, computer and telecommunications products, consumer electronics 
products, integrated circuits, LCDs/TVs, lighting products, memory chips and related products, 
pharmaceuticals and medical devices, printing products, and other consumer items . The average 
length of all investigations in FY2021 was 11.8 months, but the average length of investigations 
completed on the merits was 18.2 months.565 As noted above, CBP is i n charge of the enforcement 
of Section  337 exclusion orders issued by USITC. D OJ is responsible for defending CBP actions linked 
to these orders in the case of a dispute.566 
 
 
 
562 USITC (2014), Summary of Statutory Provisions Related to Import Relief, Inv estigations of Unfair 
Practices in Import Trade, Including Infringement of Patents, Trademarks, Copyrights, Mask Works, or Boat 
Hull Designs . USITC Publication 4468. Viewed at: https://ww w.usitc.gov/oig/documents/pub4468_2014.pdf . 
563 USITC, Section  337 Statistics: Number of New, Completed, and Active Investigations by Fiscal Year 
(Updated Quarterly) . Viewed at: 
https://usitc.gov/intellectual_property/337_statistics_number_new_completed_and_active.htm . 
564 USITC, Remedial Orders Issued (GEOs, LEOs, and CDOs) by Fiscal Year . Viewed at: 
https://www.usitc.gov/intellectual_property/337_statistics_remedial_orders_issued_leo_v_geo.htm . 
565 USITC, Section  337 Statistics: Average Length o f Investigation . Viewed at: 
https://www.usitc.gov/intellectual_property/337_statistics_average_length_investigations.htm . 
566 At the end of FY2020, C BP was administering 127 active exclusion orders issued by USITC following 
investigations of unfair import practices in the importation of articles into the United  States  in violation of 
19 U.S.C. 1337, the majority of which are based on allegations of pat ent infringement.  WT/TPR/S/434 /Rev.1  • United States  
 
- 188 - 
 
  4  TRADE POLICIES BY SECTOR  
4.1  Agriculture, Forestry, and Fisheries  
4.1.1   Main features  
4.1.  The Census of Agriculture is conducted every five years. It provides a detailed picture of 
U.S. farms and ranches. The last Census (2017) was published in April  2019.1 At the time of the 
Census, the United  States had 2.04  million f arms, a decline of 3.2% since 2012. At 441 acres, the 
average size of a farm was larger than in the two previous reports, although exactly the same size 
as in the 2002 Census. Almost 86% of all U.S. farms were owned by families or individuals, followed 
by agricultural partnerships (6.3%). Since 2007, such types  of farms have been  declining, while the 
number of farming corporations  is increasing (to 5.7% of all farms in 2017).  
4.2.  Abundant arable and pasture land and diverse climatic conditions support productio n of a wide 
range of commodities. Most farms are multiproduct operations. The direct contribution of primary 
agriculture to U.S. GDP is no more than 0.6%, and on -farm employment accounted for 
approximately 2.6  million jobs in 2020. However, as farms rely o n inputs from other industries, and 
their production feeds into other parts of the economy (processing and manufacturing, 
transportation, wholesale and retail trade, restaurants and bars, etc.), the U.S. Department of 
Agriculture's Economic Research Servic e (USDA ERS) estimates that agriculture, food, and related 
industries made up 5.2% of GDP in 2020, and that 19.7  million full - and part -time jobs were related 
to agricultural and food sectors. On average, food accounted for 11.9% of household expenditures 
in 2020, third after housing (35%) and transportation (16%).  
4.3.  U.S. farms generated a combined value of agricultural production of USD  373.5  billion in 2020 
(Table  4.1). The production value was higher for crops than for livestock in 2019 and 2020. Maize, 
soybeans, and hay (including alfalfa) are the principal crops, while livestock is dominated by cattle 
(beef and dairy), poultry and eggs, and hogs.  
Table  4.1 Value of production, 2016 -20 
(USD billion and %)   
2016 2017  2018  2019  2020  % of totala 
Total  355.5  369.3  365.4  356.0  373.5   
Maize for grain  51.3 49.6 52.1 48.9 61.0 16.3 
Soybeans  40.7 41.3 37.6 30.5 46.1 12.3 
Hay 15.5 16.1 17.3 18.0 17.3 4.6 
Wheat  9.2 8.3 9.7 8.9 9.3 2.5 
Cotton  5.8 7.2 6.4 5.9 4.7 1.3 
Milk 34.7 38.1 35.4 40.7 40.7 10.9 
Cattle and calves  48.6 50.4 49.1 48.2 45.8 12.3 
Poultry and eggs  38.8 42.7 46.2 40.0 35.5 9.5 
Hogs 17.4 19.2 18.8 21.2 18.1 4.8 
Crops total  185.9  187.9  184.7  173.2  205.3  55.0 
a Percentage of total for the year 2020.  
Source:  USDA National Agricultural Statistics Service. Viewed at: https://quickstats.nass.usda.gov/ ; USDA 
National Agricultural Statistics Service, Poultry – Production and Value , different bulle tins. 
Viewed  at: https://www.nass.usda.gov/Publications/Todays_Reports/reports/plva0422.pdf  (most 
recent) and OECD Stats, Agriculture Policy Indicators, 2022 Monitor ing and Evaluation: Reference 
Tables.  
4.4.  The United  States is the world's largest producer of soybeans, maize, beef, and chicken and 
turkey , and a major producer of pig meat and cotton (Table  4.2). Although the agricultural producers 
benefit from a large dome stic market to absorb their output, the U.S. farm sector is also 
characterized by significant export orientation for certain commodities. Overall, about one  fifth of 
U.S. agricultural production goes to foreign markets, with particularly high export shares  for cotton 
(more than 75%), and wheat and soybeans (about 50%).2 
 
1 The full report may be downloaded from: 
https://www.nass.usda.gov/Publications/AgCensus/2017/index.php .  
2 Congressional Research Service (CRS) (2021), U.S. Agricultural Export Programs: Background and 
Issues , R46760, April. Viewed at: https://crsreports.congress.gov/product/pdf/R/R46760 . WT/TPR/S/434 /Rev.1  • United States  
 
- 189 - 
 
  Table  4.2 U.S. and world production and trade of selected commodities, FY2017 /18-
2021 /22 
('000 tons, unless otherwise indicated)  
Marketing yea r 2017/18  2018/19  2019/20  2020/21  2021/22  
Maize        
Production  United  States  371,096  364,262  345,962  358,447  383,943   
% of world  34.3 32.3 30.9 31.9 31.8 
Exports  United  States  61,906  52,538  45,132  69,920  61,598   
% of world  41.3 28.8 26.2 39.0 30.2 
Wheat        
Production  United  States  47,380  51,306  52,581  49,751  44,790   
% of world  6.2 7.0 6.9 6.4 5.8 
Exports  United  States  24,658  25,503  26,372  26,985  22,453   
% of world  13.3 14.5 13.6 13.3 11.0 
Cotton ('000 480 lb bales)       
Production  United  States  20,923  18,367  19,913  14,608  17,624   
% of world  16.9 15.5 16.5 13.1 14.6 
Exports  United  States  16,281  14,833  15,512  16,371  15,000   
% of world  39.1 35.7 37.7 33.6 32.2 
Soybean, oilseed       
Production  United  States  120,065  120,515  96,667  114,749  120,707   
% of world  35.0 33.4 28.4 31.3 32.4 
Exports  United  States  58,071  47,721  45,701  61,655  55,792   
% of world  37.9 32.0 27.7 37.4 32.7 
Calendar year  2017  2018  2019  2020  2021  
Beef and veal       
Production  United  States  11,943  12,256  12,385  12,389  12,736   
% of world  21.2 21.2 21.1 21.5 22.1 
Exports  United  States  1,297  1,433  1,373  1,339  1,567   
% of world  12.9 13.5 12.1 11.9 13.5 
Poultry meat        
Production  United  States  18,938  19,361  19,941  20,255  20,378   
% of world  20.8 20.9 20.5 20.4 20.4 
Exports  United  States  3,137  3,244  3,259  3,376  3,367   
% of world  25.8 26.1 25.0 25.8 25.7 
Source:  USDA Foreign Agricultural Service (FAS), Production, Supply and Distribution database. Viewed at: 
https://apps.fas.usda.gov/psdonline/app/index.html#/app/advQuery . 
4.5.  The Un ited States is the world's largest agricultural exporter. In seven of its states, agriculture 
accounts for more than 30% of their total export value, and the share exceeds 10% in a further 
14 states. Canada and Mexico are key traditional markets and, altho ugh exports rise more slowly 
towards mature industrialized economies, Europe and Japan remain important trading partners. 
However, the most significant increases in food and commodity exports have been to China and 
other fast -growing economies in East and Southeast Asia.  
4.6.  As the United  States is a major exporter of bulk commodities, its trade surplus in agricultural 
products widened between 2006 and 2014 on the back of strong commodity prices, and then 
narrowed as these prices weakened (Chart  4.1). Agricultu ral imports have been growing consistently 
and with less volatility, as they are dominated by high -value food items (such as alcoholic beverages, 
specialty cheeses, and meat products) and domestic demand for seasonal fruit and vegetables, 
unroasted coffee,  spices, cut flowers, and other tropical products (Table  4.3). However, U.S. exports 
of processed goods are on the rise. In 2020, consumer -oriented food products (e.g. meats, dairy 
products, fruit, vegetables, and packaged foods) accounted for almost 50% o f the export value 
(though only 11% of the volume). Such goods dominate sales of U.S. agricultural products to 
developed -country markets (more than 80%) while, for example, China and North African countries 
primarily purchase bulk commodities from the Unit ed States.  WT/TPR/S/434 /Rev.1  • United States  
 
- 190 - 
 
  Chart  4.1 Exports and imports of agricultural products, 2000 -21 
(USD billion)  
 
Source:  WTO Secretariat calculations, based on UN Comtrade database.  
4.7.  As in other countries, U.S. farmers may experience revenue stress due to natural disasters, 
market disruptions, and other events. Most current U.S.  farm support program s are designed to help 
mitigate risk and provide a safety net when prices or revenue fal l, or when producers experience 
crop or livestock losses. Support does not cover all losses, and agricultural producers bear some of 
the risk and costs. The USDA estimates net cash income and net farm income as one way to measure 
the financial position of U.S. farmers.3 The decline in farm income from its peak in 2013 reached its 
lowest point in 2016, when prices were at their lowest for livestock and livestock products and only 
slightly recovered for crops. Since 2018, U.S. agricultural producers have fac ed extraordinary 
disruptions due to trade tensions, followed by the COVID -19 pandemic. However, some of the 
reduction in income has been offset by significant increases in federal government payments. 
According to the USDA ERS, net farm income rose by 20% from 2019 to 2020, and by 25% from 
2020 to 2021, although in the latter case, higher cash receipts from strong agricultural markets 
offset lower government payments. At USD  119.1  billion, projected net farm income was close to 
the peak in 2013 (USD  123.7  billion), which is the highest on record so far (Chart  4.2). However, 
the forecast for 2022 is a 5% decline to USD  113.7  billion, as higher cash receipts do not fully offset 
lower government payments and higher input costs.4 
 
3 Whereas net cash income measures the net cash flow over the calendar year, net farm income is a 
broader indicator that includes the value of home consumption, inventory changes, capital replacement, and 
implicit rent and dwelling expenses.  
4 USDA ERS, 2022 Farm Sector Income Forecast . Viewed at: https://www.ers.usda.gov/topics/farm -
economy/farm -sector -income -finances/farm -sector -income -forecast/.  
020406080100120140160180200
2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021Exports
ImportsChart 4.1
Exports and imports of agricultural products, 2000 -21
Source:  WTO Secretariat calculations, based on UN Comtrade database.(USD billion)WT/TPR/S/434 /Rev.1  • United States  
 
- 191 - 
 
  Chart  4.2 Farm sector income, 2000 -22 
(USD billion)  
 
a Forecast values.  
Source:  USDA ERS, Farm Income and Wealth Statistics . Viewed at: https://www.ers.usda.gov/data -
products/farm -income -and-wealth -statistics/ . 
4.1.1.1   Major support program s 
4.1.1.1.1   General legal framework  
4.8.  Agricultural policy is primarily governed by omnibus legislative packages (Farm Bills) that 
terminate, continue, or amend prior policies and establish new policies and program s over a five -year 
cycle. The Agriculture Improvement Act of 2018 ( P.L. 115-334), also known as the 2018  Farm Act, 
was signed into law on 20  December  2018. It extended most of the existing support progra ms, with 
modifications in some instances. Notably, the Agriculture Risk Coverage (ARC) and Price Loss 
Coverage (PLC) revenue support program s were reauthorized, with minor changes, and a new option 
for producers to choose between the two program s annually. The crop insurance program  is 
continued, with some expansion in livestock insurance options. The Dairy Margin Coverage (DMC) 
program  supers eded the earlier Margin Protection Program for Dairy Producers, and offered new 
options for dairy farmers, especially smaller scale producers, to purchase coverage for a specified 
level of a nationally determined milk -to-feed margin. The sugar program  continued with an increase 
in non -recourse loan rates. The Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) was amended 
and reauthorized through FY2023, and funding for the Emergency Food Assistance Program (TEFAP) 
was increased. The principal environmental la nd retirement program  – the Conservation Reserve 
Program (CRP) – was continued with an increase in the maximum acreage and tighter limits on how 
per acre rental rates are set. The Environmental Quality Incentives Program (EQIP), the Agricultural 
Conservati on Easement Program (ACEP), and the Regional Conservation Partnerships Program 
(RCPP) were reauthorized with increased funding. The Conservation Stewardship Program (CSP) was 
also reauthorized, but with reduced funding. Overall, mandatory conservation spen ding increased 
by 2%.  
4.9.  New features in the 2018 Farm Act include additional program s for specialty crops, organic 
farmers, local and regional markets, and beginning, military veteran, and minority farmers. The Act 
also addresses a range of issues of importa nce to rural communities, including the expansion of 
broadband access, opioid abuse and rural health, and business and infrastructure development. 
Title IX (Energy) extends eight program s and one initiative through FY2023, and creates a grant 
program  focus ing on carbon sequestration and biogas systems. The Congressional Budget Office 
(CBO) projected that outlays at enactment of the 2018 Farm Bill would be USD  428 billion over its 
five-year life cycle, of which over 75% was projected outlays for nutrition program s. 
0102030405060708090100110120130140150Chart 4.X Farm sector income, 2000 -2022
Net farm income
Net cash farm income
Federal Government direct farm
program payments
Source: USDA, Economic Research Service, Farm income and wealth statitsics. Viewed at: 
https://iconnect.wto.org/data -products/farm -income -and-wealth -statistics/,DanaInfo=www.ers.usda.gov,SSL+(USD billion)
a   Forecast values.WT/TPR/S/434 /Rev.1  • United States  
 
- 192 - 
 
  4.10.   The USDA assists producers in reducing GHG emissions, enhancing carbon sequestration, and 
adapting to a changing climate. It released an Action Plan for Climate Adaptation and Resilience, a 
framework to prepare farmers, ranchers, and land managers for current and anticipated impacts of 
climate change, in October  2021. The USDA operates a network of Regional Climate Hubs that links 
its research and program  agencies. Their aim is to facilitate climate -informed decision -making and 
direct stakeholders t owards resources needed to implement such decisions.  
4.1.1.1.2   Price Loss Coverage (PLC)  
4.11.   The PLC program  provides payments on 85% of historical base acres multiplied by historical 
yields for each historically produced covered commodity on a farm when the national pr ice (defined 
in legislation) is less than the statutory effective reference price for the commodity. There is no 
requirement to produce the covered commodity, or any other commodity, to be eligible for 
payments. Covered commodities include maize, soybeans,  wheat, other feed grains, other oilseeds, 
peanuts, pulses, rice, and seed cotton. Payments are made no earlier than 1  October after the end 
of the applicable marketing year for the covered commodity.  
4.12.   USDA Farm Service Agency data indicates that PLC paymen ts to nearly 1.4  million farms 
totaled  USD 4.95 billion for the 2019 crop year, and USD  2.07 billion in the 2020 crop year to 
800,000 farms.5 Over the two years combined, the highest PLC payments were paid on base acres 
with historical production of wheat  (USD 2,529  million), seed cotton (USD  1,439  million), maize 
(USD  1,099  million), peanuts (USD  779 million), and long grain rice (USD  626 million).  
4.1.1.1.3   Agriculture Risk Coverage (ARC)  
4.13.   The revenue guarantee of the ARC, an income support program  tied to benchmar k 
guarantees, may be determined at the farm level (individual ARC or ARC -IC) or on a 
commodity -by-commodity basis at the county level (ARC -CO). Covered commodities are the same 
as for the PLC program  and include wheat, feed grains, soybeans, peanuts, other  oilseeds, rice, seed 
cotton, and pulses.  
4.14.   Payments under ARC -CO are tied to historical base acres and no production is required. 
Payments are provided when county -level revenue is less than the guarantee, set at 86% of the 
benchmark revenue for the covered  commodity. The benchmark corresponds to the five -year 
(Olympic) average national market price multiplied by the five -year (Olympic) average county yield. 
ARC-CO payments, when triggered, are made on 85% of the base acres of the covered commodity. 
Enrolmen t in ARC -IC automatically covers all base acres on the farm, and payments are triggered 
when the farm's total revenue from the covered commodities falls short of the farm's revenue 
guarantee, which is 86% of the benchmark revenue. The benchmark is calculat ed as the weighted 
five-year average revenue of all covered commodities planted on the farm, and payments, when 
triggered, are made on 65% of the farm's total base acres.  
4.15.   The 2014 Farm Act, which introduced the PLC and ARC program s, did not allow farmers t o 
switch between the program s after the initial election had been made. However, producers could 
opt to elect ARC -CO for some of their base acres and PLC for other base acres. The 2018 Farm Act 
allows farmers to change their program  elections annually as f rom the 2021 crop year. The Act also 
changes the primary source for county average yield data used for ARC -CO from the National 
Agricultural Statistics Services to the USDA Risk Management Agency to minimize disparities in 
payments observed in certain neighboring  counties. Moreover, some large counties may be 
subdivided to reflect significant yield deviations within them.  
4.16.   According to the USDA FSA, ARC payments for the 2019 crop year totaled  USD 1.26 billion to 
some 648,000 farms and were primarily ARC -CO payments (USD  952 million). In the 2020 crop 
year, ARC payments declined to USD  87 million, with ARC -CO payments accounting for 70% of the 
total. The largest ARC payments over the two years were made on base acres of soybeans 
(USD  718 million), maize (USD  505 million), and wheat (USD  89 million).  
 
5 USDA FSA, 2019 Program Year Specific Data. Viewed at: https://www.fsa.usda.gov/Assets/USDA -FSA-
Public/usdafiles/arc -plc/2019/pdf/ 2019_arc_plc_payments.pdf ; and 2020 Program Year Specific Data. 
Viewed  at: https://www.fsa.usda.gov/Assets/USDA -FSA-Public/usdafiles/arc -
plc/2020/pdf/2020_arc_plc_payments.pdf .  WT/TPR/S/434 /Rev.1  • United States  
 
- 193 - 
 
  4.1.1.1.4   Marketing assistance loans  
4.17.   Marketing assistance loans provide interim financing on harvested commodities that enables 
producers to delay sales when market conditions are unfavorable , typically around harvest time, 
until better opportunities emerge. The farmer is expected to repay the loan at the end of the term 
(usually nine months), but it may also be redeemed earlier. The interim financing is provided by the 
USDA Commodity Credit Corporation (CCC) to eligible produ cers of 28 commodities.  
4.18.   Marketing assistance loans for covered commodities are non -recourse; the commodity is 
pledged as loan collateral and producers have the option of forfeiting the pledged collateral to the 
CCC in lieu of repayment of the outstanding l oan. Repayment provisions, which allow a producer to 
repay the loan at less than the loan rate and earn a marketing loan gain (MLG), help minimize 
potential forfeiture of loan collateral to the CCC. Producers may also elect to receive a loan deficiency 
payment (LDP) in lieu of securing a marketing assistance loan. An LDP is the difference the producer 
would have received if a loan was repaid at the lower market price. Gross income limitations apply, 
all conservation and wetland protection requirements must be complied with, and producers must 
report all crop acreage planted to be eligible for LDP or marketing loans.6 MLGs and LDPs  occurring 
in crop years 2019 -23 are not subject to payment limitations.7 
4.19.   The 2018 Farm Act extended most provisions applicable to marketing assistance loans under 
the 2014 Farm Act, including the statutory loan rates for non -recourse marketing assistance  loans 
through crop year 2023. However, the loan rates were either unchanged or increased by amounts 
ranging from 7.7% to 43.9% above the earlier statutory loan rates, but generally remain below 
market prices (Table  4.3). MLGs and LDPs totaled  USD 223 million in 2019, paid on cotton, wool, 
and pulses, and USD  12 million in 2020, paid on cotton and wool.  
Table  4.3 Commodity Loan Rates, 2018 and 2021  
Covered commodities  Marketing loan program  
Commodity loan rates, 2014 
Farm Act (as amended)  National average 
loan rates, 2021  Percentage 
change  
    
Wheat (bu.)  2.94 3.38 15.0 
Maize (bu.)  1.95 2.20 12.8 
Grain sorghum (bu.)  1.95 2.20 12.8 
Barley (bu.)  1.95 2.50 28.2 
Oats (bu.)  1.39 2.00 43.9 
Rice long-grain (cwt)  6.50 7.00 7.7 
Rice medium -grain (cwt)  6.50 7.00 7.7 
Peanuts (ton)  355 355 0 
Soybeans (bu.)  5.00 6.20 24.0 
Other oilseeds (cwt)a 0.1009  0.1009  0 
Dry peas (cwt)  5.40 6.15 13.9 
Lentils (cwt)  11.28  13.00  15.2 
Small chickpeas (cwt)  7.43 10.00  34.6 
Large chickpeas (cwt)  11.28  14.00  24.1 
Graded wool (lb)  1.15 1.15 0 
Non-graded wool (lb)  0.40 0.40 0 
Mohair (lb)  4.20 4.20 0 
Honey (lb)  0.69 0.69 0 
Sugar beet, refined (lb)  0.2409  25.38  5.4 
Sugar cane, raw (lb)  0.1875  19.75  5.3 
 
6 Producers or legal entities whose average annual gross income exceeds USD  900,000 are eligible for 
marketing assistance loans, subject to certain conditions, but they are not eligible for MLG or LDP payments. 
USDA ( 2020), Marketing Assistance Loans and Loan Deficiency Payments , September. Viewed at: 
https://www.fsa.usda.gov/Assets/USDA -FSA-Public/usdafiles/Fact Sheets/mal_ldp_fact_sheet.pdf . 
7 MLGs and LDPs have tended to be negligible in recent years. However, the United  States notified to 
the WTO Committee on Agriculture MLGs (including certificate exchange gains) and LDPs of USD  215 million for 
cotton in the 2 019/20 marketing year. WTO document G/AG/N/USA/157, 30  September  2021, Supporting 
Table  DS:6.  WT/TPR/S/434 /Rev.1  • United States  
 
- 194 - 
 
  Covered commodities  Marketing loan program  
Commodity loan rates, 2014 
Farm Act (as amended)  National average 
loan rates, 2021  Percentage 
change  
Extra-long staple cotton (lb)  0.7977  0.95 19.1 
Seed cotton (lb)  0.25b 0.25b 0.0 
Upland cotton  0.52   
a "Other oilseeds" include canola, crambe, flaxseed, mustard seed, rapeseed, safflower seed, sesame 
seed and sunflower (oil and non -oil types).  
b Seed cotton is not a covered commodity under the marketing assistance loan program . The loan rate 
has been set only for the purpose of determining the effective prices for seed cotton under the Price 
Loss Coverage program . 
Source:  USDA FSA, The Agricultural Act of 2014, as amended. Viewed at: 
https://www.fsa.usda.gov/Assets/USDA -FSA-Public/ usdafiles/Price -Support/pdf/Cotton -2021-
rates/2021%20National%20Average%20Loan%20Rates.pdf , and 
https://www.fsa.u sda.gov/Assets/USDA -FSA-Public/usdafiles/Price -
Support/pdf/2019/2019%20Crop%20Year%20Sugar%20Loan%20Rates.pdf , and WTO Secretariat 
calculations.  
4.1.1.1.5   Crop insurance  
4.20.   Policies under the Federal Crop Insurance Program (FCIP) insure against losses in yield, crop 
revenue, margin, whole -farm revenue, and other types of losses. The USDA Risk Management 
Agency administers the FCIP, including the establishment of premium rates and other provisions. 
The insurance policies are contracts between farmers and Approved Insurance Providers (AIP), sold 
by private insurance agents, and the Federal Crop Insurance Corporation (FCIC) provides 
reinsurance to the AIPs. A policy is renewed automatically every year, unless cancelled by the farmer 
within a prescribed deadline.  
4.21.   Insurance policies under the FCIP cover nearly 130 crops, including specialty crops, under 
approximately 20 types of insurance policies. The four major crops – maize, soybeans, wheat, and 
cotton – dominate in terms of area enrolled and as a result of claims pa id. Crops on 461.6  million 
acres (net of acres covered by more than one policy type) were insured in 2021. Revenue protection 
is the most frequently purchased policy type. Farmers may purchase policies at coverage levels from 
minimum "catastrophic" yield l oss coverage, under which 100% of the insurance premium is 
subsidized but indemnities are paid only on losses above 50%, through various additional ("buy -up") 
coverage. The most commonly purchased policies allow farmers to buy up to 85% coverage level, 
i.e. always less than the full value of their crops.  
4.22.   The premiums that farmers pay for buy -up coverage are also subsidized, and the Federal Crop 
Insurance Act (FCIC Act) stipulates the percentage of premium subsidy. The AIPs and the FCIC share 
the underwritin g risk. In general, the AIPs retain 80% to 85% of the insurance premiums and the 
risks associated with that share, and the FCIC provides stop -loss reinsurance to the AIPs for the risk 
associated with their retained premiums under the Standard Reinsurance A greement and the 
Livestock Price Reinsurance Agreement. These agreements also reimburse the AIPs for their 
administrative and operating expenses related to the policies. Over time, the total premiums paid 
by farmers and the Government must exceed claim pay ments to maintain the viability and actuarial 
soundness of the insurance program s. The FCIP is required to achieve a loss ratio of 1.0, which 
implies that FCIP sets premiums at an actuarially sound rate, with the premium subsidies 
representing the differen ce between the full premium and the share contributed through 
producer -paid premiums.  
4.23.   On average, about 62% to 63% of insurance premiums were paid by the Federal Government 
in crop years 2018, 2019, and 2020, although subsidy levels vary across policy type s and risk levels. 
Subsidy levels have remained relatively consistent in recent years at approximately USD  6.2 billion 
per year.8 Wider use of index insurance policies, coupled with rising commodity prices, appears to 
have led to a sharp increase in premi ums (from USD  10 billion in 2020 to USD  13.6 billion in 2021) 
and a corresponding increase in premium subsidies (from USD  6.2 billion to USD  8.5 billion) in 2021.  
4.24.   The 2018 Farm Act continued existing program s with limited changes in products and policies, 
including some expanded coverage of existing products, clarity on conservation practices such as 
 
8 FCIC, Summary of Business Report for 2019 through 2022 , as of 2  May 2022. Viewed at: 
https://www3.rma.usda.gov/apps/sob/current_week/sobrpt2019 -2022.pdf .  WT/TPR/S/434 /Rev.1  • United States  
 
- 195 - 
 
  cover crops and good farming practices, and new offerings.9 Hemp was added to the list of eligible 
crops for subsidized insurance, and for policies covering p ost-harvest losses. According to the CBO, 
the projected five -year outlays for crop insurance showed a slight decline (0.1%) relative to baseline 
levels, notably due to the increase in the administrative fee for catastrophic level coverage, which 
was raised  from USD  300 to USD  655 for each crop insured in each county.10 
4.25.   In 2020, the USDA Risk Management Agency introduced the Hurricane Insurance 
Protection  – Wind Index (HIP -WI) endorsement. Sustained hurricane -force winds, as determined by 
the National Oceani c and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), are the only cause of loss for HIP -WI. 
Producers must have an underlying insurance policy; the endorsement covers a part of a producer's 
deductible in their underlying policy. HIP -WI is available in coastal areas in  the South and East of 
the United  States, as well as in Hawaii, and covers some 70  commodities.  
4.1.1.1.6   Dairy sector  
4.26.   The 2018 Farm Act authorized the Dairy Margin Coverage (DMC) program, replacing the 
Margin Protection Program for Dairy (MPP). Like the MPP, the DM C program is a voluntary risk 
management program  providing payments to participating dairy producers on enrolled average 
historical production when the national milk -to-feed cost margin, i.e. the difference between the 
monthly U.S. all -milk price and the m onthly national average feed cost (calculated according to a 
statutory formula), falls below the margin coverage level they have selected. Catastrophic coverage, 
defined as a nationally determined margin of less than USD  4 per hundredweight (cwt), is provi ded 
at no cost other than the annual USD  100 administrative fee paid by all participants.11 Enrolled dairy 
operations choose their Tier 1 margin coverage within the USD  4 to USD  9.50 range for production 
history up to 5  million pounds and pay the premium c orresponding to the selected level of coverage 
(Table  4.4). In addition, they must decide the quantity of historical production to be covered (5% to 
95%, in 5% increments). Tier 2 protection is available to larger scale operations with a covered 
production  history exceeding 5  million pounds provided they have selected a margin of USD  8.50 or 
above in Tier 1.  
Table  4.4 DMC schedule of premiums  
(USD)  
Coverage level (margin)  
per cwt  Tier 1 – premium  Tier 2 – prem ium  
Covered production history  
≤ 5 million lbs  Covered production history  
> 5 million lbs  
4.00 None None 
4.50 0.0025  0.0025  
5.00 0.005  0.005  
5.50 0.030  0.100  
6.00 0.050  0.310  
6.50 0.070  0.650  
7.00 0.080  1.107  
7.50 0.090  1.413  
8.00 0.100  1.813  
8.50 0.105  n.a. 
9.00 0.110  n.a. 
9.50 0.150  n.a. 
n.a. Not applicable.  
Source:  USDA FSA (2019), Dairy Margin Coverage Program: Fact Sheet , June. Viewed at: 
https://www.fsa.usda.gov/Assets/USDA -FSA-
Public/usdafiles/FactSheets/2019/dairy_margin_coverage_program -june_2019 _fact_sheet.pdf . 
4.27.   The DMC program is authorized through 2023 (calendar year), and a dairy operation enrolling 
in it remains enrolled throughout the period. Producers retain the flexibility to modify margin and 
 
9 The Supplemental Coverage Option (SCO) and the Stacked Income Protection Plan (STAX), a 
cotton -specifi c supplemental crop insurance program , are both reauthorized.  
10 CRS (2019) , The 2018 Farm Bill ( P.L. 115-334): Summary and Side -by Side Comparison , R45525, 
22 February. Viewed at: https: //crsreports.congress.gov/product/pdf/R/R45525 . 
11 The administrative fee may be waived for dairy operations with limited resources, beginners, socially 
disadvantaged, and veteran farmers and ranchers.  WT/TPR/S/434 /Rev.1  • United States  
 
- 196 - 
 
  historical production coverage levels each year . However, dairy operators that fixed their coverage 
level and coverage percentage for the entire five -year period receive a 25% discount on the premium 
rates.  
4.28.   The production history is determined according to the highest milk production in 2011, 2012, 
and 2013 for most dairy farms. Other options are used for newer dairy operations. The production 
history, as determined, may only be adjusted once (by the USDA) to reflect any increase in the 
national average milk production. Small and mid -size dairy operatio ns already enrolled in the DMC 
program were offered Supplemental DMC for 2021 provided they had increased milk production over 
time prior to 2020, and subject to the following conditions: (i)  a DMC production history of less than 
5 million pounds; (ii)  2019 milk sales exceeding the established DMC production history; and (iii)  an 
approved supplemental production for the dairy operation.  
4.29.   Relative to the MPP, the DMC program expanded the margin coverage to include USD  8.50 to 
USD 9.50 in Tier 1, and most prem iums were lowered. The margin coverage range for Tier 2 was 
not increased and most premium rates were increased. Margins under the DMC program are 
calculated on a monthly basis, carrying over a change made in the last year of the MPP. Under the 
MPP, the pr emiums collected from dairy operations were higher than the indemnities paid in 2015, 
2016, and 2017. In FY2018, net payments to dairy operations amounted to USD  190 million.12 Net 
expenditures, including MPP premium refunds authorized in the 2018 Farm Act  for producers whose 
MPP premiums exceeded payments, rose to USD  348.8  million in FY2019. DMC program payments 
were triggered in seven months of FY2019, but fell to USD  208.5  million in FY2020, when payments 
were triggered in only five months, and the bulk  of premium refunds were completed. Higher feed 
costs triggered payments in all months during the 2021 program  year, except December, with 
estimated DMC indemnities totaling  nearly USD  1.2 billion.13 
4.30.   Eligible program  participants in DMC may also participat e in the Livestock Gross Margin for 
Dairy Producers Program (LGM -Dairy) and in the Dairy Revenue Protection (DRP) program 
administered by the Risk Management Agency. Dairy farmers may use LGM -Dairy insurance policies 
to protect against the loss of gross ma rgin (market value of milk minus feed costs) on milk produced 
from dairy cows and sold for commercial or private sale primarily for final human consumption.14 
The prices used in LGM -Dairy are derived from simple average daily settlement prices for future 
contracts for maize, soybean meal, and milk at the Chicago Mercantile Exchange, and not what a 
producer may obtain at the local market. There is no minimum or maximum quantity that may be 
insured by dairy farmers in the 48 contiguous states. The insurance p remium is subsidized, and the 
premium subsidy ranges from 18% to 50% depending on the deductible chosen by the farmer.15 
The premium and the indemnity, provided the actual gross margin is lower than selected the margin 
guarantee, is paid at the end of the 11-month insurance period.  
4.31.   DRP policies, available in all counties in all 50 states, insure against unexpected declines in 
the quarterly revenue from milk sales relative to a guaranteed coverage level. The expected revenue 
is derived from futures prices fo r milk and dairy commodities and the proportion of milk production 
to be covered. The covered milk production is indexed to the state or region where the dairy operator 
is located. DRP policies allow 80% to 95% coverage levels (in 5% increments) for the qu arterly 
expected revenue. Dairy operators must also choose between two pricing options, i.e. either the 
Class Pricing Option (a combination of Class III and IV milk prices) or the Component Pricing Option 
(based on component milk prices for butterfat, prot eins, and other solids). The premium subsidy 
depends on the chosen coverage level, and declines from 55% for 80% coverage, to 49% for 85% 
coverage, or 44% for 90% or 95% coverage.  
4.32.   The Agricultural Marketing Agreement Act of 1937, as amended, authorizes the  Secretary of 
Agriculture to issue federal milk marketing orders (FMMOs) under certain conditions. These 
marketing orders establish minimum uniform prices that handlers (processors) are required to pay 
for fluid milk purchased from producers. The FMMO regu lates the processors of fluid milk, while the 
 
12 WTO document G/SCM/N/343/USA, 16  July 2019.  
13 FSA. Viewed at: https://www.fsa.usda.gov/programs -and-services/dairy -margin -coverage -
program/program -enrollment -information/index . 
14 Participation in LGM -Dairy is comparable to purchasing both a call option to limit higher feed costs 
and a put option to set a floor on milk prices.  
15 The deductible is selected in USD  0.10 increments between zero and USD  2 per cwt, and the higher 
the deductible, the higher the premium subsidy.  WT/TPR/S/434 /Rev.1  • United States  
 
- 197 - 
 
  manufacturing handlers (Classes II, III, and IV) typically participate when it is economically 
beneficial.16 Milk handled by dairy cooperatives is classified and pooled, but cooperatives are not 
required to pay  their members the minimum price. The Secretary appoints market administrators 
responsible for carrying out the terms of each specific marketing order. Their expenses are financed 
through assessments on the regulated handlers and producer levies. There are  currently 11 federally 
sanctioned milk marketing orders in operation, covering approximately 75% of total U.S. milk 
production.17 Areas not covered by an FMMO are unregulated or subject to state regulation.  
4.33.   The 2018 Farm Act reauthorized the Dairy Indemni ty Program, which compensates dairy 
producers when a regulatory agency directs them to remove raw milk from the market because it 
has been contaminated by pesticides or other residues, as well as the Dairy Promotion and Research 
Program (also known as the Dairy Checkoff Program). The latter program  is funded by a levy of 
USD 0.15 per cwt on domestically produced milk and an assessment of USD  0.01327 per kg of milk 
solids in imported dairy products.18 
4.34.   The 2018 Farm Act repealed the Dairy Product Donation Program (DPDP) that had allowed 
the Commodity Credit Corporation (CCC) to purchase dairy products when milk margins were 
depressed, and subsequently donate them to public and private non -profit organizations that provide 
nutrition assistance to low -income households. Instead, the Act established the M ilk Donation 
Reimbursement Program (MDRP) to facilitate the donation of fluid milk products and avoid food 
waste, and Congress authorized program  expenditures of USD  9 million in FY2019 and USD  5 million 
for each FY thereafter. As the COVID -19 pandemic dis rupted dairy supply chains, and dairy products 
were included in food donations under the Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security Act ( CARES 
Act) (P.L.  116-136), Section  762 of the Consolidated Appropriations Act of 2021 ( P.L. 116-260) 
called for the  establishment of a Dairy Donation Program (DDP), in addition to the MDRP and other 
purchase program s of the USDA. Congress allocated USD  400 million, until expended, to establish 
the DDP. The interim final rule implementing the DDP (until 1  September  2023) was published in 
the Federal Register on 1  September  2021.19 
4.1.1.1.7   Sugar  
4.35.   The United  States is one of the world's largest sugar producers, producing somewhat more 
beet (55% -60%) than cane sugar. Sugar beet is grown in four regions (covering 11 states), and 
mostly in rotation with other crops, while sugarcane farming takes place in Florida, Louisiana, and 
Texas. Although the number of sugar beet and sugarcane farms has been declining, production has 
generally been on the rise due to a combination of several facto rs – improved crop varieties, new 
technologies, expanded acreage, and substantial investments in new processing equipment. As a 
result of domestic policies, U.S. sugar prices have consistently remained above world future contract 
prices. The CCC extends no n-recourse marketing loans to the sugar processors who, in turn, pay 
the growers of sugar beet and sugarcane at a rate proportional to the loan. The 2018 Farm Act fixes 
the loan rates for refined beet sugar (USD  0.2538 per lb) and for raw sugar (USD  0.1975  per lb) for 
crop years 2019 through 2023 (Table  4.3). At the end of the loan term (nine months at most), or 
any time before, borrowers may sell the sugar and repay the loans in full or, if prices are very low, 
forfeit the sugar collateral to the CCC and t hus redeem the loan. However, as a result of domestic 
policies, the probability of loan forfeitures is generally low. Other mechanisms, such as the Feedstock 
Flexibility Program (FFP), may also be used to divert surpluses of sugar for human consumption. FF P 
participants convert sugar into ethanol.  
 
16 The FMMO system classifies milk by its end -use within four broad categories: fluid milk (Class  I); milk 
for soft products (Class II) such as ice cream, cottage cheese, and yogurt; milk for hard cheese products 
(Class  III); and milk for butter and powdered dry milk (Class IV). Market data for dairy commodities and 
handler prices determined by milk end -uses are then combined to establish monthly uniform prices that dairy 
farmers share through pooling. The price that dairy farmers receive for their milk is thus de -linked from the 
specific usage of that milk. Farmers may conclude voluntary forward contract s with manufacturing handlers 
under the Dairy Forward Pricing Program  
17 A map of the FMMO areas in the United  States is available at: 
https://w ww.ams.usda.gov/sites/default/files/media/Federal%20Milk%20Marketing%20Orders%20Map.pdf .  
18 The import assessment corresponds to a rate of USD  0.075 per cwt of U.S. milk equivalent. Importers 
and farmers may receive a credit against the levy if they contri bute to quality program s conducting dairy 
promotion, research, or nutrition education authorized by federal or state law.  
19 Agricultural Marketing Service, Establishment of a Dairy Donation Program, Federal Register  (2021), 
Vol. 86, No.  167, 1  September, pp. 48887 -48900.  WT/TPR/S/434 /Rev.1  • United States  
 
- 198 - 
 
  4.36.   Processors of sugar sold for human consumption receive marketing allotments, and the overall 
allotment quantity (OAQ) equals at least 85% of the estimated domestic demand for the marketing 
year. Excess domesticall y produced sugar may not be sold on the market for human consumption 
and remains in storage at the owner's expense. If a processor is unable to market its allocation, the 
allotment may be reassigned to other processors within the same state and, if this do es not eliminate 
the deficit, the remaining allotment may be allocated to processors in other states.20 There is no 
provision for cane sugar OAQ deficits to be reassigned to beet sugar processors or vice versa. If, 
after reassignment, a deficit still persi sts, it may be allocated to the CCC for sale from its inventories 
and, should this be insufficient, the deficit may be assigned to imports.  
4.37.   Imports of raw cane sugar, refined sugar, and sugar -containing products are regulated under 
multilateral (WTO) and b ilateral tariff rate quotas. Relatively high MFN tariffs normally discourage 
above -quota imports. The annual WTO TRQ minimum of 1,117,195 metric tons raw value (MTRV) of 
raw cane sugar is allocated among 40 countries, based on patterns observed when trade was 
relatively unrestricted (1975 -81), with the Dominican  Republic, Brazil, the Philippines, and Australia 
taking the largest shares. A TRQ for specialty sugar is reserved within the annual WTO TRQ of 
22,000  MTRV of refined sugar, of which certain quantiti es are allocated to Canada (10,300 MTRV) 
and Mexico (2,954 MTRV). The TRQ for sugar -containing products of 64,709 MTRV is mostly allocated 
to Canada. The overall TRQ quantities are determined by the USDA for each fiscal year, and USTR 
allocates the volumes .21 
4.38.   Bilaterally, the Dominican  Republic -Central American Free Trade Agreement (CAFTA -DR) and 
certain other free trade agreements (FTAs) (Colombia, Panama, Peru, Chile, and Morocco) provide 
additional TRQs for sugar, syrup goods, and sugar -containing produc ts provided the countries can 
demonstrate a trade surplus in these goods based on the most recent data available. The 
United  States -Mexico -Canada Agreement (USMCA) provides Canada annual TRQs of 9,600 metric 
tons of refined beet sugar and 9,600 metric tons of sugar -containing products. Sugar imports from 
Mexico are restricted under agreements that suspend U.S. anti -dumping and countervailing duties 
in return for annual export limits, with a proportional limit for refined sugar, and minimum reference 
prices for refined sugar and raw sugar. Moreover, all imported sugar must be accompanied by export 
licenses  issued by Mexico.  
4.39.   Three inter -related programs facilitate the use of domestic refining capacity and enable U.S. 
sugar refiners and manufacturers of sugar -containing products to compete in world markets. Under 
the Refined Sugar Re -Export Program, a licensed refiner may import sugar at world market prices 
for refining as long as an equivalent quantity of refined sugar is exported or transferred to a 
participan t in the Sugar -Containing Products Re -Export Program (SCP). The SCP licensee is, in turn, 
obliged to export a like amount of sugar as has been received from a licensed refiner. In addition, 
manufacturers of polyhydric alcohols may purchase sugar at world m arket prices from licensed 
refiners for use in manufacturing of products not for human consumption under the Polyhydric 
Alcohol Program.  
4.1.1.1.8   Other Farm Act and disaster programs  
4.40.   The Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) has been offering assistance to 
eligible, low -income individuals and families since 1969. At the time of enactment, about 76% of the 
projected outlays over the five -year life cycle of the 2018 Farm Act (FY2019/23) were anticipated 
SNAP expenditures of some USD  65 billion pe r year. However, the economic disruptions and 
unemployment attributable to the COVID -19 pandemic pushed SNAP expenditures to record levels 
in 2020 and 2021. The average number of participants in SNAP grew by 16% from 2019 to 2021 to 
reach 41.5  million. Thi s figure is nevertheless below the level of enrolment after the financial crisis 
of 2008 -09, when participation in SNAP peaked at an average of 47.6  million persons in 2013. The 
spike in SNAP expenditures was mainly caused by a rise in benefits, including to households that 
normally receive less than the authorized maximum. The average benefit was roughly stable, 
ranging from USD  125 to USD  135 per person per month, from 2009 to 2019. As monthly benefits 
 
20 For raw cane sugar, the deficit will first be allocated to other processors in the same state, then to 
processors in the two other cane -producing states, and finally, if necessary, to processors in other states.  
21 The United  States noti fied its WTO TRQs for FY2020 in WTO document G/AG/N/USA/149, 
2 March  2021.  WT/TPR/S/434 /Rev.1  • United States  
 
- 199 - 
 
  increased to an average USD  155 per person in 2020 an d USD  216 in 2021, total SNAP expenditures 
climbed from USD  60 billion in 2019 to USD  79 billion in 2020, and to USD  112.6  billion in 2021.22 
4.41.   The USDA FSA administers various program s that address conservation issues such as the 
protection of drinking wate r, preservation of wildlife habitats, reduced soil erosion, preservation and 
restoration of forests and wetlands, and assistance to farmers facing damage from natural disasters. 
The 2018 Farm Act reauthorized the principal land retirement program , i.e. the  Conservation Reserve 
Program (CRP). The program  offers an annual rent to farmers who remove environmentally sensitive 
land from agricultural production and plant species that improve environmental quality. Although 
benefits per participant were reduced, t he CRP was allowed to expand from a maximum of 24  million 
acres in FY2019 to 27  million acres in FY2023. CRP contracts normally run for 10 to 15 years, 
although longer contracts (30 years) may be available in certain cases. The CRP was also made 
more flexi ble for grazing and commercial uses, as well as for the transitioning of CRP land for new 
and limited resource producers. Other conservation program s include the ACEP; the Conservation 
Reserve Enhancement Program, an offshoot of CRP; the Emergency Conserva tion Program; the 
Farmable Wetlands Program; the Grassland Reserve Program; and the Source Water Protection 
Program.  
4.42.   Working lands program s, which assist farmers in improving land management practices, are 
administered by the USDA Natural Resources Conserv ation Service, and cover a wide variety of 
issues. The two main working lands program s – the Environmental Quality Incentives Program 
(EQIP) and the Conservation Stewardship Program (CSP) – were reauthorized through the 
2018 Farm Act, with funding increase d for EQIP but reduced for CSP.  
4.43.   The Noninsured Crop Disaster Assistance Program (NAP) compensates enrolled agricultural 
producers for natural disaster damage to crops where crop insurance is not available. The 2018  Farm 
Act amended NAP to allow NAP eligibi lity for crops that may be covered by crop insurance, but only 
under whole -farm or weather index policies. The payment calculation was modified to consider the 
producer's share of the crop, service fees were raised, and payment limits (per producer) were 
introduced for catastrophic (USD  125,000) and buy -up (USD  300,000) coverage.  
4.44.   The 2017 Wildfires and Hurricanes Indemnity Program (WHIP), authorized under the 
Bipartisan Budget Act, provided compensation to agricultural producers for necessary expenses 
related to crop, tree, vine, and bush losses caused by a series of hurricanes and wildfires in 2017. 
Payments were based on individual losses, and could reach 95% of the losses for farmers with crop 
insurance, and 65% for non -insured farmers, retroactively from  1 January  2017. All producers 
receiving a WHIP payment were required to take out crop insurance or NAP coverage for the following 
two crop years. The Additional Supplemental Appropriations for Disaster Relief Act of 2019 
(P.L. 116-29) expanded the eligibi lity for WHIP compensation for additional weather -related losses. 
As of 10  July 2020, USD  152 million had been paid to uninsured producers for eligible during 2017 
(calendar year) for crops intended to be harvested in 2017 and 2018 (crop years).23 
4.45.   P.L. 116-29 and the Further Consolidated Appropriations Act of 2020 ( P.L. 116-94) also 
introduced the Wildfires and Hurricanes Indemnity Program Plus (WHIP+), which became effective 
on 13  September  2019. WHIP+ compensated agricultural producers for individual loss es caused by 
extreme weather conditions in 2018 and 2019. From 23  March  2020, producers could sign up for 
losses due to excessive moisture or extreme drought, which were loss categories authorized under 
P.L. 116-94. Uninsured producers had received USD  84 million in compensation for losses under 
WHIP+ by 28  September  2020.24 As with WHIP, recipients were required to sign up for crop 
insurance or NAP coverage for the following two crop years.  
4.1.1.1.9   Ad hoc  assistance for loss of traditional export markets  
4.46.   In 2018, the United  States began to impose a series of adjustments on imports of steel and 
aluminum  as well as on a broad range of products from China. Claiming that the United  States had 
taken measures that were inconsistent with its WTO commitments, seven trading  partners 
responded with retaliatory tariffs on imports from the United  States, including agricultural and food 
 
22 USDA Food and Nutrition Service, SNAP web tables. Viewed at: https://fns -
prod.azureedge.us/sites/default/files/resource -files/34SNAPmonthly -4.pdf. 
23 WTO document G/AG/N/USA/134/Rev.1, 6  August  2020.  
24 WTO document G/AG/N/USA/143, 7  October  2020.  WT/TPR/S/434 /Rev.1  • United States  
 
- 200 - 
 
  products. The European  Union and Türkiye  initiated their retaliatory measures in June  2018, followed 
by China, Mexico, Canada, and the Russian  Federation in July  2018. Türkiye  modified its retaliatory 
tariffs in October  2018. In addition, India imposed retaliatory tariffs from June  2019, notably 
affecting U.S. sales to India of almonds, walnuts, fresh apples, lentils, and chickpeas. In 
January  2021, the United  Kingdom carried over EU retaliatory tariffs upon its departure from the 
EU trading regime.  
4.47.   Canada and Mexico removed their retaliatory tariffs in May  2019 as the USMCA was being 
finalized. After the signing of the Phase One Agreement  between the United  States and China in 
early 2020, China announced that it would be granting exemptions to its retaliatory tariffs on a range 
of U.S. goods. The United  States and the European  Union reached an agreement in October  2021 
that included the li fting of retaliatory tariffs by the European  Union. Overall, trade tensions appear 
to have abated, but some retaliatory measures by other WTO Members are still maintained.  
4.48.   The trade mitigation package announced in July  2018 to assist farmers experiencing 
difficulties as a result of foreign retaliatory action had three main elements: a Market Facilitation 
Program  (MFP) providing payments to eligible producers to offset some of the increased costs 
resulting from delayed marketing; a Food Purchase and Distribu tion Program (FPDP) to purchase 
and distribute commodities domestically through nutrition assistance program s; and an Agricultural 
Trade Promotion Program (ATP) to develop alternative foreign markets. Further details, including 
estimated initial payments b y commodity, were released in September  2018.25 
4.49.   The MFP provided direct payments to eligible producers using CCC Charter Act authorities. In 
2018, commodity -specific payment rates, paid on actual production, were established for almonds, 
fresh sweet cherri es, maize, cotton, milk, hogs, soybeans, sorghum, and wheat, based on the level 
of estimated trade lost due to retaliation. Milk payments were made on production during a specified 
historical period, while hog payments were made on the number of hogs in a specific time period. 
The MFP covered additional specialty and non -specialty crops in 2019.26 Payments for non -specialty 
crops were based on a single -county payment rate (USD  15 to USD  150 per acre) multiplied by a 
farm's aggregate plantings of MFP -eligibl e crops, irrespective of which of those crops were planted 
in 2019.27 However, the total payment for eligible plantings could not exceed the total 2018 plantings 
on each farm. A single rate was applicable for all eligible tree nuts, i.e. almonds, hazelnuts , 
macadamia nuts, pecans, pistachios, and walnuts. Payments under the MFP amounted to 
USD 8.6 billion in 2018, USD  14.5 billion in 2019, and USD  3.8 billion in 2020 (calendar year). 
Payments in February  2020, which represented 25% of the authorized payment  total, were the last 
tranche of MFP payments. Forecast outlays in calendar year 2021 (USD  42.1 million) refer to minimal 
residual payments to cover errors, omissions, and appeals.28 
4.50.   Since 1  October  2018, the USDA Agricultural Marketing Service has used th e FPDP to 
purchase food – principally meat, dairy, fruit, vegetables, tree nuts, and processed foods – for 
distribution through USDA nutrition assistance program s such as food banks and food pantries 
participating in the Emergency Food Assistance Program ( TEFAP) and child nutrition program s. 
Purchases have been made at current market prices through a competitive bids process, and the 
eligibility of the recipients has been determined by household income in relation to federal poverty 
guidelines. The purchase d food must also conform with nutrition goals and guidelines. Estimated 
outlays under the FPDP were USD  1.144  billion in FY2019 and USD  1.203  billion in FY2020.29 
4.51.   Administered by the USDA Foreign Agricultural Service (FAS) under the CCC Charter Act, the 
ATP provided cost -shared assistance to eligible U.S. organizations in all agricultural, fish, and 
 
25 USDA (2018), "USDA Launches Trade Mitigation Programs", Release No.  0172.18, 4  September. 
Viewed at: https://www.usda.gov/media/press -releases/2018 /09/04/usda -launches -trade-mitigation -
programs .  
26 Covered non -specialty crops were alfalfa hay, barley, canola, maize, crambe, dried beans, dry peas, 
extra-long staple cotton, flaxseed, lentils, rice (long - and medium -grain), millet, mustard seed, oats, p eanuts, 
rapeseed, rye safflower, sesame seed, chickpeas (small and large), sorghum, soybeans, sunflower seed, 
temperate japonica rice, triticale, upland cotton, and wheat.  
27 The county payment rate was calculated based on the commodity rates, which were based on the 
estimated impact of the foreign trade retaliation, multiplied by historical county acreage and yields for all 
crops, with the total divided by total eligible acre s to get the per -county payment.  
28 USDA Office of Inspector General (2021), Commodity Credit Corporation's Financial Statements for 
Fiscal Years 2021 and 2020 , Audit Report 06403 -0004-11, November.  
29 WTO document G/AG/N/USA/157, 30  September  2021.  WT/TPR/S/434 /Rev.1  • United States  
 
- 201 - 
 
  forestry sectors in 2019. Support was mainly provided through partnerships with national and 
regional non -profit organizations for activities such as advertisin g, public relations, point -of-sale 
demonstrations, market research, and technical assistance. Overall, the ATP allocated 
USD 300 million to 59 organizations in 2019. The individual allocations ranged from USD  30,000 to 
USD 34.6 million.30 This funding was in addition to long -standing cost -shared market development 
program s such as the Market Access Program, under which approximately USD  175 million is 
allocated in each fiscal year for overseas marketing and promotion, and the Foreign Market 
Development Prog ram, which provides around USD  27 million each year to eligible organizations.  
4.52.   The USDA ERS estimates that direct U.S. agricultural export losses as a result of trade 
retaliation amounted to more than USD  27 billion by the end of 2019.31 Most of these loss es were 
accounted for by China (USD  25.7 billion), whose retaliatory tariffs affected nearly all agricultural 
and food products imported from the United  States. More limited trade impacts occurred in the 
European  Union (USD  600 million), Mexico (USD  500 million), Canada, Türkiye , and India (about 
USD 100 million in each market). By commodity, soybeans were by far the hardest hit commodity, 
accounting for 71% of the annualized export losses, followed by sorghum (6.5%), pork (4.9%), and 
fruit (4.7%). Some of the less prominent specialty crops, such as sweet cherries, were also severely 
affected due their perishability, export orientation, and difficulties in finding alternative markets. 
Geographically, soybean -producing states in the Midwest (notably Iowa, Ill inois, and Kansas) were 
the most affected, but losses were also significant in California (fruit, tree nuts, and dairy) and Texas 
(sorghum and cotton).  
4.1.1.1.10   COVID -19 measures  
4.53.   The USDA initially received funding through the CARES Act and the Families First Coron avirus 
Response Act for measures to mitigate or prevent effects of the COVID -19 pandemic. Supplementary 
appropriations of nearly USD  87 billion were made available in FY2021 through the Consolidated 
Appropriations Act of 2021 and the American Rescue Plan A ct of 2021 ( P.L. 117-2) (ARP  Act). Total 
outlays in FY2021 were nearly USD  78.5 billion, with total commitments of USD  81 billion and a 
further USD  30.5 billion remaining to be obligated. Expenditures under SNAP accounted for nearly 
USD 50 billion of the t otal COVID outlays in FY2021.  
4.54.   Specifically, the CARES Act provided the USDA with additional funding of USD  9.5 billion in 
support of agricultural producers and USD  14 billion in enhanced borrowing authority for the CCC 
(available after June  2020). The Coronavirus Food Assistance Program (CFAP) announced in 
April 2020 had two major components: (i)  USD 16 billion in direct support to farmers and ranchers 
affected by price declines and supply chain disruptions; and (ii)  USD 3 billion provided to purchase 
dairy, meat, and fresh produce to donate to people in need. Eligible producers were persons and 
legal entities of specified agricultural commodities who faced market disruptions and marketing costs 
due to the COVID -19 pandemic. Moreover, to be eligible for payments, the producer had to have 
either average gross income of less than USD  900,000 in the tax years 2016, 2017, and 2018 or 
derive at least 75% of their adjusted gross income from farming, ranching, or forestry.32 Eligible 
commodities included livesto ck, dairy, wool, certain non -specialty crops (malting barley, canola, 
maize, upland cotton, millet, oats, soybeans, sorghum, sunflowers, durum wheat, and hard red 
spring wheat), and specialty crops (various fruit and vegetables, nuts, beans, and mushrooms) . 
Commodities that had not seen a price decline of 5% or more were ineligible for support under 
CFAP 1.33 Payments under CFAP  1 were capped at USD  250,000 per person or legal entity, or 
USD 250,000 per shareholder in a corporate entity, at most USD  750,000 per corporate entity. The 
FSA accepted applications for participation in CFAP  1 from 26  May to 11  September  2020.  
 
30 USDA  FAS, ATP Funding Allocations . Viewed at: https://www.fas.usda.gov/programs/agricultural -
trade -promotion -program -atp/atp -funding -allocations . 
31 USDA ERS (2022), The Economic Impacts of Retaliatory Tariffs on U.S. Agriculture , ERR -304, 
January. Viewed at: https://www.ers.usda.gov/webdocs/publications/102980 /err-304.pdf?v=1416.6 . The 
House Committee on Appropriations directed the ERS to assess the impact of foreign tariffs on U.S. agricultural 
products in P.L.  116-260.  
32 Recipients would also have to comply with provisions of the "Highly Erodible Land and We tland 
Conservation" regulations and not have a controlled substance violation. Recipient s that were  foreign person s, 
needed to provide land, capital, and a substantial amount of active personal labor to the farming operation.  
33 Excluded commodities includ ed sheep over two years old, eggs, soft and hard red winter wheat, white 
wheat, rice, flax, rye, peanuts, feed barley, extra -long staple cotton, alfalfa, forage crops, hemp, and tobacco.  WT/TPR/S/434 /Rev.1  • United States  
 
- 202 - 
 
  4.55.   Additional ly, the USDA Agricultural Marketing Service established the Farmers to Families 
Food Box Program to purchase eligible products (dairy, meat, and fresh fruit and vegetables), 
packaged in boxes, for donation to those in need. According to USDA information, m ore than  
173 million boxes with a purchase value of about USD  6 billion had been distributed under the 
Program by end -May 2021.34 
4.56.   As additional funding became available from the CCC, the CFAP  2 was launched in the summer 
of 2020. The eligibility criteria f or participating producers were largely the same as those under 
CFAP 1, while the selection of eligible commodities was split in three categories: (i)  price trigger 
commodities (price declines of 5% or more); (ii)  flat rate crops (crops not meeting the 5% price 
decline trigger or with insufficient data to calculate the price change); and (iii)  sales commodities.35 
Hay, except alfalfa, and crops intended for grazing, as well as some other specified commodities, 
were ineligible for CFAP  2. Tobacco, which had been excluded from CFAP  1, became eligible under 
CFAP 2, and financed with funds remaining under the CARES Act. In all, CFAP covered more than 
300 eligible commodities (including aquaculture).  
4.57.   The CFAP  2 payment limitation per recipient was the same, but s eparate from, the limit under 
CFAP 1. Applications for participation in CFAP  2 could be filed between 21  September and 
11 December  2020. CFAP  2 was reopened in 2021, providing additional payments for eligible cattle 
and row -crop producers. The sign -up peri od began on 5  April and closed on 12  October  2021. An 
update to CFAP, announced by the USDA on 24  August  2021, included additional eligible 
commodities and more flexible payment calculations for sales -based commodities and eligible 
livestock and poultry co ntract producers.36 In total, CFAP (1 and 2) made payments of 
USD 23.5 billion in 2020, and forecasted expenditures in 2021 were USD  9.3 billion.37 The 
CCC-funded payments (about USD  12 billion) were mostly paid in FY2021.  
4.58.   Flexibilities introduced in respo nse to the COVID -19 pandemic included broadened use of the 
Disaster Set -Aside loan provision, normally used in the wake of natural disasters, by the USDA FSA. 
Borrowers under the Farm Storage Facility Loan program  were given a one -time option to defer the 
annual instalment payment. The repayment period for Marketing Assistance Loans was extended 
from the customary 9 months to 12 months. Producers' access to foreign farm hands was eased as 
H-2A visa requirements were temporarily changed for foreign workers a lready in the United  States, 
allowing more flexibility in switching between employers, and possible extension of their stay. In 
addition to the relief payments provided under CFAP, farmers were eligible for forgivable loans, 
subject to the same terms and c onditions as other small businesses, under the PPP administered by 
the SBA (Section  1.2.2).  
4.1.1.2   Trade measures  
4.1.1.2.1   Imports  
4.59.   U.S. agricultural import duties are generally low in comparison with those of most other 
countries. In addition, the import duties, if any, a re applied on a customs value that excludes 
transportation and landed costs. The simple average tariff on agricultural goods (WTO definition) 
was 9.2% in 2021, only marginally higher than in 2016 (9.1%) or in 2014 (9.0%). With no change 
in the underlying t ariff policy, variations still occur in the applied ad valorem  equivalents of specific 
and compound duties when the calculated duty changes due to fluctuating import prices for the 
goods subjected to such duties. On average, the highest MFN tariffs apply t o dairy products (27%), 
and beverages, spirits, and tobacco (22.7%). For other agricultural product categories, their simple 
average tariffs are close to, or well below, the sector average (Table  A3.1).  
 
34 USDA Agricultural Marketing Service, USDA Farmers to Families Food Box . Viewed at: 
https://www.ams.usda.gov/selling -food-to-usda/farmers -to-families -food-box.  
35 A USDA FSA fact sheet dated 1  October  2020 describes CFAP  2 in some detail. Viewed at: 
https://www.fsa.usda.gov/Assets/USDA -FSA-Public/usdafiles/ FactSheets/cfap2 -general -factsheet.pdf . The 
most recent factsheet is dated 13  September  2021 and available at: 
https://www.farmers.gov/sites/default/files/do cuments/cfap2 -factsheet -09132021.pdf .  
36 USDA, [Archived] Coronavirus Food Assistance Program . Viewed at: 
https://www.farmers.gov/archived/cfap2 .  
37 USDA Office of Inspector General (2021), Commodity Credit Corporation's Financial Statements for 
Fiscal Years 2021 and 2020 , Audit Report 06403 -0004-11, November.  WT/TPR/S/434 /Rev.1  • United States  
 
- 203 - 
 
  4.60.   The United  States has WTO tariff quota commitments th at cover 45 product categories 
representing 178 agricultural tariff lines at present. The main TRQs concern cheese and other dairy 
products, sugar and sugar -containing products, beef, sheep meat, tobacco, and cotton. Quota fill 
rates, which are reported to  the WTO Committee on Agriculture, may vary little overall though with 
significant year -to-year changes for some individual product categories (Section  3.1.3.5 and 
Table  A3.2). Certain dairy products and sugar have separate licensing procedures and quota 
allocation mechanisms. As explained above, the sugar TRQs are allocated to exporting countries, 
rather than to importers, based on historical supply data. A market allocation mechanism applies to 
domestic sugar, and the import regime may thus be adjusted to  take account of changes in 
U.S. market conditions.  
4.61.   The United  States has reserved the right to apply the Special Agricultural Safeguard (SSG) 
on certain imports from other WTO Members. The SSGs may be based on price or volume, but the 
United  States has ra rely opted for volume -based SSGs. The last volume -based action was applied 
in 2015 (on butter), and this type of SSG had previously not been used since 2003. Price -based 
SSGs are triggered automatically when the declared price for an item is below a pre -established 
price range and, applied at the level of every single shipment, some SSGs may affect very small 
quantities of trade.  The 194 tariff lines on which the United  States has reserved the right to use 
SSGs mainly concern milk and dairy products, sugar and sugar -containing products, and cotton. In 
2020, price -based SSGs were taken on 33 tariff lines, down from 36 tariff lines in 2019, 37 tariff 
lines in 2018, 41 tariff lines in 2017, and 55 tariff lines in 2016.38 
4.1.1.2.2   Exports  
4.62.   The 2018 Farm Act consolidated f our existing USDA export promotion program s – the Market 
Access Program (MAP), the Foreign Market Development Program (FMDP), the E. (Kika) de la Garza 
Emerging Markets Program (EMP), and the Technical Assistance for Specialty Crops (TASC)  – under 
the umbr ella Agricultural Trade Promotion and Facilitation Program (ATPFP) with an annual budget 
authorization of USD  255 million through FY2023. The budget authorization includes funding for MAP 
of USD  200 million (per year), USD  34.5 million for the FMDP, and a maximum USD  8 million and 
USD 9 million for the two other program s, respectively. MAP provides cost -shared assistance to 
agricultural, non -profit trade associations and cooperatives, regional trade groups, and state 
agencies for marketing and promotional a ctivities overseas. Large U.S. companies have not been 
able to access MAP funds since FY1998. MAP focuses on promotion of U.S. agricultural commodities, 
and the contribution to the costs required from the beneficiaries is higher for brand -name goods (at 
least 50%) than for generic promotions (minimum 10%). The FMDP mainly promotes bulk 
commodities such as grains, oilseeds, and cotton. The EMP contributes to the costs of technical 
assistance (e.g.  feasibility studies, market research, sector assessments, ori entation visits, 
specialized training, and business workshops) that promotes U.S. agricultural exports to emerging 
markets. TASC is available for projects that address SPS measures or technical barriers in foreign 
markets that constrain U.S. exports of spe cialty crops.  
4.63.   The 2018 Farm Act created a Priority Trade Fund to support any ATPFP program  (i.e. MAP, 
FMDP, EMP, and TASC) that is oversubscribed (USD  3.5 million per year through FY2023). Any 
unused ATPFP funds that remain unallocated at the end of the fi scal year following their initial 
apportionment are made available for distribution through the priority trade fund. In addition to the 
export promotion program s administered by the USDA, the CCC Charter funds the Quality Samples 
Program (QSP) through the CCC's borrowing authority. The QSP focuses on potential industrial users, 
and assists agricultural trade organizations in providing samples of food and fiber products for test 
runs by overseas manufacturers.  
4.64.   The United  States has two schemes that provide e xport credit guarantee program s, allowing 
the exporter or private financial sector in the United  States to extend dollar -denominated financing 
at prevailing market interest rates. The GSM -102 credit guarantee program  and the Facility 
Guarantee Program (FGP ) were both reauthorized under the 2018 Farm Act. GSM -102 guarantees 
credit (terms up to 18 months) to approved foreign financial institutions for the purchase of U.S.  food 
and farm products. The CCC selects commodities and products according to market pot ential and 
applicable legislative and regulatory requirements. The CCC also qualifies the exporters for 
participation and approves the financial institutions involved. The GSM -102 program  fees cover the 
 
38 WTO documents G/AG/N/USA/152, 31  May 2021; G/AG/N/USA/140, 141, and 142, 20  August  2020; 
and G/AG/N/USA/130, 15  May 2020.  WT/TPR/S/434 /Rev.1  • United States  
 
- 204 - 
 
  program 's long -term operating costs and losses. The F GP provides payment guarantees on the sale 
of goods and U.S. services that will enhance the sale of U.S. agricultural goods in markets where 
demand may be constrained by impediments in handling, marketing, storage, or distribution. The 
FGP covers credit te rms up to 10 years. The CCC is required by statute to make available a total of 
USD 5.5 billion annually, to both the GSM -102 program  and the FGP. For FY2022, the USDA  FAS 
announced the availability of USD  500 million for 85 eligible countries under the FG P.39 
4.65.   Recently signed trade agreements include provisions to improve market access for 
U.S. agricultural producers. The Phase One Agreement with China lifts or modifies import restrictions 
on several U.S. agricultural products and targets purchasing from th e United  States. Japan has 
committed to reduce tariffs on U.S. canola oil, wheat, beef, pork, feed grains, and oil seeds within 
agreed phase -in periods (5 to 15 years). The USMCA expands market access for some commodities 
relative to the North American Fre e Trade Agreement (NAFTA) and provides for new rules governing 
agricultural biotechnology and SPS measures. The United  States has organic equivalence 
arrangements with Canada, Chinese  Taipei, the European  Union, Japan, the Republic of Korea, and 
Switzerlan d. The arrangement with Japan was recently amended to include livestock products.  
4.1.1.2.3   Food aid  
4.66.   The United  States provides international food assistance through three main program s. 
USAID's Bureau for Humanitarian Assistance (BHA), as authorized under Title II of the Food for 
Peace Act, distributes food aid. The USDA FAS administers Food for Progress (agricultural 
development) and the McGovern -Dole International Food for Education and Child Nutrition Program. 
Title II of the Food for Peace Act, which is the larg est program , receives annual appropriations of 
about USD  1.5 billion. The 2018 Farm Act eliminated a requirement to monetize at least 15% of 
Title II commodities in the local recipient market.  
4.67.   Most U.S. food aid is provided in -kind, and U.S. laws stipulate a number of conditions for 
in-kind food aid. Title II of the Food for Peace Act funds food assistance to meet emergency needs 
as well as development activities, i.e. non -emergencies, to address the root causes of food 
insecurity. The 2018 Farm Ac t raised the minimum level of Title  II funds for non -emergency 
assistance from USD  350 million to USD  365 million per year, while maintaining annual 
non-emergency assistance capped at 30% of Title  II funds.40 Title II resources are predominantly 
U.S. commo dities purchased on the commercial market ; they  should preferably (minimum 50%) be 
shipped on U.S. -flagged vessels. The 2018 Farm Act amended the McGovern -Dole program  to allow 
up to 10% (of the value) of the food to be distributed to be procured locally o r regionally.  
4.1.1.3   Levels of support  
4.68.   The OECD notes that the support the United  States provides to its agricultural producers is 
consistently below the OECD average.41 Its Producer Support Estimate (PSE) for the United  States 
declined from 19.5% of gross farm receipts in 2000 -02 to 12% in 2018 -20, or USD  44.9 billion on 
average over the three years (Table  4.5). Agricultural reform has also been characterized by a 
signif icant shift towards forms of support that are less distortive of production and trade. At 32%, 
the share of the potentially most trade -distorting transfers has declined and is below the OECD 
average. Producer prices mostly align with border prices with the  notable exceptions of milk, sugar, 
and (to some extent) sheep meat, due to market price support and border measures, including tariff 
rate quotas.  
 
39 USDA FAS (2021), FY 2022 FGP Allocations and Destinations , 6 October. Viewed at: 
https://www.fas.usda.gov/programs/facility -guarantee -program/fy -2016-fgp-allocations .  
40 The Food for Peace (FFP) programs, Title II, the Bill Emerson Humanitarian Trust, Farmer -to-Farmer, 
Food for Progress, and the McGovern -Dole International Food for Education and Child Nutrition Program, 
provide in -kind aid and, in the case of Farmer -to-Farme r, technical assistance. Congress most recently 
reauthorized these programs through FY2023 in the Agriculture Improvement Act of 2018 ( P.L. 115-334).  
41 OECD, Agricultural Policy Monitoring and Evaluation 2021 , United  States. Viewed at: 
https://www.oecd -ilibrary.org/sites/5463a4b6 -en/index.html?itemId=/content/component/5463a4b6 -en.  WT/TPR/S/434 /Rev.1  • United States  
 
- 205 - 
 
  Table  4.5 Total PSE and single commodity transfer values for selected commodities, 
2016 -20 
(USD million and % of gross farm receipts for respective products)  
 2016  2017  2018  2019  2020  
Producer support estimate       
USD million  34,888  32,442  42,196  51,718  40,787  
PSE as % gross farm receipts  9.1 8.2 10.5 14.4 11.0 
Single commodity transfers (SCT)       
Wheat       
 
USD million  905 568 888 707 686  
SCT as % gross farm receipts  9.2 6.5 8.4 7.4 7.0 
Maize       
 
USD million  2,215  2,167  2,128  2,367  4,667   
SCT as % gross farm receipts  4.2 4.2 3.9 4.7 7.1 
Soybeans       
 
USD million  1,168  1,621  8,793  1,190  2,036   
SCT as % gross farm receipts  2.8 3.8 19.0 3.8 4.2 
Cotton       
 
USD million  835 670 1,556  1,190  933  
SCT as % gross farm receipts  12.6 8.6 19.6 16.9 14.8 
Milk      
 
USD million  6,895  7,531  8,235  7,584  2,245   
SCT as % gross farm receipts  19.9 19.8 23.1 18.4 5.2 
Beef and veal       
 
USD million  1 1 0 242 4,715   
SCT as % gross farm receipts  0.0 0.0 0.0 0.5 8.8 
Refined sugar       
 
USD million  907 1,179  1,345  1,294  1,327   
SCT as % gross farm receipts  38.0 46.9 56.7 54.9 40.7 
Source:  OECD Stats.  
4.69.   The OECD considers the U.S. emphasis on insurance and risk management to be a useful tool 
to assist producers in times of need. However, a move towards whole -farm revenue coverage, and  
less resort to commodity -specific insurance, would better exploit differences in yield and price 
fluctuations across products, and remove distortions in their production. Risk management 
instruments should also be evaluated to ensure that the public budge t does not needlessly carry 
risks that should be borne by farmers. Voluntary conservation program s appear to be effective in 
addressing soil erosion and water pollution but could be better leveraged to improve natural hazard 
risks management ex ante and more resilient recovery in the aftermath of disasters. It will also be 
important for the United  States to ensure that the recent resort to ad hoc support against market 
shocks and natural disasters does not become entrenched. Finally, the resolution of  current trade 
uncertainties would ease farmers' pursuit of market opportunities.  
4.70.   At the WTO, the United  States notifies information and data related to its agricultural and 
food assistance program s on a regular basis to the Committee on Agriculture and th e Committee on 
Subsidies and Countervailing Measures. During the review period, the Committee on Agriculture 
received notifications for marketing years 2016, 2017 -18, 2018 -19, and 2019 -20.42 Green Box 
program s, i.e.  support that has minimal or no distortiv e effects on trade, constitute the main part 
of the reported assistance. The United  States notified Green Box support totaling  USD 139.2  billion 
in marketing year 2019/20, an increase of USD  23 billion compared with the previous year, primarily 
due to incr eased spending on domestic nutrition assistance in response to the COVID -19 pandemic 
(Chart  4.3). Although expenditures on environmental program s are much smaller relative to food 
assistance, the funding of such program s (in particular the CRP and EQIP) is  gradually increasing.  
 
42 WTO documents G/AG/N/USA/123, 31  October  2018; G/AG/N/USA/135,  24 July 2020 and its Rev.1, 
8 April 2021; G/AG/N/USA/150, 8  April 2021 and Corr.1, 28  October  2021; and G/AG/N/USA/157, 
30 September  2021.  WT/TPR/S/434 /Rev.1  • United States  
 
- 206 - 
 
  Chart  4.3 Green Box support in the United  States, 2001 /02–2019 /20 
(USD million)  
 
Source:  WTO notifications.  
Chart  4.4 Amber Box support in the United  States, 2001 /02–2019 /20 
(USD million)  
 
Source:  WTO notifications.  
4.71.   The United  States does not grant agricultural export subsidies (Red Box) and does not report 
payments under production limitation programs (Blue Box).43 As for subsidies that are capped in the 
 
43 Pursuant to the Nairobi Ministerial Decision on Export Competition, the United  States removed its 
export subsidy e ntitlements in Part IV of Schedule XX in 2018. The modification was certified in 
November  2018 (WTO document WT/Let/1418, 8  November  2018).  
020,00040,00060,00080,000100,000120,000140,000
01/02 02/03 03/04 04/05 05/06 06/07 07/08 08/09 09/10 10/11 11/12 12/13 13/14 14/15 15/16 16/17 17/18 18/19 19/20Environmental programs
Structural adjustment
Payments for relief from natural disasters
Decoupled income support
Domestic food aid
General servicesChart 4.2
Green Box support in the United States, 2001/02 -2019/20
Source: WTO notifications.(US$ million)
05,00010,00015,00020,00025,00030,00035,000
01/02 02/03 03/04 04/05 05/06 06/07 07/08 08/09 09/10 10/11 11/12 12/13 13/14 14/15 15/16 16/17 17/18 18/19 19/20Other
Rice
Maize
Cotton
Livestock and livestock products
Soybeans
Wheat
Sugar
Dairy
Non-product specificChart 4.3
Amber Box support in the United States, 2001/02 -2019/20
Source:   WTO notifications.(US$ million)WT/TPR/S/434 /Rev.1  • United States  
 
- 207 - 
 
  WTO framework (Amber Box), they have been consistently below, or even well below, USD  20 billion 
per year until recently (Chart  4.4). 
4.72.   The U.S. commitment level on Current Total Aggregate Measurement of Support 
(AMS)  – USD 19.1 billion, which excludes de minimis  product -specific and non -product -specific 
support  – was therefore significantly higher than the Current Total AMS reported for the 2016 
(USD  3.8 billion) and 2017/18  (USD 4 billion) marketing years. This changed markedly in 2018/19, 
when MFP payments pushed product -specific support for key commodities (notably maize and 
soybeans) above the de minimis  level, resulting in a Current Total AMS of USD  13.1 billion in that 
marketing year. Although the reported product -specific MFP payments were significantly lower in 
2019/20, the pandemic relief measures under the CFAP, in particular, resulted in a current total AMS 
of USD  18.25  billion in 2019/20, just USD  856 million below  the U.S.  commitment level.44 
4.1.2   Forestry  
4.73.   The United  States accounts for about 7.5% of the world's forests.45 Forestry, fisheries, and 
related activities contributed USD  59.2 billion or 0.14% of total U.S. GDP in 2021.46 Furthermore, 
the forest product manufa cturing sector, e.g. paper, packaging, and wood products, accounts for 
about 4% of the U.S. manufacturing GDP and provides employment to 950,000 persons.47 
Employment in the forestry and logging sector proper was 34,180 in 2020.48 Although its share of 
GDP is small, the sector makes a more significant contribution to trade, with wood and wood products 
accounting for 3.2% of U.S. total imports and 2.4% of total exports in 2021.  
4.74.   Land covered by forests has remained relatively stable for the last 100 years and , in 2017, 
there were 765.5  million acres of forests or about 34% of U.S. total land area.49 Most forests (58%) 
are private forests; 42% are public forests of which the Federal Government has the most ownership, 
with smaller amounts owned by states and cou nties/municipalities.50 The majority of private forests 
are owned by almost 10  million private owners, with the top percentage being "family and individual" 
owned parcels of forest lands averaging less than 10 hectares in size.51 There have been some 
owner ship shifts in recent years with less private corporate ownership and more non -corporate 
ownership. Additionally, fewer forests are now owned by integrated wood product manufacturers, 
and more are owned by real estate investment trusts and timber investmen t management 
organizations. This shift has been driven by tax laws that make such ownership more favorable . 
Forests are roughly divided equally between east and west with Eastern forests dominated by oak, 
hickory, maple, and beech species and Western forests by fir, pine, and spruce species, with some 
tropical forests existing in Hawaii and certain U.S.  territories. Furthermore, Eastern forests tend to 
be privately owned, whereas those in the West are often on public lands. Forest volumes are a lmost 
evenly split between soft and hardwoods.  
 
44 Although the reported product -specific MFP payments declined from USD  8.76 billion in 2018/19 to 
USD 827.7  millio n in 2019/20, the non -product -specific MFP payments rose from USD  5.2 billion to 
USD 8.4 billion. Payment rates were set by crop for 2018 MFP, and at the county level for all eligible 
non-specialty crops for 2019 MFP. One reason for the change of design wa s to prevent incentivizing production 
of one crop over another and to minimize distortions.  
45 National Association of State Foresters, Timber Assurance . Viewed at: 
https://www.stateforesters.org/timber -assurance/legality/forest -ownership -statistics/ .  
46 Includes forestry, fishing, and related activities (NAICS 113). BEA, Interactive Data: Gross Output by 
Industry . Viewed at: https://apps.bea.gov/iTable/iTable.cfm?reqid=150&step=2&isuri=1&categories=gdpxind .  
47 American Forest & Paper Association, Our Impact – Forest Products Industry Jobs , August  2021. 
Viewed at: https://www.afandpa.org/statistics -resources/our -impact -forest -products -industry -jobs.  
48 U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, Forestry and L ogging: NAICS 113 . Viewed at: 
https://www.bls.gov/iag/tgs/iag113.htm#workforce .  
49 FIA, Forest Resources of the United  States, 2017 . Viewed at: https://www.fia.fs.fed.us/program -
features /rpa/docs/Forest%20Resources%20of%20the%20United%20States%202017%20Tables%20WOGTR97
.xlsx. 
50 Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) Experts Group on Illegal Logging and Associated Trade 
(EGILAT) (2018), Timber Legality Guidance Template for the United  States of America . Viewed at: 
https://www.apec.org/docs/default -source/groups/egilat/2018/us_timber -legality -guidancetemplate_dec -
2018.pdf.  
51 National Association of State Foresters, Timber Assurance . Viewed at: 
https://www.stateforesters.org/timber -assurance/legality/forest -ownership -statistics/ ; and USDA Forest 
Service, U.S. Forest Service, National Woodland Owner  Survey . Viewed at: https://www.fia.fs.fed.us/nwos/ .  WT/TPR/S/434 /Rev.1  • United States  
 
- 208 - 
 
  4.1.2.1   Production, trade, and border measures  
4.75.    The global production, consumption, and trade of forest products reached a peak in 2018 but 
there have been declines since then, in part attributed to the COVID -19 pandemic. The United  States 
follows similar trends as it is the world's single -largest prod ucer and consumer of wood products.52 
The United  States maintained its position as the largest producer of roundwood, wood pellets, and 
pulp despite slight declines in 2020 attributed to the pandemic and sawmill closures and natural 
disasters.53 Although t he United  States accounted for about 19% of world production and 18% of 
consumption of roundwood in 2020, in most wood product categories there was a steady decline in 
output during 2019 -20; however, production increased slightly again in 2021 (Table  4.6).54 
Table  4.6 Forestry production volumes, 2018 -21 
Product  Units ('000)  2018  2019  2020  2021  
Roundwood  m3 464,118  459,129  429,700  440,968  
Industrial roundwood  m3 392,510  387,702  369,175  380,380  
Other industrial roundwood  m3 13,751  13,624  13,215  13,230  
Wood fuel  m3 71,609  71,427  60,525  60,588  
Wood charcoal  tons 852 852 852 .. 
Wood chips, particles and residues  m3 60,105  61,644  57,501  58,376  
Wood pellets and other agglomerates  tons 7,580  8,704  8,524  8,855  
Sawnwood  m3 81,998  82,472  79,134  80,705  
Wood -based panels  m3 34,245  34,353  33,407  34,486  
Veneer sheets  m3 2,209  2,229  2,284  2,370  
Sawlogs and veneer logs  m3 185,837  187,160  180,237  191,345  
Pulpwood, round and split, all species  m3 192,921  186,918  175,722  175,805  
Pulp for paper  tons 52,186  50,956  49,903  .. 
Wood pulp  tons 53,233  52,062  50,871  50,895  
Pulp from fibers  other than wood  tons 168 146 149 .. 
Paper and paperboard  tons 70,891  68,157  66,239  68,536  
Packaging paper and paperboard  tons 49,609  48,045  48,163  .. 
Recovered paper  tons 47,787  44,661  42,248  .. 
.. Not available.  
Source:  FAOStat, Forestry Production and Trade . Viewed at: https://www.fao.org/faostat/en/#data ; and 
FAO, Forecast of the Committee on Forests and the Forest Industry: Forest Products Production and 
Trade 2020 -2022. 
4.76.   The United  States runs an overall trade def icit across forestry product categories; the deficit 
increased from USD  29.2 billion in 2018 to USD  51 billion in 2021, in particular driven by a significant 
surge in imports. The United  States generally runs a trade deficit in wood and wood -related produc ts, 
i.e. wood, paper, newspapers, books, and wood furniture, and the same trend was exhibited with 
declining exports, rising imports, and a continual and growing trade deficit over the period 2018 -21. 
While the United  States had a near balance of trade on paper goods, other products with a higher 
value -added, i.e. furniture, are mainly imported. U.S. exports tend to be raw materials or 
semi-processed wood products. In particular, there is an important trade surplus of roundwood, as 
the United  States has his torically been a major exporter with few imports  (Table  4.7). 
Table  4.7 Wood and wood product trade, 2018 -21 
(USD million, %)  
 2018  2019  2020  2021  % of 
forestry 
trade in 
2021  Major trading partners 
(top 3 in 2021)  
Trade balance  -29,202  -27,661  -32,299  -51,016      
Exports of wood and wood 
products  43,065  39,067  35,255  41,850   
Canada (28.5%), Mexico 
(17.4%), China (11.3%)  
 (% of total exports)  2.6%  2.4%  2.5%  2.4%    
 Wood and articles of wood; 
wood charcoal (HS  44) 9,868.3  8,280.3  7,641.3  9,730.9  23.3%  Canada (26.2%), China 
(21.1%), Mexico (11.2%)  
 (% of total exports)  0.6%  0.5%  0.5%  0.6%    
 
52 United Nations Economic Commission for Europe (UNECE), United  States Forest Products Annual 
Market Review and Prospects, 2015 -2021. Viewed at: https://unece.org/fileadmin/DAM/timber/country -
info/statements/usa2020.pdf .  
53 FAO, Forest Product Consumption and Production, 2020 . Viewed at: 
http:/ /www.fao.org/forestry/statistics/80938@180723/en/ . 
54 FAO, Forest Product Consumption and Production, 2020 . Viewed at: 
http://www.fao.org/forestry/statistics/80938@180723/en/ . WT/TPR/S/434 /Rev.1  • United States  
 
- 209 - 
 
   2018  2019  2020  2021  % of 
forestry 
trade in 
2021  Major trading partners 
(top 3 in 2021)  
 Fuel wood  1,173.9  1,222.9  1,225.9  1,338.9  3.2%  United  Kingdom (54%), 
EU-27 (24%), Canada 
(9.4%)  
 Raw timber  2,410.7  1,676.0  1,619.3  2,148.4  5.1%  China (50.3%), Japan 
(19.3%), Canada (13.7%)  
 Semi-processed  5,195.5  4,245.9  3,824.7  5,048.0  12.1%  Canada (29.3%), Mexico 
(18.7%), China (18.2%)  
 Processed  1,088.2  1,135.5  971.5  1,195.6  2.9%  Canada (54.9%), Mexico 
(10.9%), EU -27 (8.4%)  
 Paper, books, and cork 
(HS 45, 47, 48, 49)  30,166.2  27,834.3  25,097.9  29,238.1  69.9%  Canada (26%), Mexico 
(19.9%), EU -27 (9.3%)  
 (% of total exports)  1.8%  1.7%  1.8%  1.7%    
 Wood furniture (parts of 
HS 94) 3,030.8  2,952.2  2,516.2  2,880.6  6.9%  Canada (62.6%), Mexico 
(12.4%), EU -27 (4.3%)  
 (% of total exports)  0.2%  0.2%  0.2%  0.2%      
Imports of wood and wood 
products  72,267  66,727  67,554  92,866   
Canada (32.5%), China 
(17%), Viet  Nam 
(13.4%)  
 (% of total imports)  2.8%  2.6%  2.8%  3.2%    
 Wood and articles of wood; 
wood charcoal (HS  44) 22,606.0  19,304.6  22,602.5  35,544.2  38.3%  Canada (54.5%), EU -27 
(9.9%), China (9.5%)  
 (% of total imports)  0.9%  0.8%  0.9%  1.2%    
 Fuel wood  201.3  218.0  251.7  302.1  0.3%  Canada (41.4%), Mexico 
(24.9%), EU -27 (16.8%)  
 Raw timber  142.0  145.4  154.8  182.1  0.2%  Canada (69.2%), EU -27 
(24.6%), Brazil (2.6%)  
 Semi-processed  16,304.1  13,277.8  16,406.5  27,263.7  29.4%  Canada (62%), EU -27 
(10.3%), Brazil (6.4%)  
 Processed  5,958.6  5,663.4  5,789.4  7,796.2  8.4%  China (32.9%), Canada 
(28.8%), EU -27 (7.8%)  
 Cork, pulp, paper, books, 
newspapers (HS  45, 47, 48, 
49) 27,114.0  26,139.1  23,118.1  27,358.1  29.5%  Canada (32.6%), China 
(20.4%), EU -27 (18.1%)  
 (% of total imports)  1.0%  1.0%  1.0%  0.9%    
 Wood furniture (parts of 
HS 94) 22,547.2  21,283.6  21,833.4  29,963.6  32.3%  Viet Nam (36.4%), China 
(22.7%), EU -27 (9.2%)  
 (% of total imports)  0.9%  0.8%  0.9%  1.0%    
Source:  WTO Secretariat calculations, based on UN Comtrade database and USITC Dataweb.  
4.77.   Across most export categories, the main destinations in 2021 were Canada, Mexico, and 
China. For imports, most wood and wood products were sourced from Canada, China, and the 
European  Union except for wood furniture, in which the main source in 2021 was Viet  Nam. 
U.S. exports of wood and wood products increased about 100% in the period 2002 -18 driven by 
increased demand by China; however, there was a significant reversal of this trend since 2018 with 
significant declines in exports to China.55 
4.78.   U.S. tariffs on wood and wood products such as paper and pulp are very low and averaged 
1.1% in 2020 (Table  A3.1). However, there are a number of products subject to anti -dumping and/or 
countervailing duties (AD/CVD): tissue paper, crepe paper, lined paper, coated paper, multi -layered 
wood flooring, uncoated paper, folding gift boxes, hardwood plywood products, softwood lumber, 
wood moldings  and millwork products, and thermal paper.56 The Uni ted States maintains certain 
export prohibitions on logs from federal and state lands. Exports of certain unprocessed logs from 
federal/state lands in western states57 and of all unprocessed western red cedar logs are prohibited 
as a result of conservation  measures pursuant to the Endangered Species Act/ National Forest 
Management Act and due to short supply controls of the War and Defense Export Regulation statutes, 
respectively  (16 U.S.C. 620 and 50 U.S.C. App. 2406) . These statutes are managed through exp ort 
regulations and policy controls by the Departments of Agriculture, Interior, and Commerce.  
 
55 Muhammad, A. and Smith, S.A. (2020), The U.S. -China Phase One Trade Agreement: Implications for 
U.S. Forestry , University of Tennessee, Institute of Agriculture. Viewed at: 
https://extension.tennessee.edu/publications/Documents/W888.pdf .  
56 USITC (2021), Anti-dumping  and Countervailing Duty Orders in Place as of 14  December  2021. 
Viewed at: https://www.usit c.gov/trade_remedy/documents/orders.xls .  
57 West of the 100th meridian, but excluding Alaska and Hawaii. However, Alaska also bans the export of 
spruce and hemlock logs from Alaska National Forests.  WT/TPR/S/434 /Rev.1  • United States  
 
- 210 - 
 
  4.79.   At the border, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, the U.S. Department of Agriculture Animal 
and Plant Health Inspection Service (USDA  APHIS), and the U.S.  Custo ms and Border Protection 
(CBP) ensure trade compliance with the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species 
of Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES) and the Lacey Act. Amendments to the Lacey Act in 2008 introduced 
additional declaration requirements fo r importers, i.e. the specification of the country where the 
wood was harvested and information on the species. Both CITES and the Lacey Act have an impact 
on the trade of forestry products as they impose requirements for trade in timber products, e.g. 
logs, lumber, pulp, paper, and musical instruments.58 The United  States does not require any private 
or third -party certification schemes for importation.  
4.80.   The USMCA  contains new provisions to help combat illegal logging and associated illegal trade. 
In Chapter 24 (Environment), the parties agreed to obligations to combat trafficking in timber by 
strengthening law enforcement and exchanging information and experiences . It also contains 
provisions to cooperate on initiatives to promote sustainable forest management. Nearly all 
U.S. FTAs have chapters on the environment that could have an impact on trade in forestry products. 
More recent FTAs all address illegal logging activities in some way; the FTA with Peru goes further 
with a dedicated Annex on Forest Sector Governance.  
4.81.   An assessment fee is charged on imported and domestically manufactured softwood lumber 
to finance the Softwood Lumber Board's  operations to promote softwood lumber in the 
United  States.59 Exemptions exist for exports, organic products, and small shipments of less than 
15 million board feet. The original fee was USD  0.35 per thousand board feet, which was increased 
to the current rate of USD  0.41 per thousand board feet on 1  April 2021.60 The fee is assessed and 
collected by the CBP for imports of certain so ftwood lumber under 10 HS codes.61 Domestic 
producers must remit the fee directly to the Board on a quarterly basis, with a 30 -day grace period.  
4.82.   Under t he Softwood Lumber Act of 2008 , the President must maintain an importer declaration 
program  with respect  to all softwood lumber and softwood lumber product imports.62 Thus, importers 
must provide the export price, estimated export charge, and the importer declaration in the entry 
summary electronic record upon importation.63 Final rules implementing these pr ovisions were 
adopted in August  2010 that provide more details on the submission and instructions for importers.64 
4.83.   Since the early 1980s  and up until October  2015, U.S. imports of softwood lumber from 
Canada have periodically been governed by a series of S oftwood Lumber Agreements or memoranda 
of understanding (MOUs) that set quotas for imports from Canada. The latest such agreement 
expired in October  2015. From 2016 until March  2022, USDOC has conducted both AD and CVD  
investigations and reviews of softwoo d lumber from Canada. As of December  2021, the 
United  States applied AD and CVD measures on Canadian softwood lumber (Section  3.1.6) ; a WTO 
panel had been appealed to the Appellate  Body. The second administrative review of the AD and 
CVD duty orders conduc ted in 2021 resulted in an increase in the combined AD and CVD rates for 
most Canadian firms. While duty rates vary by firm, CVD rates range from 2.42% to 18.07% and 
 
58 The Lacey Act covers wood products across 11 HS chapter s: 33, 42, 44, 66, 82, 92, 93, 94, 95, 96, 
and 97. The majority are wood items in Chapter  44 but other products such as musical instruments, furniture, 
and essential oils are also covered. APHIS, Lacey Act Declaration Implementation Schedule . Viewed at: 
https://www.aphis.usda.gov/aphis/ourfocus/planthealth/import -information/lacey -act/implementaton -
schedule/hts .  
59 The Softwood Lumbe r Research, Promotion, Consumer Education and Industry Information Order, 
2011 established the Research & Promotion Program for softwood lumber, as well as the Softwood Lumber 
Board to administer the terms and provisions of the order. C .F.R. Part 1217 – Softwood Lumber Research, 
Promotion, Consumer Education and Industry Information Order. Viewed at: 
https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/CFR -2013-title7-vol10/pdf/CFR -2013-title7-vol10 -part1217.pdf  
60 Federal Register  (2021), Vol. 86, No.  36, 25  February, pp.  11387 -11391. Viewed at: 
https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2021/02/25/2021 -03467/softwood -lumber-research -promotion -
consumer -education -and-industry -information -order -assessment -rate.  
61 HS 4407.11.00, 4407.12.00, 4407.19.05, 4407.19.06, 4407.19.10, 4409.10.05, 4409.10.10, 
4409.10.20, 4409.10.90, and 4418.99.10. CBP, Softwood Lumber . Viewed at: 
https://www.cbp.gov/trade/priority -issues/trade -agreements/softwood -lumber .  
62 HTSUS subheadings 4407.10.00, 4409.10.10, 4409.10.20, or 4409.10.90. Some products are 
excluded , such as trusses, garage doors, i -joist beams, door and window frames, and furniture.  
63 Softwood Lumber Act of 2008 (P.L.  110-246). Viewed at: 
https://www.co ngress.gov/110/plaws/publ246/PLAW -110publ246.pdf#page=194 .  
64 Federal Register  (2010), Vol. 75, No.  165, 26  August, pp.  52453 -52455. Viewed at: 
https://www.govinfo.gov/con tent/pkg/FR -2010-08-26/pdf/2010 -21244.pdf .  WT/TPR/S/434 /Rev.1  • United States  
 
- 211 - 
 
  AD rates from 6.06% to 17.12%, with a combined ad valorem  effect ranging from 11.14% to 
29.66%.65 
4.84.   In October  2020, the United  States launched a Section  301 investigation regarding Viet  Nam's 
acts, policies, and practices relating to the import and use of illegal timber.66 Following consultations 
and engagement, the United  States and Viet  Nam re ached an agreement in October  2021 on a 
number of commitments to address illegal timber harvesting and trade.67 Among these are the 
obligation by Viet  Nam to enhance inspections of timber imports, verify domestic timber harvests, 
and endeavor  to revise its  domestic laws on the matter  (Section  3.1.7).68 
4.1.2.2   Framework, policy, and forest management  
4.85.   U.S. federal laws on forestry are numerous and varied as they contain provisions on forestry 
management, environmental, and trade matters (Table  4.8). Many of the key provisions of the 
Forest Service have been codified in 16 U.S.C., including, inter alia, on national forests, restoration 
management, international forestry cooperation, and user fees.  
Table  4.8 Legal framework, main laws and regulations, 2022  
Instrument  Overview  Reference  
Lacey Act  Bans the trade of illegally sourced plant and plant products  31 Stat. 187  
Multiple Use and Sustained Yield Act 
of 1960  Requires balanced multiple uses of National Forest lands  P.L. 86-517 
Food, Conservation, and Energy Act 
of 2008  Requires states to have an Asse ssment and Strategy for Forest 
Resources  P.L. 110-234 
National Forest Management Act of 
1976 Requires a land and resource management plan for National 
Forests  16 U.S.C. 1600  
National Environmental Policy Act 
(NEPA) of 1969  Fosters and promotes the general welfare of the environment  P.L. 91-190 
Cooperative Forestry Assistance Act 
of 1978  Authorizes forestry activities of the Forest Service  P.L. 95-313 
Endangered Species Act  Prevents extinction of endangered plants and animals  16 U.S.C. 
1531-1544 
Conservation  Regulations governing the Forest Service and related matters, 
etc. 16 U.S.C.  
Source:  Compiled by the WTO Secretariat from the sources listed and from Forest Service, Laws and 
Regulations . Viewed at: https://www.fs.usda.gov/about -agency/regulations -policies/laws -
regulations . 
4.86.   With the exception of foreign trade issues and taxation on imports, the forestry sector is 
regulated mostly at the state level. Thus, matters such as land ownership and use, intrastate 
commerce, regulation of businesses and profess ions, and use of natural resources are all generally 
regulated at the state level. Forestry administration, policy, and planning matters on private lands 
are usually determined individually by each state, aside from certain federal environmental laws that 
apply to all landownership types. The exception are federal forests, in particular National Forests 
(19% of U.S. forests), which fall under the purview of the Federal Government and are administered 
by the U.S. Forest Service; other federal forests (12%) a re administered by the Bureau of Land 
Management, the National Park Service, or the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. The Federal 
Government regulates timber harvesting on federal lands. Approximately 24% (46  million acres) of 
 
65 Federal Register  (2021), Vol.  86, No.  229, 2  December, pp.  68467 -68471. Viewed at: 
https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2021/12/02/2021 -26152/certain -softwood -lumber -products -from-
canada -final-results -of-the-countervailing -duty-administrative ; Federal Register  (2021), Vol.  86, No . 229, 
2 December, pp.  68471 -68475. Viewed at: https://www.federalregister. gov/documents/2021/12/02/2021 -
26149/certain -softwood -lumber -products -from-canada -final-results -of-antidumping -duty-administrative -
review ; and Federal Register  (2022), Vol.  87, No.  6, 10 January, pp.  1114-1117. Viewed at: 
https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR -2022-01-10/pdf/2022 -00212.pdf .  
66 Federal Register  (2020), Vol. 85, No.  196, 8  October, pp.  63639 -63640. Viewed at: 
https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2020/10/08/2020 -22270/initiation -of-section -301-investigation -
vietnams -acts-policies -and-practices -related -to-the-import .  
67 USTR (2021), Agreement between the Government of the Socialist Republic of Viet  Nam and the 
Government of the United  States of America on Illegal Logging and Timber Trade . Viewed at: 
https://ustr.gov/sites/default/files/files/Vietnam%20Timber/VN%20Timber%20Agreement%20Text%20(9 -30-
21).pdf .  
68 Federal Register  (2021), Vol. 86, No.  191, 6  October. Viewed at: 
https://www.federalregister .gov/documents/2021/10/06/2021 -21809/determinations -and-ongoing -monitoring -
investigation -concerning -vietnams -acts-policies -and-practices .  WT/TPR/S/434 /Rev.1  • United States  
 
- 212 - 
 
  federal forests are designated for timber harvesting; however, most timber harvesting in the 
United  States is conducted on private lands.69 Federally recognized Indian Tribes manage forests on 
Tribal trust lands in coordination with the Bureau of Indian Affairs.  
4.87.   Although laws and regula tions that promote or regulate certain forestry aspects exist at the 
state level, their outreach, with some exceptions, is mainly limited to voluntary guidelines and best 
management practices, as the majority of forests under state jurisdiction are private  forests. Certain 
incentives, such as lower tax rates/incentives, advisory services, and outreach programs may be 
used by states to encourage private landowners to comply with voluntary provisions.70 While the 
Federal Government has limited control over ma nagement and use of private forests, it may still 
have some influence on them through cooperative programs with states to provide technical 
assistance to private landowners, by producing and disseminating forest research materials, and by 
providing funding  or incentives. The Forest Inventory and Analysis (FIA) Program of the Forest 
Service (part of USDA) collects data and reports on the status of U.S. forests . 
4.88.   Private forestry owners are generally subject to yield or severance taxes on the specific value 
or volume of timber harvested. These are charged by the states and thus vary significantly.71 Logging 
on federal lands is generally done through the identification of a sale package of timber that is 
offered through bidding/auction.72 Individuals may collect forest products from federal forests but 
generally must obtain a permit to do so. In 2020,  the Forest Service issued a new Rule that revised 
categorical exclusions to the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) regulations, thereby providing 
easier approval processes for more logging activities in National Forests.73 
4.89.   In January  2021, the Presi dent issued an Executive Order , which put the climate crisis at the 
center  of U.S. foreign policy and national security.74 The E.O. puts in place multiple actions across 
the Administration to address the climate crisis, with several points impacting the fo rest sector , 
including developing a  Climate -Smart Agriculture and Forestry (CSAF) strategy . Based on comments 
received regarding the CSAF strategy, in February  2022 USDA launched the Partnerships for 
Climate -Smart Commodities , to provide  support for the pr oduction and marketing of climate -smart 
commodities via a set of pilot projects lasting one to five years.  
4.1.2.3   Support measures and pandemic -related matters  
4.90.   The Federal Government plays a role in financing and/or providing support to private forest 
owners, mos tly through state partner agencies. Federal public funds are spent annually on a number 
of program s that support private forest owners such as research, education, technical assistance, 
and financial support (Table  4.9). In FY2021, the Forest Service had U SD 236.2  million in funding 
authorized for all assistance programs.75 Some states also have support programs, both financial 
and technical.  There is a 10% federal tax credit and amortization for certain reforestation expenses, 
which has been notified to th e WTO (Expensing and Seven -Year Amortization for Reforestation 
 
69 Hardwood Federation. Viewed at: http://www.hardwoodf ederation.com/page -1506331 ; and CRS 
(2019) , Timber Harvesting on Federal Lands , R45688, 12  April. Viewed at: 
https://sgp.fas.org/crs/misc/R45688.pdf .  
70 American Hardwood Export Council (2020), Introd uction to U.S. Forestry Regulation . Viewed at: 
https://www.americanhardwood.org/sites/default/files/reports/d ownload/2020 -
07/Introduction%20to%20U.S.%20forestry%20regulation.pdf ; and USDA (2017), State Property Tax 
Incentives for Promoting Ecosystem Goods and Services from Private Forest Land in the United  States: A 
Review and Analysis . Viewed at: https://www.timbertax.org/taxpolicy/gtr_srs228.pdf .  
71 National Timber Tax Website, Quick Reference: Forest Property Taxation Systems in the 
United  States . Viewed at: https://www.timbertax.org/statetaxes/quickreference/ .  
72 USDA Forest Service, Timber Sales on the National Forests . Viewed at: 
https://www.fs.usda.gov/managing -land/forest -management/products/timber -sales.  
73 Federal Register  (2020), Vol. 85, No.  224, 19  November, pp.  73620 -73632. Viewed at: 
https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2020/11/19/2020 -25465/national -environmental -policy -act-nepa-
compliance .  
74 Executive Order on Tackling the Climate Crisis at Home and Abroad. Viewed at: 
https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing -room/presidential -actions/2021/01/27/executive -order -on-tackling -the-
climate -crisis-at-home -and-abroad/ .  
75 CRS (2022), Forest Service Assist ance Programs , R45219, updated 6  January. Viewed at: 
https://crsreports.congress.gov/product/pdf/R/R45219 .  WT/TPR/S/434 /Rev.1  • United States  
 
- 213 - 
 
  Expenditure scheme).76 The United  States has also notified to the WTO its Capital Gains Treatment 
of Certain Timber Income policy, an income tax concession aimed to encourage domestic timber 
production, whereby certain timber income can be treated as capital gains for income tax purposes 
and be subject to a lower tax rate; and its Expensing of Multi -Period Timber Growing Costs scheme, 
through which timber owners can expense, rather than capitali ze, certain costs from taxable 
income.77 Other federal tax measures include income exclusions for conservation -oriented 
programs: the Forest Health Protection Program, the Conservation Reserve Program, the 
Environmental Quality Incentives Program, and cert ain state programs.  
Table  4.9 Forestry support measures, FY2021  
Program/Reference  Activity  Budget (USD)  
Collaborative Forest Restoration, P.L. 106-393 Forest restoration  13.8 million  
Community Forest and Open Space Conservation Program, 
16 U.S.C. 2103d  Purchase of forestlands for 
conservation  4 million  
Cooperative Fire Protection, 16 U.S.C. 2106  Wildfire prevention  92.4 million  
Forest Health Protection, 16 U.S.C. 2104  To combat forest pests and diseases  46.2 million  
Forest Legacy Program, 16 U.S.C. 2103c  Purchase of forestlands  94.3 million  
Forest Stewardship Program, 16 U.S.C. 2103a, 16 U.S.C. 
2107, 16 U.S.C. 2102  Provides professional planning and 
technical assistance  11.9 million  
Internatio nal Forestry Program, 16 U.S.C. 4501  Planning, management, prevention  15.4 million  
Landscape Scale Restoration Program, 16  U.S.C.  2109a  Forest restoration  14 million  
Urban & Community Forestry Assistance Program, 16 
U.S.C.  2105 Planning and education  31.9 million  
Wood Technology and Innovation Programs:  
-Community Wood Energy/Innovation, 7  U.S.C.  8113 
-Hardwood Technology Transfer, 16 U.S.C.  1650 
-Rural Revitalization, 7 U.S.C. 6601  
-Wood Innovation Grant Project, 7 U.S.C. 7655d  Technology d evelopment  24.8 million  
Source:  Compiled by the Secretariat from the sources listed in the table and Forest Service (2021), FY 2022 
Budget Justification . Viewed at: https://www.fs.usda.gov/sites/default/files/usfs -fy-2022-budget -
justification.pdf . 
4.91.   The COVID -19 pandemic impacted the U.S. forestry sector in several ways. In t he early part 
of the pandemic, the sector was negatively affected by disruptions to global transportation networks, 
which impacted wood trade, as well as by the closure of some ports. The pandemic triggered a 
generally reduced output from sawmills that wer e not able to meet demand, leading to an increase 
in imports in response. The slower growth in domestic supply and the supply constraints occurred 
in parallel to an increase in demand for wood products, boosted by construction, and particularly 
house renov ation, and by the "Zoom Town" phenomenon.78 The pandemic also delayed the 
implementation of the Lacey Act's Phase Six enforcement measures, originally scheduled for 
October  2020. USDA announced the implementation of the measures effective 1  October  2021.79 
The coverage of products subject to import declaration requirements was expanded to include certain 
essential oils, wooden pallets, trunks and cases of wood, and musical instruments.80 
4.92.   The Consolidated Appropriations Act of 2021 contained a number of prov isions for 
pandemic -related assistance for the forestry sector, including the Pandemic Assistance for Timber 
Harvesters and Haulers (PATHH) program  that provided up to USD  200 million for loggers and log 
 
76 The first USD  5,000/10,000 depending upon filing status may be deducted with the remainder 
amortized over 84 months. Forest Service, Tax Tips for Forest Landowners for the 2021 Tax Year . Viewed at: 
https://www.timbertax.org/publications/fs/taxtips/TaxT ip2021.pdf . This measure was notified in the latest 
U.S. subsidy notification, WTO document G/SCM/N/372/USA, 14  July 2021. The estimated revenue loss was 
USD 40 million in FY2019 and USD  50 million in FY2020.  
77 The estimated revenue losses were USD  150 million in FY2019 and USD  130 million in FY2020; and 
USD 40 million in FY2019 and USD  50 million in FY2020, respectively.  
78 A town or community that has a significant population increase as remote work becomes more 
popular and workers buy larger houses, often creating more demand for housing and renovation. See: UNECE 
(2021), Forest Products Annual Market Review 2020 -2021. Viewed at: 
https://unece.org/sites/default/files/2021 -11/2114516E_Inside_Final_web.pdf  
79 The Lacey Act forbids the importation of illegally taken, possessed, transport ed, or sold fish, plants, 
wildlife or wildlife. See: APHIS (2021), "APHIS Announces Phase Six Lacey Act Enforcement Schedule Effective 
Date of October  1, 2021", 21  July. Viewed at: https://www.aphis.usda.gov/aphis/newsroom/stakeholder -
info/stakeholder -messages/plant -health -news/six -lacey-act-enforcement -
schedule#:~:text=Program%20Updates -,APHIS%20Announces%20Phase%20Six%20Lacey%20Act .  
80 Federal Register  (2020), Vol. 85, No.  62, 31  March, pp.  17849 -17850. Viewed at: 
https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2020/03/31/2020 -06695/implementation -of-revised -lacey-act-
provisions .  WT/TPR/S/434 /Rev.1  • United States  
 
- 214 - 
 
  trucking businesses that suffered revenue losses of at least 10% during 2020.81 The Infrastructure 
Investment and Jobs Act ( P.L. 117-58) also provided funds for new forest program s and other 
forestry/wood funding measures, including: (i)  mechanical thinning and timber harvesting in an 
ecologically appropriate manner (USD  500 million); (ii)  loan guarantees or low interest loans for 
wood facilities that purchase by -products of restoration treatments (USD  400 million); 
(iii) reforestation (public and private lands) (USD  200 million); (iv)  the REPLANT Act, which adds 
funds to the Reforestation Trust Fund for restoration82; and (v)  wood innovation projects 
(USD  460 million).83 
4.1.2.4   International cooperation and agreements  
4.93.   The Forest Service has a section on International Programs that supports sus tainable forest 
management and biodiversity internationally. The Forest Service works with other U.S.  agencies, in 
particular USAID, to conduct various program s abroad. These program s include Sustainable Forestry 
& Natural Resource Management, Disaster Ass istance & Preparedness, International Law 
Enforcement (e.g. to combat illegal logging), Migratory Species, and Invasive Species.84 The 
United  States supports in -country forest program s through its foreign assistance agency. In 2020, 
USAID forestry investme nts totaled  USD 243 million in 45 countries, with USD  233 million focused 
on tropical forests. Assistance is planned in cooperation with governments and local stakeholders 
and includes support for strengthening forest conservation, management, and restorat ion; 
enhancing traceability; implementing forest monitoring and information systems to support legal 
trade; engaging the private sector to mobilize financing for sustainable activities; and expanding the 
participation of small holders and local communities  in supply chains.  
4.94.   The Department of Justice's Environment and Natural Resources Division engages in bilateral 
programming to enhance the capacity of law enforcement, prosecutors, and judges to investigate 
and prosecute timber trafficking crimes.  
4.95.   The Unite d States has been a long -standing and active member of the UN Forum on Forests 
and the FAO Committee on Forestry. It is also a member of the 2006 International Tropical Timber 
Agreement (ITTO) that supports sustainable management and conservation of tropic al forests. The 
United  States also participates in the Asia -Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) Experts Group on 
Illegal Logging and Associated Trade (EGILAT).  At the recent COP26, the United  States undertook a 
number of forest -related initiatives. The Uni ted States announced its Plan to Conserve Global 
Forests, launched the Forest Investor Club and the Forest Finance Risk Consortium (FFRC), endorsed 
the Glasgow Leaders' Declaration on Forests and Land Use, and joined the Global Forest Finance 
Pledge. The P lan to Conserve Global Forests  pledg es USD 9 billion for international climate funding, 
subject to Congressional appropriations.85 
4.1.3   Fisheries  
4.96.   The U.S. fisheries sector comprises marine, inland, and aquaculture sources of fish and 
seafood. The marine sector, including nearshore and coastal fisheries, benefits from the largest 
Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ) in the world – 13,000 miles of coastline and 3.4  million square 
nautical miles of ocean – thus marine capture fishing remains the dominant source of fish for the 
United  States.86 The sector has shared competencies between federal, state, and territorial 
 
81 USDA (2021), "USDA Issues Final Pandemic Payments for Timber Harvesters and Haulers", 
2 December. Viewed at: https://www .usda.gov/media/press -releases/2021/12/02/usda -issues -final-pandemic -
payments -timber -harvesters -and-haulers .  
82 The Repairing Existing Public Land by Adding Necessary Trees Act of 2021 (REPLANT Act) , Title III of 
the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act (P.L. 117-58) remov ed the funding cap of USD  30 million per year 
on the Reforestation Trust Fund. The funding is through existing tariffs on wood products.  
83 Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act ( P.L. 117-58). Viewed at: 
https://www.congress.gov/bill/117th -congress/house -bill/3684 .  
84 Forest Service, Program Topics . Viewed at: https://www.f s.usda.gov/about -agency/international -
programs/program -topics .  
85 The White House, Plan to Conserve Global Forests: Critical Carbon Sinks.  Viewed at: 
https://www.whitehouse.gov/wp -content/uploads/2021/11/Plan_to_Conserve_Global_Forests_final.pdf . 
86 NOAA, Map of the U.S. Exclusive Economic Zone. Viewed at: 
https://www.gc.noaa.gov/documents/2011/012711_gcil_maritime_eez_map.pdf .  WT/TPR/S/434 /Rev.1  • United States  
 
- 215 - 
 
  governments. The nearshore, defined as 3 nautical miles of the shoreline87, is under state/territorial 
jurisdiction, whereas coastal waters, defined be yond the 3 nautical miles to the limit of the EEZ at 
200 nautical miles from the coast is under federal control, specifically, the National Marine Fisheries 
Service, within USDOC 's National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), hereinafter 
NOAA Fi sheries. U.S. states also have jurisdiction over much of the Great Lakes and other inland 
freshwater lakes (there are some 250), as well as over regulation of parts of the aquaculture sector.  
4.97.   The U.S. fisheries sector contributes a relatively small amount to GDP (Section  4.1.3); 
however, it is important in the global perspective, as the United  States was the largest importer, 
eighth largest exporter, and second -largest consumer of fish and seafood products in 2018.88 The 
United  States has also taken a leade rship role in many international initiatives, in particular to 
promote sustainable fishing; combat illegal, unreported, and unregulated (IUU) fishing.  
4.1.3.1   Production and trade  
4.98.   There are over 800 aquatic species produced in the United  States; in 2020, commercia l fishing 
landings were 3.8  million tons, with a USD  4.8 billion value. The U.S. commercial marine fish 
landings reached their highest level, in terms of value and quantity in 2017, and have steadily 
declined since, and even more rapidly in 2019 -20 (Table  4.10). The 2020 catch was 13% lower than 
the five -year average, and landings were down in all regions and most major species . The decline 
has been attributed to the COVID -19 pandemic and its related effects. The sector has been affected 
by a global decline  in seafood demand, in particular high -end seafood sold to restaurants, as well as 
by supply -side impacts from port and border closures, increased shipping costs and timelines, 
reduced shipping capacity, and closure of processing facilities.89 The pandemic  contributed to some 
shifts in the sector ; for instance, f ood service sales declined sharply, but retail sales improved 
considerably as suppliers moved to direct marketing and online sales as a replacement.  
Table  4.10 U.S. Production of fish and aquaculture, 2017 -20 
(tons and USD  million)  
 2017  2018  2019  2020  
Marine landings:      
 Commercial, quantity ( tons) 4,522,975  4,280,321  4,250,453  3,806,452  
 Commercial value (USD  million)  5,834  5,692  5,598  4,780  
 Main species:      
  Salmon  688 588 707 479 
  Lobsters  594 684 681 569 
  Crabs  610 644 635 584 
  Scallops  512 541 572 488 
 Recreational, quantity ( tons) 201,056  158,894  157,842  160,333  
Aquaculture:  
Quantity ( tons) 286,287  308,550  298,336  .. 
Value (USD  million)  1,497  1,524  1,481  .. 
 Catfish  355 342 362 .. 
 Oysters  211 219 221 .. 
 Crawfish  190 211 224 .. 
.. Not available.  
Source:  NOAA, Marine landings database. Viewed at: 
https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/foss/f?p=215:200:29230518756584:Mail:NO ; and NOAA (2021), 
Fisheries of the United  States, 2019 . 
4.99.   During 2017 -20, the top four species of fish  harvested, in terms of value, were salmon, 
lobsters, clams, and scallops. By value, the U.S.  produces slightly more shellfish than finfish. The 
United  States is not a major producer of aquaculture seafood, ranking 18th internationally; however, 
it is a large consumer of aquaculture fish. It is estimated that about 50% of U.S. consumption is 
 
87 For most states, it is three nautical miles; the exception is for Texas, western Florida, and Puerto  Rico 
in which the limit is nine nautical miles.  
88 USITC (2021), Seafood Obtained via  Illegal, Unreported, and Unregulated Fishing: U.S. Imports and 
Economic Impact on U.S. Commercial Fisheries , Pub. No.  5168, February. Viewed at: 
https://www.usitc.gov/publications/332/pub5 168.pdf ; and FAO (2020), The State of World Fisheries and 
Aquaculture 2020 . Viewed at: https://www.fao.org/publications/sofia/2020/en/ .  
89 NOAA (2021), U .S. Seafood Industry and For-Hire Sector Impacts from COVID -19: 2020 in 
Perspective.  Viewed at: https://spo.nmfs.noaa.gov/sites/default/files/TM221.pdf .  WT/TPR/S/434 /Rev.1  • United States  
 
- 216 - 
 
  from aquaculture.90 U.S. aquaculture production reached USD  1.5 billion in 2019. The United  States 
produces both freshwater and mar ine species in aquaculture, but freshwater species are dominant 
in terms of value, in particular catfish, crawfish, and trout. The top marine aquaculture species are 
oysters, clams, and Atlantic salmon. In comparison to the marine catch sector, aquaculture  is small, 
accounting for about 7% in terms of volume; however, it is more significant in terms of value, 
accounting for 21% of 2018 production.  
4.100.   The United  States is a significant net importer of fish and fish products and had a trade 
deficit of USD  24.3 billion in 2021 (Table  4.11). Import figures are magnified due to the processing 
of U.S.  fish abroad where imported fish is actually harvested by U.S. vessels and is landed elsewhere 
for processing, returning to the United  States as an import.91 In 2020, la ndings of tuna by 
U.S.-flagged vessels at ports outside the United  States amounted to 189,419 tons. Reflecting this, 
the United  States mainly imports processed fish products, i.e. fish fillets (HS 0304), crustaceans and 
prepared crustaceans (HS 0306 and 16 05), and other prepared and preserved fish products including 
caviar (HS 1604). With respect to fresh fish, the major seafood species imported include shrimp, 
Atlantic salmon, crab, and tuna. Overall, the main source countries of seafood imports in 2021 we re 
Canada (17%), India (11%), Chile (10%), and Indonesia (9%).92 Imports from Canada consisted 
predominantly of lobster, while those from Indonesia were mostly shrimp and crabmeat, and imports 
from India consisted mainly of shrimp. China has been a major s ource of imports in recent years, 
although imports fell considerably in 2020 -21 mainly reflecting the closure of fish processing facilities 
due to the pandemic, as well as higher tariffs resulting from the Section  301 investigation.  
4.101.   U.S. fish and fish prod uct exports followed a similar trend as production and overall exports 
as they generally declined during the initial period and recovered in 2021 albeit not to the level 
achieved in 2018  (Table  4.11) . The major export category is frozen fish (HS 0303). The  main fish or 
fish products exported are lobster, salmon, surimi, and certain non -edible fish products, 
e.g. fishmeal.93 The major export markets by value in 2021 were Canada (29%), the European  Union 
(18%), and China (15%).  
Table  4.11 Imports and exports of fish and fish products, 2018 -21 
(USD million)  
HS Description  2018  2019  2020  2021  
0301 Live fish  84.7 82.8 86.5 125.1  
0302 Fish, fresh or chilled, excluding fish fillets, etc.  2,271.8  2,306.9  1,883.2  2,545.8  
0303 Fish, frozen, excluding fish fillets and other fish meat of HTSUS  
03.04.  761.0  765.1  703.7  982.4  
0304 Fish fillets and other fish meat (..), fresh, chilled or frozen  6,696.1  6,421.5  6,100.9  7,472.3  
0305 Fish, dried, salted or in brine; smoked fish; flours, meals and pellets 
of fish, fit for human consumption  276.7  297.6  328.7  359.3  
0306 Crustaceans, whether in shell or not, live, fresh, chilled, frozen, etc.  7,337.7  7,653.0  7,700.0  10,940.8  
0307 Molluscs, whether in shell or not, live, fresh, chilled, frozen, etc.  1,043.9  931.1  696.5  1,206.5  
0308 Aquatic invertebrates other than crustaceans and molluscs, live, etc.  44.3 43.0 39.0 51.0 
0508 Coral and similar materials (..);shells of mollusc crustaceans, etc.  20.1 18.8 23.7 24.6 
0511 Animal products not elsewhere specified or included  56.4 54.2 61.4 83.4 
1504 Fats and oils and their fractions, of fish or marine mammals, etc.  135.4  122.4  121.0  145.3  
1603 Extracts and juices of meat, fish or crustaceans, molluscs, etc.  24.8 21.5 27.5 27.3 
1604 Prepared or preserved fish; caviar and caviar substitutes, etc.  1,874.9  1,910.4  2,102.3  2,002.0  
1605 Crustaceans, molluscs and other aquatic invertebrates, etc.  3,098.0  2,651.0  2,854.8  3,912.7  
2301 Flours, meals and pellets, (..), unfit for human consumption; 
greaves  113.0  94.8 102.2  126.6  
Total fish imports  23,839  23,374  22,831  30,005  
0301 Live fish  62.2 58.2 35.2 46.5 
0302 Fish, fresh or chilled, excluding fish fillets, etc.  187.2  196.2  191.5  234.1  
0303 Fish, frozen, excluding fish fillets and other fish meat of heading 
03.04.  2,039.9  1,880.1  1,480.3  1,726.4  
0304 Fish fillets and other fish meat (..), fresh, chilled or frozen  1,368.7  1,376.4  1,205.2  1,275.7  
0305 Fish, dried, salted or in brine; smoked fish; flours, meals and pellets 
of fish, fit for human consumption  22.1 26.7 21.3 19.9 
0306 Crustaceans, whether in shell or not, live, fresh, chilled, etc.  1,081.6  938.7  755.0  1,159.9  
0307 Molluscs, whether in shell or not, live, fresh, chilled, frozen, etc.  451.8  371.1  295.7  374.0  
 
90 NOAA (2021), Fisheries of the United  States, 2019 . Viewed at: 
https://media.fisheries.noaa.gov/2021 -05/FUS2019 -FINAL -webready -2.3.pdf?null= .  
91 USITC (2021), Seafood Obtained via Illegal, Unreported, and Unregulated  Fishing: U.S. Imports and 
Economic Impact on U.S. Commercial Fisheries , Pub. No.  5168. Viewed at: 
https://www.usitc.gov/publications/332/pub5168.pdf . 
92 USITC Dataweb.  
93 NOAA (2021), Fisher ies of the United  States, 2019 . Viewed at: 
https://media.fisheries.noaa.gov/2021 -05/FUS2019 -FINAL -webready -2.3.pdf?null= . WT/TPR/S/434 /Rev.1  • United States  
 
- 217 - 
 
  HS Description  2018  2019  2020  2021  
0308 Aquatic invertebrates other than crustaceans and molluscs, live, etc.  38.9 31.4 23.4 25.3 
0508 Coral and similar materials, (..); shells of molluscs, crustaceans, etc.  3.8 3.3 3.1 3.5 
0511 Animal products not elsewhere specified or included  139.2  113.3  97.7 112.1  
1504 Fats and oils and their fractions, of fish or marine mammals, etc.  154.2  193.7  162.5  148.9  
1603 Extracts and juices of meat, fish or crustaceans, molluscs, etc.  17.2 16.5 14.7 15.8 
1604 Prepared or preserved fish; caviar and caviar substitutes, etc.  307.8  288.1  309.2  279.0  
1605 Crustaceans, molluscs and other aquatic invertebrates, etc.  72.4 80.2 67.9 112.9  
2301 Flours, meals and pellets, (..), unfit for human consumption; 
greaves  203.2  198.2  186.6  185.7  
Total fish exports  6,150  5,772  4,849  5,720  
Source:  WTO Secretariat calculations, based on UN Comtrade database.  
4.1.3.2   Import, export, and investment provisions  
4.102.   The importation of fish or seafood is controlled at the border by CBP, but other government 
agencies also have a role, in particular the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), NMFS, and the Fish 
and Wildlife Service (FWS). FWS regulates the importation, expor tation, and transport of certain 
wildlife species through a licensing and declaration process. FWS also issues permits and certificates 
to ensure compliance with CITES and the Endangered Species Act. FDA  play a  role with respect to 
the safety of products ; foreign processors that ship fish or fish products must conform with the 
provisions in the Seafood Hazard Analysis Critical Control Point (HACCP) Regulation for fish or the 
National Shellfish Sanitation Program (NSSP) for bivalves.94 The regulatory aspects  of aquaculture 
fall under state jurisdiction. NMFS's Seafood Inspection Program provides export certification 
services to exporters and works in cooperation with FDA through an MOU on a number of fish safety 
matters including standards, inspections, evalu ations, certifications, and information sharing.95 
4.103.   U.S. import tariffs on fish and fish products (WTO definition) are generally very low and 
averaged 1.4% in 2021, with a range from zero to 35% in 2021 (Section  3.1.3). The vast majority 
of rates are at zer o, with the remainder mostly at 3% or 6%. However, higher tariffs are applied on 
sturgeon roe (7.5 -15%), crabmeat (7.5%), sardines in airtight containers (15 -20%), fish sticks 
(7.5-10%), caviar (15%), prepared meat of crab and lobster (10%), tuna in airtig ht containers 
(12.5 -35%), and a few products, which are subject to non -ad valorem  rates. The higher tariffs tend 
to be on prepared/processed or value -added fish products and specialty items like roe and prepared 
caviar. The United  States maintains a long -standing TRQ on canned tuna imports (Section  3.1.3.5), 
in which a small quantity, i.e. about 7% of canned tuna imports by value, enter through the TRQ. 
Due to domestic changes in the tariff schedule, lower quantities of tuna have entered under the TRQ 
in re cent years, and the text providing the quota quantity does not align with that of the 
United  States' bound tariff commitment. A D duties are applied on frozen warm -water shrimp and 
prawns from China, India, Thailand, and Viet  Nam; and on frozen fish fillets  from Viet  Nam.96 
4.104.   The United  States implements the Tuna Tracking and Verification Program (TTVP) at the 
border to monitor imports of all processed and frozen tuna and tuna products (not fresh tuna) and 
certify the "dolphin safe" status in conformity with t he Dolphin Protection Consumer Information 
Act.97 The TTVP requires the submission of a Fisheries Certificate of Origin as part of the import 
process with CBP, along with attached certifications (i.e. Captain's Statement, Observer Statement, 
and/or Interna tional Dolphin Conservation Program  (IDCP) Member Nation Certification), so as to 
authenticate dolphin -safe claims. The IDCP Member Nation Certificate requirement applies to certain 
tuna harvested by purse seine vessels with a carrying capacity over 400 sh ort tons in the Eastern 
Tropical Pacific Ocean (ETP). All of these documents must be submitted to CBP prior to entry through 
the Automated Commercial Environment (ACE) interface (single window). In addition, for tuna 
products designated dolphin -safe, the i mporter of record must maintain recordkeeping information 
on the complete chain of custody and ensure that such information is readily available to the NMFS 
upon request. Moreover, any tuna importer must be in possession of an International Fisheries Trade  
Permit (IFTP). The IFTP, introduced in 2016, replaced some earlier permits and expanded its 
 
94 FDA has recently proposed a new rule t hat would require traceability for certain fish products, 
i.e. finfish, crustaceans, molluscs, and bivalves (Section  3.3.3). FDA no longer has a role in the inspection and 
safety of catfish species; rather, USDA's Food Safety Inspection Services is respons ible. 
95 Memorandum of Understanding Between U.S. Department of Commerce National Oceanic and 
Atmospheric Administration and U.S. Department of Health and Human Services Food and Drug Administration, 
MOU 225 -09-0008. Viewed at: https://www.fda.gov/about -fda/domestic -mous/mou -225-09-0008.  
96 USITC, Anti-dumping  and Countervailing Duty Orders in Place as of 14  December  2021. Viewed at: 
https://www.usitc.gov/trade_remedy/documents/orders.xls  (December  2021).  
97 Dolphin Protection Consumer Information Act, 16 U.S.C. 1385.  WT/TPR/S/434 /Rev.1  • United States  
 
- 218 - 
 
  coverage to other trade monitoring programs. The IFTP is now required for imports, exports, and 
re-exports of fish and fish products of the Atlantic Highly Migrato ry Species (HMS) International 
Trade Program, Antarctic Marine Living Resources (AMLR), the TTVP, and the Seafood Import 
Monitoring Program (SIMP). Currently, an IFTP requirement applies to 17 types of fish and certain 
frozen or processed products.98 IFTPs  are granted by the NMFS for a period of one year after approval 
and payment of a fee (USD  30).99 Only U.S. residents or entities are eligible for an IFTP.  
4.105.   Like the TTVP, the AMLR, the HMS program , and SIMP require an IFTP and additional 
measures at the bo rder to control the trade of certain fish and fish products. For the HMS program , 
an IFTP is required in order to import, export, and re -export bluefin tuna, frozen bigeye tuna, 
swordfish, or shark fins. The HMS domestic program  requires specific dealer permits for the domestic 
purchase of certain species. For example, there is a federal Atlantic Tunas Dealer Permit that requires 
bluefin tuna dealers to submit biweekly electronic reports of domestic purchases. On those forms, 
dealers must indicate if fish were kept in the U.S. market, imported, exported, or re -exported and 
include information on the fishing vessel, landings, gear type, catch area, and purchase price. Other 
dealer permits are in place and require similar informatio n for other species. The AMLR imposes 
additional requirements for the import of Patagonian toothfish, Antarctic toothfish, and Antarctic 
krill. It requires dealers to have pre -approval for each shipment of frozen toothfish, and a separate 
approval for re -exports. A report for fresh air -shipped toothfish must be submitted within 24 hours 
of import for any shipment of fresh toothfish. The AMLR requires dealers to submit an import ticket 
for importing Antarctic krill.  
4.106.   SIMP is a risk -based traceability program that requires the importer of record to file 
additional data elements electronically through ACE. These data elements include detailed 
information under three broad categories: entities harvesting or producing the fish, the fish that was 
harvested and proc essed, and where and when the fish were harvested and landed.100 Importers 
must retain the chain of custody records associated with the import for two years. Inspection upon 
importation, screening, and assessment, including post -entry audit, is conducted by  NMFS.  
4.107.   Since 1991, the United  States has maintained an import ban on wild -caught shrimp and 
prawns due to harvesting methods that may adversely affect sea turtles ( P.L. 101-162, 
Section  609). Imports are limited to those from sources that have gone through  an annual procedure 
that certifies their fishing environments do not pose a danger to sea turtles or that their sea turtle 
protection program s are comparable to that of the United  States. As at April  2021, 42 economies 
had received such certification, in some cases only for some regions or species.101 A completed 
Shrimp Exporter's/Importer's Declaration must also accompany the shipment. A similar measure is 
in place with respect to yellowfin tuna caught using purse seine fishing gear in the ETP. Importation  
is prohibited pursuant to the provisions of the Marine Mammal Protection Act (MMPA), 
16 U.S.C.  1371, from any nation that harvests yellowfin tuna in the ETP using purse seine vessels 
that have more than 400 short tons (363 metric tons) carrying capacity i f that nation has not 
received an affirmative finding from the Assistant Administrator for NOAA Fisheries regarding its 
membership in the Inter -American Tropical Tuna Commission (IATTC) and compliance with rules 
regarding dolphin protection under the IDCP.  This measure currently covers all yellowfin tuna or 
products derived from yellowfin tuna harvested in the ETP by purse seine vessels of, or exported 
from seven trading partners . Fresh yellowfin tuna is exempt.  
 
98 It is required for the import, export, or re -export of abalone, swordfish, shark fins, toothfis h, Antarctic 
krill, Atlantic cod, Pacific cod, blue crab, red king crab, dolphinfish (Mahi Mahi), grouper, red snapper, sea 
cucumber, sharks, shrimp, swordfish, and tunas (Albacore, Bigeye, Skipjack, Yellowfin, and Bluefin). It is also 
required for the imp ort of all frozen or processed tuna. For details on products covered and HS tariff codes, see 
CBP (2020), ACE Automated Broker Interface Requirements: Implementation Guide for National Marine 
Fisheries Service . Viewed at:  https://www.cbp.gov/sites/default/files/assets/documents/2020 -
Mar/ACE%20NMFS%20PGA%20Implementation%20Guide%20 18Feb2020_final_0.pdf .  
99 NOAA, International Fisheries Trade Permit . Viewed at: 
https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/permit/international -fisheries -trade -permit .  
100 Feder al Register  (2016), Vol. 81, No.  237, 9  December, pp.  88975 -88998. Viewed at: 
https:/ /www.federalregister.gov/documents/2016/12/09/2016 -29324/magnuson -stevens -fishery -
conservation -and-management -act-seafood -import -monitoring -program .  
101 Federal Register  (2021), Vol. 86, No.  82, 30  April, pp.  23027 -23028. Viewed at: 
https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2021/04/30/2021 -09077/bureau -of-oceans -and-international -
environmental -and-scientific -affairs -annual -certification -of.  WT/TPR/S/434 /Rev.1  • United States  
 
- 219 - 
 
  4.108.   The provisions of the MMPA have generally wid e-ranging requirements that prohibit 
importation of fish and fish products if the fishing technology results in the serious injury or death 
of marine mammals in excess of U.S. standards. The MMPA Import Provisions Rule of August  2016 
requires foreign fish harvesters to therefore seek and receive a comparability finding from the NMFS 
demonstrating they meet this criterion to export fish to the United  States.102 The rule also applies 
to intermediary countries to ensure there is no circumvention of the import p rohibition. The MMPA 
Import Provisions Rule established a five -year exemption period that initially expired on 
31 December  2021. However, an interim final rule extended the exemption period by one year until 
31 December  2022.103 Applications for comparabili ty findings were due on 30  November  2021 and 
as of March  2022 were being evaluated prior to making decisions by 30  November  2022.  In 
August  2018, pursuant to a Court of International Trade order, CBP implemented import restrictions 
on certain fish and fish  products from Mexico caught with gillnets.104 A subsequent notice extended 
existing prohibitions on shrimp, corvina, sierra, and chano  fish and fish products harvested by 
gillnets in the upper Gulf of California.  
4.109.   Foreign direct investment in U.S. fisheries is prohibited or restricted in certain cases. The 
main restrictions pertain to the ownership of fishing vessels for the catch and tra nsport of fish in 
U.S. waters. Regulations 19 (C .F.R. § 4.80) require that the vessel is built in the United  States and 
is owned by a U.S. citizen or where at least 75% of the ownership and control is by U.S. citizens. 
There are also some restrictions on f oreigners to obtain individual fishing quota (IFQ) allocations. 
Limited Access Privilege Programs (LAPPs) prohibit any person other than a U.S. citizen, a 
corporation, partnership, or permanent resident alien from acquiring quota. All fish harvested under 
a LAPP must be processed on vessels of the United  States or on U.S. soil, unless a waiver from this 
requirement has been issued. There are no special restrictions for foreigners engaging in fish product 
processing and aquaculture.  
4.1.3.3   Policy, fisheries managem ent, and support measures  
4.110.   In recent years, the United  States has worked domestically and internationally to promote 
sustainable fisheries. It has improved domestic management schemes to prevent overfishing and 
promoted sustainable fishing. In line with thi s, it has also improved enforcement and enacted new 
measures. The United  States joined the Port State Measures Agreement in 2016 and has taken other 
measures to combat IUU fishing. Some examples include the establishment of the Interagency 
Working Group on  IUU fishing under the Maritime Security and Fisheries Enforcement (SAFE) Act105, 
the inclusion in FTAs of provisions to deal with IUU fishing, the use of Customs Mutual Assistance 
Agreements to cooperate with foreign customs administrations in combating IU U fishing, and the 
implementation of SIMP, a traceability program.  
4.111.   SIMP was implemented on 1  January  2018 and aims to deter IUU fish and fish products and 
misrepresented seafood from entering U.S. commerce and to support the identification of such 
products  while complementing existing NMFS traceability programs for imported seafood products. 
SIMP requirements apply to 13 single species and species groups that were determined to be the 
most vulnerable.106 These species are some of the most popular fish produc ts, thus SIMP covers 
about half of all U.S. seafood imports.107 NMFS developed SIMP under the constraint that lawful 
trade should not be stopped and the volume of imports is too large to inspect every shipment; 
however, it is possible to prohibit or stop th e importation of IUU fish shipments pursuant to the 
provisions of the Magnuson -Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act  (MSA). The SIMP 
 
102 Federal Register  (2016), Vol. 81, No.  157, 15  August, pp.  54390 -54419. Viewed at: 
https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2016/08/15/2016 -19158/fish -and-fish-product -import -provisions -
of-the-marine -mammal -protection -act.  
103 Federal Register  (2020), Vol. 85, No.  213, 3  November, pp.  69515 -69157 . Viewed at: 
https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2020/11/03/2020 -24210/mo dification -of-deadlines -under -the-
fish-and-fish-product -import -provisions -of-the-marine -mammal . 
104 Federal Register  (2018), Vol. 83, No.  167, 28  August, pp.  43792 -43796. Viewed at: 
https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR -2018-08-28/pdf/2018 -18628.pdf .  
105 The Maritime SAFE Act, passed in 2019, calls for the establishment of an interagency working group 
to strengthen coordination on maritime security and combat IUU fishing.  
106 Since inception it has applied to abalone, Atlantic cod, blue crab (Atlantic), dolphinfish (Mahi Mahi), 
grouper, king crab (red), Pacific cod, red snapper, sea cucumber, sharks, shrimp, swordfish, and tuna 
(Albacore, Bigeye, Skipjack, Yellowfin, and Bluef in); however, for the initial period until 31  December  2018, 
there was a stay on the implementation for abalone and shrimp.  
107 NOAA, Seafood Import Monitoring Program . Viewed at: 
https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/international/seafood -import -monitoring -program .  WT/TPR/S/434 /Rev.1  • United States  
 
- 220 - 
 
  provisions are implemented by NOAA Fisheries' Office of International Affairs, Trade, and Commerce 
(IATC), which conducts random and directed audits. SIMP's first assessment, completed in 
April 2021, showed non -compliance in about 40% of the audits mainly due to discrepancies between 
information reported at the time of the initial entry and records provided at the ti me of the audit.108 
4.112.   The SIMP implementing rules were amended in April  2018 to lift the stay that had applied 
to shrimp and abalone species since inception. The stay had been put in place in the original rule 
over concerns about equivalency. Recordkeeping and traceability information for domestic 
aquaculture abalone and shrim p was deemed not equivalent or comparable to that of imported 
abalone and shrimp, as it was regulated at the state level and was subject to different rules. The 
Consolidated Appropriations Act of 2018 mandates that the stay for abalone and shrimp be lifted  
and a new Final Rule in this respect be issued by USDOC. As a result, these two species were added 
to SIMP with an effective date of 31  December  2018.109 At the same time, the same Act instructed 
the Secretary of Commerce to establish a traceability progra m for inland, coastal, and marine 
aquaculture of shrimp and abalone by 31  December  2018. These domestic traceability rules were 
presented in a proposed rule by NOAA on 11  October  2018.110 The Traceability Information Program 
for Seafood (TIPS), a proposed d omestic counterpart to the shrimp and abalone import requirements 
under SIMP to verify that U.S.  aquacultured shrimp and abalone were lawfully produced, was placed 
on hold as a result of the impact of the COVID -19 pandemic.  
4.113.   The USMCA contains provisions on  fisheries, marine conservation, and IUU fishing, including 
articles on IUU fishing, sustainable fisheries management, and conservation of marine species. As 
part of USMCA implementation, USD  8 million  was allocated to NOAA to combat IUU fishing and 
enhanc e the implementation of the SIMP.  
4.114.   E.O. 13921 of 7  May 2020, known as the Seafood Competitiveness Executive Order, made 
several changes with the aim of improving the competitiveness of the U.S. seafood industry.111 The 
main action points included: (i)  removi ng barriers to U.S. fishing, to this end the Order instructed 
the USDOC to prepare a prioritized list of recommended actions to reduce burdens on domestic 
fishing and to increase production within sustainable fisheries, including a proposal for initiating each 
recommended action within one year of the date of the order; (ii)  combating IUU fishing; 
(iii) removing barriers to permits (through rulemaking, technical assistance and training, 
public -private partnerships, and promoting interagency, intergovernment al, and international 
cooperation); (iv)  improving regulatory transparency for aquaculture, and removing regulatory 
barriers and opening new areas in the aquaculture sector; (v)  updating the Aquaculture 
Development Plan; (vi)  promoting aquatic animal healt h; and (vii)  establishing an Interagency 
Seafood Trade Task Force. Most of these elements require consulting and reporting, with 
recommendations or other outcomes generally expected within a one -year time period.  One of the 
key provisions of the E.O. direc ts NOAA to establish 10 Aquaculture Opportunity Areas (AOAs) , small 
geographic areas with potential suitability for commercial aquaculture. As at March  2022, NOAA had 
identified potential areas in federal waters off of southern California and the Gulf of M exico to 
establish the first two AOAs, and was developing an Environmental Impact Statement for each region 
to identify the specific areas to be included in each AOA.  
 
108 During calendar year 2020, 1,073 audits were completed. NOAA (2021), Report on t he 
Implementation of the U.S. Seafood Import Monitoring Program . Viewed at: 
https://media.fisheries.noaa.gov/2021 -05/SIMP%20Implementation%20Report%2020 21.pdf?null .  
109 Federal Register  (2018), Vol.  83, No.  79, 24 April, pp. 17762 -17765. Viewed at: 
https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2018/04/24/2018 -08553/magnuson -stevens -fishery -
conservation -and-management -act-lifting -the-stay-on-inclusion -of-shrimp -and.  
110 Federal Register  (2018), Vol.  83, No.  197, 11  October,  51426 -51434 . Viewed at: 
https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2018/10/11/2018 -22039/magnu son-stevens -fishery -
conservation -and-management -act-traceability -information -program -for.  
111 The Order stated that it is "the policy of the Federal Government to: (a) identify and remove 
unnecessary regulatory barriers restricting American fishermen and aq uaculture producers; (b) combat illegal, 
unreported, and unregulated fishing; (c) provide good stewardship of public funds and stakeholder time and 
resources, and avoid duplicative, wasteful, or inconclusive permitting processes; (d) facilitate aquaculture  
projects through regulatory transparency and long -term strategic planning; (e) safeguard [U.S.] communities 
and maintain a healthy aquatic environment; (f) further fair and reciprocal trade in seafood products; and 
(g) continue to hold imported seafood to  the same food -safety requirements as domestically produced 
products". Federal Register  (2020), Vol. 85, No.  92, 12  May, 28471 -28477. Viewed at: 
https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2020/05/12/2020 -10315/promoting -american -seafood -
competitiveness -and-economic -growth .  WT/TPR/S/434 /Rev.1  • United States  
 
- 221 - 
 
  4.115.   The Interagency Seafood Trade Task Force was made responsible for improving fair and 
reciprocal trade in seafood products and making recommendations to USTR on a comprehensive 
interagency seafood trade strategy that identifies opportunities to improve access to foreign markets 
through trade policy and negotiations. The Task Force submitted rec ommendations to USTR on 
5 August  2020. USTR transmitted its Seafood Trade Strategy to the President on 3  November  2020.  
4.116.   In aquaculture, U.S. Policy  is guided by its Aquaculture Action Plan 2020 -24 under the 
USDA's Agricultural Research Service.112 The Plan aims to improve domestic aquaculture efficiency 
and quality by conducting research and developing new technologies: it  targets improving 
efficiencies in catfish, salmonid, hybrid striped bass, and shellfish aquaculture; developing marine 
finfish feedstocks ; and advancing sustainable aquaponic production systems.  
4.117.   The United  States manages fisheries stocks and combats overfishing through the MSA, which 
is its long -standing and main legislation on fisheries management. There have been several 
significant amend ments or additions to the MSA including the Sustainable Fisheries Act, the 
Reauthorization Act of 2006, and most recently the Modernizing Recreational Fisheries Management 
Act, all of which have extended its scope (Table  4.12).  
Table  4.12 Key fisheries legislation, 2022  
Legislation/Reference  Overview  
Magnuson -Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management 
Reauthorization Act of 2006, 16 U.S.C. 1801 et  seq. Primary law on fisheries management, i.e. preventing 
overfishing  
Modernizing Recreational Fisheries Management Act 
(P.L. 115-405) Makes improvements to recreational fishing data  
High Seas Driftnet Fishing Moratorium Protection Act 
(P.L. 102-582) Addresses IUU fishing  
Endangered Species Act, 16 U.S.C. 1531 -1544 Prevents extinction of endangered species  
Marine Mammal Protection Act ( P.L. 92-522) Establishes protections to protect marine mammals  
National Environmental Policy Act ( P.L. 91-190) Environmental impacts assessment  
American Fisheries Act ( P.L. 105-277) Strengthens U.S. ownership standards  
Antarctic Marine Living Resources Convention Act, 
50 C.F.R. 300.100 -300.116  Establishes the Antarctic Marine Living Resources 
Program for managing Southern Ocean resou rces 
Atlantic Tunas Convention Act, 16 U.S.C. 971  Implements Convention  
National Aquaculture Act, 16 U.S.C. 2801  Promotes the development of U.S. aquaculture  
Illegal, Unreported, and Unregulated Fishing Enforcement Act 
(P.L. 114-81), Title 3 Port Stat e Measures Agreement Act of 
2015 Amends the Magnuson -Stevens Fishery Conservation and 
Management Act and implements the Agreement on Port 
State Measures to Prevent, Deter and Eliminate IUU 
fishing  
Sustainable Fisheries Act ( P.L. 104-297) Measures to prevent overfishing and rebuild stocks  
Interjurisdictional Fisheries Act, 16 U.S.C. 4101 -4107 Regional management of states' fisheries  
The High Seas Fishing Compliance Act, 
50 C.F.R. 300.330 -300.341  Requires a permit to fish on the high seas  
Source:  Compiled by the WTO Secretariat from NOAA information.  
4.118.   In recent years, U.S. fishing stocks managed under the MSA were maintained within catch 
limits, i.e. between 87% to 93%. The number of stocks on the overfishing list improved slightly, 
from 30 to 26 over  the period; however, the number overfished deteriorated slightly from 38 to 49.  
4.119.   Support measures to the fishing sector involve a number of programs at the federal and 
state levels, including tax concessions or rebates, loans, and pandemic -related measures . Most 
measures have been in place for many years and are notified to the WTO as subsidies and compiled 
by the OECD in its annual reporting of support to the sector. More recently, the CARES Act  provided 
additional funding to NOAA for fisheries assistance  that aims to help states, Tribes, and territories 
with coastal and marine fisheries who have been negatively affected by the COVID -19 pandemic ; 
USD 300 million was allocated for 2020.113 The funds are directed through fisheries commissions 
and involve direc t and indirect payments for fishery -related losses; aquaculture enterprises are also 
eligible. One  third of the funds are allocated to Alaska and Washington.  
 
112 USDA (2020), USDA ARS National Program 106, Aquaculture Action Plan 2020 -2024. Viewed at: 
https://www.ars.usda.gov/ARSUserFiles/np106/NP106%20Aquaculture%20Action%20Plan%202020 -
2024%20Amended%207 -20-2021_fina l2.pdf .  
113 NOAA (2020), "Commerce Secretary Announces Allocation of $300 Million in CARES Act Funding", 
7 May. Viewed at: https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/feature -story/commerce -secretary -announces -allocation -
300-million -cares -act-funding .  WT/TPR/S/434 /Rev.1  • United States  
 
- 222 - 
 
  4.120.   An excise tax has been charged on fishing gear since 1950 pursuant to the Dingell –Johnson 
Act. The  current rate is 10% of the value of the sale and it is charged on manufacturers and importers 
of, inter alia, specified fishing gear, reels, outboard motors, and nets.114 The Dingell –Johnson Act 
also directs other tax payments, in addition to excise receipts, to the Sport Fish Restoration and 
Boating Trust Fund. The Fund was recently reauthorized through FY2026.115 The other receipts 
include: (i)  federal fuel taxes attribut able to motorboat fuel from the Highway Trust Fund (HTF); 
(ii) receipts attributable to small engine fuel used for outdoor power equipment from the HTF; and 
(iii) annual receipts from import duties on fishing tackle, yachts, and pleasure craft. The majorit y of 
the receipts in the Fund, about two  thirds, are from the motorboat fuel tax, 18% from excise duty 
receipts, and about 10% from import duties.116 In 2020, the Fund dis bursed nearly USD  1 billion, 
and over the course of its history dis bursed nearly USD  23 billion.117 The funds are allocated to each 
state but are generally spent on wetlands restoration (19%), boating safety (17%), boat 
infrastructure such as docks and outreach (6%), and state fish and wildlife agencies (58%).118 
4.121.   In its annual notification to the WTO pursuant to Article  XVI:1 of GATT  1994 and Article  25 
of the Agreement on Subsidies and Countervailing Measures, the United  States notified eight 
programs in the fisheries area (Table  4.13).  
Table  4.13 Fisheries subsidies notified to the WTO  
(USD)  
Program/Reference  Amount of subsidy/loans 
outstanding  
Columbia River Fishery Development Program (Mitchell Act), 16 U.S.C. 755 -757 USD 17,310,648  
Fisheries Finance Program, 46 U.S.C. 53701  USD 92,000,000  
Saltonstall -Kennedy R&D Program Annual Grant Competition: Fisheries R&D, 15 U.S.C. 
713c-3(c) USD 10,000,000  
Capital Construction Fund (CCF), 46 U.S.C. 535  USD 2,500,000  
Bycatch Reduction Engineering Program (BREP), 16 U.S.C.  1865 USD 2,342,000  
The Vessel Monitoring System (VMS) Reimbursement Program, 16 U.S.C. 1801 et seq.  USD 706,174  
Fishing Capacity Reduction Loan Program, 16 U.S.C. 1801 et  seq. none 
Fishery Disaster Assistance Program, 16 U.S.C. 1801 et seq. and 16 U.S.C. 4101 -4107 USD 165,000,000  
Source:  WTO document G/SCM/N/372/USA, 14  July 2021.  
4.1.3.4   International agreements and cooperation  
4.122.   In 2015, the United  States enacted the Port State Measures Agreement Act,  which 
implemented the Port State Measures Agreement.119 The Agreement entered into force for the 
United  States on 5  June 2016 and works to deter or prevent IUU fishing among the 70 parties to the 
Agreement.120 Many of the provisions of the Agreement were already common practice in the 
United  States prior to r atification; however, there have been improvements to the screening and 
administration of landings in particular. The United  States is also a party to the Multilateral Treaty 
on Fisheries Between Certain Governments of the Pacific Island States and the Gov ernment of the 
United  States of America (commonly known as the South Pacific Tuna Treaty) with 16 Pacific Island 
parties that allows U.S. purse seine vessels to fish tuna in the EEZ of these parties in exchange for 
certain payments or fees.121 The Treaty  has been in place since 1988 but has been amended several 
 
114 IRS, Field Directive Federal Excise Tax on the Importation and Manufacture of Fishing and Archery 
Products . Viewed at: https://www.irs.gov/businesses/small -businesses -self-employed/field -directive -federal -
excise -tax-on-the-importation -and-manufacture -of-fishing -and-archery -products .  
115 P.L. 117-52, 15  November  2021.  
116 National Marine Manufacturers Association, Sport Fish Restoration and Boating Trust Fund . 
Viewed  at: https://www.nmma.org/assets/cabinets/Cabinet585/NMMA_Trust%20Fund%20One -
Pager_Oct%202019.pdf .  
117 Department of the Interior (2020), "Sportsmen and Sp ortswomen Generate Nearly $1 Billion in 
Conservation Funding", 19  March. Viewed at: https://www.doi.gov/pressreleases/sportsmen -and-
sportswomen -generate -nearly -1-billion -conservation -funding .  
118 National Marine Manufacturers Association, Sport Fish Restoration and Boating Trust Fund . 
Viewed  at: https://www.nmma.org/assets/cabinets/Cabinet585/NMMA_Trust%20Fund%20One -
Pager_Oct%202019.pdf .  
119 Port State Measures Agreement Act of 2015. Viewed at: 
https://uscode.house.gov/view.xhtml?path=/prelim@title16/chapter93&edition=prelim .  
120 FAO, Agreement on Port State Measures . Viewed at: https://www.fao.org/port -state-measures/en/ . 
121 Parties to the Treaty  include Australia, Cook Islands, Federated States of Micronesia, Fiji, Kiribati, 
Marshall Islands, Nauru, New  Zealand, Niue, Palau, Papua New Guinea, Samoa, Solomon  Islands, Tonga, 
 WT/TPR/S/434 /Rev.1  • United States  
 
- 223 - 
 
  times. In the latest amendment in 2016, the United  States secured a more flexible arrangement in 
terms of fishing days and modernized the way access is secured.122 The amend ed Treaty is awaiting 
Senate consent and amendments to its implementing legislation, the South Pacific Tuna Act. The 
Agreement on the International Dolphin Conservation Program  (AIDCP) is a multilateral agreement 
to reduc e incidental dolphin mortalities in tuna purse seine fishing in the ETP area and ensur e the 
long-term sustainability of tuna stocks. The United  States is a member since its inception  in 1999 . 
4.123.   The United  States is a member of a number of bilateral and regional fisheries management 
agreements, including membership in nine Regional Fisheries Management Organizations (RFMOs). 
One new agreement entered into force recently: the Agreement to Prevent Unregulated High Seas 
Fisheries in the Central Arctic Ocean came into force on 25  June 2021. The United  States i s one of 
the 10  parties that have agreed to protect the Arctic high seas from commercial fishing activities 
before they have begun and potentially manage commercial fishing if it becomes possible. The 
Agreement also facilitates joint research and monitorin g of the area.123 
4.2  Energy  
4.2.1   General  
4.124.   Primary energy consumption amounted to 100.4 quadrillion British thermal units (Btu) in 
2019, 0.8% less than in the previous year. In 2020, primary energy consumption dropped a further 
7.4% due to lower economic activity and reduced demand for transportati on due to the COVID -19 
pandemic. These effects were particularly pronounced in April -May 2020. Although the return to a 
normalized consumption pattern continued during 2021, with consumption up 7.5% year -on-year 
from April until November, primary energy co nsumption remains below the peak reached in 2018.124 
4.125.   The U.S. economy has gradually become more energy efficient. Whereas, in the past, 
economic growth was associated with rising need for energy, the growth trends have decoupled 
since 2005. From 1990 to 201 7, a period during which the population rose by 30% and real GDP 
almost doubled, the rise in total primary energy consumption was more moderate (up 16%). Fossil 
fuels constitute nearly 80% of the domestic supply of primary energy. The share has not changed  
much in recent years as rising output of crude oil and natural gas has outstripped declining 
production of coal. Biomass, wind, and hydropower are the main sources of renewable energy. The 
contribution from nuclear power to primary U.S. energy production is about 11%.  
4.126.   Overall, the United  States was a net exporter of energy through 1953, after which it became 
a net importer. The dependency on energy imports grew considerably in the 1960s and 1970s and, 
with the energy crises of 1973/74 and 1979/80 in mind, energy security became a matter of political 
concern. However, the energy outlook did not begin to change until technological breakthroughs in 
the production of shale oil and gas around 2005 made such exploitation economical. Net imports of 
primary energy,  about 30.2 quadrillion Btu in 2005, declined by 63% until 2015 and, after a slight 
rise in 2016, the energy trade balance narrowed further. The United  States became a net energy 
exporter during 2019 and, except for a small deficit in June  2020, it has mai ntained a steady surplus 
in energy trade since then.  
4.127.   Total greenhouse gas emissions in the United  States amounted to 6,457  million tons of 
carbon dioxide equivalent in 2017, or about 12% of global emissions. Emissions of carbon dioxide, 
mostly from combust ion processes, accounted for 82% of the total. The remainder – primarily 
methane and nitrous oxide emissions – originated from agriculture, waste management, and the 
 
Tuvalu, the United  States, and Vanuatu. NOAA Fisheries , South Pacific Tuna Treaty . Viewed at: 
https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/pacific -islands/international -affairs/south -pacific -tuna-treaty .  
122 NOAA Fish eries, South Pacific Tuna Treaty . Viewed at: https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/pacific -
islands/international -affairs/south -pacific -tuna-treaty . 
123 The signatories are Canada, China, Denmark (in respect of the Faroe Islands and Greenland), the 
European  Union, Iceland, Japan, the Republic of Korea, Norway, the Russian  Federation, and the United  States. 
FAO (2018), Agreement to Prevent Unregulated High Se as Fisheries in the Central Arctic Ocean . Viewed at: 
http://extwprlegs1.fao.org/docs/pdf/mul199323.pdf .  
124 U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA), Monthly Energy Review January  2022, 
DOE/EIA -0035(2022/1), Table  1.1. Viewed at: 
https://www.eia.gov/totalenergy/data/monthly/archive/00352201.pdf . WT/TPR/S/434 /Rev.1  • United States  
 
- 224 - 
 
  production of oil and gas.125 The United  States has been party to the United Nations Framew ork 
Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) since it entered into force in 1994 and signed the Paris 
Agreement on 3  September  2016. The United  States withdrew from the Paris Agreement in 
November  2020, but its absence was brief. The new U.S. administration a nnounced that the 
United  States was re -entering the Paris Agreement in January  2021. In April  2021, the United  States 
submitted its Nationally Determined Contribution to reduce net greenhouse gas emissions by 50% 
to 52% below 2005 levels by 2030, create a carbon -pollution -free electric power sector by 2035, 
and achieve net -zero emissions economy -wide by no later than 2050.126 A National Climate Task 
Force has been formed to mobilize action on climate change by all federal government agencies.  
4.128.   In November  2021, the U.S. Administration released a report regarding the Long -Term 
Strategy of the United  States, which lays out pathways to reach the net -zero emissions 2050 goal 
and identifies the clean energy deployment and scale -up needed to meet this target.127 Pursuant to 
Article  4.19 of the Paris Agreement, the report serves to communicate the Long -Term Strategy to 
the international community, and shows how current and near -term policies and actions across the 
country deliver a pathway through the 2030s and 2040s t o reach the 2050 net -zero goal. The 
analysis finds that mobilizing to achieve net -zero will reduce distributional inequities of 
environmental pollution and climate vulnerability, improve public health, and promote economic 
growth. The report also states th at all viable routes to net -zero involve five key transformations: 
decarbonize electricity; electrify end uses and switch to other clean fuels; reduce energy waste; 
reduce methane, hydrofluorocarbons, and other non -CO2 greenhouse gas emissions; and scale u p 
CO2 removal, including through land carbon sinks and engineered strategies.  
4.129.   The United  States is a global leader in energy -related research, development, and 
demonstration. In 2017, some USD  7.3 billion in federal funds were allocated to basic energy 
research (31%), energy efficiency (24%), renewable energy (16%), nuclear energy (11%), fossil 
fuels (6%), and electric power systems (5%).  
4.2.2   Crude oil  
4.130.   Crude oil is produced in 32 states and in U.S. coastal waters, primarily in the Gulf of Mexico. 
Incentives for  oil (and gas) production are mainly provided in the form of tax breaks to the producing 
companies, and petroleum products are taxed (relatively) lightly. The production of light tight (shale) 
oil is price sensitive, and the industry boom slowed down in 20 15-16 as global oil prices softened, 
only to rise again as markets tightened. The United  States became the world's largest producer of 
crude oil in mid -2018, having first overtaken the Kingdom of Saudi  Arabia (in February  2018) and 
then the Russian  Federat ion (in July  2018). The growth in U.S. production continued through 2019 
and into the first months of 2020. The COVID -19 pandemic, which had strong effects on demand 
and in global prices, triggered a drop in U.S. production of crude oil that continued into  2021. 
Exploration and production companies cut capital expenditures, focusing on well completions rather 
than new drilling. U.S. production, which is increasing once again, may average about 12  million 
barrels/day (b/d) in 2022, but will still be below th e November  2019 level (13  million  b/d). 
4.131.   The United  States holds about one fifth of the world's refining capacity. The industry 
expanded with the boom in shale oil production when exports of crude oil were subject to licensing , 
and effectively banned, whereas refined products could be exported with more ease. The 40 -year-old 
ban on crude oil exports was lifted in 2015. Due to high domestic demand, the United  States is a 
net importer of certain petroleum products.  
4.132.   The United  States ' Strategic Petroleum Reserve (SPR) comprises four sites with deep 
underground storage caverns capable of holding u p to 727  million barrels of crude oil in total. From 
FY2017 through FY2020, about 60  million barrels of oil were sold from the SPR. At the end of 2021, 
 
125 International Energy Agency (2019), Energy Policies of IEA Countries:  United  States  2019 Review . 
Viewed at: https://www.iea.org/reports/energy -policies -of-iea-countries -united -states -2019-review .  
126 U.S. Department of Stat e and U.S. Executive Office of the President (2021), The United  States' 
Nationally Determined Contribution: Reducing Greenhouse Gases in the United  States: A 2030 Emissions 
Target . Viewed at: 
https://www4.unfccc.int/sites/ndcstaging/PublishedDocuments/United%20States%20of%20America%20First/
United%20States%20NDC%20April%2021%202021%20Final.pd f.  
127 U.S. Department of State and U.S. Executive Office of the President (2021), The Long -Term Strategy 
of the United  States: Pathways to Net -Zero Greenhouse Gas Emissions by 2050 . Viewed at: 
https://www.whitehouse.gov/wp -content/uploads/2021/10/US -Long-Term-Strategy.pdf . WT/TPR/S/434 /Rev.1  • United States  
 
- 225 - 
 
  the SPR inventory nevertheless amounted to 593.7  million barrels of crude oil. Legislation in place 
would allow a drawdown of the SPR to some 310  million barrels by 2031.  
4.2.3   Natural gas  
4.133.   The United  States has been the world's largest  producer of natural gas since 2011. Shale 
gas is now the dominant source of supply. The growth in U.S. shale gas production is pro jected to 
continue through 2050. Natural gas accounted for 36% of the production of primary energy in 2020 
and 2021. Domestic consumption appears to have reached a historic peak in 2019, driven by demand 
from the transformation sector (i.e. heat and power generation) and industry, in particular the 
chemicals sector. The United  States has an extensive network of transmission pipelines – about 210 
pipeline systems with a total length of nearly 500,000 km.  
4.134.   Imports or exports of natural gas require short - or long-term authorizations from the 
Department of Energy, in accordance with the Natural Gas Act of 1938, as amended . Applications 
involv ing countries that have concluded FTAs with the United  States are granted without modification 
or delay, and exports to non -FTA countries are also authorized unless considered inconsistent with 
public interest or explicitly prohibited by law or policy. The first major export shipment of LNG took 
place in February  2016; since then, exports have been on the rise . Net exports of natural gas grew 
by 178% in 2019, followed by a further 44% rise in 2020, and another 41% increase in 2021.  
4.2.4   Coal 
4.135.   The United  States holds the world's largest reserves of coal and ranks second (after China) 
in global output, and third (after China and India)  in global consumption of coal. Coal mining takes 
place in three main regions that cover 25 states. Wyoming (41% of total production) and 
West Virginia (13%) were the two principal coal mining states in 2020. Coal is predominantly (about 
94%) used for heat  and power generation, and domestic demand for coal has fallen dramatically as 
public utilities have been switching to abundant natural gas supplies as the main feedstock. About 
13% of the coal produced in 2019 and 2020 was exported. Europe, and increasing ly countries in 
Asia, constitute the main markets for U.S. coal. In the first 11 months of 2021, coal accounted for 
11% of the primary energy production in volume in the United  States, down from 28.4% in 2011.  
4.136.   Environmental regulations have significant imp act on coal -fired power generation. Older, 
smaller, and less efficient production units have closed, and further retirements may be expected in 
the coming years. Moreover, as market conditions remain unfavorable , no new coal plants are being 
considered. Th e combustion of coal generates greenhouse gases and other pollutants (e.g.  mercury, 
sulphur dioxide, and nitrogen oxides) in larger quantities relative to other sources of fuel. The issue 
is being addressed through, inter alia, the funding of research on c arbon capture, utilization, and 
storage technologies. The American Jobs Creation Act of 2004 established a tax credit for the 
production of refined coal, i.e. coal that has been treated to lower emissions during combustion. 
A coal excise tax is levied on u nderground and surface mining to finance health -related expenditures 
for miners under the Black Lung Disability Fund.  
4.2.5   Renewable energy  
4.137.   About 12.6% of the production of primary energy was derived from renewable sources in 
2021, compared to 9.3% in  2005. Amo ng renewables, biomass (including renewable waste) has for 
many years accounted for 50% (or more) of the energy output, but its share is slowly declining. 
Solid biomass is used in electricity generation as well as in certain industries, in particular pulp and 
paper. Another important bio -component is ethanol, mainly produced from maize, which is blended 
to make transport biofuel. The Energy Policy Act of 2005 established a Renewable Fuel Standard 
(RFS), further expanded by the Energy Independence and Securi ty Act of 2007. The RFS mandates 
the incorporation of renewable fuels into the domestic transportation fuel supply. Each year, the 
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) issues RFS rulemakings with increasing volume 
requirements specific to certain ren ewable fuel categories. For example, the RFS sets a target of 
36 billion gallons per year of renewable fuel by 2022, with conventional (maize) ethanol accounted 
for in the RFS limited to 15  billion gallons per year . 
4.138.   The United  States does not have a nation al target for renewable energy nor an explicit 
federal support mechanism. However, the Public Utilities Regulatory Policies Act of 1978 requires WT/TPR/S/434 /Rev.1  • United States  
 
- 226 - 
 
  regulated utilities to purchase power from alternative energy sources produced by "qualified 
facilities" at rat es that cover their costs of such production. Incentives are also provided in the form 
of investment tax credits for the installation of solar panels, and production tax credits for power 
generated by wind turbines. Although wind and solar power still acco unted for 3.4% and 1.5%, 
respectively, of primary energy production in 2021, the ir growth rates have been high, and 
generation from wind power has  in general exceeded th at from hydroe lectric sources  since 
August  2019.  Renewable portfolio standards have bee n enacted by 31 states and the District of 
Columbia, each with their own specific policies, eligible sources and technologies, trading rules, and 
targets.  
4.2.6   Nuclear energy  
4.139.   The Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) is responsible for industry oversight, includi ng 
reactor safety, materials safety and materials licensing, waste management, and the issuance and 
renewal of reactor licenses . The NRC is required by law to recover approximately 90% of its annual 
budget from the nuclear industry. Reactor licenses  are is sued for an initial term of 40 years and may 
be extended for an unlimited number of 20 -year periods.  
4.140.   The United  States is the world's largest producer of nuclear power. Its 56 commercially 
operating nuclear power plants, comprising 93 light water reactor units across 28 states, generate 
about one third of the world's nuclear electricity. Most of the reactors were built between 1967 and 
1990. Units 3 and 4 at the Alvin W. Vogtle Electric Generating Plant in Georgia, planned for 
completion in 2022 an d 2023, are the first new nuclear units to be built in the United  States in more 
than 30 years. Federal loan guarantees and tax credits similar to those granted for renewable 
projects have been provided to support the project.  
4.141.   Facing competition from shale  gas and subsidized wind power, several nuclear plants have 
shut down before the end of their operating licenses  in recent years. High costs for repair and 
refurbishment, and compliance with stricter environmental requirements, have also been 
contributing factors. Three states (New York, Illinois, and New Jersey) have introduced 
zero-emissions credit program s to provide subsidies to their nuclear energy producers and thereby 
secure the long -term operation of the reactors. The Nuclear Waste Policy Act of 198 2 made the final 
repository of such waste a federal responsibility, and a charge is levied on all generated nuclear 
power for the benefit of the Nuclear Waste Fund. More than USD  44 billion has been accumulated in 
the fund to date. As no central repository  is available, nuclear waste continues to be stored on -site, 
and nuclear utilities receive some USD 800 million per year in compensation for their storage costs.  
4.2.7   Electricity  
4.142.   In 2021, electricity end -use consumption amounted to approximately 3.93 trillion kWh, 
96.6% of which was sold by retail and the remaining consumed directly by end  users. After reaching 
in 2020 its lowest level since 2012, electricity consumption returned to prior COVID -19 levels in 
2021, mainly through increases in consum ption of the commercial and industrial sectors.128 In 2021, 
the residential sector was the largest user of electricity, with a share of 38.9% of all retail sales, 
followed by the commercial (34.9%) and industrial sectors (26.0%).  
4.143.   During the review period, t he use of natural gas increased, from 32% in 2017 to 38% of 
electricity generation in 2021.129 Similarly, renewable energy sources (including wind, hydroelectric, 
solar, biomass, and geothermal energy) generated a record 826  billion kWh of electricity, 
corresponding to 20% of all the electricity generated in the country (17% in 2017). Excluding 
hydropower, renewable energy sources represent nearly 14% of total U.S. generation, and their 
capacity has increased by 10% between 2020 and 2021. Generation from ren ewable sources has 
surpassed nuclear (19%) (Chart  4.5). In general, generation from non -renewable sources has been 
losing share: coal -fired power plants delivered 899  billion kWh in 2021, 55% less than its peak 
production observed in 2007. Petroleum accoun ted for less than 0.5% of the electricity generated 
in 2021. The increase in renewable energy has partly resulted from the swift deployment of wind 
 
128 U.S. EIA (2022), Monthly Energy Review: March  2022, Table  7.6. Electricity End Use. Viewed at : 
https://www.eia.gov/totalenergy/data/monthly/pdf/mer.pdf . 
129 However, U.S.  EIA expects a decline in the share of natural gas in electricity generation in coming 
years, replaced by  renewables , in particular wind and solar energy. U.S. EIA, Short Term Energy Outlook,  
February  2022. Viewed at: https://www.eia.gov/outlooks/steo/report/electricity.php . WT/TPR/S/434 /Rev.1  • United States  
 
- 227 - 
 
  and solar energy installation s since 2015. Reflecting this, wind energy production almost doubled 
between 20 15 and 2021, surpassing hydroelectric generation as the largest source among 
renewables in 2019. Solar energy has increased almost five-fold its share in electricity generation 
since 2015 and contributed nearly 3% of the electricity generated nationwide in  2021. On the other 
hand, hydroelectric production has decreased since 2017 ( -13% in 2021), partially due to severe 
droughts in the last year. The United  States is a net importer of electricity. In 2021, electricity 
imports and exports amounted to 53  billion kWh and 14  billion kWh, respectively . These amounts 
are small as compared to domestic production . In fact, electricity trade with neighboring  Canada 
and Mexico remains marginal, representing less than 2% of total domestic demand for electricity.  
Chart  4.5 U.S. electricity net generation by major sources, 1950 -2021  
(Billion kWh)  
 
Source:  U.S. EIA, Monthly Energy Review , various issues, Table  7.2a. Viewed at: 
https://www.eia.gov/totalenergy/data/annual/index.php . 
4.144.   Federal tax credit program s play a key role in new generation capacity. These programs 
include the Renewable Electricity Production T ax Credit (PTC), the Investment Tax Credit (ITC), and 
the Residential Energy -Efficient Property Credit (REEPC).130 Renewable energy developers may 
choose to benefit from the PTC or the ITC but cannot receive the two benefits. The PTC provides 
eligible gener ation facilities with a tax credit per kWh for the first 10 years a facility is in operation.131 
The Further Consolidated Appropriations Act of 2020 (P.L.  116-94) and the Consolidated 
Appropriations Act of 2021 extended the PTC tax benefit for wind and othe r renewables facilities that 
began construction before the end of 2021. Similarly, the ITC, introduced in 2005, has been 
extended several times since then. Solar and geothermal energy has a permanent 10% ITC; 
however, the Bipartisan Budget Act of 2018 ( P.L. 115-123) and the Consolidated Appropriations Act 
of 2021 increased the ITC temporarily to 30% through 2021.132 The REEPC is a tax credit for 
residential owners for qualifying properties, such as, inter alia, solar electric property, solar water 
 
130 Other grant and loan program s may be available from several government agencies, including the 
Department of Agriculture, the Department of Energy, and the Department of the Interior.  
131 The PTC originally granted  a 100%  qualify for a production tax credit on projects  starting  before 
1 January  2015 and that entered into service before 2023. To address delays related to the COVID -19 
pandemic, the Taxpayer Certainty and Disaster Tax Relief Act of 2020, extended the PTC for 10 years at 60% 
of the full credit amount (USD  0.018 per kWh) in December  2020 for projec ts commencing  construction before 
2022.  
132 The ITC credit rate is reduced to 26% and 22% for facilities commencing construction in 2022 and 
2023, respectively. The tax credit rate for offshore wind facilities is 30% until 2025 and does not phase out. 
CRS (2 021), The Energy Credit or Energy Investment Tax Credit (ITC) , 23 April. Viewed at: 
https://crsreports.congress.gov/product/pdf/IF/IF10479 . 
05001,0001,5002,0002,5003,0003,5004,0004,500Chart 4.6
U.S. electricity net generation by major sources, 1950 -2021
Petroleum
Renewables
Nuclear
Natural Gas
Coal
Source: U.S. Energy Information Administration, Monthly Energy Review , Table 7.2a, , viewed at: 
https://www.eia.gov/totalenergy/data/annual/index.php.(Billion kilowatthours)WT/TPR/S/434 /Rev.1  • United States  
 
- 228 - 
 
  heaters, geothermal heat pumps, small wind turbines, and fuel cell property.133 Estimated revenue 
losses related to these tax provisions amounted to USD  13.2 billion and USD  12.6 billion in FY2020 
and FY2021, respectively.134 
4.145.   In addition to federal regulatio n, the electricity industry is subject to regulatory regimes at 
municipal and state levels. State Public Utility Commissions deal with regulatory issues, including 
the regulation of retail sales to customers, the approval of generation facilities, distinct  reliability 
issues, and more recently, renewable portfolio standards program s. Several incentives supporting 
renewables and energy efficiency are also available at this level.135 
4.3  Manufacturing  
4.146.   The contribution of manufacturing to U.S. GDP has continued to decline since the last Review 
in 2018. This trend, as well as the related decline of manufacturing jobs, has been well documented 
since the beginning of the 2000s136 and it has been behind some policy decisions, e.g.  on 
procurement, by the U.S.  authorities during the review period. In 2021, the manufacturing sector 
contributed 11.1% of the total value added produced in the United  States, a mild recovery 
(+0.2  percentage points) following the negative shock in 2020 related to the COVID -19 pandemi c, 
and down from 11.7% in 2015 (Table  4.14). The contribution of durable goods to national output 
has fallen by almost half a  percentage point since 2015; durable goods accounted for 6.1% of GDP 
in 2021. The manufacturing of durable goods witnessed a loss of more than half a  million jobs 
between 2019 and 2020, and employment levels in 2020 were below their respective values in 2015. 
As for non -durable goods, their decline in GDP participation was limited to 0.18  percentage points 
since 2015. In terms of emp loyment, non -durable manufacturing showed higher resilience to the 
COVID -19 recession and kept employment levels similar to those observed in 2015.  
Table  4.14 Evolution of the manufacturing sector, 2015 -21 
(USD billion and % of GDP)   
2015  2016  2017  2018  2019  2020  2021a 
Manufacturing sector (USD  billion)  2,131  2,103  2,199  2,334  2,371  2,272  2,484  
 (% of GDP)  
Manufacturing sector  11.7 11.2 11.3 11.4 11.1 10.9 11.1 
 Durable goods  6.5 6.4 6.3 6.3 6.2 6.1 6.1 
 Wood products  0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.3 
 Non-metallic mineral products  0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 
 Primary metals  0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 
 Fabricated metal products  0.8 0.8 0.8 0.8 0.8 0.7 0.7 
 Machinery  0.8 0.8 0.8 0.8 0.8 0.8 0.7 
 Computer and electronic products  1.5 1.4 1.4 1.5 1.4 1.5 1.5 
 Electrical equipment, appliances, and 
 components  0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 
 Motor vehicles, bodies and trailers, parts  0.8 0.8 0.8 0.8 0.7 0.7 0.8 
 Other transportation equipment  0.8 0.8 0.8 0.8 0.8 0.6 0.6 
 Furniture and related products  0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.1 
 Miscellaneous manufacturing  0.4 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 
 Non-durable goods  5.2 4.9 4.9 5.0 4.9 4.8 5.0 
 Food and beverage and tobacco products  1.4 1.4 1.4 1.3 1.3 1.4 1.4 
 Textile mills and textile product mills  0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 
 Apparel and leather and allied products  0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 
 Paper products  0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 
 Printing and related support activities  0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 
 Petroleum and coal products  0.8 0.5 0.7 0.9 0.8 0.5 0.8 
 Chemical products  1.8 1.9 1.9 1.8 1.8 1.9 1.9 
 Plastics and rubber products  0.4 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.4 
 
133 This credit terminates in December  2023, an d its current rate (26%) will reduce to 22% for 
properties entering into service after December  2022. Internal Revenue Service (IRS), Energy Incentives for 
Individuals . Viewed at: https://www.irs.gov/newsroom/energy -incentives -for-individuals -residential -property -
updated -questions -and-answers .  
134 Congress of the United  States, Joint Committee on Taxation (2020), Estimates of Fede ral Tax 
Expenditures for Fiscal Years 2020 -2024. Viewed at: https://www.jct.gov/publications/2020/jcx -23-20/.  
135 North Carolina State University (NCSU) provides an overview of financial incentives and other 
policies. NCSU, Database of State Incentives for Renewables & Efficiency . Viewed at: 
https://www.dsireusa.org/ . 
136 The decline is in terms of contribution to GDP and not in terms of output or production levels, which 
continued to increase during the review period. As for employment, the declining trends were described in CRS 
reports: CRS (2018), Labor Market Patterns Si nce 2007 . Viewed at: 
https://crsreports.congress.gov/product/pdf/R/R45330 ; and CRS (2019), Job Creation in the Manufacturing 
Revival . Viewed at: https://crsreports.congress.gov/product/pdf/R/R41898 . WT/TPR/S/434 /Rev.1  • United States  
 
- 229 - 
 
   
2015  2016  2017  2018  2019  2020  2021a 
 Employment ('000)  
Manufacturing sector  12,332  12,335  12,440  12,672  12,806  12,109  .. 
 Durable goods  7,763  7,702  7,744  7,943  8,035  7,544  .. 
 Non-durable goods  4,569  4,633  4,695  4,729  4,770  4,565  .. 
.. Not available.  
a The first semester of 2021 at seasonally adjusted annual rates.  
Note:  Statistics do not include self-employment.  
Source:  U.S. Bureau of Economic Analysis.  
4.147.   With more than 12  million jobs, the manufacturing sector remains the third -largest employer 
in the U.S. private industries in 2020, just behind retail trade, and health care and social assistance. 
Manufacturing is also the largest exporting sector of the U.S. economy, accounting for more than 
80% of total U.S. goods exports (nearly 55% of all U.S. exports) in 2020; the United  States remained 
the second -largest exporter of manufactured go ods in 2020.137 U.S. manufacturing exports in 2020 
were dominated by motor vehicles for the transport of persons, and their parts and accessories; 
electronic integrated circuits; petroleum gases; telephone sets, including mobile phones; medical 
instruments and appliances; medicaments, including immunological products such as vaccines; and 
automatic data processing machines. Petroleum gases, electronic integrated circuits, and 
immunological products were the fastest -growing exports in the manufacturing sector  and have 
accounted for a combined increase of USD  40.9 billion since 2015. On the other hand, parts and 
accessories for vehicles, motor cars, and telephone sets have cumulated a decrease of 
USD 27.3 billion in U.S. exports since 2015.  
4.3.1   Border measures  
4.148.   The U.S. MFN simple average applied tariff for the non -agricultural sector in 2021 was 4.0% 
(WTO  definition). The manufactured products with higher -than-average tariffs include footwear, and 
textiles and clothing. The HS sections of pulp and paper and works of  art have the lowest rates of 
duty, all at zero. Steel and aluminum  products generally face low or zero MFN tariff rates, but many 
are subject to AD and CV duties, as well as Section  232 measures (Sections  3.1.6 and  3.1.7).  Since 
2018, USDOC has conducted and completed seven Section  232 investigations: two investigations 
were on steel and aluminum ; and one each on automobiles and auto parts; uranium; titanium 
sponge; lamination for stacked cores; and vanadium. The President took action only with r espect to 
the aluminum  and steel investigations, in the form of tariff surcharges. An investigation with respect 
to imports of neodymium -iron-boron (NdFeB) permanent magnets was initiated in 
September  2021.138 The investigation was ongoing in February  2022.  As of February  2022, two sets 
of safeguard measures, on Crystalline Silicon Photovoltaic Cells, and on Large Residential Washers, 
were in place  (Sections  3.1.6 and 3.1.7). Some 95% of the 48 9 AD measures in place as of end-2021 
were applied on manufacture d or semi -manufactured goods; 48.0% of the total were applied on iron 
and steel products, and 14.0% on chemicals and pharmaceuticals. Some 90% of the CVD measures 
in place on the same date were on manufactured products (Section  3.1.6). Of the affirmative 
determinations of duty evasion against individual importers made by the CBP under the Enforce and 
Protect Act (EAPA) up to January  2022, the vast majority were on manufactured goods, to a large 
extent, steel products. Imports of semiconductors and many asso ciated products from China have 
been subject to Section  301 tariffs of 25% since July and August  2018 (Section  3.1.7).139 
4.149.   The United  States requires licenses  or permits to import a limited number of manufactured 
products including some chemicals, firearms, explosives, and nuclear materials, generally for 
protection and safety reasons. The United  States changed its automatic import licensing procedures 
concerning the amended aluminum  and steel monitoring mechanisms, i.e. the Steel Import 
 
137 USTR (2021),  2021 Trade Policy Agenda and 2020 Annual Report. Viewed at: 
https://ustr.gov/sites/default/files/files/reports/2021/2021%20Trade%20Agenda/Online%20PDF%202021%20
Trade%20Policy%20Agenda%20and%202020%20Annual%20Report.pdf . 
138 USDOC (2021), "The U.S. Department of Commerce Announces Section  232 Investigation into the 
Effect of Imports of Neodymium Magnets on U.S. National Security", 24  September. Viewed at: 
https://www.commerce.gov/news/press -releases/2021/09/us -department -commerce -announces -section -232-
investigation -effect . 
139 WTO document WT/TPR/S/382/Rev.1, 27  March  2019, provides a detailed description of the ini tiation 
of these actions. Additional information is available on the USTR website. Manufacturers might request an 
exemption for an imported input subject to Section  301 tariffs under some conditions.  WT/TPR/S/434 /Rev.1  • United States  
 
- 230 - 
 
  Monitoring and Analys is (SIMA) system and the Aluminum Import Monitoring and Analysis (AIM) 
system, which entered into force in October  2020 and June  2021, respectively.  
4.3.2   Main policy developments  
4.150.   During the review period, authorities actively sought to foster the development of  the 
manufacturing sector in the United  States through policies oriented in different areas, such as 
intensifying regional trade integration, COVID -19-related policy responses facilitating the vaccines' 
development, strengthening the domestic resilience of  supply chains in pharmaceuticals and 
semi-conductors, incentives to advance manufacturing, domestic purchase program s including for 
government procurement, and other measures covered in other sections of this report.  
4.151.   The USMCA aims to reinforce economic i nterlinkages between signatories, particularly in 
motor vehicles (Section  2.3.2). For automotive goods, it raises the regional value content 
requirements to 75% (up from 62.5% under NAFTA), imposes mandatory production of core parts 
in the region, and requ ires steel and aluminum  purchases within the region of at least 70% for car 
manufacturers, among other measures. Thirteen manufacturers were granted an alternative staging 
regime allowing them to gradually meet regional value content levels in the next fiv e years.140 The 
authorities confirmed an increase in U.S. exports of textiles and apparel to Canada and Mexico since 
the implementation of USMCA; these products benefit from increased tariff preferences and more 
flexible rules of origin as well.  Under the P hase One Agreement with China signed on 
15 January  2020, the U.S.  manufacturing sector was expected to benefit from additional purchases 
of manufactured goods by China amounting to USD  77.7 billion (above the 2017 baseline) in 
calendar years 2020 and 2021 (Section  2.3.3).  
4.152.   Between October  2018 and June  2020, 15 Presidential Determinations were issued, aimed 
at improving the domestic141 capability for the production, including separation and processing in 
some cases, of goods and materials declared essential for national defense  under Section  303 of the 
Defense Production Act (DPA) of 1950  (50 U.S.C. 4533) , as amended. Goods declared as essential 
for national defense  are mainly related to supplies for the military; however, some of them have a 
large potential civil use, such as rare earth elements and permanent magnets. The total value of all 
actions covered by a given Presidential Determ ination cannot exceed USD  50 million,  unless 
otherwise authorized by the President, authorized in law by Congress, or waived during a national 
emergency declared by Congress or the President. Though any industry may apply for DPA 
assistance, only those pro ducts covered by a Presidential Determination or a national emergency 
waiver are eligible for funding. For FY2018 to FY2021, Congress appropriated USD  330 million for 
DPA activities .142 
4.153.   In March  2020, the EPA and the Department of Transportation's (DOT) Nat ional Highway 
Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) issued a final rule, which set carbon dioxide emission and fuel 
efficiency standards for passenger car and light trucks for model years 2021 -26.143 In 
December  2021, the EPA revised its greenhouse gas emis sion standards for passenger cars and light 
duty trucks for model years 2023 -26.144 The NHTSA also proposed revisions for model years 2024 -26 
in August  2021.145 
4.154.   Since 2014, the United  States supports a National Network for Manufacturing Innovation , 
known as "Manufacturing USA",  bringing together industry, academia, and federal partners with the 
goal of ensuring global leadership in advanced manufacturing through large -scale public -private 
 
140 Federal Register  (2020), Vol. 85, No.  77, 21  April, pp . 22238 -22244. Viewed at: 
https://www.federalregister.gov/d/2020 -08405 . Manufacturers granted this benefit are listed on the USTR 
website. Viewed at: https://ustr.gov/trade -agreements/free -trade -agreements/united -states -mexico -canada -
agreement/alternative -staging . 
141 50 U.S.C. 4552 defines a "domestic source" as a busine ss concern that performs substantially all of 
the R&D, engineering, manufacturing, and production activities required by it in the United  States or Canada.  
142 This amount does not include USD  1.0 billion in supplemental appropriations provided by Congress 
via the CARES Act to respond to the COVID -19 pandemic.  
143 Federal Register  (2020), Vol. 85, No.  84, 30  April, pp.  24174 -25278. Viewed at: 
https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pk g/FR-2020-04-30/pdf/2020 -06967.pdf . 
144 Federal Register  (2021), Vol. 86, No.  248, 30  December, pp.  74434 -74256. Viewed at:  
https://www.federalregister.gov/d/2021 -27854 . 
145 Federal Register  (2021), Vol. 86, No.  169, 3  September, pp.  49602 -49883. Viewed at: 
https://www.federalregister.gov/d/2021 -17496 . WT/TPR/S/434 /Rev.1  • United States  
 
- 231 - 
 
  collaboration on technology, supply chain, and workforce development. B esides federal agencies and 
more than 1,200 manufacturers, the network consists of 16 manufacturing innovation institutes 
partially sponsored by federal funds.146 At the state level, several programs aim to attract investment 
in manufacturing across all U.S . states.147 
4.155.   Advancing and defending the interests of manufacturers and their workers remain priorities 
for the authorities. Other policy actions include temporary waivers to tariff duties such as those 
defined by the American Manufacturing Competitiveness Act (AMCA) of 2016148; safeguard measures 
proclaimed under Section  201 of the Trade Act of 1974; export control measures necessary for 
essential security interests; and investigations to counter foreign trade -distorting practices or foreign 
trade practices that threaten national security.  
4.156.   On 24  February  2021, the President issued E.O. 14017 on America's Supply Chains. The E.O . 
calls for more resilient, diverse, and secure U.S. supply chains to ensure prosperity and national 
security, which would support domestic production and promote a world -class U.S. manufacturing 
base and workforce, and the E.O. declares that it is the pol icy of the current Administration to 
strengthen the resilience of U.S. supply chains. The E.O. instructed: (i)  the Secretary of Commerce 
to submit a report identifying risks and policy recommendations in the semiconductor manufacturing 
and advanced packagi ng supply chains; (ii)  the Secretary of Energy to submit a report identifying 
risks and policy recommendations in the supply chain for high -capacity batteries, including 
electric -vehicle batteries; (iii)  the Secretary of Defense to submit a report identify ing risks in the 
supply chain for critical minerals and other identified strategic materials, including rare earth 
elements; and (iv)  the Secretary of Health and Human Services (HHS) to submit a report identifying 
risks and policy recommendations in the su pply chain for pharmaceuticals and active pharmaceutical 
ingredients. The 100 -day reports were published on 8  June 2021.149 E.O. 14017 also required that, 
within one year of the date of the order, the heads of agencies submit reports on sectoral supply 
chain assessments for the defense  industrial base ( Secretary of  Defense ); public health and 
biological preparedness industrial base  (HHS) ; critical sectors and subsectors of the information and 
communications technology (ICT) industrial base (Commerce and Home land Security ); the energy 
sector industrial base (Energy ); the transportation industrial base (Transportation ); and the 
production of agricultural commodities and food products (Agriculture ). In February  2022, seven 
one-year agency reports and a capstone report detailing actions taken to support supply chains since 
the E.O. and plans for continuing work were released.150 
4.3.3   COVID -related measures and other support  
4.157.   In response to the COVID -19 pandemic, in May  2020, the Government launched Operation 
Warp Speed ( OWS), a public -private partnership with the participation of several federal agencies 
to facilitate a quick development and safe delivery of vaccines, therapeutics, and diagnostics for 
COVID -19.151 OWS efforts were led by a federal partnership between the D epartment of Defense 
(DOD) and the Department of HHS. This partnership was renamed the COVID -19 Countermeasures 
Acceleration Group (CAG) in late February  2021. The CAG transferred its responsibilities to the 
Department of HHS on 31  December  2021. According  to a report by the CBO, OWS provided, 
 
146 The maximum support by federal funds in total costs of an institute is fixed at  50%. In 2020, the 
16 institutes attracted USD  425 million, of which USD  163 million were federal funds. Manufacturing USA 
(2021), "Manufacturing USA Highlights Report Released", 5  November. Viewed at: 
https://www.manufacturingusa.com/reports/manufacturing -usa-highlights -report -released . 
147 The subscription -based State Business Incentives Database developed by the Council for Community 
and Economic Research (C2ER) allows users to consult more than 2,300 state incentives program s offered by 
U.S. states. Viewed  at: http://selectusa.stateincentives.org/ . 
148 P.L. 114-159. The last cycle of tariff  suspensions related to the AMCA expired on 31  December  2020.  
149 The White House (2021), Building Resilient Supply Chains, Revitalizing American Manufacturing, and 
Fostering Broad -Based Growth: 100 -Day Reviews under Executive Order 14017 . Viewed at: 
https://www.whitehouse.gov/wp -content/uploads/2021/06/100 -day-supply -chain -review -report.pdf . 
150 The White House (2022), " The Biden -⁠Harris Plan to Revitalize American Manufacturing and Secure 
Critical Supply Chains in 2022" , 24 February. Viewed at: https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing -
room/statements -releases/2022/02/24/the -biden -harris -plan-to-revitalize -american -manufacturing -and-
secure -critical -supply -chains -in-2022/ . 
151 OWS was a partnership among components of t he Department of HHS, including the Centers for 
Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), the FDA, the National Institutes of Health (NIH), and the Biomedical 
Advanced Research and Development Authority (BARDA), and the DOD. OWS engaged with private firms and 
other federal agencies. Funding was provided through BARDA.  WT/TPR/S/434 /Rev.1  • United States  
 
- 232 - 
 
  through the Biomedical Research and Development Authority (BARDA)152, more than 
USD 19.0 billion in assistance to seven private pharmaceutical manufacturers developing vaccines 
by covering R&D costs in five cases and b y committing to advance purchases of successful vaccines 
in six cases.153 The related appropriations of funds for these activities were passed by the 
Coronavirus Preparedness and Response Supplemental Appropriations Act of 2020 ( P.L. 116-123), 
the CARES Act , the Consolidated Appropriations Act of 2021, and the ARP  Act. The United  States 
was able to procure 700  million doses of 3 vaccines authorized for emergency use by the FDA on 
11 December  2020, 18  December  2020, and 27  February  2021, respectively.  
4.158.   Section  2303 of the ARP  Act appropriated, for FY2021, USD  6.05 billion, for expenses with 
respect to research, development, manufacturing, production, and the purchase of vaccines, 
therapeutics, and ancillary medical products and supplies to prevent, prepare, or respo nd to 
COVID -19 or any disease with potential for creating a pandemic or to SARS -CoV-2 or any viral 
mutation with pandemic potential. Section  2304 appropriated USD  500 million for the evaluation of 
the continued safety and effectiveness of vaccines, therape utics, and diagnostics approved, cleared, 
licensed, or authorized for use for the treatment, prevention, or diagnosis of COVID -19. 
Section  2402 appropriated USD  1.75 billion for genomic sequencing and surveillance.  
4.159.   Following the increased demand for medici nes and medical equipment related to the 
COVID -19 pandemic, E.O. 13944154 of 6 August  2020 instructed the establishment of a list of 
Essential Medicines, Medical Countermeasures, and Critical Inputs.155 E.O. 13944 aims to accelerate 
the development of domest ic production of medicines, personal protective equipment, critical inputs, 
finished drugs, and other finished devices by prioritizing federal contracts or orders of these goods, 
and by maximizing domestic production in federal procurement. E.O. 13944 also  calls for reducing 
dependence on foreign manufacturers for these products and for ensuring reliable long -term 
domestic production, and states that it is the policy of the United  States to  accelerate the 
development of cost -effective and efficient domestic  production of essential medicines and medical 
countermeasures.  
4.160.   The Defense Production Act Loan Program, administered by the recently established 
U.S. International Development Finance Corporation (DFC) in partnership with DOD, seeks to restore 
the domesti c production of strategic resources needed to respond to the COVID -19 outbreak, and 
to strengthen any relevant domestic medical supply chains.156 To this end, E.O. 13922 of 
14 May 2020 delegated a time -limited authority under Title III of the Defense Produc tion Act (DPA) 
of 1950, as amended, to DFC. DFC's participation in the program expire d in March  2022.  Also, the 
ARP Act appropriated USD  10 billion, available until 30  September  2025, for all activities under the 
DPA.157 Following E.O. 14017, a review of ph armaceuticals and active pharmaceutical ingredients, 
prepared by the Department of HHS and published in June  2021, calls for continued financial 
incentives or investments in domestic production capacity under the DPA, and suggests a focus on 
 
152 BARDA, within the Office of the Assistant Secretary for Preparedness and Response in the 
Department of HHS, promoted the development of medical countermeasures, including vaccines, drugs, 
thera pies, and diagnostic tools for public health medical emergencies such as chemical, biological, radiological, 
and nuclear (CBRN) accidents, incidents and attacks, pandemic influenza, and emerging infectious diseases. 
Viewed at: https://www.medicalcountermeasures.gov/barda/ . 
153 CBO (2021), Research and Development in the Pharmaceutical Industry , April. Viewed at: 
https://www.c bo.gov/system/files/2021 -04/57025 -Rx-RnD.pdf . 
154 Federal Register  (2020), Vol. 85, No.  158, 14  August, pp.  49929 -49934. Viewed at: 
https://www.federalregister.gov/d/2020 -18012 . 
155 In consultation w ith federal partners, the FDA made the list publicly available in October  2020. 
FDA (2020), Drug and Biologic Essential Medicines, Medical Countermeasures, and Critical Inputs for the List 
Described in Section  3(c) of the Executive Order 13944 . Viewed at: 
https://www.fda.gov/media/143406/download . 
156 Federal Register  (2020), Vol. 85, No.  97, 19  May, pp.  30583 -30584. Viewed at: 
https://www.fe deralregister.gov/d/2020 -10953 . Generally, the loan coverage does not exceed 80% of project 
investment, and maturity can go up to 25 years; loan amounts and interest rate are determined project -by-
project. As of March  2022, no loan funds  had been distributed . 
157 Appropriat ions must be used for the purchase, production, or distribution of medical supplies and 
equipment to combat the COVID -19 pandemic, including in vitro  diagnostic products for the detection of the 
virus that causes COVID –19; face masks and personal protective equipment; and drugs, devices, and biological 
products that are approved, cleared, licensed, or authorized for use in treating or preventing COVID -19. WT/TPR/S/434 /Rev.1  • United States  
 
- 233 - 
 
  the 50 -100 mos t critical drugs (Critical Drug List).158 In March  2022, the list of most critical drugs 
was not yet published.  
4.161.   The measures taken worldwide to the counter the COVID -19 pandemic caused disruptions 
in the supply chains of several U.S. (sub)sectors operating under a just -in-time logistic. Disruptions 
in the production and delivery of semiconductors created problems for several domestic 
manufacturing  activities , including vehicles, medical devices, and other products in 2021. 
Lawmakers enacted the Creating Help ful Incentives To Produce Semiconductors For America Act, or 
CHIPS for America Act, Title XCIX of the William M. (Mac) Thornberry National Defense Authorization 
Act for Fiscal Year 2021, which authorizes USDOC, to award financial assistance to private enti ties 
or public -private consortia to finance, construct, expand, or modernize facilities to support the 
fabrication; assembly, test, and packaging; and advanced packaging of semiconductors. However, 
the Act does not appropriate funding for the law.  
4.162.    Other s upply chains of interest for U.S. authorities mentioned in E.O. 14017 are 
(i) high capacity batteries, including electric -vehicle (EV) batteries, and (ii)  critical minerals and 
other identified strategic materials, including rare earth elements. The a uthor ities support the 
development of clean cars and trucks and have set up an objective of 50% of passenger cars and 
light trucks sold in 2030 to be zero -emission vehicles.159 The EV Charging Action Plan outlines steps 
federal agencies are taking to support the  establishment of a national network of EV chargers 
(USD  7.5 billion allocated by the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act, to replace old school buses 
with U.S. -made, zero -emission buses (additional USD  7.5 billion allocated) ), to promote the 
manufactur ing of battery minerals, refined materials, battery components and batteries 
(USD  6 billion allocated), and to foster the manufacturing of qualifying components for eligible 
vehicles (USD  17 billion in direct loans available through the Department of Energ y Loan Programs 
Office's Advanced Technology Vehicles Manufacturing Program), among others. As concerns 
minerals and other strategic materials, the List of 35 Critical Minerals, established in 2018 following 
E.O. 13817160, served as a basis for the 2021 review, which extends the analysis to strategic 
products other than minerals. Similar to what was stated in E.O. 13953161, the recent review 
highlights the dependence on imports of several products and suggests adopting an e nvironmentally 
and socially responsible production; expanding domestic production and processing capacity, 
including recycling; using DPA Title III and similar programs to support domestic capacities and 
emerging technologies; and strengthening U.S.  stockp iles, among others. An updated List of Critical 
Minerals covering 50 minerals was published in February  2022.162 
4.3.4   Small businesses  
4.163.   Based on 2018 U.S. Census Bureau data, 32.5  million small businesses represented 99.7% 
of all businesses in the U.S. economy an d employed 61.2  million workers (46.8% of all 
employees).163 Women made up 47.3% of workers and owned 43.1% of small businesses; only 
one fifth of small businesses are owned by racial minorities. Goods exported by some 280,000 small 
businesses valued at USD  460 billion made up 31.6% of all exports in 2019. Although  the 
242,000  small businesses (with employees) in the manufacturing sector account for only 4% of all 
small businesses nationwide, their 5.1  million employees correspond to 42.6% of employment in the 
manufacturing sector and 8.3% of all employment generate d by small businesses. SMEs in 
manufacturing are a source of employment opportunities.  
4.164.   For the first time in a U.S. trade agreement, the USMCA includes a dedicated chapter on 
small and medium -sized enterprises (SMEs), recognizing their role in each signato ry economy. 
 
158 E.O. 14017 of 24  February  2021, America's Supply Chains, Federal R egister  (2021), Vol. 86, No.  38, 
1 March, pp.  11849 -11854. Viewed at: https://www.federalregister.gov/d/2021 -04280 . 
159 Zero-emissions vehicles refer to battery electric, plug -in hybrid electric, o r fuel cell electric vehicles. 
Stricter standards of fuel efficiency are also set for other types of vehicles. E.O. 14037, Federal Register  
(2021), Vol.  86, No.  151, pp.  43583 -43585. Viewed at: https://www.federalregister.gov/d/2021 -17121 . 
160 Federal Register  (2017), Vol. 82, No.  246, 26  December, pp.  60835 -60837. Viewed at: 
https://www.federalregister.gov/d/2017 -27899 . 
161 Federal Register  (2020), Vol. 85, No.  193, 5  October, pp.  62539 -62544. Viewed at: 
https://www.federalregister.gov/d/2020 -22064 . 
162 Federal Register  (2022), Vol.  87, No.  37, 24  February, pp.  10381 -10382. Viewed at : 
https://www.federalregister.gov/d/2022 -04027 . 
163 SBA, Office of Advocacy, 2021 Small Business Profile. Viewed at: https://cdn.advocacy.sba.gov/wp -
content/uploads/2021/08/30144808/2021 -Small -Business-Profiles -For-The-States.pdf . WT/TPR/S/434 /Rev.1  • United States  
 
- 234 - 
 
  U.S. companies with less than 500 employees represent two thirds of companies trading goods with 
Canada and Mexico. The Agreement promotes cooperation and information sharing to increase 
opportunities for SME trade and investment in the region,  cuts red tape for shipments with a value 
lower than USD  2,500, increases de minimis  levels, eliminates the local presence requirement for 
cross-border service providers, and facilitates the exchange of information and best practices for 
SME participation in covered government procurement, among other measures.164 
4.165.   The U.S. Small Business Administration (SBA) keeps track of savings related to reduced 
regulatory burden affecting small businesses in a yearly report.165 Enhancing the ability of small 
businesses t o participate in the global marketplace is a key objective for the authorities. 
Recommendations resulting from the E.O. 14017 review call for: (i)  investing in small, medium, and 
disadvantaged businesses in critical supply chains; (ii)  developing an ecosys tem that includes 
growing innovative small, medium, and disadvantaged businesses; and (iii)  examining the ability of 
the U.S. Export -Import Bank to use existing authorities to support U.S.  manufacturing.  Other policies 
such as government procurement set -asides and preferences promote economic opportunities for 
small businesses, including those in manufacturing (Section  3.3). 
4.166.   As noted in Section  1, to attenuate the impact of the COVID -19 pandemic on small 
businesses, the CARES Act established the Paycheck Pr otection Program  (PPP) and the COVID -19 
Economic Injury Disaster Loan (EIDL) Program. Subsequently, the PPP was adjusted several times166 
and consisted of two draws with only certain prior PPP borrowers eligible for the second draw of PPP 
loans. PPP loans w ere aimed at providing a direct incentive for small businesses to keep their workers 
on the payroll. While businesses with 500 or fewer employees167 were eligible for the first draw, only 
businesses with 300  or fewer employees were eligible for the second d raw which ended in 
December  2021. As of 5  June 2020, loans carried an interest of 1%, had a maturity of five years, 
and no collateral was required; the maximum loan amount was fixed at 2.5 times the average 
monthly 2019 or 2020 payroll costs (or 3.5% for a ccommodation and food services sector) up to 
USD 10 million. For the second draw of PPP loans, the maximum amount was USD  2 million. 
Borrowers were able to request loan forgiveness based on some criteria for employee retention and 
fund use.168 The manufactu ring sector received some USD  76 billion for the whole PPP loan 
program .169 
4.167.   The SBA's COVID -19 Economic Injury Disaster Loan (EIDL) Program provided working capital 
assistance to small businesses, which were defined as having 500 or fewer employees with lim ited 
exceptions.170 The loan program  also initially offered the option of requesting an EIDL  Advance, 
which was emergency economic relief up to USD  10,000 (USD  1,000 per employee) requested at 
the time of the loan application by businesses that were currently experiencing a loss of revenue.171 
 
164 USTR, USMCA Fact Sheets – Small and Medium -Sized Businesses. Viewed at: 
https://ustr.gov/sites/default/files/files/Press/fs/USMCA/USMCA -SME.pdf . 
165 The SBA's latest report regarding savings during FY2020 was published in July  2021. SBA (2021) 
Report on the Regulatory Flexibility Act, FY 2020: Annual Report of the Chief Counsel for Advocacy on 
Implementation of the Regulatory Flexibility Act and Executive Order 13272 . Viewed at: 
https://advocacy.sba.gov/2021/07/21/report -on-the-regulatory -flexibility -act-fy-2020-annual -report-of-the-
chief-counsel -for-advocacy -on-implementation -of-the-regulatory -flexibility -act-and-executive -order -13272/ . 
166 Laws amending the PPP, appropriating funds to the program , adjusting its eligibility criteria, or 
extending its application period inclu de the Paycheck Protection Program and Health Care Enhancement Act, 
the Paycheck Protection Program Flexibility Act of 2020 ( P.L. 116-147), the Consolidated Appropriations Act of 
2021, and the PPP Extension Act of 2021.  
167 Businesses with more than 500 empl oyees, but within the SBA thresholds in terms of employees for 
their NAICS activity, were also eligible.  
168 SBA, PPP Loan Forgiveness . Viewed at: https://www.sba.gov/funding -programs/loans/COVID -19-
relief-options/paycheck -protection -program/ppp -loan-forgiveness . 
169 SBA, Paycheck Protection Program (PPP) Reports , various editions. Viewed at: 
https://www.sba.gov/sites/default/files/2021 -06/PPP_Report_Public_210531 -508.pdf ; and 
https://www. sba.gov/sites/default/files/2021 -09/PPP_Report - 2020-08-10-508.pdf . 
170 Exceptions outlined on the SBA website: SBA, COVID EIDL Loans Information as of September  8, 
2021. Viewed at: https://www.sba.gov/sites/default/files/2021 -09/COVID -EIDL-FAQs-090821 -508.pdf . 
171 Businesses with 300 or fewer employees with a revenue loss greater than 30% over an 8 -week 
period since 2  March  2020 (compared to the previous year)  and located in low -income communities (defined by 
Section  45D(e) of the Internal Revenue Code) were eligible to request a non -repayable grant (Targeted EIDL 
Advance) of up to USD  10,000. A supplemental grant of USD  5,000 (Supplemental Targeted Advance) was 
available for business with 10 or fewer employees in the same communities demonstrating a revenue loss 
greater than 50% for the same period; the total amount of these b enefits was up to USD  15,000 including the 
 WT/TPR/S/434 /Rev.1  • United States  
 
- 235 - 
 
  Loan applications were open only until 31  December  2021 with a loan term of up to 30 years with 
an automatic deferment of 2 years for the initial payment, and an interest rate of 3.75% for small 
businesses. The maximum loan amount was USD  2 million, and collateral was needed for loans 
above USD  25,000.172 Additionally, the ARP  Act allowed any business with fewer than 
500 employees to claim refundable tax credits equivalent to the cost of providing paid sick and family 
leave to their employees due to COVID -19. This benefit was available from 1  April 2021 to 
30 September  2021.173 Finally, the CARES  Act also provided relief to small businesses regarding the 
Bankruptcy Code  (11 U.S.C. 101 et seq .) Notably, it increased the aggregate debt limit for small 
businesses filing for relief from USD  2.73 million to USD  7.5 million, excluding federal 
COVID -19-related relief payments from disposable income while filing bankruptcy, and allowed 
modifications of Chapter 13 -confirmed plans by extending payments for up to seven years. Relief 
was extended until 26  March  2022.174 
4.4  Servic es 
4.4.1   Financial services  
4.4.1.1   Overview  
4.168.   The financial services sector is a substantial contributor to the U.S. economy. In 2021 
(third  quarter), the share of financial services in GDP was 8.5%, up from 7.5% in 2017, as reported 
in the previous Review. Banking servi ces generated 3.7% of GDP; insurance and related services 
2.9%; securities, commodity contracts, and investment 1.7%; and funds trusts and other financial 
vehicles 0.1%.175 The United  States continued to run a significant surplus in trade in financial 
services during the period under review. In 2020, exports of financial services excluding insurance 
services were USD  144.34  billion, a 6% increase from 2019 levels, while imports of financial services 
amounted to USD  42.26  billion. On the other hand, it runs a  deficit on insurance services, with 
exports of USD  20.43  billion compared with imports of USD  55.62  billion in 2020.176 
4.169.   As of 31  December  2021, only one bank remained under the Troubled Asset Relief Program 
(TARP), put in place by the Government as a respo nse to the financial crisis. The initial authorization 
for TARP was USD  700 billion, later reduced to USD  475 billion. As of 31  December  2021, a total of 
USD 443 billion had been disbursed under TARP, and a total of USD  442.7  billion had been collected 
back. The Treasury estimates that the combined overall cost of TARP at USD  32.1 billion. As part of 
TARP, the Treasury put in place the Capital Purchase Program (CPP), a preferred stock and equity 
warrant purchase program. As of 31  December  2021, the Treasury  had recovered USD  226.8  billion 
from the CPP through repayments, dividends, interest, and other income, compared to the 
USD 204.9  billion initially invested under the program .177 As of February  2022, the Federal National 
Mortgage Association (Fannie Mae) a nd Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corp (Freddie Mac) continue 
to be under conservatorship.  
4.170.   As of 30  September  2021, there were 2,127 "large" commercial banks in the United  States, 
each with consolidated assets of USD  300 million or more, compared to 1,812 in 2 017. At the same 
date, total banking system assets were USD  21.6 trillion (USD  16.7 trillion in 2017), of which 
 
maximum USD  10,000 Targeted EIDL Advance. SBA (2021), Targeted and Supplemental Advance: Frequently 
Asked Questions , 27 April. Viewed at: https://www.sba.gov/sites/default/files/2021 -
04/Targeted%20and%20Supplemental%20Advance%20FAQ_FINAL -508.pdf . 
172 The minimum disaster loan amount for which the SBA may require collateral was fixed at this leve l 
initially for three years by the RISE After Disaster Act of 2015 ( P.L. 114-88) and was extended for another four 
years by the Rebuilding Small Businesses After Disasters Act ( P.L. 116-70), enacted on 22  November  2019.  
173 IRS (2021), Under the American Res cue Plan, Employers Are Entitled to Tax Credits for Providing 
Paid Leave to Employees Who Take Time Off Related to COVID ‐19 Vaccinations , 28 July. Viewed at: 
https://www.irs.gov/newsroom/employer -tax-credits -for-employee -paid-leave -due-to-COVID -19. 
174 COVID -19 Bankruptcy Relief Extension Act of 2021 ( P.L. 117-5). 
175 Bureau of Economic Analysis, Interactive Data . Viewed at: 
https://apps.bea.gov/iTable/iTable.cfm?reqid=150&step=2&isuri=1&categories=gdpxind .  
176 Bureau of Economic Analysis, International Data . Viewed at: 
https://apps.bea.gov/iTable/iTable.cfm?reqid=62&step=9&isuri=1&6210=4 . 
177 Department of the Treasury (2022), Troubled Asset Relief Program, Monthly Report to Congress, 
December  2021. Viewed at: https://home.treasury.gov/system/files/256/2021 -12-December -Monthly -Report -
to-Congress.pdf .  WT/TPR/S/434 /Rev.1  • United States  
 
- 236 - 
 
  USD 19.7 trillion were of domestic banks and USD  1.9 trillion were assets of foreign -owned banks.178 
There are some 5,098 credit unions in the Un ited States. Credit unions are not -for-profit 
organizations owned by their members; they accept deposits, make loans, and provide a wide array 
of other financial services. The United  States is the largest insurance market in the world, with net 
insurance p remiums that amounted to USD  1.28 trillion in 2020, and total cash and invested assets 
of USD  9.7 trillion.179 
4.171.   U.S. financial markets were strongly impacted by the onset of the COVID -19 pandemic. After 
reaching record highs in mid -February  2020, as the number of coronavirus cases continued to 
increase, the perception of risk increased, and financial markets experienced significant corrections, 
while demand for safe and more liquid assets, such as U.S. Treasury instruments, rose, prompting 
price increases , and higher corporate bond spreads.180 The Federal Reserve responded by adopting 
measures such as the reduction of the primary credit rate by 150 basis points to 0.25%, effective 
16 March  2020, and a reduction of the reserve requirement ratios to 0% effect ive on 26  March  2020. 
It also encouraged banks to use their capital and liquidity buffers. Measures to support credit 
allocation were also put in place (see below).  
4.4.1.2   Legislation and regulation  
4.172.   There are numerous significant laws governing the financial sect or, including, inter alia, the 
SEC Act, the Investment Company Act, the Bank Holding Company Act, the National Bank Act, and 
the Federal Deposit Insurance Act. The Dodd -Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection 
Act of 2010 (DFA) made significant add itions and revisions to the law governing the financial sector. 
Reforms to the DFA were introduced in 2018, by Title IV, Tailoring Regulations for Certain Bank 
Holding Companies, of the Economic Growth, Regulatory Relief, and Consumer Protection Act 
(P.L. 115-174), of 24  May 2018 (see below).  
4.173.   Several institutions and agencies are charged with the supervision and regulations of 
different aspects of the financial sector, including the Federal Reserve, the Office of the Comptroller 
of the Currency (OCC), and t he FDIC for the banking sector; the National Credit Union Administration 
(NCUA); the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC); the Commodity Futures Trading 
Commission (CFTC); the Federal Housing Finance Agency (FHFA); and the Consumer Financial 
Protection  Bureau (CFPB), an independent bureau of the Federal Reserve System. The Financial 
Stability Oversight Council (FSOC), created by the DFA, was established to identify risks to 
U.S. financial stability that could arise from material financial distress, fail ure, or ongoing activities 
of large, interconnected bank holding companies (BHCs) or nonbank financial companies; of 
promoting market discipline; and of responding to emerging threats to the stability of the 
U.S. financial system. While the business of ins urance is regulated primarily at the state level, the 
DFA also provides that the Federal Reserve regulate insurers affiliated with savings and loan holding 
companies and gave the Treasury's Federal Insurance Office (FIO) responsibility for monitoring all 
aspects of the insurance sector. In addition, the DFA granted the SEC and the CFTC authority to 
regulate over -the-counter derivatives (swaps).  
4.174.   Under Section  113 of the DFA, the FSOC is authorized to make a determination as to whether 
a non -bank financial co mpany must be supervised by the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve 
System and be subject to enhanced prudential standards if material financial distress at the company 
could pose a threat to U.S. financial stability.181 In December  2019, the FSOC  approved the Authority 
to Require Supervision and Regulation of Certain Nonbank Financial Companies, its updated final 
rule and interpretive guidance for non -bank financial company determinations, which replaced prior 
guidance.182 The new guidance prioriti zes the FSOC's efforts to identify potential risks and threats 
 
178 Federal Reserve Statistical Release. Viewed at: 
https://www.federalreserve.gov/releases/lbr/current/ .  
179 Insurance Information Institute, Facts + Statistics: Industry Overview . Viewed at : 
https://www.iii.org/fact -statistic/facts -statistics -industry -overview . 
180 Financial Stability Board (2020), Holistic Review of the March Market Turmoil , 17 November. 
Viewed at: https://www.fsb.org/wp -content/uploads/P171120 -2.pdf. 
181 Department of the Treasury, Designations . Viewed at: https://home.treasury.gov/policy -
issues/financial -markets -financial -institutions -and-fiscal-service/fsoc/designations . 
182 Financial Stability Oversight Council, Authority to Require Supervision  and Regulation of Certain 
Nonbank Financial Companies, Federal Register  (2019), Vol. 84, No.  249, 30  December, pp.  71740 -71770. 
Viewed at: https://home.treasury.gov/system/files/261/Authority -to-Require -Supervision -and-Regulation -of-
Certain -Nonbank -Financial -Companies.pdf . WT/TPR/S/434 /Rev.1  • United States  
 
- 237 - 
 
  to U.S. financial stability on a system -wide basis through an activities -based approach, rather than 
through entity -specific determinations, as was before, to reduce the potential for competiti ve market 
distortions that could arise from entity -specific determinations.  
4.175.   Section  804 of the DFA authorizes the FSOC to designate a Financial Market Utility (FMU) as 
systemically important if it determines that the failure of, or a disruption to the func tioning of, the 
FMU could create or increase the risk of significant liquidity or credit problems spreading among 
financial institutions or markets and thereby threaten the stability of the U.S. financial system. 
Designated FMUs are subject to heightened p rudential and supervisory provisions; must provide 
advance notice and review of changes to their rules, procedures, and operations; and are subject to 
relevant examination and enforcement provisions. The FSOC has designated eight FMUs as 
systemically impor tant under the DFA.183 
4.176.   Section  318 of the DFA directed the Federal Reserve Board to collect assessments, fees, or 
other charges, from certain large bank holding companies and savings and loan holding companies 
and nonbank financial companies designated by t he FSOC for supervision by the Board equal to the 
expenses the Board estimates are necessary or appropriate to carry out its supervision and 
regulation of those companies. In December  2020, the Federal Reserve issued a final rule to adjust 
the amount charg ed to assessed companies with total consolidated assets between USD  100 billion 
and USD  250 billion to reflect changes in supervisory and regulatory responsibilities resulting from 
the Economic Growth, Regulatory Relief, and Consumer Protection Act of 24  May 2018 (EGRRCPA) 
(P.L. 115 174); the rule also increased the minimum threshold for assessment from USD  50 billion  
to USD  100 billion .184 
4.177.   Section  619 of the DFA, commonly referred to the Volcker Rule, came into force in July  2015. 
The objective of the Volck er Rule is to reduce the amount of speculative investments on large firms' 
balance sheets. To achieve this, it prohibits banking entities from proprietary trading of any security, 
derivatives, and certain other financial instruments for a banking entity's own account, subject to 
certain exemptions.185 The EGRRCPA  removed certain Volcker Rule limitations on hedge fund and 
private equity fund naming conventions, exempted most small banks from the purview of the Volcker 
Rule by increasing the minimum limit, red uced regulatory burdens for small and medium -sized BHCs, 
and introduced changes regarding custodial banks' supplementary leverage ratio calculations .186 
4.178.   The CARES Act, enacted on 27  March  2020, contains a provision granting temporary relief 
for community ba nks, by fixing a Community Bank Leverage Ratio of 8% (the minimum allowed by 
law)187, and granting a qualifying community bank that falls below this ratio a reasonable grace 
period to satisfy it. These provisions were effective until the earlier of the term ination date of the 
national emergency concerning the COVID -19 outbreak or 31  December  2020. The ratio was 
increased to 8.5% in 2021 and subsequently to its original 9% level in the first quarter of 2022.188 
The CARES Act allowed temporary access to credit for corporate credit unions in addition to 
natural -person credit unions. The Act amended the Federal Credit Union Act to provide greater 
flexibility to corporate credit unions with respect to the amount they must pay to subscribe to the 
 
183 These are the Clearing House Payments Company LLC; CLS Bank International; Chicago Me rcantile 
Exchange, Inc.; the Depository Trust Company; Fixed Income Clearing Corporation; ICE Clear Credit LLC; 
National Securities Clearing Corporation; and the Options Clearing Corporation. Department of the Treasury, 
Designations . Viewed at: https://www.treasury.gov/initiatives/fsoc/designations/Pages/default.aspx . 
184 Federal Reserve System 12 C .F.R. Part 246.Regulation TT. Docket No. R -1683. Supervision and 
Regulati on Assessments of Fees for Bank Holding Companies and Savings and Loan Holding Companies with 
Total Consolidated Assets of $100 Billion or More . Viewed at: 
https://www.federalreserve.gov/newsevents/pressreleases/bcreg20201119a.htm . 
185 Such as trading transactions in government securities, and transactions in connect ion with 
underwriting or market -making, on behalf of customers by an insurance company solely for the general 
account of the company. Additionally, certain risk -mitigating hedging is allowed, as well as proprietary trading 
conducted solely outside of the U nited States by a banking entity not directly or indirectly controlled by a 
banking entity organized under U.S. federal or state laws.  
186 OCC, Final Rule on Covered Savings Associations, Federal Register  (2019), Vol. 84, No.  101, 24  May, 
pp. 23991 -24007. V iewed at: https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR -2019-05-24/pdf/2019 -10902.pdf . 
187 The EGRRCPA instructed Federal banking agencies to develop a Community Bank Leverage Rati o of 
not less than 8% and not more than 10% for qualifying community banks.  
188 Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System (2021), SR 21 -21: Interagency Statement on the 
Community Bank Leverage Ratio Framework , 21 December. Viewed at: 
https://www.federalreserve.gov/supervisionreg/srletters/SR2121.htm . WT/TPR/S/434 /Rev.1  • United States  
 
- 238 - 
 
  capital stock of th e Central Liquidity Facility (CLF).189 The CARES Act temporarily increased the NCUA 
Board's borrowing authority on behalf of the CLF to 16  times the subscribed capital stock and surplus 
of the CLF.190 In December  2020, the NCUA extended the effective date of its temporary final rule, 
issued in April 2020, which modified certain regulatory requirements to ensure that federally insured 
credit unions (FICUs) can conduct appropriate liquidity management to address the conditions 
caused by the COVID -19 pandemic, until 31  December  2021. The rule tempo rarily raised the 
maximum aggregate amount of loan participations that an FICU may purchase from a single lender 
to the greater of USD  5 million or 200% of the FICU's net worth.  
4.179.   The Federal Reserve introduced the following emergency lending facilities to s upport the flow 
of credit into the economy: (i)  the Primary Market Corporate Credit Facility, open to 
investment -grade companies and which provides bridge financing of up to four years; (ii)  the 
Secondary  Market Corporate Credit Facility, which purchases i n the secondary market corporate 
bonds issued by investment -grade U.S. companies and U.S. -listed exchange traded funds; (iii)  the 
Term Asset -Backed Securities Loan Facility, which provides non -recourse loans to holders of certain 
eligible asset -backed secu rities; (iv)  the Money Market Mutual Fund Liquidity Facility (MMLF), which 
makes loans available to eligible financial institutions secured by high -quality assets purchased from 
Money Market Mutual Funds; (v)  the Commercial Paper Funding Facility, which pu rchases eligible 
three -month unsecured commercial paper and asset -backed commercial paper from eligible issuers; 
(vi) the Primary Dealer Credit Facility, which offers overnight and term funding with maturities up 
to 90 days against a wide range of collater al; (vii) the Paycheck Protection Program Liquidity Facility 
(PPPLF), which extends non -recourse loans to eligible financial institutions that pledge loans covered 
under the SBA's (PPP); (viii) the Municipal Liquidity Facility, which purchases short -term n otes 
directly from the different constituencies; and (ix)  the Main Street Lending Program, which 
purchases participations in loans made to eligible small and medium -sized businesses.191 The Federal 
Reserve also participated in Central Bank Liquidity Swaps c oordinated with other central banks, as 
well as in a Temporary Foreign and International Monetary Authorities (FIMA) Repo Facility, which 
was extended through 30  September  2021.  
4.180.   U.S. banking regulators adopted the Liquidity Coverage Ratio (LCR) stipulated under 
Basel  III rules, through a final rule, in September  2014.192 The rule requires that companies have a 
LCR of 100% or more, and applies to certain large banking organizations, generally, those with 
USD 100 billion or more in total consolidated assets. C ommunity banks are exempt from the rule. 
LCR requirements are tailored to the risks of large banking organizations, with the most stringent 
requirements applying to the largest and most complex organizations. In response to the COVID -19 
pandemic, in May  2020, the federal banking regulators adopted an interim final rule to modify the 
LCR requirement to support banking organizations' participation in the MMLF and the PPPLF.193 The 
modification lasted until 30  July 2021, after which no new credit extensions und er the PPPLF were 
granted (for the MMLF, it was 31  March  2021).  
 
189 The CLF is a mixed -ownership government corporation that provides the credit union system with a 
contingent source of fu nds to assist with system -wide liquidity events. The CLF also serves as an additional 
liquidity source for the National Credit Union Share Insurance Fund. Member credit unions own the CLF, which 
exists within the NCUA. Joining the facility is voluntary.  
190 In July  2020, 3,797 credit unions, or 73% of all federally insured credit unions, had access to the 
CLF, either as a regular member or through their corporate credit union. As of 31  May 2020, the facility's 
borrowing authority stood at USD  25.8 billion, a n increase of USD  15.3 billion since April  2020. NCUA (2020), 
"CLF Borrowing Capacity Exceeds $25 Billion", 6  July. Viewed at: https://www.ncua.gov/newsroom/press -
release/2020/clf -borrowing -capacity -exceeds -25-billion . 
191 Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, COVID -19 Supervisory and Regulatory FAQs, 
Federal Reserve Liquidity Programs . Viewed at: https://www.federalreserve.gov/COVID -19-supervisory -
regulatory -faqs.htm . 
192 The LCR is the ratio of high -quality, liquid assets (central bank reserves and government and 
corporate debt that can be converted quickly into cash) to its projected net cash outflows over a 30 -day period.  
193 The rule seeks to neutralizes the effect on the LCR requirement of a bank's participation in the MMLF 
or PPPLF by excluding cash flows from M MLF and PPPLF funding and assets securing such funding, from the 
calculation of a banking organization's total net cash outflow amount. OCC, Board of Governors of the Federal 
Reserve System, and FDIC, Interim Final Rule on Liquidity Coverage Ratio Rule: Tr eatment of Certain 
Emergency Facilities, Federal Register  (2020), Vol. 85, No.  88, 6 May, pp.  26835 -26842. Viewed at: 
https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR -2020-05-06/pdf /2020 -09716.pdf .  WT/TPR/S/434 /Rev.1  • United States  
 
- 239 - 
 
  4.181.   In July  2013, the Federal Reserve issued a final rule to implement Basel III capital rules in 
the United  States.194 The rule stipulates a minimum ratio of Tier 1 capital to risk -weighted assets of 
6% and a minimum leverage ratio of 4% for all banking organizations, as well as a ratio of total 
capital to risk -weighted assets (total capital ratio) of 8%. Under prompt cor rection action 
requirements for banks, a bank meets the regulatory definition of "well -capitalized" when its total 
risk-based capital ratio equals or exceeds 10%, its Tier 1 risk -based capital ratio equals or exceeds 
8%, its leverage ratio equals or exceed s 5%, and its common equity Tier 1 risk -based capital ratio 
equals or exceeds 6.5%. In September  2016, the Federal Reserve Board issued a policy statement 
regarding considerations the Board would use in implementation of a counter -cyclical capital buffer, 
to range from 0% to 2.5% of risk -weighted assets, when authorities determine credit growth may 
result in systemic risk.  
4.182.   The Community Reinvestment Act (CRA) (12 USC 2901), enacted in 1977, encourages 
federally insured commercial banks and savings associati ons to help meet the credit needs of the 
local communities in which they do business. CRA new final rules were issued in June  2020 to provide 
metrics to evaluate the CRA performance of national banks and savings associations supervised by 
the OCC. Although  the final rule was effective 1  October  2020, its general compliance date was 
1 January  2023, or 1  January  2024 for small and intermediate banks. In December  2021, the OCC 
issued a new final rule to rescind the 2020 CRA rule and replace it with one that al igned the OCC's 
CRA rules with Federal Reserve and FDIC rules.195 The final rule took effect on 1  January  2022, with 
a separate compliance date of 1  April 2022.196 Financial institutions are evaluated under different 
CRA examination procedures based upon the ir asset -size classification.  
4.183.   CRA regulations require commercial banks and savings associations above the small and 
intermediate small bank asset -size thresholds to collect and report data regarding their small 
business and small farm lending and community  development lending. The reporting threshold is 
adjusted annually based on changes to the CPI; since 1  January  2022, it has been 
USD 1.384  billion.197 In 2020, 687 lenders, of which 124 had assets below the mandatory reporting 
threshold, reported data abou t originations and purchases of small loans (of up to USD  1 million) to 
businesses and farms; 139 large reporters with assets of USD  10 billion or more accounted for 71% 
of the CRA reported small business loans. CRA reporters accounted in 2020 for 75% of s mall business 
loans outstanding and 32% of small farm loans outstanding at bank and thrift institutions; 8.4  million 
small business loans totaling  nearly USD  461.8  billion were reported in 2020, up 10.9% from 2019. 
The value of the small business loans inc reased by 78.7%, mainly due to lending from the PPP.198 
4.184.   In December  2020, the OCC, the Federal Reserve, and the FDIC issued an interim final rule 
to mitigate temporary transition costs on banking organizations related to COVID -19. The rule 
permits national banks, savings associations, state banks, BHCs, savings and loan holding 
companies, and U.S. branches and agencies of foreign banking organizations with under 
USD 10 billion in total assets as of 31  December  2019 to use asset data as of that date to determine 
the applicability of various regulatory asset thresholds during calendar years 2020 and 2021. In 
January  2021, the regulators issued a final rule that requires certain banking organizations to make 
a deduction from their r egulatory capital for certain investments in unsecured debt instruments 
issued by foreign or U.S. global systemically important banks (G -SIBs) for the purpose of meeting 
minimum total loss -absorbing capacity requirements and, where applicable, long -term de bt 
requirements, or for investments in unsecured debt instruments issued by G -SIBs that are 
subordinated to such debt instruments. In March  2021, the OCC, the Federal Reserve, and the FDIC 
issued an interim final rule to facilitate the implementation of th e Emergency Capital Investment 
 
194 Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, Basel Regulatory Framework . Viewed at: 
http://www.federalreserve.gov/bankinforeg/basel/default.htm .  
195 OCC, Fi nal Rule on Treasury Community Reinvestment Act Regulations, Federal Register  (2021), 
Vol. 86, No.  238, 15  December, pp.  71328 -71354. Viewed at: https://www.occ.gov/news -issuances/federal -
register/2021/86fr71328.pdf . 
196 OCC (2021), Community Reinvestment Act: Final Rule to Rescind and Replace Community 
Reinvestment Act Rule Issued in 2020 . Viewed at: https://www.occ.gov/news -
issuances/bulletins/2021/bulletin -2021-61.html .  
197 Federal Reserve (2021), "Agencies Release Annual Asset -Size Thresholds under Community 
Reinvestment Act Regulations", 16  December. Viewed at: 
https://www.federalreserve.gov/newsevents/pressreleases/bcreg20211216a.htm .  
198 Federal Financial Institutions Examination Council (FFIEC), Findings from Analysis of Nationwide 
Summary Stat istics for 2020 Community Reinvestment Act Data Fact Sheet . Viewed at: 
https://www.ffiec.gov/hmcrpr/cra_fs21.htm . WT/TPR/S/434 /Rev.1  • United States  
 
- 240 - 
 
  Program (ECIP), through which the Treasury makes capital investments in low - and 
moderate -income community financial institutions.199 
4.4.1.3   Consolidated financial sector regulation  
4.185.   During the period under review, there has been no c hange in legislation governing financial 
sector consolidation. The Gramm -Leach -Bliley Act (Financial Services Modernization) of  1999 (GLBA) 
regulates financial consolidation. The GLBA allows domestic and foreign banks to affiliate with 
entities that engage  in financial activities or provide services that are incidental or complementary 
to a financial activity, provided certain capital and managerial standards are met. The Act allows 
commercial banks, investment banks, securities firms, and insurance compani es to consolidate and 
create a financial holding company (FHC). As of 30  September  2021, there were 366 FHCs, of which 
151 were large FHCs, with assets of above USD  10 billion each.200 
4.186.   The Federal Reserve is responsible for the overall regulation and superv ision of large, 
consolidated banking institutions including FHCs. The FSOC also monitors the risks to financial 
stability posed by such institutions. The FSOC is empowered to determine that certain financial 
companies should be subject to supervision by th e Federal Reserve and make recommendations 
concerning prudential standards that should apply to those companies. Furthermore, the activities 
of subsidiaries of FHCs are regulated by the appropriate regulator: the OCC in the case of national 
banks; a state banking agency and the Federal Reserve or the FDIC in the case of state -chartered 
banks; the SEC in the case of securities firms; and in cases where the Federal Reserve has 
supervisory authority over an insurer (because it is a designated insurer or it is part of a savings 
and loan holding company), the relevant state insurance commissioner will exercise concurrent 
supervisory authority. There currently are no designated insurers.  
4.187.   In October  2019, the Federal Reserve issued a final rule that updated the pru dential 
framework for stress testing rules for large BHCs and U.S. intermediate holding companies (IHCs) 
of foreign banking organizations (FBOs) (tailoring rules). Also in October  2020, the OCC, the Federal 
Reserve, and the FDIC issued a final rule that im plements a stable funding requirement for certain 
large banking organizations, and establishes a quantitative metric, the net stable funding ratio 
(NSFR), to measure the stability of the funding profile of certain large banking organizations; it 
requires t hese banking organizations to maintain minimum amounts of stable funding to support 
their assets, commitments, and derivatives exposures over a one -year time horizon. The final rule 
applies to certain large U.S. depository institution holding companies, de pository institutions, and 
U.S. IHCs of FBOs, each with total consolidated assets of USD  100 billion or more, together with 
certain depository institution subsidiaries.  
4.4.1.4   Banking services  
4.188.   A number of federal and state regulators are responsible for the super vision of the banking 
sector. The Federal Reserve is responsible for supervising BHCs, saving and loan holding companies, 
foreign banks' U.S. operations, state member banks, foreign branches, Edge Act and agreement 
corporations201, and designated financial market utilities.202 The OCC charters, regulates, and 
supervises all national banks and federally chartered savings associations and also supervises the 
federal branches and agencies of foreign banks, as well as the international activities of U.S. national  
banks. The OCC is the primary regulator of banks chartered under the National Bank Act and federal 
 
199 Under the Emergency Capital Investment Program (ECIP), established by the Consolid ated 
Appropriations Act of 2021, the Treasury allocated up to USD  9 billion in capital directly to depository 
institutions that are certified Community Development Financial Institutions (CDFIs) or minority depository 
institutions (MDIs) to provide loans, grants, and forbearance for small businesses, minority -owned businesses, 
and consumers, especially in low -income and underserved communities. The Treasury set aside USD  2 billion 
for CDFIs and MDIs with less than USD  500 million in assets and an additional  USD 2 billion for CDFIs and 
MDIs with less than USD  2 billion in assets. Department of the Treasury, Emergency Capital Investment 
Program . Viewed at: https://home.treasury.gov/policy -issues/coronavirus/assistance -for-small-
businesses/emergency -capital -investment -program . 
200 Federal Financial Institutions Examination Council, National Information Center (NIC), BHCPR Peer 
Group Average Reports . Viewed at: https://www.ffiec.gov/npw/FinancialReport/BHCPRReports . 
201 Edge Act and agreement corporations are subsidiaries of banks or BHCs, organized to allo w 
international banking and financial business.  
202 Financial market utilities provide the essential infrastructure for transferring, clearing, and settling 
payments, securities, and other financial transactions among financial institutions.  WT/TPR/S/434 /Rev.1  • United States  
 
- 241 - 
 
  savings associations chartered under the Home Owners' Loan Act. The OCC issues rules and 
regulations that govern the banks it supervises and takes superviso ry actions against banks that do 
not comply with these statutes or that otherwise engage in risky practices.203 The FDIC is the primary 
federal regulator for state -chartered institutions that are not members of the Federal Reserve 
System. State regulators a re organized in the Conference of State Bank Supervisors (CSBS).204 
Banking and other financial service regulators and representatives are members of the FSOC.  
4.189.   The United  States provides national treatment with respect to all banking services, except 
that b ranches of foreign banks are not allowed to have FDIC deposit insurance and therefore cannot 
accept retail deposits (unless grandfathered205) and agencies of foreign banks are not permitted to 
accept deposits from U.S. citizens and residents. The United  States made GATS commitments in 
market access and national treatment for all subsectors included in the Annex on Financial Services, 
and in line with the Understanding on Commitments in Financial Services.206 Although geographic 
and other limitations are appli ed to foreign banks and foreign -owned bank subsidiaries generally on 
a national treatment basis, the U.S. GATS Schedule contains some exceptions to national treatment. 
For example, foreign banks cannot be members of the Federal Reserve System, although 
foreign-owned U.S.  bank subsidiaries are not subject to this limitation. Also, foreign ownership of 
Edge Act corporations is limited to foreign banks and U.S.  subsidiaries of foreign banks, while 
domestic non -bank firms may own such corporations.  
4.190.   The FDIC pro vides deposit insurance on deposits in FDIC -insured banks. The amount insured 
in 2022 is USD  250,000 per depositor, per insured bank, for each account ownership category; this 
amount has not changed since the previous Review.207 Foreign banks in the United  States can be 
insured by the FDIC. The FDIC covers checking accounts; negotiable order of withdrawal (NOW) 
accounts; savings accounts; money market deposit accounts; time deposits such as certificates of 
deposit (CDs); and cashier's checks, money orders, a nd other official items issued by a bank. 
Depositors do not need to apply for FDIC insurance. Coverage is automatic whenever a deposit 
account is opened at an FDIC -insured bank or financial institution.  
4.191.   Under U.S. law, interstate banking is allowed; this c an be done either through a merger or 
through the establishment of new branches, subject to certain restrictions. In the case of mergers, 
size limitations apply on a non -discriminatory basis, whereby the merged bank cannot control more 
than 10% of the tota l deposits of insured depository institutions in the United  States. Additionally, 
limits on the total deposits of the merged bank within a state apply as well.  
4.192.   Under the International Banking Act of 1978, foreign banks can establish a commercial 
presence i n the United  States by setting up federal - or state -licensed branches and agencies, or 
representative offices, or through the acquisition of a national or state subsidiary bank. These are 
accorded national treatment. Foreign persons may establish or acquir e a nationally chartered bank 
subsidiary in all states, subject to commercial presence requirements. Initial entry or expansion by 
a foreign person through the acquisition or establishment of a state -chartered commercial bank 
subsidiary is prohibited or li mited in 22 states; other limitations also apply at the state level.208 
4.193.   Chartered national banks must apply to the OCC to make substantial changes to their 
activities or structure. Under OCC regulations, a national bank is permitted to issue additional 
common stock if approved by holders of at least two  thirds of the shares of  the bank's voting stock. 
Common stock may be issued with or without a par value; a par value may not exceed USD  100 per 
share. Prior approval is required if the national bank is issuing stock in exchange for other than cash. 
 
203 OCC, What We Do. Viewed at: https://www.occ.gov/about/what -we-do/index -what-we-
do.html#:~:text=The%20OCC%20is% 20the%20primary,govern%20the%20banks%20it%20supervises . 
204 CSBS. Viewed at: https://www.csbs.org .  
205 Branches covered by FDIC deposit insurance prior to the passage of the Federal Deposit Insurance 
Corporation Improvemen t Act of 1991 (P.L.  102-242), which prohibited foreign branches from having FDIC 
insurance coverage, were permitted to retain that insurance.  
206 WTO document GATS/EL/90/Suppl.3, 26  February  1998.  
207 FDIC, Understanding Deposit Insurance . Viewed at: https://www.fdic.gov/resources/deposit -
insurance/understanding -deposit -insurance/ .  
208 Branch licenses  for foreign banks are not permitted in Georgia, Louisiana, Missou ri, and Oklahoma. 
Representative offices of foreign banks are not permitted in 12 states, and are subject to limitations in 
Oklahoma, while some states require their incorporation. Some states also place limitations on the acquisition 
by a foreign person o f savings banks or loan associations (Tennessee and Washington).  WT/TPR/S/434 /Rev.1  • United States  
 
- 242 - 
 
  A national bank must obtain pr ior OCC approval for transactions that reduce permanent capital.209 
Under federal and state law, certain types of depository institutions may convert to a national bank 
or a federal savings association (FSA). These institutions include commercial banks, sta te banks, 
state savings associations (mutual form or stock form), trust companies, and credit unions. A state 
bank converting to a national bank must have the approval of shareholders who together own at 
least 51% of the institution's capital stock. Under the National Bank Act, if the institution's charter 
or bylaws require a more stringent approval threshold, the institution must adhere to this threshold. 
If the converting state bank's holding company is the sole shareholder, the holding company may 
author ize the conversion through a board resolution. All holding companies, however, must follow 
state law requirements.210 
4.4.1.5   Insurance services  
4.194.   The insurance sector in the United  States is divided into three segments: life and health 
(L&H) insurers, property and c asualty (P/C) insurers, and health insurers. Companies in the L&H 
sector offer life insurance and annuities, as well as accident and health products that cover expenses 
for health and long -term care or provide income in the event of disability. P/C insurer s offer products 
that generally protect against the risk of financial loss associated with damage to property or 
exposure to liability for individuals and families (personal lines, e.g. auto and homeowners' 
insurance) and for businesses (commercial lines, e.g. professional liability insurance). The health 
segment includes companies licensed solely as health insurers or as health maintenance 
organizations. In 2020, there were 4,550 insurers licensed in the United  States, including 2,614 P/C 
insurers, 1,260 h ealth insurers, and 676 L&H insurers.211 
4.195.   The U.S. insurance industry employed 2.9  million people in 2020, of which 1.7  million 
worked for insurance companies, including life and health insurers (962,500 workers), P/C insurers 
(665,900  workers), and reinsure rs (27,300 workers). The remaining 1.2  million people worked for 
insurance agencies, brokers, and other insurance -related enterprises.  
4.196.   Net premiums written for the P/C insurance sector totaled  USD 647.3  billion in 2020. Net 
premiums written for the L&H segment totaled  USD 627.5  billion in 2020.212 Total private health 
insurance direct premiums written were USD  1.1 trillion in 2020, comprising USD  834.5  billion from 
the health insurance segment, USD 208.7  billion from the L&H segment, and USD  6.8 billion from 
the P/C segment. In addition to private sources of coverage, the health insurance segment extends 
to government program s. Total P/C cash and invested assets were USD  2.0 trillion in 2020, whi le 
L&H cash and invested assets totaled  USD 4.7 trillion in 2020; separate accounts assets totaled  
USD 3.0 trillion. Total general account cash and invested assets for the L&H segment was 
USD 6.7 trillion, mostly in bonds (55% of P/C investment portfolio, and 70% of L&H investment 
portfolio). At the end of 2020, the U.S. insurance sector held approximately USD  11 trillion in total 
assets, with approximately USD  8 trillion held by the L&H segment, USD  2.4 trillion held by the P/C 
segment, and USD  0.5 trillion held by the health segment.  
4.197.   P/C insurers paid out USD  74.4 billion in property losses related to natural catastrophes in 
2020, considerably above the USD  38.7 billion paid in 2019, and USD  60.4 billion in 2018, including 
losses from the National Flood In surance Program.213 As of 31  December  2020, capital and surplus 
in the L&H segment stood at USD  440 billion; the P /C segment reported policyholder surplus of some 
USD 914 billion; and the health segment reported approximately USD  244 billion.214 
 
209 OCC (2021), Comptroller's Licensing Manual: Capital and Dividends , December. Viewed at: 
https://www.occ.gov/publications -and-resources/publications/comptrollers -licensing -manual/files/licensing -
booklet -capital -and-dividends.html . 
210 OCC (2021), Comptroller's Licensing Manual: Conversions to Federal Charter , December. Viewed at: 
https://www.occ.gov/publications -and-resources/pu blications/comptrollers -licensing -manual/files/licensing -
booklet -conversions -to-federal -charter.html . 
211 Department of the Treasury (2021), Annual Report on the Insurance Industry , September. 
Viewed  at: https://home.treasury.gov/system/files/311/FIO -2021-Annual -Report -Insurance -Industry.pdf . 
212 Department of the Treasury (2021), Annual Report on the Insurance Industry , September. 
Viewed  at: https://home.treasury.gov/system/files/311/FIO -2021-Annual -Report -Insurance -Industry.pdf . 
213 Insurance Information Institute. Viewed at: https://www.iii.org/fact -statistic/facts -statistics -industry -
overview.  
214 Department of the Treasury (2021), Annual Report on the Insurance Industry , September. 
Viewed  at: https://home.treasury.gov/system/files/311/FIO -2021-Annual -Report -Insurance -Industry.pdf . WT/TPR/S/434 /Rev.1  • United States  
 
- 243 - 
 
  4.198.   The L&H segm ent continues to be concentrated in the United  States. In 2020, the top 
10 firms in the L&H segment were responsible for nearly 54% of the direct premiums written 
(Table  4.15). MetLife Inc. continued to be the market leader. The health segment is even more  
concentrated, with the top 10 firms being responsible for over 60.4% of the direct premiums written 
in 2020. The United Health Group, which was the largest firm, had 14.3% of the market share.  The 
P/C insurance sector is less concentrated that the other t wo: the top 10 companies were responsible 
for 48.2% of direct premiums written in 2020, a small increase from the 47.9% registered in 2019.  
Table  4.15 L&H insurance: U.S. life and annuities subsector direct pr emiums written  
2019 
rank  2020 
rank  Insurance group  2019 direct 
premiums written 
(USD  '000)  Share 
of total 
(%) 2020 direct 
premiums 
written 
(USD  '000)  Share of 
total (%)  
1 1 MetLife Inc.  95,079,321  12.99  103,335,055  13.06  
3 2 Equitable Holdings  44,612,694  6.09 62,688,657  7.92 
2 3 Prudential Financial Inc.  56,206,131  7.68 61,913,976  7.82 
4 4 New York Life Insurance 
Group  34,984,924  4.78 40,211,642  5.08 
5 5 Massachusetts Mutual Life 
Insurance Co.  30,375,127  4.15 38,461,197  4.86 
7 6 Principal Financial Group Inc.  27,038,400  3.69 26,439,671  3.34 
6 7 Lincoln National Corp.  28,471,688  3.89 25,385,450  3.21 
11 8 Western & Southern Financial 
Group  20,594,041  2.81 22,920,717  2.90 
10 9 Transamerica  22,360,111  3.05 22,875,109  2.89 
8 10 American International Group  25,684,294  3.51 22,620,803  2.86   
Combined top 10  387,869,365  52.97  426,852,277  53.94    
Combined top 25  585,155,216  79.92  636,498,353  80.44    
Combined top 100  722,558,422  98.68  782,664,853  98.93  
Total U.S. life insurance lines  732,191,458  100.0  791,277,958  100.0  
Source:  Department of the Treasury (2021), Annual Report on the Insurance Industry , September. 
Viewed  at: https://home.treasury.gov/system/files/311/FIO -2021-Annual -Report -Insurance -
Industry.pdf . 
4.199.   Despite the negative effects of the pandemic, the U.S. insurance industry was able to 
maintain its financial health in 2020. Although there were increased balance sheet pressures, the 
L&H segment achieved an increase in its capital and surplus, boosted by growth in cash and invested 
assets. Also, and despite the effects of COVID -19, the P/C segment also increased its policyholder 
surplus, reflecting steady leverage ratios and improved liquidity levels. On the other hand, the 
sustained low interest rate envi ronment continued to affect the insurance industry's performance. 
Both the L&H and P/C segments exhibited declining operating margins and some deterioration in the 
quality of their investment portfolios in 2020. The L&H segment's underwriting performance w as 
mainly impacted by negative premium growth. The P/C segment's reduced net investment income 
largely drove negative operating growth. The industry continued to seek higher yields, increasing its 
non-investment -grade bond holdings and alternative investme nts in 2020.215 
4.200.   Under the McCarran -Ferguson Act of 1945 and the GLBA, the business of insurance is 
regulated mainly at the state level, both in terms of market conduct and prudential standards. As a 
result, in the United  States, the primary regulators of th e business of insurance are the 50 states, 
the District of Columbia, and the five U.S. territories. However, the Federal Government also plays 
an important role in the insurance industry, mainly through FIO, which was established within the 
Treasury by Tit le V of the DFA. FIO monitors the insurance sector and represents the United  States 
on prudential aspects of international insurance matters. The Federal Reserve may also have an 
insurance supervisory role in some cases.  
4.201.   In addition to advising the Secreta ry of the Treasury on domestic and prudential international 
insurance policy issues and participating in the FSOC, FIO has authority to: (i)  monitor all aspects 
of the insurance industry; (ii)  recommend to the FSOC that it designate an insurer as an entity  
subject to regulation by the Federal Reserve as a non -bank financial company; (iii)  assist the 
Secretary in the administration of the Terrorism Risk Insurance Program (TRIP); (iv)  coordinate 
federal efforts and develop federal policy on prudential aspects  of international insurance matters, 
including representing the United  States; (v)  determine whether state insurance measures are 
 
215 Department of the Treasury (2021), Annual Report on the Insurance Industry , September. 
Viewed  at: https://home.treasury.gov/system/files/311/FIO -2021-Annual -Report -Insurance -Industry.pdf . WT/TPR/S/434 /Rev.1  • United States  
 
- 244 - 
 
  pre-empted by covered agreements; and (vi)  consult with the states regarding insurance matters of 
national importance and prud ential insurance matters of international importance. FIO and the 
Federal Reserve coordinate on the performance of annual analyses of non -bank financial companies 
supervised by the Federal Reserve, particularly with respect to stress testing. FIO has sever al 
statutorily imposed reporting obligations, under the DFA and the EGRRCPA.216 
4.202.   To be able to offer insurance services, insurance companies, agents, and brokers need to be 
licensed in the state where they plan to provide services. Licensing requirements var y depending 
upon the type of services offered (e.g. insurers have different licensing requirements than do agents) 
and also across states. Furthermore, insurance premiums need to be approved by the state 
regulators. Foreign firms can access the direct insu rance market by acquiring a licensed insurance 
company, or as a subsidiary or a branch of a foreign insurance company. The majority of states 
prohibit the conduct of business by government -controlled or government -owned insurance 
companies. A foreign compa ny operation as a branch may only write premiums based on the capital 
it has deposited in the state where it is conducting business. However, this condition is usually 
waived, particularly if the company has a deposit in another state. In certain cases, su ch as large 
industrial placements, MAT (marine, aviation, or transport insurance), or "surplus lines" insurance, 
exemptions from the state residency requirements exist; these vary across states. Foreign reinsurers 
that are permitted to conduct cross -border  business with U.S. companies even when not licensed in 
a particular state may be required to make a trust account deposit in the United  States for the full 
amount of their liabilities or to provide a letter of credit to this effect.  
4.203.   Insurance premiums cov ering U.S. risks paid to companies not incorporated in the 
United  States or in countries with which the United  States has a double taxation treaty are subject 
to a federal tax of 1% on life insurance and reinsurance, and 4% on non -life insurance premiums. 
This was listed as a national treatment exemption in the U.S. GATS schedule.  
4.204.   Although insurance is regulated at the state level, efforts have been made to reinforce state 
coordination. To this end, state regulators participate in the National Co uncil of State Insurance 
Legislators (NCOIL) and the National Association of Insurance Commissioners (NAIC). The NCOIL 
comprises state legislators, whose purpose is to help legislators make informed decisions on 
insurance issues  that affect their constituents. NAIC, composed of the chief insurance regulators 
from the 50 states, the District of Columbia and five U.S. territories, provides a forum for policy 
coordination, establishing standards and best practices, and coordinating regulatory oversight.  
4.205.   The Terrorism Ris k Insurance Program  (TRIP) , created by the Terrorism Risk Insurance Act 
of 2002 (TRIA), was most recently extended through 31  December  2027 by the Terrorism Risk 
Insurance Program Reauthorization Act of 2019 ( P.L. 116-94). Under TRIA, the Government pays 
80% of the insured losses of an insurer resulting from certified acts of terrorism  where industry -wide 
insured losses exceed USD  200 million , subject to payment of a deductible. The Government's share 
of industry losses is capped at an annu al aggregate maximum of USD  100 billion. FIO assists the 
Secretary of the Treasury in administering the TRIP. In June  2021, FIO published a study noting the 
significant participation of small insurers in terrorism risk insurance.217 
4.206.   The Bilateral Agreement between the U.S. and the EU on Prudential Measures Regarding 
Insurance and Reinsurance, generally known in the United  States as the U.S. –EU Covered 
Agreement, was signed by the parties in September  2017, and entered into force on 4  April 2018. 
It addresses  three areas of insurance and reinsurance prudential measures: (i)  group supervision; 
(ii) reinsurance supervision, including collateral and local presence requirements; and (iii)  exchange 
of information between supervisory authorities.  More specifically, the agreement eliminated, under 
specified conditions, local presence and collateral requirements in each Party for reinsurers from the 
other Party. The agreement gave a five -year period for the implementation of the collateral 
requirements.218 It also addre ssed the role of the host and home supervisory authorities with respect 
 
216 Department of the Treasury (2021), Annual Report on the Insurance Industry , September. 
Viewed  at: https://home.treasury.gov/system/files/311/FIO -2021-Annual -Report -Insurance -Industry.pdf . 
217 FIO (2021 ), Study of Small Insurer Competitiveness in the Terrorism Risk Insurance Marketplace . 
Viewed at: https://home.treasury.gov/system/files/311/2021T RIPSmallInsurerReportJune2021.pdf . 
218 Non-U.S. reinsurers have been historically required to hold 100% collateral within the United  States 
for the risks they assume from U.S. insurers. In 2011, NAIC adopted a revised Credit for Reinsurance model 
law and mod el regulation that allowed non -U.S. reinsurers to post less than 100% collateral for U.S. claims, if 
the non -U.S. reinsurer showed proven financial strength and the effectiveness of its home -country regulator. 
 WT/TPR/S/434 /Rev.1  • United States  
 
- 245 - 
 
  to prudential group supervision of an insurance or reinsurance group whose worldwide parent 
undertaking is in the home Party, and reaffirmed the Parties' mutual support for the exchang e of 
information between supervisory authorities, recommending practices for such exchange.219 The 
U.S.–UK Covered Agreement, substantively similar to the agreement with the European  Union, was 
signed by the parties in December  2018, and entered into force on 31  December  2020.220 The 
covered agreement with the United  Kingdom is based upon the provisions of the U.S. -EU Covered 
Agreement in view of the withdrawal of the United  Kingdom from the European  Union: it incorporates 
its timeframes and addresses the sam e topics.  
4.207.   The NAIC Credit for Reinsurance Model Law and Regulation, as amended in 2019, provides 
a basis for U.S. states to revise their credit for reinsurance measures for purposes of achieving 
consistency with the covered agreements and avoiding a potent ial pre -emption determination under 
the FIO Act.221 Implementation of the Covered Agreements contemplates action by each U.S. State 
to revise its relevant credit for reinsurance measures, and in 2019, NAIC adopted amendments to 
its Credit for Reinsurance Mo del Law and Regulation in response to the Covered Agreements. The 
2019 Model Law and Regulation were later designated by NAIC as accreditation standards, and 
U.S. States are revising their credit for reinsurance measures based on the 2019 Model Law and 
Regulation.222 The 2019 Credit or Reinsurance Model Law and Regulation are an NAIC accreditation 
requirement, effective 1  September  2022. Under the Covered Agreements, if U.S. insurance 
supervisors do not develop and implement a group capital assessment applic able to U.S. groups 
with insurance operations in the European  Union and the United  Kingdom, regulators from those 
jurisdictions could impose their domestic group capital requirements on such groups and may not 
be precluded from imposing collateral requirem ents on U.S. reinsurers assuming business from 
insurers in those jurisdictions.  
4.208.   In December  2020, NAIC members adopted revisions to the Insurance Holding Company 
System Model Act and Insurance Holding Company System Model Regulation to implement the Group 
Capital Calculation (GCC) and Liquidity Stress Test (LST). The LST for large life insurance groups 
meeting the scoping criteria provides lead state regulators with more insights into the groups' 
liquidity risk.223 To facilitate implementation of these model s in the states, NAIC adopted additional 
changes to the Uniform Application Checklist for Certified Reinsurers and a new Uniform Checklist 
 
Following the agreements with the European  Union and the United  Kingdom, in June  2019, NAIC adopted 
revisions to the models intended to implement the reinsurance collateral provisions of the Covered 
Agreements. The revisions eliminate reinsurance collateral requirements for reinsurers that have their head 
office or are domiciled in an EU-member country  (or the United  Kingdom); a U.S. jurisdiction (state) that 
meets the requirements for accreditation under NAIC financial standards and accreditation program; and a 
non-U.S. jurisdiction recognized as a Qualified Jurisdiction that meets add itional requirements consistent with 
the terms of the EU/U.S. Covered Agreement.  
219 Department of the Treasury, U.S.-EU Covered Agreement . Viewed at: 
https://home.treasury.gov/policy -issues/financial -markets -financial -institutions -and-fiscal-service/federal -
insurance -office/covered -agreements/us -eu-covered -agreement .  
220 Department of the Treasury, U .S.-UK Covered Agreement . Viewed at: 
https://home.treasury.gov/policy -issues/financial -markets -financial -institutions -and-fiscal-service/federal -
insurance -office/covered -agreements/us -uk-covered -agreement . 
221 The FIO Act of 2010 sets forth procedures for the pre -emption of state insurance measures by the 
FIO Director in connection with a covered agreement. A state insurance measure shall be pre -empted only if 
the FIO Director determines that it: (i)  results in less favorable  treatment of a non -U.S. insurer domiciled in a 
foreign jurisdiction that is  subject to a covered agreement than a U.S. insurer domiciled, licensed, or otherwise 
admitted in that state; and (ii)  is inconsistent with the covered agreement. FIO, Preemption Analysis . 
Viewed  at: https://home.treasury.gov/policy -issues/financial -markets -financial -institutions -and-fiscal-
service/federal -insurance -office/covered -agreements/preemption -analysis . 
222 FIO evaluate d whether a U.S. State credit for reinsurance measure s were consistent with the 
Covered Agreements  with the European  Union  and the United  Kingdom. In case of inconsistency, State 
measures are  subject to potent ial pre -emption under the FIO Act. The agreements require d the United  States 
to complete any pre -emption determination by 1  September  2022. FIO, Preemption Analysis . Viewed at: 
https://home.treasury.gov/policy -issues/financial -markets -financial -institutions -and-fiscal-service/federal -
insurance -office/covered -agreements/preemption -analysis . 
223 NAIC (2021), NAIC 2020 Liquidity Stress Test Framework for Life Insurers Meeting the Scope 
Criteria, May. Viewed at: https://content.naic.org/sites/default/files/inline -
files/Final%202020%20LST%20Framework_0.pdf . The GCC is a groupwide capital reporting and assess ment 
framework including insurers and financial and nonfinancial businesses within an insurance group . Entities 
included for the purposes of LS testing include U.S.  life insurance legal entities, including reinsurers; where 
applicable, holding companies th at could be a source or draw of liquidity to the life insurance legal entities; and 
non-life insurance entities and non -insurance entities with material sources of liquidity, which could pose 
material liquidity risk to the U.S. group.  WT/TPR/S/434 /Rev.1  • United States  
 
- 246 - 
 
  for Reciprocal Jurisdiction Reinsurers. All states with a group impacted by the Covered Agreement 
were encourage d to adopt the GCC revisions effective 7  November  2022.224 In 2021, 22 life 
insurance groups filed an LST using 2020  data. 
4.209.   In 2021, NAIC adopted revisions to statutory accounting rules and interpretations, relating 
to insurer transactions with affiliates, which clarifies that any direct or indirect ownership interest 
greater than 10% in a reporting entity results in a related party designation. NAIC has report ed 
advances in adoption of common regulatory measures on the part of the states: as of October  2021, 
16 states had adopted the 2020 revisions to NAIC's Suitability in Annuity Transactions Model 
Regulation, and it was pending in six states.225 Also as of October  2021, 18  states had adopted some 
form of the NAIC's Insurance Data Security Model Law, which establ ishes standards for insurer data 
security and for notification to state insurance regulators of a cybersecurity event.  
4.210.   E.O. 14030 of 20  May 2021 on Climate -Related Financial Risk instructed the Treasury to 
direct FIO to assess climate -related issues or gap s in the supervision and regulation of insurers, and 
the potential for major disruptions of private insurance coverage in U.S. regions particularly 
vulnerable to climate change impacts. To this end, FIO issued a request in August  2021 to solicit 
public com ment on the insurance sector and climate -related financial risks.  
4.4.1.6   Securities services  
4.211.   The U.S. equity markets are the largest in the world; at USD  52 trillion (almost 2.5 times 
GDP) in 2021, they represented 42.0% of the USD  125 trillion global equity mark et capitalization in 
that year. The U.S. market share increased during 2021; it averaged 37.4% over the 2012 -21 
period. The main indexes showed positive results in 2021: the S&P 500 index averaged 4,273.41 for 
FY2021, and it was 29.5% higher than in FY2020 ; the Dow Jones Industrial Average (DJIA) averaged 
34,055.29, +22.1% over FY2020; the Nasdaq averaged 14,371.66, +28.7%. Total equity issuance 
was USD  390.4  billion in FY2021.226 The number of initial public offerings (IPOs) was up 21.7% 
year-on-year (Table  4.16). 
Table  4.16 U.S. primary and secondary equity markets, FY2020 and FY2021  
(USD billion and %)  
 FY2021  FY2020  Y/Y 
Primary market     
Total equity issuance (USD  billion)  435.8  390.4  11.6%  
Total IPO value (USD  billion)  153.1  85.4 79.2%  
Number of IPOs  393 209 88.0%  
Small cap as % Total IPOs  66% 73% -7.4%  
Number of listed companies  4,734  4,771  -0.8%  
Private equity deal value (USD  billion)  1,035.7  689.6  50.2%  
Secondary markets     
Equity average daily trading volume (USD  billion)  11.4 10.9 4.4%  
ETF average daily trading volume (USD  billion)  1.7 2.0 -15.1%  
ETFs as % equity ADV  14.8%  18.2%  -3.4%  
Options ADV (millions)  39.2 29.5 32.7%  
Market performance (price) S&P 500  4,273.41  3,217.86  32.8%  
Dow Jones Industrial Average  34,055.29  26,890.67  26.6%  
 
224 NAIC, Financial Re gulation Standards and Accreditation Committee: Draft Minutes -12 April 2021, 
Meeting. Viewed at: 
https://conte nt.naic.org/sites/default/files/call_materials/Group%20Capital%20Calcuation%20%28E%29%20
Working%20Group_Minutes.pdf . 
225 NAIC Model Laws, Regulations, Guidelines and Other Resources —Spring 2020, Suitability in Annuity 
Transactions Model Regulation . Viewed at : https://content.naic.org/sites/default/files/inline -files/MDL -275.pdf . 
226 SIFMA (2022), Research Quarterly – 4Q21. Primary Market: US Equity Capital Formation. Secondary  
Markets: US Cash Equities, ETFs, and Multi -Listed Options , January. Viewed at: https://www.sifma.org/wp -
content/uploads/2022/01/US -Research -Quarterly -Equity -2022-01-26-SIFMA.pdf . WT/TPR/S/434 /Rev.1  • United States  
 
- 247 - 
 
   FY2021  FY2020  Y/Y 
Nasdaq  14,371.66  10,201.51  40.9%  
Russell 2000  2,242.91  1,523.90  47.2%  
VIX 19.66  29.25  -32.8%  
Note:  ETF = Exchange Traded Fund; IPO = Initial Public Offering; VIX = Chicago Board Options Exchange 
Volatility Index.  
Source:   SIFMA Research Quarterly – 4Q21. Primary Market: US Equity Capital Formation; Secondary 
Markets: US Cash Equities, ETFs, and Multi -Listed Options , January  2022. Viewed at: 
https://www.sifma.org/wp -content/uploads/2022/01/US -Research -Quarterly -Equity -2022-01-26-
SIFMA.pdf . 
4.212.   The main legislation regarding the securiti es sector is contained in the Securities Act of 1933,  
the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, the Sarbanes -Oxley Act of 2002 (SOX), the DFA, Jumpstart 
Our Business Startups (JOBS) Act of 2012, and the Economic Growth, Regulatory Relief and 
Consumer Protection  Act of 2018 (EGRCPA).  
4.213.   The Securities Act mandates a full disclosure of securities being offered for sale; securities 
generally need to be registered if offered for sale in the United  States.227 Debt securities such as 
bonds, debentures, and notes need to b e registered under the Securities Act. However, if such 
securities are offered for public sale, a formal agreement between the bond issuer and the bond 
holder known as the "trust indenture" is needed. The trust indenture needs to conform to the 
provisions of the Trust Indenture Act.228 Companies , including mutual funds, that engage in 
investing, reinvesting, and trading in securities, and whose own securities are offered to investors, 
are regulated under the Investment Company Act (ICA). Under the ICA, compa nies are required to 
disclose their financial condition and investment policies to investors when the stock is initially 
offered for sale and subsequently on a regular basis. Investment advisors, firms, or individuals 
engaged in advising others about secur ities investment for compensation are regulated under the 
Investment Advisors Act (IAA) , amended in 1996 and 2010. Advisors who manage USD  100 million 
or more or advise a registered investment company , must  register with the SEC. As per the national 
treatm ent exemption undertaken by the United  States in GATS, domestic banks involved in 
securities advisory and investment management services are exempt from registration under the 
IAA, while foreign banks are required to register. The registration requirement involves maintenance 
of records, inspections, submission of reports, and pay ing a fee.  The Investment Company Act 
regulates the organization of companies, that engage primarily in investing, reinvesting, and trading 
in securities, and whose own securities are offered to the investing public.  
4.214.   The Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC), established by the Securities and Exchange 
Act (SEC Act), is the principal regulator of the securities sector in the United  States.229 The SEC Act 
empowered the SEC  with broa d authority over all aspects of the securities industry, including the 
power to register, regulate, and oversee brokerage firms, transfer agents, and clearing agencies as 
well as securities self -regulatory organizations (SROs). The SEC Act  also identifies and prohibits 
certain types of conduct in the markets and provides the SEC with disciplinary powers over regulated 
entities and persons associated with them. It empowers the SEC to require periodic reporting of 
information by companies with publicly traded  securities: companies with more than USD  10 million 
in assets with securities held by more than 500 owners must file annual and other periodic reports. 
These reports are available to the public through the SEC's EDGAR database. The SEC Act requires 
disclo sure of information by anyone seeking to acquire more than 5% of a company's securities by 
direct purchase or tender offer. It also prohibits insider trading, which is illegal when a person trades 
a security while in possession of material non -public infor mation in violation of a duty to withhold 
the information or refrain from trading. The Act requires market participants including exchanges, 
brokers and dealers, transfer agents, and clearing agencies to register with the SEC. Registration 
statements and p rospectuses become public shortly after filing with the SEC. If filed by U.S. domestic 
 
227 Although, in general, securities sold in the United  States must be registered, not all offerings of 
securities must be registered with the SEC. Private offerings to a limited number of persons or institutions; 
offerings of limited size; intrastate offerings; and securities of municipal, State, and Federal Governments are 
exempt from registration requirements. Furthermore, foreign issuers can opt to use different registration and 
periodic reporting forms than those us ed by domestic users.  
228 Under the Trust Indenture Act, securities may not be offered for sale to the public unless a formal 
agreement between the issuer of bonds and the bondholder, known as the trust indenture, conforms to the 
standards of this Act.  
229 This includes the power to register, regulate, and oversee brokerage firms, transfer agents, and 
clearing agencies as well as securities self -regulatory organizations (SROs).  WT/TPR/S/434 /Rev.1  • United States  
 
- 248 - 
 
  companies, the statements are available on the EDGAR database, accessible at www.sec.gov . 
Registration statements are subject to examination for compliance with disclosure requirements.  
4.215.   The SEC Act identifies the various securities exchanges, such as the New York Stock 
Exchange, the Nasdaq Stock Market, and the Chicago Board of Options exchanges, and the Financial 
Industry Regulator y Authority (FINRA) as SROs that must create rules that allow for disciplining 
members for improper conduct and for establishing measures to ensure market integrity and 
investor protection. SRO proposed rules are subject to SEC review and published to soli cit public 
comment. Many SRO proposed rules are effective upon filing, but some require SEC approval before 
they can go into effect.  
4.216.   The Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC), which was created by the Commodity 
Futures Trading Commission Act of 1974,  is responsible for administering the Commodity Exchange 
Act (CEA), as supplemented by the DFA of 2010. The CEA stipulates that persons engaged in offering 
or selling foreign exchange traded futures and options to persons based in the United  States need 
to register with the CFTC or petition the CFTC for an exemption from registration.230 
4.217.   The SOX Act created the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (PCAOB) to oversee 
the activities of the auditing profession. The Act mandates that senior corporate officers personally 
certify in writing that the company's financial statements comply with SEC disclosure requirements. 
Officers who sign off on financial statements that they know to be inaccurate are subject to criminal 
penalties. The Act requi res that management and auditors establish internal controls and reporting 
methods to ensure the adequacy of those controls, and contains rules with respect to recordkeeping, 
including scope, retention period, and record destruction and falsification.  
4.218.   The DFA governs consumer protection, trading restrictions, credit ratings, regulation of 
financial products, corporate governance and disclosure, and transparency of financial services 
related activities. The DFA amended the SEC Act, whereby the SEC, when cons idering the application 
of a foreign person or an affiliate of a foreign person to register in the United  States as a broker or 
a dealer, must consider if the applicant poses a risk to the stability of the U.S. financial system and 
whether the applicant's home country has legislation in place that would mitigate such risk. 
Furthermore, the SEC is authorized to revoke the authorization of foreign brokers and dealers if their 
home country has not taken appropriate steps to mitigate risk. The DFA also amended the SEC Act 
to require that each nationally recognized statistical rating organization set up, enforce, and 
document an effective internal control structure to determine policies, procedures, and framework 
for assigning credit ratings. The DFA established a comprehensive regulatory framework for swaps 
and security -based swaps : swap dealers and major swap participants are required to register with 
the CFTC, while security -based swap dealers and major security -based swap participants need to 
register with the  SEC. The JOBS Act allows for an exemption for up to five years from the SOX 
requirement to obtain an annual verification report from a registered public accounting firm . 
4.219.   Section  501 of the EGRRCPA amended the Securities Act, exempting from the obligation of 
state registration securities approved by the SEC for national trading and authorized to be listed on 
a national securities exchange. It also direct s the SEC to report on the risks and benefits of 
algorithmic trading in capital markets. Section  504 of t he Act creates a new subset of venture capital 
funds called qualifying venture capital funds (QVCFs), not defined as an investment company as 
stipulated in the ICA. To qualify as a QVCF, a venture capital fund must have less than 250  beneficial 
investors a nd less than USD  10 million in invested capital. The Act also increased the threshold 
amount of stock that a company can sell to its corporate employees in a year, without being subject 
to additional disclosure requirements, from USD  5 million to USD  10 million. The Act allows certain 
"fully reporting" companies to be eligible for certain exemptions from disclosure requirements ; it 
also allows closed -end funds to use certain streamlined reporting procedures.  
 
230 The CFTC is authorized under CFTC Regulation 30.10 to provide an exemption to the petitioner if the 
petitioner demonstrates that its home -country regulatory regime is comparable to the CFTC's and that the 
home -country regulator has an appropriate information sharing arrangement with the CFTC. Currently, 
17 self-regulatory and regulatory  organizations have been granted order exemption under CFTC 
Regulation  30.10, in 14 trading partners: Australia; Brazil; Canada; France; Germany; Hong Kong, China; 
India; Japan; the Republic of Korea; Malaysia; Singapore; Spain; Chinese  Taipei; and the Uni ted Kingdom. 
CFTC, Foreign Part  30. Viewed at: 
http://sirt.cftc.gov/sirt/sirt.aspx?Topic=ForeignPart30Exemptions&implicit=true&status=Order+Issued+Granti
ng&CustomColumnDisplay=TTTTTTTT . WT/TPR/S/434 /Rev.1  • United States  
 
- 249 - 
 
  4.220.   The Holding Foreign Companies Accountable Act (P. L. 116-222), enacted on 
18 December  2020, amended the SOX Act to require the SEC to identify each covered issuer that 
retains a registered public accounting firm that has a branch or office located in a foreign jurisdiction, 
which the PCAOB determined it i s unable to inspect or investigate completely because of a position 
taken by an authority in the foreign jurisdiction. If the SEC determines that a covered issuer has 
three consecutive non -inspection years, it must prohibit the securities of the covered is suer from 
being traded on a national securities exchange or through any other method that is within the 
jurisdiction of the SEC to regulate, including through over -the-counter trading. The prohibition is 
removed on proof of compliance, but, in case of re -incidence, a new prohibition, for a minimum of 
five years, will be imposed.  
4.4.2   Telecommunications  
4.221.   The telecommunications market in the United  States is valued at USD  583.4  billion in 2021 
in terms of revenue. In 2020, the United  States had a USD  18.1 billion t rade surplus in 
telecommunications, computer, and information services, with exports totaling  USD 56.7 billion, and 
imports reaching USD  38.6 billion.231 Export growth (36.8%) between 2015 and 2020 denoted a 
dynamic exporting sector; imports remained almost  unchanged over the same period, mainly due 
to a sharp decline of USD  4 billion in imports of computer services between 2019 and 2020. Export 
growth was driven by increases in exports of computer services whose export values more than 
doubled since 2015 to  USD 42.1 billion in 2020.232 
4.222.   Mobile phone subscriptions reached 351  million  in 2020, with a pen etration rate  of 106.2%. 
Fixed telephone subscriptions dropped by 2 4 million between 2015 and 2020, and subscriptions per 
inhabitants are at their lowest level s ince the 1970s; only 3 of 10 U.S. citizens had a fixed line 
subscription in 2020. Broadband subscriptions, whether fixed or wireless, have steadily increased 
since 2015; fixed -broadband subscriptions increased by almost 20  million until 2020 (reaching a 
penetration rate of 36.4%)233 while the threshold of 500  million subscriptions was exceeded for 
wireless broadband in 20 20, i.e. a penetration rate of 15 6.7%. The progress in broadband use also 
reflects the increased access to the Internet – 9 out of 10 U.S. citizens used the Internet in 20 20, 
up from nearly 75% in 2015 (Table  4.17). 
Table  4.17 Selected telecommunications indicators, 2015 -20 
 2015  2016  2017  2018  2019  2020  
Fixed telephone subscriptions (million)  125 121 116 110 107 101 
Fixed telephone subscriptions per 100 inhabitants  38.9 37.6 35.8 33.7 32.4 30.7 
Mobile -cellular telephone subscriptions (million)  382 396 400 348 356 351 
Mobile -cellular telephones per 100 inhabitants  119.1  122.6  123.0  106.5 108.1 106.2  
Internet users (%)  74.6 85.5 87.3 88.5 89.4 90.9 
Fixed -broadband subscriptions (million)  102 106 108 111 114 121 
Fixed -broadband subscriptions per 100 inhabitants  31.8 32.7 33.3 33.9 34.7 36.6 
Wireless -broadband total subscriptions (million)  375 409 431 463 493 519 
Wireless -broadband total subscriptions per 100 inhabitants  117.0  126.7  132.7  141.6 149.8 156.7  
Source:  ITU World Telecommunication/ICT Indicators Database, July  2021 Edition. Viewed at: 
https://www.itu.int/en/ITU -D/Statistics/Pages/publications/wtid.aspx . 
4.223.   The U.S. telecommunications market consolidated during the review period. In April  2020, 
the merger between operators T -Mobile and Sprint was approved after two years of review by 
different regulatory instances, including the Federal Communications Commission (FCC), the 
Department of Justice, and the California Public Utilities Commission.234 There are now three 
 
231 BEA, International Transactions, International Services, and International Investment Position 
Tables . Viewed at: https://apps.bea.gov/iTable/iTable.cfm?ReqID=62&step=1 . 
232 Computer software, including end -user licenses  and customization, accounted for nearly half of 
U.S. exports (USD  27 billion) of the whole sector in 2020; exports of these activities have increased by almost 
USD 15 billion since 2015. Exports related to cloud computing and data storage services are the fastest 
growing; exported value increased four -fold between 2015 and 2020.  
233 According to the OECD, the fixed -broadband penetration in the United  States has consistently 
remained above the OECD average rate. OECD, OECD Digital Economy Outlook 2020 . Viewed at: 
https://www.oecd -ilibrary.org/sites/bb167041 -en/index.html?itemId=/content/publication/bb167041 -en. 
234 Several conditions were part of settlements for this approval, which included the sale of subsidiary 
mobile phone ne twork (Boost Mobile) to Dish Network, transition services and network access to users of 
 WT/TPR/S/434 /Rev.1  • United States  
 
- 250 - 
 
  nationwide mobile network operators in the market (AT&T, Verizon, and T -Mobile ), each of them 
with more than 100  million subscribers.  
4.224.   The Communications Act of 1934  (47 U.S.C. 151  et seq .), as amended by the 
Telecommunications Act of 1996 ( P.L. 104-104), is the main law governing the sector; it established 
FCC. The Commission regulates interstate and international communications nationwide, including 
U.S. territories, and its regulatory oversight covers telecommunications carriers and other carriers 
transmitting by wire or radio, including wireline235; wireless companies; radio and TV  broadcasters; 
cable providers; and satellite companies. The National Telecommunications and Information 
Administration (NTIA), under USDOC, is the main advisor to the Presid ent on telecommunications 
and information policy issues. The International Communication and Information Policy (CIP) Office 
under the Department of State and USTR also play an active role in developing and coordinating 
telecommunications policy in interna tional fora, including in the negotiation of bilateral and 
multilateral agreements.  
4.225.   Overseen by Congress, FCC is an independent government agency responsible for 
implementing and enforcing communications laws and regulations. As such, FCC has rulemaking 
authority, and may initiate a rulemaking proceeding when Congress specifically requests it , when 
the agency itself identifies a need requiring a new or an amended rule, or a change of rule , or when 
the public address a petition for the agency to take action.236 Under the Communications Act, FCC 
manages the electromagnetic spectrum and grants licenses  or authorizations, including for public 
safety, commercial and non -commercial fixed and mobile wireless services, broadcast television and 
radio, satellite, and o ther services. Before requesting a license , individuals and businesses must 
obtain an FCC registration (10 -digit) number . Depending on the type of service, FCC maintains 
several licensing systems and provides search functionalities into the different databases, inter alia, 
by file number; applicant name or purpose; and call sign, licensee name, station, or radio service.237 
4.226.   Common carriers are generally required to interconnect with each other, either directly or 
through other common carriers' facilities. Interconnection agreements may be regulated at both the 
state and federal levels and FCC has the authority to address interc onnection issues for such common 
carriers. Since the release of the 2017 Restoring Internet Freedom Order238, providers of broadband 
Internet access services are regulated as information services.  
4.227.   Before a company may assign an FCC license  to another compan y or acquire a company 
holding an FCC license , it must receive the Commission's approval. FCC reviews applications for the 
transfer of control and assignment of licenses  and authorizations to ensure that the public interest 
is served by approving the appli cations.239 As part of its public interest review, the FCC hears from 
the public and considers several factors, including competition.240 The agency may issue conditional 
approvals requesting the implementation of actions to remedy public interest harms of m ergers 
(e.g. divestiture). During the review period, the FCC conditionally approved the acquisition of Sprint 
by T-Mobile, the fourth - and the third -largest national wireless carriers in the  United  States at the 
time of the filing.241 Although the FCC aims to complete reviews in 180  days, major transactions 
such as the one previously mentioned may exceed that timespan.  
 
Dish Network, the sale of the Sprint's 800  MHz spectrum to Dish three years after closing the merger, 
commitments on its coverage of 5G wireless services, and the free ze on retail prices for three years.  
235 Intrastate wireline telecommunications providers are primarily regulated by a public utility 
commission (PUC) in each state, and some PUCs also lightly regulate wireless companies and/or interconnected 
VoIP providers.  Cable operators are licensed by cable franchising authorities at the local or state level, and 
regulatory power over them is shared by local/state authorities and FCC.  
236 FCC, Rulemaking Process . Viewed at: https://www.fcc.gov/about -fcc/rulemaking -process . 
237 Search interfaces into FCC databases are available at: https://www.fcc.gov/licensing -
databases/search -fcc-datab ases. 
238 FCC (2017), Declaratory Ruling, Report and Order, and Order in the Matter of Restoring Internet 
Freedom , WC Docket No.  17-108. Viewed at: https://www.fcc.gov /document/fcc -releases -restoring -internet -
freedom -order . 
239 FCC, Mergers and Acquisitions . Viewed at: https://www.fcc.gov/proceedings -actions/mergers -and-
acquisitions . 
240 Depending on the type of license , factors such as the deployment of advanced services, and the 
diversity of license  holders, information sources, and services available to the public, may be considered.  
241 FCC, Current and Recent Major Transactions . Viewed at: https://www.fcc.gov/transactions/rec ent-
transactions . WT/TPR/S/434 /Rev.1  • United States  
 
- 251 - 
 
  4.228.   To deter conduct by a foreign carrier that could result in harm to competition in the 
U.S. telecommunications market, FCC maintains regulator y safeguards such as the "no special 
concessions" rule, the benchmark settlement rates policy, and dominant carrier requirements. Under 
the no special concessions rule ( 47 C.F.R.  63.14) , U.S. international carriers are prohibited from 
agreeing to enter int o exclusive arrangements with foreign carriers with sufficient market power to 
affect competition adversely in the U.S. market. The Foreign Participation Order adopted a 
presumption that carriers with a market share of less than 50% in the foreign market l ack such 
market power.  The rules concerning foreign ownership limitations in the telecommunications sector 
remained unchanged during the review period. Foreign ownership in some  services, such as 
wireline -based carriers and submarine cable landing licensees, must comply with restrictions in the 
FCC's general obligations and qualifications for ownership of such businesses. Under Section  310 of 
the Communications Act242, foreign ownership in common carriers is limited, unless FCC approves 
otherwise, to  20% direct investment and 25% indirect investment for common carrier wireless 
licensees.243 FCC conducts a public interest analysis when evaluating applications to receive 
authorization to exceed the 25% foreign ownership benchmark.244 The methodology used to assess 
compliance with foreign ownership statutory benchmarks is detailed in a 2016 FCC Order.245 
4.229.   E.O. 13913 of 4 April 2020, Establishing the Committee for the Assessment of Foreign 
Participation in the United  States Telecommunications Services Sector, formalized the establishment 
of a Committee for the Assessment of Foreign Participation in the United  States Telecommunications 
Services Sector, which assists FCC in its public interest review of national security and law 
enforcement concerns raised by for eign participation in the U.S.  telecommunications services 
sector.246 Upon referral by FCC, the Committee conducts a 120 -day review of certain types of 
applications , which can be  extended by 90 days in case of a potential secondary assessment .247 The 
Committ ee can make a range of recommendations to FCC including no objection to an application, 
approval of an application subject to mitigation, denial of an application, or modification or revocation 
of a license . In September  2020, FCC adopted a Second Report a nd Order that provides for new 
rules and procedures to formalize the review process of the Committee, notably by defining the 
scope of the review and establishing categories of information to be submitted by applicants.248 This 
review differs from the one c onducted by CFIUS as it is focused on the operation purposes of 
licenses ; some transactions may trigger a review by the two bodies. Following procedures initiated 
before the issuance of E.O. 13913, FCC revoked the licenses  of four foreign common carrier wi reless 
providers during the review period.  
 
242 Under Section  310 of the Communications Act of 1934, common carrier radio licenses  cannot be 
granted to or held by non -U.S. citizens, corporations not organized under U.S. laws, or foreign governments. 
Nor can licenses  be granted to U.S . corporations of which more than 20% of the capital stock is owned of 
record or voted by any of these entities. However, licenses  may be granted to companies set up in the 
United  States that are controlled by holding companies set up in the United  States and in which foreign 
individuals, corporations, or Governments own of record or vote more than 25% of the capital stock, unless 
FCC finds that such ownership is inconsistent with the public interest.  
243 Non-common carrier wireless licensees  are not subject to foreign ownership restrictions.  
244 The public interest analysis conducted to review an application by a supplier from a WTO Member 
relies on an "open entry" standard, whereby FCC starts from a presumption (subject to rebuttal) that the 
foreign entry does  not threaten competition in the U.S. telecommunications market. It also involves a 
consideration of policy concerns raised by federal government agencies in relation to national security, law 
enforcement, foreign policy, or trade policy issues.  
245 FCC, Report and Order in the Matter of Review of Foreign Ownership Policies for Broadcast, Common 
Carrier and Aeronautical Radio Licensees under Section  310(b)(4) of the Communications Act of 1934, as 
Amended , GN Docket No.  15-236. Released: 30  September  2016. Vie wed at: 
https://docs.fcc.gov/public/attachments/FCC -16-128A1.pdf . 
246 Federal Register (2020) , Vol. 85, No.  68, pp.  19643 -19650. Viewed at: 
https://www.federalregister.gov/d/2020 -07530 .  
247 Department of Justice, Committee for the Assessment of Foreign Participation in the United  States  
Telecommunications Services Sector – Frequently Asked Questions . Viewed at: 
https://www.justice.gov/nsd/committee -asses sment -foreign -participation -united -states -telecommunications -
services -sector . 
248 FCC, Report and Order in the Matter of Process Reform for Executive Branch Review of Certain FCC 
Applications and Petitions Involving Foreign Ownership , IB Docket No.  16-155. V iewed at: 
https://docs.fcc.gov/public/attachments/FCC -20-133A1.pdf . In a Second Report and Order, issued in 
September  2021, the FCC adopted standard questions to be addressed during the review. Viewed at: 
https://docs.fcc.gov/public/attachments/FCC -21-104A1.pdf . WT/TPR/S/434 /Rev.1  • United States  
 
- 252 - 
 
  4.230.   Since 2018, at least seven states have enacted net neutrality laws, which have generated 
ongoing legal challenges from litigants arguing a conflict with the Restoring Internet Freedom 
Order.249 In July  2021, E.O . 14036 encouraged FCC to restore net neutrality rules.250 
4.231.   There is a digital divide in the United  States across different dimensions , including speed; 
up-to-date technology; and  use of fixed versus mobile.251 In its 2021 Broadband Deployment 
Report252, prepared under Section  706 of the Telecommunications Act of 1996, FCC reported that, 
for the third consecutive year, advanced telecommunications capability is being deployed on a 
reasonable and timely basis. Following the Broadband DATA Act (P.L.  116-130), NTIA released 
detailed maps of broadband availability and needs in June  2021 to contribute to the implementation 
of federal initiatives and programs on broadband deployment.253 NTIA is responsible for overseeing 
more than USD  50 billion in program s relate d to broadband deployment authorized by the 
Consolidated Appropriations Act of 2021 and the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act.254 
4.232.   In October  2018, a Presidential Memorandum on Developing a Sustainable Spectrum 
Strategy for America's Future , requested f ederal agencies to coordinate efforts regarding the 
spectrum repurposing (reassignment) for 5G deployment.255 Since then, FCC has taken several 
actions, including the reallocation of already established license  holders, to make additional spectrum 
at high, mid, and low bands available for 5G services either for exclusive or shared use. The 
attribution, by auction, of several of these bands was completed over the 2019 -21 period. For 
instance, the auction of the n ew flexible -use overlay licenses  (granted for up to 15 years from the 
date of issuance) in the 3.7 GHz band was concluded in February  2021256, and raised a record 
amount of USD  81 billion in bids.257 In January  2021, NTIA released the National Strategy to Se cure 
5G and Next Generation Wireless Communications, as required by the Secure 5G and Beyond Act of 
2020 ( P.L. 116-184).258 The second Annual Report on the Status of Spectrum Repurposing , issued 
in January  2021, highlighted the progress done while recognizi ng that additional spectrum 
repurposing is still needed. At the same time, FCC has modernized its rules to accelerate the 
deployment of next -generation networks and services by removing barriers to infrastructure 
investment, streamlining rules on the use o f utility poles for new network equipment, setting 
deadlines for the review of modifications of the wireless infrastructure, and stating its opposition to 
state and local moratoriums on telecommunications services and facilities deployment.  
4.233.   The Cybersecuri ty and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA) was established by 
P.L. 115-278 in November  2018 to lead cybersecurity and critical infrastructure security programs, 
operations, and associated policy. CISA's mandate includes providing guidance and 
recommendat ions on the security of underseas cables, which carry the bulk of international data 
 
249 States that adopted net neutrality r egulations are California, Colorado, Maine, New Jersey, Oregon, 
Vermont, and Washington. Lide, C. (2022), "State Net Neutrality Laws May Lead to Federal Legislation", The 
National Law Review, Vol.  XI, No.  60, 1 March. Viewed at: https://www.natlawreview.com/article/state -net-
neutrality -laws-may-lead-to-federal -legislation . American Cable Association v. Becerra , Case No.  18-CV-2684. 
Viewed at: https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/7987167/american -cable-association -v-becerra/ ; and New 
York State Telecommunications Association v. James , Case No.  2:21-cv-2389. 
250 The White House (2021), Fact Sheet: Executive Order on Promoting Competition in the American 
Economy , 9 July. Viewed at: https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing -room/statements -
releases/2021/07/09/fact -sheet -executive -order -on-promoting -competition -in-the-american -economy/ . 
251 FCC (2020), The Digital Divide in US Mobile Technology and Speeds . Viewed at: 
https://docs.fcc.gov/public/attachments/DOC -369010A1.pdf . 
252 FCC (2021), 2021 Broadband Deployment Report , GN Docket No.  20-269. Viewed at: 
https://docs.fcc.gov/public/attachments/FCC -21-18A1.pdf . 
253 NTIA, BroadbandUSA, Public Maps & Tools . Viewed at: 
https://broadbandusa.ntia.doc.gov/resources/data -and-mapping . 
254 These programs include, inter alia, the Broadband Equity, Access, and Deployment Program, the 5G 
Fund for Rural Ameri ca, Digital Equity Act Programs, Middle Mile Grant Program, and the Tribal Broadband 
Connectivity Program.  
255 Federal Register  (2018), Vol.  83, No.  210, 25  October, pp.  54513 -54516. Viewed at: 
https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2018/10/30/2018 -23839/developing -a-sustainable -spectrum -
strategy -for-americas -future . 
256 FCC, Auctions Summary . Viewed at: https://www.fcc.gov/auctions -summary . 
257 The deployment of services was delayed  due to  potential risks of interference with aircraft 
communications systems. FAA (2022), "FAA Statements on 5G", 23  February. Viewed at:  
https://www.faa.gov/newsroom/faa -statements -5g. 
258 NTIA (2021), National Strategy to Secure 5G Implementation Plan , 6 January. Viewed at: 
https://www.ntia.doc.gov/files/ntia/publications/2021 -1-
12_115445_national_strategy_to_secure_5g_implementation_plan_and_annexes_a_f_final.pdf .  WT/TPR/S/434 /Rev.1  • United States  
 
- 253 - 
 
  traffic; however, CISA has no formalized policy or procedure regarding data traffic on the grounds 
of cybersecurity. The Department of Homeland Security Data Framework Act  of 2018 ( P.L. 115-331) 
and the Strengthening, and the Enhancing Cyber -capabilities by Utilizing Risk Exposure (SECURE) 
Technology Act (P.L.  115-390) were enacted in December  2018. They  aim at enhancing the 
cybersecurity framework and at mitigating supply chain risks in the acquisition of technology and 
equipment through a strategic plan to be developed by the Federal Acquisition Security Council . 
E.O. 13873 of 15  May 2019, Securing the Information and Communications Technology and Services 
Supply Chain , declared a national emergency to deal with the threat constituted by the unrestricted 
acquisition and use of certain information and communications technology and services 
transactions.259 E.O. 14028 of 12  May 2021, Improving the Nation's Cybersecurity, sought to widen 
cybersecurity efforts throughout all government agencies, and to enhance the security of the supply 
chain for critical software used by the Federal Government.260 
4.234.   In line with the John S. McCain National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2019 
(P.L. 115-232), FCC prohibited the use of Universal Service Funds for the purchase of products and 
services from two manufacturers (Huawei and ZTE) in November  2019.261 The Secure and Trusted 
Communications Networks Act of 2019 ( P.L. 116-352) esta blished a mechanism to prevent the entry 
of communications equipment or services that pose a national security risk to U.S.  networks and to 
mandate their removal if in current use. FCC is responsible for publishing and maintaining a list of 
equipment or se rvices prohibited to be purchased with federal funds. In March  2021, FCC published 
the list of equipment and services covered by this legislation.262 The Secure Equipment Act of 2021 
(P.L. 117-55) require s FCC not to review or approve products on this list.  
4.235.   As part of its response to the COVID -19 pandemic, FCC launched a USD  3.2 billion 
Emergency Broadband Benefit (EBB) program , succeeded by the Connectivity Program on 
31 December  2021, which provide direct support to eligible households for the payment of t heir 
broadband connection. Other FCC programs aimed at mitigating the negative impacts of the 
pandemic include a USD  7.2 billion Emergency Connectivity Fund (ECF) for schools and libraries, 
and a USD  450 million COVID -19 Telehealth Program263, initiated by the CARES Act.  
4.236.   The United  States maintains several Mutual Recognition Agreements for conformity 
assessment of telecommunications equipment (Section  3.3).264 In June  2021, the United  States and 
the European  Union launched the EU -US Trade and Technology Counc il (TTC) that serves as a forum 
for the European  Union and the United  States to coordinate approaches to key global trade, and 
economic and technology issues, and to deepen transatlantic trade and economic relations based on 
shared democratic values. Worki ng groups, such as Technology Standards, Secure Supply Chains, 
and Information and Communication Technology and Services, were established.  
4.4.3   Transport  
4.4.3.1   Air transport and airports  
4.4.3.1.1   Air transport  
4.237.   The Office of the Assistant Secretary for Aviation and Internatio nal Affairs within the  
U.S. Department of Transportation ( DOT) is responsible for a wide spectrum of policies and 
 
259 Feder al Register  (2019), Vol.  84, No.  96, pp.  22689 -22692 . Viewed at: 
https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2019/05/17/2019 -10538/securing -the-information -and-
comm unications -technology -and-services -supply -chain .  
260 Federal  Register  (2021), Vol.  86, No.  93, 17 May, pp.  26633 -26647. Viewed at: 
https://www.federalregister.gov/d/2021 -10460 . 
261 Report and Order,  Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, and Order in the Matter of Protecting 
Against National Security Threats to the Communications Supply Chain Through FCC Programs, Huawei 
Designation, and ZTE Designation , WC Docket 18 -89, PS Docket 19 -351, and PS Dock et 19-352. Viewed at: 
https://docs.fcc.gov/public/attachments/FCC -19-121A1.pdf . 
262 FCC, List of Equipment and Services Covered by Section  2 of the Secure Networks Act. Viewed at: 
http://www.fcc.gov/supplychain/coveredlist .  
263 FCC, Report and Order and Order on Reconsideration in the matter of COVID -19 Telehealth Program 
Promoting Telehealth for Low -Income Consumers , WC Docket No . 20-89 and WC Docket No.  18-213. 
Viewed  at: https://www.fcc.gov/document/fcc -moves -forward -round -2-COVID -19-telehealth -program . 
264 FCC, Equipment Authorizati on – Mutual Recognition Agreements . Viewed at: 
https://www.fcc.gov/general/equipment -authorization -mutual -recognition -agreements . WT/TPR/S/434 /Rev.1  • United States  
 
- 254 - 
 
  regulatory activities relating to domestic and international aviation. DOT and the Office of Aviation 
Negotiations of the Department of State, in close coordination with  USDOC , conducts bilateral and 
multilateral negotiations of international air transport agreements to liberalize commercial aviation 
markets. The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), an operating administration within DOT , is 
responsible for the safety of aircraft and flight operations, including certification of aircraft, pilots, 
instructors, flight crews, and airport operators; air traffic control; designation of airspace; and 
federal assistance to airports. As an operat ional arm of the FAA, the Air Traffic Organization (ATO) 
provides air navigation services in the airspace of the United  States and large portions of the Atlantic 
and Pacific Oceans and the Gulf of Mexico.265 The Department of Homeland Security's Transportat ion 
Security Administration (TSA) aims to ensure air transport security, at U.S. airports, and for all 
domestic and international aircraft operations while maintaining freedom of movement for people 
and commerce.  
4.238.   In 2019, civil aviation in the United  States accounted for 6.5  million jobs, contributed 
USD 779 billion annually to the U.S. economy, and was responsible for 4.2% of GDP.266 In FY2019, 
and prior to any COVID -19-related travel restrictions, FAA guided 27.7  million flights every year, 
consisting of 16.4  million instrument flight rule flights (radar assisted) and 11.3  million 
visual -flight-rule flights (low -flying planes). It manages 520 control towers and 21  air route traffic 
control centers , with more than 14,000 air traffic controllers.267 
4.239.   Four air passenger carriers  (American Airlines, Southwest Airlines, Delta Air Lines, and 
United Airlines ) account for two thirds of the domestic market (65.2% based on domestic revenue 
passenger miles)268 and are among the six largest commercial airlines worldwide.269 In 
February  2022, two low -cost airlines, Spirit and Frontier, announced the intended merger to create 
the fifth -largest U.S. carrier. In September  2021, the Department of Justice, together with Attorneys 
General in six states and the District of Columbia, announced a civil antitrust complaint a gainst  a 
series of agreements between American Airlines and Jet Blue, known as the Northeast Alliance.270 
4.240.   The air transport sector was severely hit by the travel restrictions and quarantine 
requirements re lated to the COVID -19 pandemic since 2020. Based on information reported by 
24 U.S. airlines, the second quarter of 2021 is the first quarter with an after -tax profit since the end 
of 2019; the after -tax net profit in the second quarter of 2021 was USD  1 billion, and losses 
cumulated since the beginning of the pandemic amounted to USD  38.1 billion.271 The sector is 
witnessing a recovery, although airline travel has not yet recovered to levels observed in 2019.  
4.241.   Air freight accounted for less than 0.1%  of tota l freight in terms of weight and represented 
6.3% of total freight value in 2018. In 2018, total freight transported by air was valued at 
USD 1.18 trillion, with international trade via air freight accounting for 88% of that figure (at 
USD 1.04 trillion). U.S. exports (imports) carried via air represented USD  482 billion 
(USD  562 billion) or 29.1% (23.3%) of all U.S. exports (imports).272 Federal Express (FedEx) and 
United Parcel Services (UPS) remain the world's two largest air cargo carriers with fleets of  nearly 
700 and more than 500 aircraft, respectively. Amazon Air is a recent entrant to this market.  
4.242.   Foreign and U.S. carriers are subject to two separate authorizations to provide air transport 
services in the United  States: (i)  an economic authorization in the form of a certificate for interstate 
or foreign passenger and/or cargo authority issued by the Office of the Secretary of Transportation; 
 
265 FAA, Air Traffic Organizat ion. Viewed at: 
http://www.faa.gov/about/office_org/headquarters_offices/ato/ . 
266 IATA (2019), The Value of Air Transport in the United  States. Viewed at:  
https://www.iata.org/contentassets/cf15de08044e49b6b6e1ebf8a3513ed4/economic -studies -usa-eng-
final.pdf . 
267 FAA, Air Traffic by the Numbers . Viewed at: https://www.faa.gov/air_traffic/by_the_numbers/ . 
268 Bureau of Transportation Statistics (BTS). Viewed at: https://transtats.bts.gov .  
269 IATA (2021), World Air Transport Statistics 2021 . Viewed at: 
https://www.iata.org/contentas sets/a686ff624550453e8bf0c9b3f7f0ab26/wats -2021-mediakit.pdf . 
270 Department of Justice (2021), "Justice Department Sues to Block Unprecedented Domestic Alliance 
between American Airlines and JetBlue", 21  September. Viewed at: https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/justice -
department -sues-block-unprecedented -domestic -alliance -between -american -airlines -and. 
271 BTS, U.S. Airlines Sho w First Profit Since COVID -19 in 2nd Quarter 2021 . Viewed at: 
https://www.bts.gov/newsroom/us -airlines -show-first-profit -COVID -19-2nd-quarter -2021. 
272 BTS, Freight Facts and Figures: Moving Goods in the United  States . Viewed at: 
https://data.bts.gov/stories/s/Moving -Goods -in-the-United -States/bcyt -rqmu . WT/TPR/S/434 /Rev.1  • United States  
 
- 255 - 
 
  and (ii)  a safety authorization in the form of an Air Carrier Certificate and Operations Specifications 
issued by FAA.273 The economic authorization is conditional on obtaining the safety authorization. 
Authorizations are not transferable without prior DOT approval.  The United  States has Open Skies 
Agreements (OSAs) with over 130 foreign partners.274 
4.243.   C.F.R. Title 14 contains regulations concerning air transport. U.S. carriers are required to be 
owned and controlled by U.S. citizens; non -U.S. citizens can hold up to 25% of the voting interest 
of any airline providing domestic services. Further nationality requ irements apply for the airline's 
management: the president and not less than two  thirds of the board of directors and other 
managing officers must be U.S. citizens. Since 1991, foreign investors whose country of origin has 
an Open Skies air services agreem ent in effect with the United  States may own up to 49% of total 
equity ownership, comprising both voting and non -voting stock in airlines.275 Except in limited 
circumstances and unless specifically approved by DOT, cabotage can be provided only by 
U.S. carriers (49 U.S.C. 41703(c)) . Only U.S. nationals or residents can serve as crew in domestic 
air passenger and freight service.  
4.244.   Government -financed transportation of passengers or cargo must utilize services supplied 
by a U.S. air carrier, a service supplied by a foreign airline under a U.S. carrier code, or a service 
supplied by a foreign air carrier operating pursuant to an applicable OSA in effect that provides such 
opportunities for government -procured travel.276 In very special circumstances, a foreign car rier can 
be used for transportation between two places outside the United  States  (49 U.S.C.  40118(d) ). 
4.245.   To ensure that small communities continue receiving a minimum scheduled air service after 
deregulation adopted in 1978, DOT subsidizes commuter and certi fied air carriers to 59  communities 
in Alaska and 111 communities in the other 49 U.S. states and Puerto  Rico through the Essential Air 
Service (EAS) program. In general, EAS subsidizes two round trips a day with 30 - to 50-seat aircraft, 
or additional freq uencies with aircraft with 9 seats or fewer, usually to a large - or medium -hub 
airport. Carriers are typically selected for two -, three -, four -, or five -year contracts, DOT 
compensates the carriers in arrears on a per flight -completed basis, and the per  passenger subsidy 
is capped at USD  200, unless the communities are located more than 210  miles from the nearest 
large- or medium -hub airport.  
4.246.   Eligible communities to receive EAS subsidies are defined in 49 U.S.C. 41731(a)(1)(B). 
Requirements include maintain ing an average of 10 enplanements or more per service day, as 
determined by the Secretary of Transportation, during the most recent fiscal year, except for 
locations in Alaska and Hawaii, and for communities more than 175 driving miles away from the 
neares t large - or medium -hub airport.277 To provide more flexibility to communities, an Alternate 
Essential Air Service Program (AEAS) allowing communities to forgo their EAS for a prescribed 
amount of time in exchange for receiving a grant to spend in a variety of ways that might better suit 
their individual needs was established in 2004. In February  2022, seven communities participated 
in the AEAS program, and all have secured public charter air transportation. In 2022, the annual 
contract subsidy rates, includi ng AEAS grants, amounted to USD  321.7  million for communities 
outside Alaska and USD  28.8 million for communities in Alaska.278 
 
273 DOT, Aviation Policy . Viewed at: https://www.transportation.gov/policy/aviation -policy . 
274 The Multilateral Agreement on the Liberalization of International Air Transportation (MALIAT) 
between the United  States, Brunei  Darussalam, Chile, New  Zealand and Singapore  is the only multilateral open 
skies agreement signed by the United  States. DOT, Air Service Agreements . Viewed at: 
https://www.transportation.gov/policy/aviation -policy/international -relations/air -service -agreements . The list 
of OSAs currently applied may be viewed at: https://www.transportation.gov/policy/aviation -policy/open -skies-
agreements -being -applied .  
275 Average  foreign ownership is 15% and only one U.S. carrier (Polar Air Cargo) is owned at 49% by a 
foreign investor, with a 25% voting interest. Government Accountability Office, U.S. Airlines: Information on 
DOT's Oversight of and Stakeholders' Perspectives on Fo reign Ownership . Viewed at: 
https://www.gao.gov/products/gao -19-540r. 
276 Open Skies Agreements that provide foreign carriers the right to carry U.S. Government -funded 
traffic include those with Austra lia, the European  Union, Japan, the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, and Switzerland. 
These rights do not apply to transportation funded by the DOD.  
277 Communities with an average subsidy per passenger of more than USD  1,000 during the most recent 
fiscal year face termination of eligibility, regardless of distance to a hub airport.  
278 DOT, Subsidized EAS Communities – February  2022. Viewed at: 
https://www.transportation.gov/sites/dot.gov/files/2022 -
 WT/TPR/S/434 /Rev.1  • United States  
 
- 256 - 
 
  4.247.   The Small Community Air Service Development Program (SCASDP) is a separate grant 
program designed to help small communities addre ss air service and airfare issues. Among other 
conditions, SCASDP applicants cannot be larger than a small -hub airport, communities cannot 
benefit simultaneously from SCASDP and EAS, air carriers cannot directly benefit from the financial 
assistance throug h SCASDP, and only one project can be supported in each community at any one 
time. Provided in the form of a reimbursable grant, financial assistance can be used as, inter alia, 
revenue guarantees, financial assistance for marketing program s, start -up cost s and studies. In 
January  2022, DOT invited applications for FY2021 and announced reserves of USD  17 million to 
carry out the program . In FY2019, the SCASDP offered a total of USD  18 million in grants to 22 local 
communities in 22 states; individual grants  ranged between USD  450,000 and USD  1 million. In 
response to the COVID -19 pandemic, the duration of existing grants was extended between one and 
five years at the written request of communities.279 
4.248.   To respond to the challenges due to lockdowns and travel r estrictions related to the 
COVID -19 pandemic, the Department of the Treasury authorized three consecutive program s to 
provide assistance to passenger air carriers, cargo air carriers, and aviation contractors. Established 
under the CARES Act, the Consolida ted Appropriations Act of 2021, and the ARP  Act of 2021, these 
program s were directed to provide payroll support of up to USD  54 billion to passenger air carriers, 
and USD  4 billion to cargo air carriers. More than 300  passenger air carriers and nearly 40 cargo air 
carriers benefited from the payroll support.280 In addition to payroll support, Section  4003 of the 
CARES Act authorizes the Treasury to make loans, loan guarantees, and other investments to 
provide liquidity to eligible air carriers. Among other conditions, beneficiaries were required to not 
reduce th eir employment levels by more than 10% until September  2020, to not repurchase stock, 
and to not pay dividends until 12 months after the loan has been repaid. Authorized amounts for 
passenger and cargo air carriers were USD  25 billion and USD  4 billion, re spectively. According to  a 
February  2022 report available, 24 air carriers benefited from a loan ; although USD  21.9 billion were 
authorized for loans, total disbursements only amounted to USD  2.7 billion.281 
4.249.   The Aircraft Certification, Safety, and Accountability Act, enacted in December  2020, 
requires the FAA to implement major changes in its policies and procedures concerning certification 
of commercial passenger and cargo jets and to review its policies for delegating certification authority 
to pr ivate entities under its Organization Designation Authorization (ODA) program. Recent 
developments in air transport regulation include the issuance by the DOT of final rules on the 
definition of unfair or deceptive practices by airlines or ticket agents, t he transport of service animals 
trained to help individuals with disabilities while ensuring safety for the general public, and on 
compensation due to oversales and mishandled baggage in domestic air transportation. The latter 
rule also increased the liabi lity limits for denied boarding and mishandled baggage.  
4.250.   The FAA Reauthorization Act ( P.L. 115-254), signed into law on 5  October  2018, extended 
the FAA's funding and authorities through FY2023 and introduced important legislative changes 
related to, inter alia, increasing safety, improving infrastructure, enabling innovation including the 
pace of Unmanned Aircraft System (UAS) integration, expediting the financing and development of 
airport capital projects, advancing leadership in international aviation sa fety and supersonic aircraft 
policies, addressing aircraft noise, and ensuring safe lithium battery transport. The FAA published 
its Strategic Plan for FY2019 through FY2022; strategic goals include reducing fatalities and serious 
injuries, investing in av iation infrastructure, developing and deploying innovative practices and 
technologies, and reducing regulatory burden.  
 
02/Subsidized%20EAS%20report%20for%20communities%20in%2048%20states_HI_PR_Feb2022.pdf ; and 
DOT, Subsidized EAS Report for Alaska Communities – February  2022. Viewed at: 
https://www.transportation.gov/sites/dot.gov/files/2022 -
02/Subsidized%20EAS%20report%20for%20com munities%20in%20Alaska_Feb2022.pdf . 
279 DOT, Order Awarding Grants in the Matter of the Small Community Air Service Development 
Program , Docket DOT -OST-2020-0231. Viewed at: https://www.transportation.gov/sites/dot.gov/files/2021 -
07/FY2019 -SCASDP -Selection_Order2021 -7-13.pdf . 
280 Department of the Treasury, Airline and National Security Relief Programs . Viewed at: 
https://home.treasury.gov/policy -issues/coronavirus/assistance -for-american -industry/airline -and-national -
security -relief-programs . 
281 Depart ment of the Treasury (2022), Report Under Section  4026(b)(1)(C) of the CARES Act , 
February. Viewed at: https://home.treasury.gov/system/files/136/4026b1CLoanReport0201 2022.pdf . WT/TPR/S/434 /Rev.1  • United States  
 
- 257 - 
 
  4.4.3.1.2   Airports  
4.251.   In 2020, there were 19,633 airports in the United  States; of these, 5,082 were airports for 
public use and 14,551 were smaller a irports for private use.282 There are currently (2022) 
519 commercial service airports, understood as those receiving scheduled passenger service and 
boarding at least 2,500 passengers a year. Almost all commercial airports are owned by local and 
state gove rnments, or by public entities such as airport authorities or multipurpose port authorities. 
In 2019, there were 10.4  million scheduled flights; air passenger traffic was down 60% in 2020.283 
4.252.   Grants for the planning and development of public -use airports in cluded in the National Plan 
of Integrated Airport Systems (NPIAS)284 are made available through the Airport Improvement 
Program, funded through taxes on passenger ticket sales and on aviation fuel. The share of costs 
covered by Program grants depends on the  type of work and the size of the airport. Program -funded 
projects remain subject to Buy American provisions regarding steel and manufactured goods.285 The 
FAA has the authority to waive these preferences under certain conditions: 60% domestic content 
is reached and final assembly of the facility or equipment has occurred in the United  States; steel 
and goods are not domestically produced in a sufficient and reasonably available amount or are not 
of a satisfactory quality; or when the purchase of domestic pr oducts implies a 25% increase in the 
cost of the overall project. In FY2020, USD  3.18 billion were authorized for the Airport Improvement 
Program. The ARP  Act authorized Program grants to be awarded at a 100% federal share.286 
4.253.   Commercial airports controlled  by public agencies may also obtain funds for projects 
enhancing safety, security, or capacity; reducing noise; or increasing air carrier competition through 
the Passenger Facility Charge (PFC) Program. PFC fees may go up to USD  4.50 for every eligible 
passenger per segment (maximum two segments on a one -way trip and four in a round trip). As of 
January  2022, the total amount of PFC funds collected at airports was USD  116.6  billion.287 The 
Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act, enacted in November  2021, pro vided additional funds to be 
invested in runways, taxiways, safety, sustainability, terminal, airport -transit connections, and 
roadway projects under the existing Airport Improvement Program and PFC. A total amount of 
USD 15 billion for airport infrastruct ure grants will be distributed evenly (USD  3 billion per year) 
across FY2022 -26 and will remain available until FY2030 for project completion. The legislation 
foresees an additional USD  5 billion fund (USD  1 billion per year across FY2022 -26) to provide 
competitive grants for airport terminal development and airport -tower projects that address the 
ageing infrastructure of the nation's airports. These grants will cover, inter alia, projects on airport 
rail access, maintenance of air traffic control towers, i ncreased and improved capacity and passenger 
access, replacement of ageing infrastructure, and on energy efficiency.288 
4.254.   In response to the COVID -19 pandemic, several emergency funds were awarded as economic 
relief to eligible U.S. airports. These funds incl ude USD  10 billion from the CARES Airport Program, 
USD 2 billion from the Airport Coronavirus Response Grant Program, and USD  8 billion from Airport 
Rescue Grants. The distribution of grants was structured according to airport size, categories, and 
traffic , and workforce retention requirements apply to awarded airports. Under these program s, 
30 large hub airports, 32 medium -hub airports, and nearly 70 small -hub airports benefited from 
some economic support. The ARP  Act granted USD  8 billion in funds (Airpor t Rescue Grants) to 
eligible U.S. airports to respond to the COVID -19 pandemic. Primary commercial service airports 
(over 10,000 annual passenger boardings) were allocated nearly USD  6.5 billion; an additional 
 
282 Some 300 public and private airports are also used by the military. BTS, Number of U.S. Airports . 
Viewed at: https://www.bts.gov/content/number -us-airportsa . 
283 BTS, Full Year 2020 and December  2020 U.S. Airline Traffic Data . Viewed at: 
https://www.bts.gov/newsroom/full -year-2020-and-december -2020-us-airline -traffic -data. 
284 There are  3,310 airports covered in the NPIAS. The NPIAS contains all commercial service airports, 
all reliever airports, and selected public -owned general aviation airports. Viewed at: 
http://www .faa.gov/airports/planning_capacity/npias/ . 
285 FAA, AIP Buy American Preference Requirements – Airports . Viewed at: 
http://www.faa.gov/airports/aip/buy_american/ . 
286 FAA, Airport Rescue Grants – Airports . Viewed at: 
https://www.faa.gov/airports/airport_rescue_grants/ . 
287 FAA, Passenger Facility Charge (PF C) Monthly Reports – Airports . Viewed at: 
https://www.faa.gov/airports/pfc/monthly_reports/ . 
288 FAA, Bipartisan Infrastructure Law – Airport Terminals Program . Viewed at: 
https://www.faa.gov/bil/airport -terminals . WT/TPR/S/434 /Rev.1  • United States  
 
- 258 - 
 
  USD 800 million was allocated to provide relief from rent and minimum annual guarantees to eligible 
in-terminal airport concessions.  
4.255.   Private ownership of airports in the United  States remains quite limited. Although policies to 
promote airport privatization of publicly owned airports have  been in place for years, participation 
in the process so far has been limited. The Airport Privatization Pilot Program (APPP), established in 
1996, was renamed the Airport Investment Partnership Program (AIPP) by the FAA Reauthorization 
Act of 2018 ( P.L. 115-254). Restrictions on the number and type of public airports participating in 
the AIPP were removed, the joint management of airports by public sponsors and private operators 
was introduced, and the privatization of multiple airports owned by the same public sponsor was 
authorized. Commercial airports can only be leased, while general aviation airports can be sold or 
leased. Airports can partly or wholly outsource the operation and management of facilities to third 
parties. Out of 12 airports in the AIP P, only two airports have completed the privatization process, 
and one of them later reverted to public ownership.289 
4.256.   Slot allocation in the United  States follows the process laid out in IATA's Worldwide Slot 
Guidelines. The FAA establishes runway limitatio ns and runs formal schedule reviews for some 
Level 3 and Level 2 airports.290 The process relies mainly on "historic slots", a two -month minimum 
usage requirement, and other provisions in the FAA order and rules such as FAA High Density Rules.  
4.257.   In the GATS, the United  States submitted commitments with respect to aircraft repairs and 
maintenance, and scheduled MFN exemptions for the sale and marketing of air transport services 
and the operation and regulation of Computer Reservation System services. As a contr acting party 
to the WTO Plurilateral Agreement on Trade in Civil Aircraft, national treatment is granted to the 
acquisition of civil aircraft and related articles originating from other parties of the Agreement.  
4.4.3.2   Maritime transport, port services, and shipb uilding  
4.4.3.2.1   Maritime transport  
4.258.   In 2020, waterborne shipping carried more tonnage (nearly 1.5  billion short tons) in 
U.S. international trade than any other mode of transportation. Tonnage corresponding to exports 
totaled  846 million short tons, while that corr esponding to imports was 638  million short tons.291 
Domestic waterborne tonnage was 492  million short tons, of which 251  million short tons were 
intrastate commerce. Statistics on i nternational maritime cargo include containerized freight, dry 
bulk ships fo r grain and other commodities, tanker ships for energy products, roll -on/roll -off (Ro/Ro) 
ships for cars, trucks, and construction vehicles, and breakbulk ships for a variety of 
non-containerized products, such as rolls of paper or coils of steel, and comm odities.292 In 2020, 
U.S. ports saw more than 465,000  vessel calls, representing more than 10% of the global total. 
Each port has its own arrangement of marine terminals serving different types of cargo.  
4.259.   The United  States considers its Marine Transportation  System (MTS) as critical to national 
security and economic prosperity. The MTS is an integrated network that consists of 25,000  miles 
of coastal and inland waters and rivers serving 361 ports, supports USD  5.4 trillion of economic 
 
289 The Luis Muñoz Marín International Airport, a medium -hub airport in San  Juan, Puerto  Rico, is the 
only commercial service airport operating under private management since 20 13. 
290 In the United  States, the FAA operates slot allocation in three Level 3 airports (John F. Kennedy 
International Airport, LaGuardia Airport, and Ronald Reagan Washington National Airport), and four Level 2 
airports (Chicago O'Hare International Airpor t, Los Angeles International Airport, Newark Liberty International 
Airport, and San Francisco International Airport). Orlando International Airport (MCO) and Seattle -Tacoma 
International Airport, two international passenger terminals, are at Level 2; howev er, they are non -FAA Level 2 
designated airports, and they are managed by local authorities.  
291 U.S. Corps of Engineers, USACE Digital Library (2021), Waterborne Tonnage for Principal U.S. Ports 
and All 50 States and U.S. Territories; Waterborne Tonnages fo r Domestic, Foreign, Imports, Exports and 
Intra-State Waterborne Traffic. Viewed at: 
https://usace.contentdm.oclc.org/digital/collection/p16021coll2/id/7447/rec/ 18. 
292 BTS (2021), On National Maritime Day and Every Day, U.S. Economy Relies on Waterborne Shipping , 
12 May. Viewed at: https: //www.bts.dot.gov/data -spotlight/national -maritime -day-and-every -day-us-
economy -relies -waterborne -shipping . WT/TPR/S/434 /Rev.1  • United States  
 
- 259 - 
 
  activity each year, and accounts for the employment of more than 31  million people.293 The size of 
the U.S. -flagged, privately  owned fleet of self -propelled, cargo -carrying vessels of 1,000 gross tons 
and above continued to decline over the period under review: as of October  2021, there were a total 
of 180 privately owned vessels with a capacity of 8.2  million d ead weight tons, down from 181 
vessels in 2018.294 Of these, 96 were Jones Act eligible. The composition of the fleet was 65  tankers, 
62 container ships, 26 Ro/Ro, 20 general cargo ships, 4 dry bulk ships, and 3 vehicle carriers. Some 
70% of the volume and 40% of the value of goods that the United  States imports and exports move 
by water transportation.295 However, it is estimated that just 1.5% of U.S.  waterborne imports and 
exports by tonnage move on oceangoing commercial vessels registered under the flag o f the 
United  States. Although, the U.S.  domestic water transportation (Jones Act) market is served by 
approximately 41,000 vessels, only about 96 are above 1,000 tons; the rest are small ships, mainly 
tugs and barges, work and supply vessels used in the of fshore oil industry, and specialty vessels 
such as pilot boats, dredge vessels, and others.296 
4.260.   The Maritime Administration (MARAD), under the DOT, is the agency responsible for 
developing program s that promote the use of waterborne transportation and its in tegration with 
other segments of the transportation system, and the viability of the U.S.  Merchant Marine. MARAD 
is charged with carrying out the national policies established by the Merchant Marine Act of 1936 
(see below). MARAD's mission is to foster, pr omote, and develop the maritime industry of the 
United  States to meet the nation's economic and security needs. For this, MARAD supports the 
technical aspects of U.S. maritime transportation infrastructure.297 MARAD also maintains a fleet of 
cargo ships in reserve to provide surge sealift during war and national emergencies. MARAD also  
advocates for the maritime industry; manages assets in support of the DOD, including maintaining 
a fleet of government -owned cargo vessels; administers and funds the Maritime Security Program 
(MSP) and the Voluntary Intermodal Sealift Agreement (VISA) program ; operates the U.S.  Merchant 
Marine Academy (USMMA); provides training ships, funding, and other support for the six State 
Maritime Academies (SMA) (Maine, Massachusetts, N ew York, Texas, California, and Michigan); and 
administers the Federal Ship Financing Program (Title  XI). 
4.261.   The Federal Maritime Commission (FMC) is responsible for regulating ocean -borne liner 
transport, including ocean transportation intermediaries, and fo r supervising the collective activities 
of shipping lines that are not subject to U.S. antitrust laws for both U.S. and foreign operators of 
liner shipping services with fixed schedules. The U.S. Coast Guard, under the Department of 
Homeland Security, is i n charge of regulating maritime transport in areas including vessel safety and 
security, environmental protection, and licensing mariners.  
4.262.   The Merchant Marine Act of 1936, as amended, one of the main laws governing maritime 
transport, provides for the Gove rnment's support of the Merchant Marine. Under the Act, it is 
U.S. maritime transport policy to have a merchant marine: sufficient to carry the waterborne 
domestic commerce and a substantial part of the waterborne U.S. foreign trade and to provide 
shipping  services essential for maintaining the flow of the waterborne domestic and foreign trade at 
all times; capable of serving as a naval and military auxiliary in time of war or national emergency; 
owned and operated as U.S. vessels by U.S. citizens; composed  of vessels constructed in the 
United  States and manned with trained and efficient U.S. personnel; and supplemented by facilities 
 
293 DOT (2020), Goals and Objectives for a Stronger Maritime Nation: A Report to Congress , February. 
Viewed at: https://www.maritime.dot.gov/sites/marad.dot.gov/files/docs/outreach/policy -papers -and-fact-
sheets/12561/n ational -maritime -strategy.pdf . 
294 United  States Maritime Administration (MARAD), United  States‐Flag Privately ‐Owned Merchant Fleet 
Report: Oceangoing, Self ‐Propelled Vessels of 1,000 Gross Tons and Above that Carry Cargo from Port to Port . 
Viewed at: https://www.maritime.dot.gov/sites/marad.dot.gov/files/2021 -12/DS_USFlag -
Fleet_2021_1014_Bundle_0.pdf . 
295 BTS, International Freight Gateways . Viewed at: https://data.bts.gov/stories/s/International -Freight -
Gateways/4s7k -yxvu/ . 
296 DOT (2020), Goals and Objectives for a Stronger Maritime Nation: A  Report to Congr ess, February. 
Viewed at: https://www.maritime.dot.gov/sites/marad.dot.gov/files/docs/outreach/policy -papers-and-fact-
sheets/12561/national -maritime -strategy.pdf . 
297 MARAD, About Us . Viewed at: https://www.maritime.dot.gov/about -us.  WT/TPR/S/434 /Rev.1  • United States  
 
- 260 - 
 
  for building and repairing vessels.  The Act defines as the policy of the United  States to encourage 
and aid the development an d maintenance of a merchant marine.298 
4.263.   Accordingly, one of the main DOT policy objectives is to keep the MTS strong in international 
trade, and, to this end, government programs under the DOT seek to partially compensate carriers 
for the operating cost differential between U.S. -flagged and foreign -flagged vessels. The DOT 
considers that U.S. regulatory compliance is not a major impediment to the competitiveness of the 
U.S. flag registry, but future improvements in the regulatory process and policy may re duce costs 
without decreasing safety risk. To this end, legislation has been enacted requiring the DOT to 
collaborate with other agencies to address challenges within the MTS. Section  169 of the 
Consolidated Appropriations Act of 2014 provided that the DOT , in collaboration with the DOD, 
further develop a national sealift strategy that ensures the long -term viability of the Merchant 
Marine;  Section  603 of the Howard Coble Coast Guard and Maritime Transportation Act of 2014 
(Coble  Act) directed the DOT in co nsultation with the U.S. Coast Guard (USCG) to submit to Congress 
a national maritime strategy to: (i)  identify federal regulations and policies that reduce the 
competitiveness of U.S. -flagged vessels in international transportation markets; and (ii)  include 
recommendations to make U.S. -flagged vessels more competitive in shipping routes between the 
United  States and foreign ports, increase the use of U.S. -flagged vessels to carry cargo imported to 
and exported from the United  States, and enhance the United  States' shipbuilding capability. More 
recently, Section  3513(b) of the John S. McCain National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal 
Year 2019 amended Section  603(a) of the Coble Act to set a deadline of not later than 18 months 
after its enactment for the  submission of the report.  DOT issued a report to Congress with 
recommendations to improve competitiveness and the regulatory framework in early 2020.299 
4.264.   The United  States maintains restrictions to cabotage services of both cargo and passengers 
under the co astwise laws. Section  27 of the Merchant Marine Act of 1920, commonly referred to as 
the Jones Act (46  U.S.C.  55102), reserves cargo service between two points in the United  States 
(including its territories and possessions), either directly or via a forei gn port, for ships that are 
registered and built (or repaired) in the United  States and that are at least 75% owned by a 
U.S. corporation, and on which 100% of the officers and 75% of the crew are U.S. citizens.300 In 
general, the same requirements apply to  the domestic passenger service under the Passenger Vessel 
Service Act of 1886 (46 U.S.C. 55103). As noted above, as of October  2021, 96 oceangoing, 
self-propelled, cargo -carrying and owned vessels of 1,000 gross tons and above with a dead weight 
of 4.8  billion DWT were eligible as Jones Act vessels.301 Cargo carried on routes covered by the Jones 
Act, including coastwise, intercoastal, Great Lakes, and inland shipping, reached 3,467.51  million 
gross tons, accounting for 47.1% of the U.S. domestic cargo carr ied by all means of transport. 
Although the Jones Act limits cargo services to companies that use U.S. -built ships and U.S. 
mariners, it does not prevent foreign companies from establishing shipping companies in the 
United  States if their U.S. affiliates c an meet the law's requirements regarding citizenship, crew, and 
operation of domestic -built vessels. Foreign -owned U.S. companies may also own and operate ships 
flying the U.S. flag in international service. CBP is responsible for enforcing the coastwise l aws, 
including the Jones Act, and can impose fines and penalties on violators.  
4.265.   Waivers to the provisions of the Jones Act and other coastwise laws may be granted under 
limited circumstances. There are two types of Jones Act waiver request processes, one fo r the 
 
298 MARAD (2017), Maritime Administration Strategic Plan Navigating the Fut ure, 2017 -2021. Viewed at: 
https://www.maritime.dot.gov/sites/marad.dot.gov/files/docs/resources/3606/marad -strategic -plan-2017-
2021-20170119 -final-signed.pdf . 
299 To address legislative requirements, DOT/MARAD conducted outreach activities with industry and the 
public from October  2013 through December  2019, which resulted in the development of four strategic goals: 
Goal 1: Strengthen U.S. Maritime Capabilities Ess ential to National Security and Economic Prosperity; Goal 2: 
Ensure the Availability of a U.S. Maritime Workforce that Will Support the Sealift Resource Needs of the 
National Security Strategy; Goal 3: Support Enhancement of U.S. Port Infrastructure and Pe rformance; and 
Goal 4: Enable Maritime Industry Innovation in Information, Automation, Safety, Environmental Impact and 
Other Areas. To achieve these goals, 39 objectives were developed. DOT (2020), Goals and Objectives for a 
Stronger Maritime Nation: A Re port to Congress , February. Viewed at: 
https://www.maritime.dot.gov/sites/marad.dot.gov/files/docs/outre ach/policy -papers -and-fact-
sheets/12561/national -maritime -strategy.pdf . 
300 Under 46 U.S.C. 8103(b)(B), "not more than 25 % of the total number of unlicensed seamen on the 
vessel may be aliens lawfully admitted to the United  States for permanent residence".  
301 MARAD, United  States‐Flag Privately ‐Owned Merchant Fleet Report: Oceangoing, Self ‐Propelled 
Vessels of 1,000 Gross Tons and Above that Carry Cargo from Port to Port . Viewed at: 
https://www.maritime.dot.gov/sites/marad.dot.gov/files/2021 -12/DS_USFlag -Fleet_2021_1014_Bundle_0.pdf . WT/TPR/S/434 /Rev.1  • United States  
 
- 261 - 
 
  Secretary of Defense (SECDEF) regarding military operations and one for all other cases including 
Non-Military Operations (NMO) of DOD. For SECDEF waiver requests, the Secretary of Homeland 
Security is only authorized to grant a waiver if it is consi dered "necessary in the interest of national 
defense" (see 46 U.S.C. 501(a)). CBP has the delegated authority to grant such waivers. SECDEF 
must explain the circumstances for such a measure to Congress within 24 hours of issuance. For all 
other NMO waiver requests, the Secretary of Homeland Security is only authorized to grant a waiver 
if he or she considers it "necessary in the interest of national defense" (see 46 U.S.C. 501(b)). As a 
result, when an NMO waiver request is submitted, the Department of Home land Security screens it 
and makes an assessment regarding whether there is sufficient "interest of national defense" to 
proceed. If the application passes the test, MARAD must make a formal determination regarding the 
availability of coastwise -qualified U .S.-flagged vessel capacity to meet the national defense  
requirements and identify in its determination any actions that could be taken to enable qualified 
United  States flag capacity to meet the need. DHS also consults DOD and other federal government 
agencies in making its determination. After these consultations, the Secretary of Homeland Security 
makes the waiver decision. DHS must report all waivers and valid waiver applications to Congress 
within 48 hours. MARAD is required to inform the Secretary of Transportation when formal advice is 
issued, and post non -availability advice on MARAD's website. Upon completion of the voyage of a 
vessel that operated under a waiver, the owner or operator of the vessel must submit a report to 
MARAD.302 
4.266.   MARAD also admini sters other exemption programs that allow the use of foreign vessels 
domestically under precise circumstances and conditions, such as the Small Passenger Vessels 
waiver program. The Small Vessel Coastwise Endorsement Eligibility Determination 
(46 U.S.C.  12121) authorizes MARAD to administratively exempt the U.S. -build requirements of the 
Passenger Vessel Services Act (for domestic passenger transport) on a case -by-case basis for 
foreign -built small passenger vessels carrying 12 passengers or less. Approxima tely 150 waivers of 
the U.S. build requirement are granted each year  to foreign vessels or vessels of unknown build to 
operate in the United  States as commercial passenger vessels . To benefit from the program, the 
vessel must be at least three years old an d owned by a U.S. citizen. Activities such as carriage of 
cargo, commercial fishing, towing, dredging, and salvage do not qualify for this program. The 
intended use of the vessel must be published in the Federal Register ; after the publication, MARAD 
will determine if the issuance of the waiver will cause an "undue adverse effect" on existing operators 
and shipbuilders. If that is not the case, the waiver is approved.303 Once obtained, the waiver stays 
with the vessel if it is sold. Once a waiver is received , the applicant should file for a Coastwise Trade 
Endorsement for the passenger trade with the USCG. MARAD no longer issues waivers valid for all 
U.S. coasts: the waiver request must list all states of intended operation.  
4.267.   Waivers may also be exceptionally granted under the Launch Barge Exemption Program.  This 
waiver is granted on rare occasions, when the launch of an exceptionally large oil rig or offshore 
platform requires the use of a foreign -built launch barge. 46 U.S.C. 55108 allows MARAD to make 
determ inations allowing the use of these launch barges when no U.S. -built launch barge is available 
or technically capable. Regulations require that the platform owner or operator notify MARAD at least 
21 months prior to the contemplated use of a foreign -built l aunch barge. No new exemptions have 
been requested or granted during the period under review; one exemption was granted in 2014. 
MARAD may also grant waivers under the Anchor Handling Exemption Program. MARAD is authorized 
to make determinations under P.L.  111-281, allowing the use of foreign anchor -handling vessels 
(used to position mobile offshore drilling units) if no U.S. -flagged vessels are available. This program  
only applies to operations in the Beaufort Sea and Chukchi Sea, adjacent to Alaska. Since 2006, 
MARAD has issued decision letters allowing three foreign -flagged vessels into service for a limited 
length of time. No new exemptions have been granted since 2 015. 
4.268.   Under the Aquaculture Program, implemented following  the enactment of the Coast Guard 
Authorization Act of 2010, 46 U.S.C. 12102, the Secretary of Transportation has the discretionary 
authority to issue exemptions allowing documented vessels with regi stry endorsements or 
foreign -flagged vessels to be used in operations that treat aquaculture fish to protect the fish from 
disease, parasitic infestation, or other threats to their health when suitable U.S. vessels are not 
available. The authority has been  delegated to MARAD, which has recently been granting 
 
302 MARAD, Domestic Shipping:  U.S. Shipping in U.S. Waters . Viewed at: 
https://www.maritime.dot.gov/ports/domestic -shipping/domestic -shipping /. 
303 MARAD, Small Passenger Vessel Waiver Program . Viewed at: 
https://www.maritime.dot.gov/ports/domestic -shipping/small -vessel -waiver -program . WT/TPR/S/434 /Rev.1  • United States  
 
- 262 - 
 
  approximately four exemptions of this type per year. MARAD is responsible for determining 
U.S.-flagged Oil Spill Response Vessel (OSRV)  availability before deciding to use a foreign vessel.304 
4.269.   Public Res olution No.  17 of 1934 requires that exports of goods that benefit from export 
loans or credit guarantees from the Export -Import Bank be carried in U.S .-flagged vessels, although 
the vessels of a recipient country where there is no discriminatory treatment  against U.S. -flagged 
carriers may be granted access to 50% of those cargoes. Waivers may be granted, subject to 
reciprocity treatment. Under  10 U.S.C. 2631 Preference for United  States Vessels in Transporting 
Supplies by Sea (2021), 100% of military suppl ies must be transported in available U.S. -flagged 
vessels at rates that are fair and reasonable for U.S. commercial vessels. If availability or cost 
conditions cannot be met, the DOD can issue a waiver. In any case, the DOD is to ensure compliance 
via its contracting officers, and provide a report to Congress each year on the waivers issued and 
the reason for each action. Contractors who violate this law can be suspended or debarred. Cargo 
preference applies not only to the end product but also to component  parts.305 The Cargo Preference 
Act of 1954 requires that at least 50% of the gross tonnage of all government -generated cargo be 
transported on privately owned, domestically flagged commercial vessels to the extent that such 
vessels are available at fair and reasonable rates. Shipments from or to the Strategic Petroleum 
Reserve must use domestically flagged tankers for at least 50% of oil transport.  
4.270.   MARAD also administers two maritime transport programs related to national defense : the 
MSP and the Vol untary Intermodal Sealift Agreement (VISA) program . The MSP, created by the 
Maritime Security Act of 1996 to replace the operating -differential subsidy (ODS), supports the 
U.S.-flagged merchant marine by providing a fixed payment to U.S. -flagged vessel ope rators.306 The 
purpose of the MSP is to provide a fixed payment to U.S. -flagged vessel operators to ensure that a 
limited number of militarily useful vessels from the commercial fleet are available to meet the 
nation's sealift requirements in time of war or  national emergencies. Hence the MSP maintains a 
fleet of commercially viable, militarily useful merchant ships active in international trade. The 
program also provides DOD access to MSP participants' global intermodal transportation network of 
terminals, facilities, logistic management services, and U.S.  citizen merchant mariners. The program  
was originally established for FY1996 through FY2005, to provide funding of up to USD  100 million 
annually for up to 47 vessels and was subsequently prolonged and its  scope extended. In 
February  2022, 60 ships from 14 shipping companies participated in the MSP, totaling  3.3 million 
GT and 2.99  DWT. The Maritime Security Act of 2003 reauthorized the MSP for FY2006 through 
FY2015 and increased the size of the Maritime Se curity Fleet receiving stipend payments to 60 
vessels. The National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) for  FY2013 ( P.L. 112-239) further extended 
the MSP from FY2016 through FY2025.307 Section  3504 of the NDAA for FY2016 (P.L.  114-92) and 
Division  O, Title  1, Section  101(e) of the Consolidated Appropriations Act of 2016 (P.L.  114-113) 
revised the annual MSP payment schedule through FY2021. The authorized funding for FY2018 -20 
was USD  5 million each fiscal year. The NDAA for FY2020 authorized the extension of  existing MSP 
operating agreements through 30  September  2035. All MSP dry cargo ships are enrolled in the VISA 
program , while  MSP tankers are enrolled in the Voluntary Tanker Agreement . 
4.271.   MARAD's  VISA program, authorized under the Defense Production Act of 1 950 as amended 
and the Maritime Security Act of 2003, and approved as a DOD commercial sealift readiness program 
in January  1997, is a partnership between the Government and the maritime industry to provide the 
DOD with assured access to commercial sealift  and intermodal capacity to support the emergency 
deployment and sustainment of U.S.  military forces  during a national emergency or wartime 
operations . The VISA program provides for a time -phased activation of commercial intermodal 
equipment to coincide wi th DOD requirements while minimizing disruption to U.S. commercial 
operations.308 It can be activated in three stages as determined by the DOD with each stage 
representing a higher level of capacity commitment. In Stage III, participants must commit at leas t 
 
304 MARAD, Domestic Shipping:  U.S. Shipping in U.S. Waters. Viewed at: 
https://www.maritime.dot.gov/ports/domestic -shipping/domestic -shipping/ . 
305 MARAD, Cargo Preference . Viewed at: https://www.maritime.dot.gov/ports/cargo -preference/cargo -
preference . 
306 The ODS, granted on a 20 -year contract basis, was provided for U.S. -flagged vessels operating in 
international trade routes in order to compensate for cost differences between U.S. and foreign operators. 
WTO document S/NGMTS/W/2/Add.11, 31  January  1995.  
307 MARAD, Maritime Security Program . Viewed at: https://www.maritime.dot.gov/national -
security/strategic -sealift/maritime -security -program -msp. 
308 MARAD, Voluntary Intermodal Sealift Agreement (VISA) . Viewed at: 
https://www.maritime.dot.gov/national -security/strategic -sealift/voluntary -intermodal -sealift -agreement -visa.  WT/TPR/S/434 /Rev.1  • United States  
 
- 263 - 
 
  50% of their capacity, except dry cargo vessels, which must commit 100%. VISA program 
participants get priority preference when bidding on DOD peacetime cargo. As of February  2022, 
there were 105  oceangoing, self -propelled, cargo -carrying vessels of 1,00 0 gross tons and above in 
the VISA program, with 4.73 million GT and 4.25  million DWT ; MSP participants' vessel capacity 
made up to 70.4% of the VISA capacity.309 
4.272.   The maritime transport sector enjoys antitrust immunity for certain operations. U.S. and 
foreign operators of liner shipping services and marine terminal operators in the United  States 
benefit from exemptions to antitrust laws, including the Sherman and Clayton Acts, with respect to 
their operations in U.S. -foreign ocean -borne trade. Under the  Shipping Act of 1984, as amended by 
the Ocean Shipping Reform Act (OSRA) of 1998, agreements among liner operators and marine 
terminal operators (MTOs) to discuss, fix, or regulate transportation rates, and other conditions of 
service, or cooperate on ope rational matters must be filed with and examined by the FMC. Privately 
owned ocean carriers must publish tariff rates and charges for carriage for trade with foreign 
countries. These rates are reviewed by the FMC, which also reviews the rates of 
government -controlled ocean carriers to ensure that they are not unreasonably low.  
4.273.   The American Fisheries Act of 1998 (AFA), incorporated in the Omnibus Consolidated and 
Emergency Supplemental Appropriations Act of 1999 ( P.L. 105-277), contains U.S. citizen ownershi p 
and control requirements for U.S. -flagged fishing industry vessels of 100 feet and greater in 
registered length. Under the AFA and its implementing regulations (46 C.F.R. Part 356), 75% of the 
ownership and control of the vessel must be vested in U.S. ci tizens at each tier and in the aggregate. 
MARAD is responsible for determining whether vessels are owned and controlled by U.S. citizens and 
eligible for documentation with a fishery endorsement. In addition, MARAD must determine whether 
lenders are qualif ied to hold a preferred mortgage on fishing industry vessels; if that is not the case, 
the lender must utilize an approved mortgage trustee to hold the preferred mortgage for its benefit, 
and MARAD must review the transaction to verify that this does not r esult in a transfer of control to 
a non -citizen.310 The U.S. fishing industry has a Treaty of Friendship, Commerce, and Navigation 
with Denmark, Japan, and the Republic of Korea to foster fair and efficient ownership practices.  
4.274.   MARAD's America's Marine High way Program seeks to improve U.S. economic 
competitiveness while creating and sustaining jobs, including through the reduction of landside 
traffic congestion, the ability to add cost -effective new freight and passenger transportation capacity, 
reducing gre enhouse gas emissions, adding to U.S. strategic sealift resources, and supporting the 
U.S. shipbuilding industry.311 MARAD works closely with public and private organizations to develop 
and expand marine highway service options and facilitate their further integration into the current 
U.S. surface transportation system, especially where water -based transport is the most efficient, 
effective, and sustainable option. Support is also provided through the America's Marine Highway 
Project Grants program . The first round of Marine Highway Grants was awarded in September  2010. 
Since then, Congress has periodically appropriated funds for subsequent rounds, which are 
advertised through Notices of Funding Opportunity published in the Federal Register . Between  2010 
and December  2021, 44 grants were given, for USD  51,704,000.312 
4.275.   Under the Foreign Shipping Practices Act of 1988 (FSPA) (46 U.S.C.  42302), the FMC is 
required to investigate and take action in response to conditions arising from foreign government 
measures or business practices in the U.S. -foreign shipping trades that adversely affect U.S. carriers 
but do not apply to foreign carriers in the United  States. Section  19 of the Merchant Marine Act of 
1920 authorizes the FMC to investigate and take action t o address "unfavorable shipping conditions 
in U.S. foreign commerce and may impose penalties". No action was taken during the period under 
review. The FMC maintains a Passenger Vessel (Cruise) Operator program, with some 200 cruise 
 
309 Based on tonnage, see: MARAD , United  States‐Flag Private ly‐Owned Merchant Fleet Report: 
Oceangoing, Self ‐Propelled Vessels of 1,000 Gross Tons and Above that Carry Cargo from Port to Port . 
Viewed  at: https://www.maritime.dot.gov/sites/marad.dot.gov/files/2021 -12/DS_USFlag -
Fleet_2021_1014_Bundle_0.pdf . 
310 MARAD, American Fisheries Act . Viewed at: https://www.marad.dot.gov/ships -and-
shipping/american -fisheries -act/. 
311 MARAD (2011), America's Marine Highway: Report to Congress . Viewed at:  
https://cms.marad.dot.gov/sites/marad.dot.gov/files/docs/intermodal -systems/marine -
highways/3051/maradamhreporttocongress.pdf . 
312 MARAD, Grants:  American Marine Highways Grants . Viewed at: https://cms.marad.dot.gov/grants -
finances/marine -highways/grants . WT/TPR/S/434 /Rev.1  • United States  
 
- 264 - 
 
  vessels registered in it  and monitored by FMC. The FMC is also engaged in regulatory reform.313 In 
2020, the FMC issued Federal Maritime Commission Proposed FY 2022 -2026 Strategic Goals and 
Stewardship. Among the strategic goals are: (i)  maintaining a competitive and reliable inte rnational 
ocean transportation supply system; (ii)  developing and implementing a comprehensive monitoring 
program to assess covered services; (iii)  protecting the public from unlawful, unfair, and deceptive 
ocean transportation practices, by identifying th em and preventing public harm through licensing 
and financial responsibility requirements; and (iv)  resolving international shipping disputes through 
alternative dispute resolution and adjudication.314 
4.276.   The United  States did not make any commitment on mariti me transport under the GATS and 
maintains an MFN exemption covering restrictions on performance of longshore work by crews of 
foreign vessels owned and flagged in countries that similarly restrict U.S. crews on U.S. -flagged 
vessels from longshore work.  The United  States has bilateral agreements with Brazil, China, the 
European  Union, Japan, the Republic  of Korea, the Russian  Federation, Panama, and Viet  Nam.315 It 
also has a Memorandum of Cooperation with the Philippines.  
4.4.3.2.2   Port services  
4.277.   The United  States has over 360 ports, which are operated by a state, a county, a 
municipality, a private corporation, or a combination of these. The top 50 ports account for roughly 
85% of total U.S. waterborne cargo tonnage. Port congestion, particularly in the U.S. West Coast  
ports continues to be a challenge, requiring an improvement in infrastructure. MARAD provides 
expertise on port investment and finance and assists ports of all sizes and functions with 
infrastructure development, efficiency (agile port systems and cargo h andling), deepwater port 
licensing, and conveyance. MARAD also chairs the National Port Readiness Network (NPRN) Steering 
Group and administers Port Planning Orders for certain commercial ports to support national 
defense . 
4.278.   The United  States does not grant domestic preferential treatment with respect to the use of 
port and harbor  facilities. The United  States maintains an MFN exemption covering restrictions on 
performance of longshore work by crews of foreign vessels owned and flagged in countries that 
similarly restrict U.S. crews on U.S. -flagged vessels from longshore work. The Immigration and 
Nationality Act of 1952, as amended, prohibits non -U.S.-national crewmembers from performing 
longshore work in the United  States, but provides a reciprocity exception.  
4.279.   Under Title I of the Maritime Transportation Security Act of 2002 ( P.L. 107-295), commercial 
vessels arriving in the United  States from a foreign port are required to transmit electronically, in 
advance, information on passengers, crew, and cargo. The Maritime Transportation Security Act of 
2004 amended federal shipping law to  grant U.S. district courts jurisdiction to restrain violations of 
certain port security requirements and authorized the Secretary of Transportation to refuse or revoke 
port clearance to any owner, agent, master, officer, or person in charge of a vessel th at is liable for 
a penalty or fine for violation of such requirements.  
4.280.   The Deepwater Port Act of 1974 as amended (DWPA) ( P.L. 93–627) (33 U.S.C. 1501 et seq.) 
and its regulations (68 FR 36496) establish a licensing system for ownership, construction, opera tion 
and decommissioning of deepwater port structures located beyond the U.S. territorial sea for the 
import and export of oil and natural gas. The Act sets out conditions that license  applicants must 
meet, including environmental ones  and the submission o f detailed plans for construction, operation, 
and decommissioning of deepwater ports . The DWPA also contains detailed procedures for the 
issuance of licenses  by the Secretary of Transportation and prohibits the issuance of a license  without 
the approval of  the Governors of the Adjacent Coastal States. MARAD is responsible for determining 
the financial capability of potential licensees and the citizenship of the applicant, and for issuing or 
denying the deepwater port license . The DWPA establishes a specific  time-frame of 330 days from 
 
313 FMC, FMC Regulations & Statutes . Viewed at: https://www.fmc.gov/about -the-fmc/fmc -regulations -
statutes/ . 
314 FMC (2021), Proposed FY 2022 -2026 Strategic Goals and Stewardship . Viewed at: 
https://www.fmc.gov/wp -content/uploads/2022/01/FY2022 -2026ProposedStrategicGoals.pdf . 
315 MARAD, International Agreements . Viewed at: https://cms.marad.dot.gov/economic -
security/international -agreements . WT/TPR/S/434 /Rev.1  • United States  
 
- 265 - 
 
  the date of publication in the Federal Register  for approval or denial of the deepwater port license .316 
As of end -2021, 28 Deepwater Port License Applications had been filed for approval: 18 for licenses  
to import liquefied nat ural gas (LNG); 2 to export LNG; 6 to export oil; and 2 for licenses  to import 
oil. As of that date, 10 applications had been approved and 7 licenses  had been issued. Of the seven 
licenses  issued, three were issued for currently operational facilities (Lou isiana Offshore Oil Port, 
Neptune, Northeast Gateway); three licenses  had been surrendered (Gulf Landing, Port Dolphin, 
Port Pelican); and one had been issued for a facility that was decommissioned (Gulf Gateway).317 
4.281.   MARAD's Office of Port Infrastructure De velopment is charged with assisting with port, 
terminal, waterway, and transportation network development issues. The Office, inter alia, 
coordinates and manages port infrastructure projects for state, local, and territorial authorities; 
provides discretionary grant funding on a competitive basis for maritime infrastructure projects; 
promotes the use of waterways and ports; coordinates studies, surveys, and investigations of port 
and inter -modal facilities. The Office manages the Port Infrastructur e Development Program (PIDP) , 
a discretionary grant program. Funds for the PIDP are awarded on a competitive basis to projects 
that improve the safety, efficiency, or reliability of the movement of goods into, out of, around, or 
within a port. The FY2019 C onsolidated Appropriations Act provided first -year funds of 
USD 293 million for the program ; the corresponding Acts for FY2020 and FY2021 appropriated 
USD 225 million and USD  230 million, respectively. During 2019 -21, 232 ports applied for funds 
under the PIDP; the 2022 PIDP Notice of Funding Opportunity was published in February  2022 
announcing USD  450 million in funding available for port -related projects.318 
4.282.   The Port of Guam Improvement Enterprise Program is a partnership between the Federal 
Government, t he Government of Guam, and the Port Authority of Guam to modernize and improve 
the Jose D. Leon Guerrero Commercial Port. The Hawaii Harbors Infrastructure Expansion Program 
provides modern commercial harbor  facilities within the state of Hawaii through a partnership 
between the Federal Government and the State of Hawaii, to provide more efficient movement of 
goods and services through the State of Hawaii to foster trade, encourage natural resource exports, 
and create employment opportunities by attracting new industry and new cargo movement.319 
4.4.3.2.3   Shipbuilding and ship repairs  
4.283.   Under U.S. law, only U.S. -built ships qualify for domestic service; the United  States was 
granted an exemption from GATT rules for measures prohibiting the use, sale, or lease of 
foreign -built or foreign -reconstructed vessels in commercial applications between points in national 
waters or the waters of an exclusive economic zone. There are no restrictions on foreign investment 
in U.S.  shipyards or ship -repair facilities but floating dry -docks are eligible for loan guarantees under 
the Federal Ship Financing Program only if owned by U.S. citizens.  
4.284.   MARAD provides financial assistance to shipowners and U.S. shipyards through the Federal 
Ship Financing Program (Title  XI), established pursuant t o Title XI of the Merchant Marine Act of 
1936, as amended. The aim of the Title XI Program is to promote the growth and modernization of 
the U.S. merchant marine and U.S. shipyards. The program provides U.S.  Government -guaranteed 
debt issued by: (i)  U.S. o r foreign shipowners for the purpose of financing or refinancing either 
U.S.-flagged vessels or eligible export vessels constructed, reconstructed, or reconditioned in 
U.S. shipyards; and (ii)  U.S. shipyards for the purpose of financing advanced shipbuildi ng technology 
and modern shipbuilding technology of a privately owned, general shipyard facility located in the 
United  States. It also assists U.S. shipyards with modernizing their facilities for repairing vessels. 
 
316 MARAD, About the Deepwater Port Act . Viewed at: https://cms.mara d.dot.gov/ports/deepwater -
ports-and-licensing/about -deepwater -port-act. 
317 MARAD, Overview of Deepwater Port Applications Reviewed by the Maritime Administration . 
Viewed  at: https://cms.marad.dot.gov/ports/deepwater -ports-and-licensing/approved -applications . 
318 MARAD, Notice of Funding Opportunity for the Maritime Administration's Port Infrastructure 
Development Program (PIDP) under the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act ("Bipartisan Infrastructure 
Law") . Viewed at: https://www.maritime.dot.gov/sites/marad.dot.gov/files/2022 -
02/2022%20PIDP%20NOFO%20FINAL.pdf . 
319 MARAD, Office of Port Infrastructure Development . Viewed at: https://cms.marad.dot.gov/office -
port-infrastructure -development/port -and-terminal -infrastructure -development/office -port-and. WT/TPR/S/434 /Rev.1  • United States  
 
- 266 - 
 
  Since the obligations are guaranteed by t he Government, the repayment term allowed is longer and 
the interest rates lower than those available from the commercial lending market.320 
4.285.   Title XI, by offering long -term debt repayment guarantees, encourages U.S. and foreign 
shipowners to obtain new vessels from U.S. shipyards. However, applicants for a project involving a 
vessel to be operated in the U.S. coastwise trade must demonstrate U.S. citizenship for the owner 
and any bareboat charterer. Additionally, if the applicant is a partnership or limi ted liability company, 
governing agreements for the entities must be in a form and substance satisfactory to MARAD. The 
guarantee is based on the actual cost of the vessels or the technology used in shipbuilding, which 
generally includes the cost of constr uction, reconstruction, or reconditioning of the vessel, together 
with construction period interest and the guarantee fee. The guarantees are up to 87.5% of the 
value of the project, for up to 25 years depending on the type of project. The approximate subs idy 
available for Title XI was USD  35.4 million, as of April  2021. Loan guarantees based on the average 
risk for projects MARAD previously guaranteed could support some  USD 487 million in loan 
guarantees. As of January  2022, there were six applications pen ding for a total of USD  569.2  million; 
in five cases, the review was in progress; in one case, it had been completed and was pending 
recommendation.321 As of end -December  2020, Title XI guarantees totaling  USD 2.49 billion were 
outstanding.322 
4.286.   The Capital Construction Fund (CCF) and Construction Reserve Fund (CRF) allow 
U.S. citizens owning or leasing vessels to obtain tax benefits for the construction, reconstruction, or 
acquisition of vessels. CCF vessels must be U.S. built and documented under U.S. laws for operation 
in foreign, Great Lakes, Short -Sea Shipping, or non -contiguous domestic trade or fisheries. The CCF 
program  was created to help owners and operators of U.S. -flagged vessels secure the capital 
necessary to modernize and expand the U.S. Merchant Marine. The program  encourages 
construction, reconstruction, or acquisition of vessels through the deferment of federal income taxes 
on certain deposits of money or other property placed into a CCF.  
4.287.   The C RF scheme provides tax -deferral benefits to U.S. -flagged operators with respect to 
gains attributable to the sale or loss of a vessel, provided the proceeds are used to expand or 
modernize the U.S. merchant fleet. Its main purpose is to promote the constru ction, reconstruction, 
reconditioning, or acquisition of merchant vessels that are necessary for national defense  and to the 
development of U.S. commerce. A CRF may be established by any U.S. citizen who owns, in whole 
or in part, a vessel or vessels opera ting in the foreign or domestic commerce of the United  States 
or in the fisheries. Owners of vessels operating in the fisheries of the United  States, its territories, 
and possessions are also eligible. Deposits into the CRF must be made within 60 days afte r receipt 
of the proceeds of the sale of a vessel. Tax benefits are only granted if the funds deposited in the 
CRF are expended for the construction, reconstruction, or acquisition of a new vessel or vessels. The 
new vessel ( built not more than five years prior to acquisition) must be constructed or reconstructed 
in the United  States and documented under U.S. laws. Vessels must be suitable for use on the high 
seas or Great Lakes. Within three years from the date of any deposit into a CRF, the funds must be 
used for the construction or acquisition of a new vessel, no less than 12.5% of the price of the vessel 
must be expended or irrevocably obligated, and no less than 5% of the work on the vessel must be 
completed. MARAD must determine that the price of the n ew vessel is fair and reasonable.323 
4.288.   The Manufacturing Extension Program ( P.L. 108-87, Section  8062) makes U.S. naval 
shipyards eligible to participate in any manufacturing extension program  financed by funds 
appropriated by any Act.  The Small Shipyard Gran t Program , Section  3501 of P.L. 116-92, 
authorizes MARAD to provide assistance in the form of grants to make capital and related 
improvements in small shipyards and to provide training for workers in shipbuilding, ship repair, and 
associated industries. Th e Consolidated Appropriations Act of 2021 appropriated USD  20 million to 
 
320 MARAD, Federal Ship Financing Program (Title XI) . Viewed at: 
https://www.maritime.dot.gov/grants/title -xi/federal -ship-financing -program -title-
xi#:~:text=The%20Federal%20Ship%20Financing%20Program,merchant%20marine%20and%20U.S.%20shi
pyards . 
321 MARAD, Pending Applications . Viewed at: https://www.maritime.dot.gov/gran ts/title -xi/pending -
applications . 
322 MARAD. Viewed at: https://www.maritime.dot.gov/grants/title -xi/outstanding -guarantees  
323 MARAD, Construction Reserve Fund . Viewed at: https://cms.marad.dot.gov/grants/construction -
reserve -fund. WT/TPR/S/434 /Rev.1  • United States  
 
- 267 - 
 
  the Program, of which the total amount available for grant awards was USD  19.6 million.324 The 
purpose of the Program is to foster efficiency, and quality ship construction, repair, and 
reconfiguration in small shipyards across the United  States in addition to fostering employee skills 
and enhanced productivity related to shipbuilding, ship rep air, and associated industries. Grants are 
available for: (i)  capital and related improvements to qualified shipyard facilities that will be effective 
in fostering efficiency, competitive operations, and quality ship construction, repair, and 
reconfigurati on; and (ii)  training projects that would be effective in fostering employee skills and 
enhanced productivity related to shipbuilding, ship repair, and associated industries. No  more than 
25% of the funds available will be awarded to shipyard facilities in  one geographic location that have 
more than 600 production employees. Grants are capped at 75% of the project's estimated cost and 
are available to facilities with fewer than 1,200 production employees.  
4.289.   As at end -2021, there were 124 shipyards and ship -repair facilities in the United  States. The 
order book was estimated at 547 commercial and military vessels at more than USD  110.3  billion. 
U.S.-flagged vessels repaired in most foreign countries face a 50% ad valorem  duty, assessed on 
the cost of equipment and non -emergency repairs in foreign countries, although exemptions apply 
under certain circumstances  in accordance with U.S. bilateral agreements . U.S. -owned 
foreign -flagged vessels are not subject to any duty.  
4.4.4   Medical professional and health services  
4.4.4.1   Overview  
4.290.   The U.S. healthcare sector is one of the largest in the world, and the United  States  has the 
highest expenditure on health as a percentage of GDP325; total national health expenditure amounted 
to USD  4.1 trillion in 2020, an increase of 9.7% from 2019 . Employment in the sector is also 
significant, 14.6  million in 2020, or 11% of the domestic workforce.326 The domestic sector is large 
with limited but growing trade as exports reached USD  1.3 billion in 2020. Potential exists for future 
growth and opportu nity, in part driven by advancements in technology, regulatory enhancements, 
and measures taken during the COVID -19 pandemic. This section covers professional medical and 
healthcare services and approximates as much as possible the classification used unde r GATS.327 
4.291.   There is no federal healthcare system in the United  States, although the Federal Government 
does have a significant role in certain areas. The private sector is the predominant provider of health 
services in the United  States. Hospitals, of which  there are over 6,000, are mainly non -profit 
community hospitals (48.5%), for -profit community hospitals (20.2%), and state, local, and federal 
government hospitals (19%).328 The Federal Government is mainly involved in Medicare, providing 
health coverage f or persons over 65  and persons under 65 with certain disabilities, and others with 
end-stage renal disease ; Medicaid  (jointly funded by the Federal Government and the states but 
mostly administered by the states) , providing health coverage to persons with disabilities and with 
low income; the Children's Health Insurance Program for low -cost health coverage to certain children 
pursuant to income levels; and health services to the active and retired military.329 There has been 
a gradual increase in total healt h care expenditure over the last few years, as well as in all the main 
categories of expenditure, e.g.  hospitals and dental services (Box  4.1). An exception to this is private 
health insurance spending, which declined 1.2% in 2020 compared to 2019. Health expenditures by 
the Federal Government experienced a 36% increase between 2019 and 2020, largely due to the 
 
324 MARAD, Small Shipyard Grant Program: Notice of Small Shipyard Grants Application Deadlines , 
Federal Register  (2021), Vol. 86, No.  13, 22  January, pp.  6733-6737. Viewed at: 
https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR -2021-01-22/pdf/2021 -01359.pdf . 
325 OECDstat, Health Expenditure and Financing . Viewe d at: 
https://stats.oecd.org/Index.aspx?ThemeTreeId=9 .  
326 Full-time equivalent employees in hospitals, ambulatory healthcare, and nursing and residential care 
facilities. BEA statistical information, Table  6.5D: Full -Time Equivalent Employees by Industry. Viewed at: 
https://apps.bea.gov/iTable/iTable.cfm?reqid=19&step=3&isuri=1&nipa_table_list=197#reqid=19&step=3&isu
ri=1&nipa_table_list=197 .  
327 Under the GATS Services  Sectoral Classification List (MTN.GNS/W/120), medical professional services 
are covered under 1. Business, A. Professional Services, h. Medical and dental services, and j. Services 
provided by midwives, nurses, physiotherapists and para -medical personnel (CPC 9312, 93191); and health 
services are covered under 8. Health Related and Social Services, A. Hospital services, and B. Other human 
health services (CPC 9311 and 9319, other than 93191).  
328 American Hospital Association (AHA), Fast Facts on U.S.  Hospit als, 2022 . Viewed at: 
https://www.aha.org/statistics/fast -facts-us-hospitals .  
329 Includes the Military Health System and Veterans Health Administration, including hospitals.  WT/TPR/S/434 /Rev.1  • United States  
 
- 268 - 
 
  COVID -19 pandemic, to almost USD  1.5 trillion. This was the highest annual growth rate on record 
since the statistics series commenced in the mid -1980s. The Federal Government is the largest 
contributor to total healthcare expenditures, mainly due to payments under Medicaid and Medicare, 
which together accounted for over half of federal expenditures.  
4.292.   The COVID -19 pandemic has affected the sector in ma ny ways. There was an initial decline 
in revenues and employment, followed by rising costs, and medical supply chain issues. The 
Government responded with a number of COVID -19-specific appropriation measures that supported 
the Public Health Service sector directly or through an emergency fund (Public Health and Social 
Services Emergency Fund (PHSSEF)).330 These measures are wide ranging and include, inter alia, 
funds for vaccine and drug development, COVID -19 testing, manufacturing of medical products, 
suppo rt for healthcare providers. Another development during the review period was increased 
healthcare coverage. While the United  States does not have universal healthcare per se , most of the 
population is covered by private or government healthcare insurance or program s. With the entry 
into force of most provisions of the Affordable Care Act (ACA) in 2014 and revisions to Medicaid 
eligibility, the share of the U.S. population wit hout health insurance has gradually declined; although 
this share increased slightly in the 2018 -20 period, it remains below pre -ACA levels. As of 2020, 
some 60.7% of the population was covered by private insurance, while 9.5% were uninsured.331 
Box 4.1 Key healthcare facts, 2020  
National Health Expenditure (NHE)  
 -by federal  
 -by households  
 -by private business  
 -by state and local  
 -by other private revenues  
NHE per person  USD 4,124  billion  
USD 1,499  billion (36%)  
USD 1,078  billion (26%)  
USD 691 billion (17%)  
USD 588 billion (14%)  
USD 269 billion (7%)  
USD 12,530  
Hospital expenditures  
Physician and clinical services expenditure  
Retail prescription drug expenditures  
Nursing care expenditures  
Dental service expenditures  USD 1,270  billion  
USD 810 billion  
USD 348 billion  
USD 197 billion  
USD 142 billion  
Licensed physicians  
 Graduates of U.S. and Canadian medical schools  
 Graduates of international medical schools  
Licensed RN/PN nurses  1,018,776  
783,639 (77%)  
233,177 (23%)  
6,033,911  
Density of doctors per 10,000 population (2019)  
Density of nursing and midwifery personnel per 10,000 population (2019)  
Density of dentists p er 10,000 population  (2019)  26 
157 
6 
Source:  U.S. Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS), National Health Expenditure Fact Sheet . 
Viewed at: https://www.cms.gov/Research -Statistics -Data-and-Systems/Statistics -Trends -and-
Reports/NationalHealthExpendData/NHE -Fact-Sheet ; WHO (2021), World Health Statistics, 2021 . 
Viewed at: https://apps.who.int/iris/bitstream/handle/10665/342703/9789240027053 -eng.pdf ; 
Federation of St ate Medical Boards (FSMB), Physician Licensure . Viewed at: 
https://www.fsmb.org/u.s. -medical -regulatory -trends -and-actions/u.s. -medical -licensing -and-
disciplinary -data/physician -licensure/ ; National Council of State Boards of Nursing, The National 
Nursing Database . Viewed at: https://www.ncsbn.org/national -nursing -database.htm . 
4.4.4.2   Regulatory framework  
4.293.   The U.S. healthcare regulatory framework involves a web of federal, state, local, and private 
bodies.332 All healthca re professionals and care are regulated, sometimes by both government and 
 
330 Division A of the Coronavirus Preparedness and Response Supplemental Appropriations Act of 2020 
(P.L. 116-123); Division A of the Families First Coronavirus Res ponse Act (FFCRA) ( P.L. 116-127); Division B of 
the CARES Act ( P.L. 116-136); Division B of the Paycheck Protection Program and Health Care Enhancement 
Act (PPPHCEA) ( P.L. 116-139); Division M of Consolidated Appropriations Act of 2021 ( P.L. 116-260); and the 
ARP Act. The total amount allocated through these first five Acts and the PHSSEF was USD  305.6  billion. The 
ARP Act has USD  1.9 trillion allocated in total, including other stimulus measures.  
331 WTO Secretariat calculation, based on: CMS, National Healt h Expenditure Fact Sheet,  Historical 
National Health Expenditure Accounts, NHE Table  22. Viewed at: https://www.cms.gov/Research -Statistics -
Data-and-Systems/Statistics -Trends -and-Reports/NationalHealthExpendData/NationalHealthAccountsHistorical .  
332 Field, R.I., Department of Health Management and Policy, Drexel University, Regulation of Health 
Care in the United  States: Complexity, Confrontation and Compromise . Viewed at: 
https://anaisihmt.com/index.php/ihmt/article/download/45/38/ .  WT/TPR/S/434 /Rev.1  • United States  
 
- 269 - 
 
  non-government entities. The regulatory framework for professional medical personnel, in particular 
doctors, nurses, and dentists, is mainly the responsibility of state licensing boa rds, which accredit 
personnel or grant licenses  to allow them to practice.333 While there are normally restrictions 
requiring healthcare workers to be licensed in each state in which they intend to practice, this has 
been relaxed in some states recently as part of the public health emergency due to the pandemic.334 
In addition, doctors and other medical professionals who treat Medicare patients must also meet 
certain federal standards in order to be reimbursed through the program, and doctors who practice 
through hospitals or health maintenance organizations may also face additional regulations. The 
American Medical Association (AMA), a private professional association of registered doctors, also 
plays a role in accreditation or standard setting with respect t o certain aspects of the medical 
profession or professionals.335 
4.294.   Hospitals, like medical professionals, are regulated at the state level. In addition, federal 
programs such as Medicare and Medicaid  impose conditions of reimbursement that have the effect 
of mandating compliance with specified standards. Government reimbursement program s determine 
compliance through certification, a process in which the evaluation is frequently delegated to 
non-profit accreditation organizations. The largest of the accrediting  organizations for hospitals is 
the Joint Commission.336 The establishment of hospitals and other health facilities, e.g.  out-patient 
and long -term care facilities, is also controlled by state Certificate of Need (CON) laws. At present, 
35 states have CON l aws that regulate various aspects including construction, establishment, capital 
expenditures, acquisition of medical equipment, provision of services, and moratoriums.337 Many 
CON laws were established to avoid costly duplicative services in a particular a rea and also ensure 
services to underserved areas.  
4.295.   The regulation of telemedicine or telehealth338 is particularly important as it can influence 
the mode and cross -border tradability of healthcare services beyond state or national borders. Since 
the COVID -19 pandemic, the United  States has liberalized many domestic telehealth restrictions, 
mostly on a temporary basis. The Federal Government has several laws or statutes that define 
telemedicine or telehealth and its role in the provision of healthcare. The He alth Care Safety Net 
Amendments Act of 2002 ( P.L. 107-251) introduced the term "telehealth " when it directed the 
Department of HHS to establish demonstration projects on the use of telehealth care services. 
Provisions in the Indian Health Care Improvement Act ( P.L. 94-437) also used the term 
"telemedicine " but without specifically indicating its use. The rules under the Veterans Administration 
allow for telehealth by its healthcare professionals and in particular allow it across state borders  
(38 U.S.C. 173 0C). The federal rules of Medicare have increased its use recently (see section below) 
but do not allow payment for health services that are not furnished within the United  States .339 This 
 
333 Although licensure is by individual sta tes, a 2015 Interstate Medical Licensure Compact was agreed 
upon whereby 29 state medical boards (and Guam and the District of Columbia) are joined together to 
facilitate licensure across several states. The states have agreed to adopt common rules and pro cedures to 
streamline the process of obtaining medical licenses  in multiple states. As at 2020, more than 10,000 licenses  
have been issued through this process. FSMB, About Physician Licensure . Viewed at: 
https://www.fsmb.org/u.s. -medical -regulatory -trends -and-actions/guide -to-medical -regulation -in-the-united -
states/about -physician -licensure/ . In additio n, there are several other Compacts facilitating licensure for 
nurses, psychologists, physical therapists, EMS workers, occupational therapists, and speech language 
therapists in obtaining licensure in multiple states. HHS, Telehealth Licensing Requirement s and Interstate 
Compacts . Viewed at: https://telehealth.hhs.gov/providers/policy -changes-during -the-COVID -19-public -
health -emergency/telehealth -licensing -requirements -and-interstate -compacts/ .  
334 The Uniform Emergency Volunteer Health Practitioner Act allows states that have adopted it to 
recognize out -of-state licenses  for certain health care workers during a state of emergency.  
335 Field, R.I., Department of Health Management and Policy, Drexel University, Regulation of Health 
Care in the United  States: Complexity, Confrontation and Compromise.  Viewed at: 
https://anaisihmt.com/index.php/ihmt/article/download/45/38/ . 
336 The Joint Commission is a non -profit tax -exempt organization that accredits health care 
organizations and programs. T he majority of state governments recognize Joint Commission accreditation as a 
condition of licensure for the receipt of Medicaid and Medicare reimbursements. Member health care 
organizations are subject to a three -year accreditation cycle, and laboratorie s are surveyed every two years.  
337 As of 2021, 13  states had moratoriums on certain types of healthcare. National Conference of State 
Legislatures, Certificate of Need (CON) State Laws . Viewed at: https://www.ncsl.org/research/health/con -
certificate -of-need-state-laws.aspx .  
338 U.S. legislation uses both terms and defines them in various laws and statutes.  
339 Section  1862(a)(4) of the Social Security Act and 42 C .F.R. 411.9. There are limited exceptions to 
the payment exclusion that do not involve telehealth. They allow Medicare to pay for inpatient hospital services 
and physician and ambulance services furnished in connection with covered inpatient hospital services ou tside 
 WT/TPR/S/434 /Rev.1  • United States  
 
- 270 - 
 
  payment exclusion remains in effect during a public health emergency  and is not affected by 
telehealth flexibilities put in place for the COVID -19 pandemic. Medicaid, as regulated by the Federal 
Government and implemented by the states may cover services while a beneficiary is abroad.340 
However, states are prohibited from making direct payments to foreign institutions or entities.  
4.296.   All U.S. states have some type of telehealth/telemedicine policy and regulation; however, 
they differ by state.341 Telemedicine is generally limited by regulations in the type of healthcare 
service; by modality, i.e. using video, telephone, or other technologies; and by whether prescribing 
controlled substances is allowed, limited, or prohibited. Forty -nine states req uire that telemedicine 
be conducted by physicians licensed in the state where the patient is located.342 Some states require 
special licenses  or authorizations to conduct telemedicine specifically. Most states also have detailed 
rules on the practice of telemedicine by out -of-state physicians. As of 2021, all states except three 
required a full license  or telemedicine permit in that state to pe rform telemedicine. However, some 
of these requirements were suspended due to temporary COVID -19 measures (see  below).343 Since 
2020, many states are considering making some arrangements  permanent. For example, in 2021, 
43 state bills were enacted that addr essed cross -state licensing.344 A recent study by the industry 
on regulatory overload in the healthcare sector notes that hospitals, health systems, and post -acute -
care providers must comply with at least 629 separate regulatory measures, across 9 domains a t 
the federal level, leading to regulatory compliance costs of USD  39 billion annually.345 
4.4.4.2.1   Recent developments and issues  
4.297.   In March  2020, the CARES Act came into force in response to the pandemic and its impact 
on the economy and public health. In Part II, i n support of healthcare providers, it provided funding 
and grants for telehealth networks and telehealth resource centers  that serve medically underserved 
populations. Financial support of USD  100 billion was also allocated in the Act to healthcare provide rs 
who had to cut back on elective procedures, had forgone revenues, or otherwise faced financial 
hardship. These funds were established and distributed through the Provider Relief Fund (PRF). The 
Act also allowed for some accommodations or flexibilities t o use telehealth instead of in -person 
meetings where there was a requirement under existing rules. Additionally, it provided 
USD 200 million to the FCC for telecommunications services and related items in support of the 
efforts of the provision of teleheal th services.  
4.298.   In response to the CARES Act funding, an FCC Report and Order of April  2020 established 
the COVID -19 Telehealth Program in response to the CARES Act funding, which provides 
reimbursements to eligible health care providers for authorized expens es and services; these include 
telecommunications services and broadband connectivity services, information services, and 
connected devices/equipment.346 In the same Report and Order, the FCC also set up a three -year 
Connected Care Pilot Program that provid es USD  100 million funding for selected pilot projects 
covering 85% of eligible costs of broadband connectivity, network equipment, and information 
services necessary for connected care patient services to eligible low -income persons and to 
 
of the U nited States in some instances. Specifically, Medicare may pay only if: (i) at the time of an emergency, 
the beneficiary is in Canada traveling between Alaska and another state without unreasonable delay and by the 
most direct route; (ii) the beneficiary is in the United  States  when there is an emergency, and the foreign 
hospital was closer to the site of the emergency than the nearest U.S. hospital that can treat their medical 
condition; (iii) the beneficiary lives in the United  States , and t he foreign hospital is closer to their home than 
the nearest U.S. hospital that can treat their medical condition, regardless of whether it is an emergency . 
340 Medicaid (2010), The Affordable Care Act and SMDL #10 -026. Viewed at: 
https://www.medicaid.gov/federal -policy -guidance/downloads/smd10026.pdf .  
341 CCHP. Telehealth policies by state for rules of each jurisdiction can be viewed at: 
https://www.cchpca.org/all -telehealth -policies/ .  
342 FSMB, Telemedicine Policies . Viewed at: https://www.fsmb.org/siteassets/advocacy/key -
issues/telemedicine_policies_by_state.pdf .  
343 FSMB, Regulations on the Practice of Telemedicine and Out -of-State Physicians . Viewed at: 
https://www.fsmb.org/siteassets/advocacy/regulatory/additional -policies/regulat ions-on-the-practice -of-
telemedicine -and-out-of-state-physicians.pdf .  
344 CCHP (2021), 2021 in Review: State Telehealth Policy Legislative Roundup . Viewed at: 
https://mailchi.mp/cchpca/2021 -in-review -state-telehealth -policylegislative -roundup . 
345 AHA (2017), Regulatory Overload . Assessing the Regulatory Burden on Health Systems, Hospitals 
and Post -acute Care Providers , October  2017. Viewed at: https://www.aha.org/system/files/2018 -
02/regulatory -overload -report.pdf .  
346 FCC, Report and Order, 20 -44. Viewed at: https://www.fcc.gov/document/fcc -fights -COVID -19-
200m -adopts -long-term-connected -care-study .  WT/TPR/S/434 /Rev.1  • United States  
 
- 271 - 
 
  veterans. In De cember  2020, the Consolidated Appropriations Act of 2021 provided additional 
funding of USD  250 million to the COVID -19 Telehealth Program. It also made other 
healthcare -changes through Division CC on Health Extenders by extending or making permanent 
the e xisting temporary COVID -19 provisions that allow Medicare beneficiaries who do not live in 
rural areas to receive mental health services provided via telehealth. The Paycheck Protection 
Program and Health Care Enhancement Act (PPPHCEA) (P.L.  116-139) added  additional funds, 
USD 75 billion, to the PRF.  
4.299.   The United  States made unprecedented use of telehealth in 2020 during the COVID -19 
pandemic.347 Both federal and state regulators made use of emergency measures or otherwise 
waived existing provisions to allow greater use of telehealth and other measures to mitigate the 
situation caused by the pandemic. The Federal Government implemented a  large number of 
temporary waivers and related policy measures that predominantly impact the federal programs 
Medicaid and Me dicare. The Secretary of the Department of HHS, using Section  1135 of the Social 
Security Act (SSA), waived or temporarily modified provisions per the public health emergency 
declaration status. The waivers impacted most areas across the healthcare spectru m including many 
with a particular effect on professional services or the ability to provide healthcare through new or 
novel means, i.e. telemedicine (Box  4.2). While many of these measures were temporary, the 
Centers for Medicaid and Medicare Services hav e extended some telehealth services under Medicaid 
and Medicare unconditionally until the end of 2023.  U.S. states have also responded by waiving or 
amending telemedicine rules to alleviate pressure on the healthcare system. These telehealth 
flexibilities are monitored by the Federation of State Medical Boards (FSMB). As at January  2022, 
26 states had some form of telehealth waiver in place due to the pandemic.348 
Box 4.2 Selected HHS federal waivers and policy changes due to COVID -19 impacting 
supply of medical services  
Medicare telehealth waivers   
Patient location  Provision to offer telehealth services to patients located in their homes and 
outside of designated areas  
Practicing across state lines  Allowing health care providers to furnish telehealth services using 
communications technology where the patient is located, subject to state 
requirements  
Patient -provider relationship  Providers may see new and established patients using communications 
technology  
Types of telehealth services covered  Expands the services that can be provided via telehealth. Of the 272 services 
authorized in 2022, 98 were added temporarily due to the pandemic  
Eligible telehealth providers  Eligible Medicare providers are eligible to bill for telehealth  
Medical staff   
Right to continue practicing for those 
whose privileges will expire  42 C.F.R. 482.22(a)(1) -(4) is waived  
Right to practice prior to full medical 
governing body appr oval 42 C.F.R. 482.22(a)(1) -(4) is waived  
Public Readiness and Emergency Preparedness Act (PREP Act) (P.L.  109 148)  
Telehealth cross -state licensing  Allows cross -state licensing of healthcare personnel using telehealth to administer 
COVID -19-covered countermeasures  
Source:  HHS, Medicare and Medicaid Policies. Viewed at: https://telehealth.hhs.gov/providers/policy -
changes -during -the-COVID -19-public -health -emergency/medicare -and-medicaid -
policies/#:~:text=Th e%20Centers%20for%20Medicare%20%26%20Medicaid%20Services%20anno
unced%20a%20waiver%20allowing,home%2C%20even%20across%20state%20lines ; CMS, 
Coronavirus Waivers & Flexibilities . Viewed at: https://www.cms.gov/about -cms/emergency -
preparedness -response -operations/current -emergencies/coronavirus -waivers ; and CCHP, Federal 
Telehealth Laws. Viewed at: https://www.cchpca.org/federal/ . 
 
347 CCHP (2021), 2021 in Review: State Telehealth Policy Legislative Roundup . Viewed at: 
https://mailchi.mp/cchpca/2021 -in-review -state-telehealth -policylegislative -roundup .  
348 FSMB, U.S. States and Territories Modifying Licensure Requirements for Physicians in Response to 
COVID -19. Viewed at: https://www.fsmb.org/siteassets/advocacy/pdf/state -emergency -declarations -
licensures -requirementsCOVID -19.pdf .  WT/TPR/S/434 /Rev.1  • United States  
 
- 272 - 
 
  4.300.   The regulations promulgated under the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act 
of 1996,  as amended  (collectively, HIPAA) governs the privacy and security of health information 
for certain medical enti ties, in particular, patient protected health information (PHI). Under HIPAA, 
all U.S. healthcare institutions and most businesses supplying services for them, e.g. treatment 
providers, billing organizations, and vendors, must be HIPAA compliant.349 Foreign providers of these 
services should ensure HIPAA compliance. How HIPAA may apply to certain cases, such as 
U.S. persons abroad, international research projects, and clinical trials, is still not entirely clear, 
although they are not in principle ex empt from privacy requirements.350 In general, privacy and data 
sharing of health information has become a growing issue, in particular as other jurisdictions have 
different or conflicting rules. One recent paper suggests a "sector -specific " approach be tak en by the 
United  States to facilitate international transfers of health data, i.e. a HIPAA Shield, in particular 
between the United  States and the European  Union to facilitate international research.351 
4.4.4.2.2   Trade  
4.301.   U.S. trade in professional medical and health se rvices is relatively small compared to other 
service sectors and also with respect to the size of the domestic market but it has exhibited steady 
growth in recent years. Analysis of this trade is hampered by definitional aspects and the overlap of 
medical professional and health services and by the suppression of data, but nevertheless some 
general trends can be presented. Cross -border trade in health services and the U.S. trade surplus 
in this sector appear to have grown between 2015 -20. On a regional basi s, most U.S. cross -border 
trade in the sector has been with Europe.  Health services' trade is reportedly dominated by 
health -related travel services and telemedicine. For mode 4, certain impediments exist, such as 
licensing requirements that reportedly pre vent access of foreign health practitioners to supply the 
U.S. market.352 Services provided by mode 1, telemedicine, while allowed in principle, may be 
negatively impacted by patient data and privacy laws. A  recent report by the World Bank suggests 
two main  policy initiatives to increase trade in health services: to allow more healthcare workers to 
cross borders through special visas or temporary work permits (mode 4); and to increase the scope 
for cross -border telemedicine (mode 1).353 
4.302.   As is the case with ma ny U.S. services sectors, health services are mainly traded through 
affiliates (mode 3), with much less trade in modes 1 and 4 (Table  4.18). The United  States has a 
significant trade deficit of cross -border health services through affiliates, as imports ar e 
approximately three times the level of exports. This is due to foreign healthcare companies investing 
and expanding in the U.S. market more than U.S. firms have expanded abroad. The expansion of 
U.S. medical institutions abroad has frequently been in the  form of medical schools or training 
facilities for foreign health workers, rather than by establishing medical treatment facilities, thus 
exporting education services.  
4.303.   The examination of health -related travel statistics as U.S. persons travel abroad for 
healthcare, or foreign patients travel to the U.S. for treatment, indicates a significant U.S. trade 
surplus. Although these figures are overestimated as they include travel services, they, nevertheless, 
can be examined for general trends. Since 2015, there  was a steady growth in imports and exports 
as both have increased by about the same amount until 2020 when there was a precipitous fall due 
 
349 HIPAA defines "covered entities " that include health plans, healthcare providers, healthcare 
clearinghouses, and business associates and their sub -contractors, e.g. cloud service providers, attorneys, 
CPAs, and transcriptionists. HHS, Covered Entities and Business Associates . Viewed at: 
https://www.hhs.gov/hipaa/for -professionals/covered -entities/index.html .  
350 The treatment of foreign national beneficiaries abroad by DOD or other federal agencies is, however, 
exempt. HHS, Appendix  H: Clarify in Guidance that IRB Alteration of HIPAA's Authorization Requirement May 
Be Sought and Granted for International Research . Viewed at: https://www.hhs.gov/ohrp/sachrp -
committee/recommendations/2004 -september -27-letter -appendix -h/index.html .  
351 Bradford, L., Aboy, M., and Liddell, K. (2020), "International transfers of health data between the EU 
and USA: a sector -specific approach for the USA to ensure an 'adequate' level of protection ", Journal of Law 
and the Biosciences , Vol. 7, Issue  1, January -June 2020. Viewed at: 
https://a cademic.oup.com/jlb/article/7/1/lsaa055/5871850 .  
352 USITC (2021), Recent Trends in U.S. Services Trade: 2018 Annual Report , Pub. No.  5192. Viewed at: 
https://usitc.gov/publications/332/pub4789. pdf.  
353 World Bank (2020), Trade and COVID -19 Guidance Note, Health Services Trade and the COVID -19 
Pandemic . Viewed at: https://documents1.worldbank.org/curated/en/804331588657997511/pdf/Health -
Services -Trade -and-the-COVID -19-Pandemic.pdf .  WT/TPR/S/434 /Rev.1  • United States  
 
- 273 - 
 
  to the COVID -19 pandemic. In 2020, imports and exports were nearly identical, indicating that 
incoming health -related travel fell more than outgoing travel.  
4.304.   According to a study that surveys hospital members that cater to inbound medical tourists, 
over 58,000 foreign tourists visited the United  States for treatment and generated USD  2.9 billion 
in revenues in 2018-19.354 This survey accounted for just 51 hospitals, thus it significantly 
underrepresents the market size, as many other hospitals and healthcare facilities were not included, 
but nevertheless gives some estimate of the size of the sector.  
Table  4.18 Trade in health services, 2015 -20 
(USD million)  
 2015  2016  2017  2018  2019  2020  
Modes 1 and 4  
Exports        
Other personal, cultural, and recreational services  3,532  3,837  3,454  2,960  3,662  5,764  
 Health services  1,005  (D) (D) (D) (D) 1,339  
Imports        
Other personal, cultural, and recreational services  1,479  1,647  1,877  1,772  2,324  2,684  
 Health services  135 183 146 (D) 588 (D) 
Balance        
Other personal, cultural, and recreational services  2,053  2,190  1,577  1,188  1,338  3,080  
 Health services  870 .. .. .. .. .. 
Exports  980 1,030  1,098  1,126  1,174  271 
Imports  526 584 639 677 716 235 
 Balance  454 446 459 453 458 36 
       
Health care and social services  supplied to Foreign 
persons by U.S. MNEs through their MOUSAs  6,827  6,738  6,096  6,621  (D) .. 
Health care and social services  supplied to U.S. 
persons by Foreign MNEs through their MOUSAs,  14,100  14,652  17,427  18,744  19,847  .. 
(D) Suppressed to avoid the disclosure of data of individual companies.  
.. Not available.  
MNEs:  Multinational enterprises . 
MOUSAs:  Majority -owned U.S. affiliates . 
Source:  Bureau of Economic Analysis, interactive data tables.  
4.4.4.3   GATS commitments  
4.305.   The United  States' GATS schedule inclu des some commitments on hospital and other health 
care facilities in Section  8 on health services. There are no commitments on professional services 
and on medical and related professions, and no horizontal commitments are directly applicable to 
the sector . The schedule contains a horizontal commitment with respect to the temporary entry and 
stay of intra -corporate transferees that includes "specialists". The commitment on hospitals and 
other health care facilities concerns direct ownership, management, and  operation by contract of 
hospital and other health care facilities on a "for fee" basis. In terms of national treatment, 
healthcare reimbursed by the Government is limited to U.S.  facilities, i.e. the payment of healthcare 
via Medicaid and Medicare is lim ited to healthcare establishments in the United  States. In addition, 
needs -based quantitative limits may be imposed and at the sub -federal level; the States of New  York 
and Michigan impose additional requirements.  
4.4.4.4   Provisions in FTAs  
4.306.   The USMCA  introduced no changes to U.S. service commitments on medical professionals or 
healthcare; however, it did introduce commitments on data transfer that potentially impact the 
healthcare sector. Provisions in the chapter on digital trade prevent restrictions  on data transfers 
across borders, including personal information, if it is for the conduct of the business of a covered 
person; however, there are exceptions for legitimate public policy objectives.355 The USMCA, like 
NAFTA, contains rights with respect to  the temporary entry of business persons, with a special 
 
354 U.S. Cooperative for International Patient Program s (USCIPP), USCIPP Annual Market Update: 
2018-2019. Viewed at: https://www.laingbuissonnews.com/imtj/news -imtj/uscipp -annual -market -update -
2018-2019/ .  
355 USMCA, Chapter 19, Digital Trade. Viewed at: 
https://ustr.gov/sites/default/files/files/agreements/FTA/USMCA/Text/19 -Digital -Trade.pdf .  WT/TPR/S/434 /Rev.1  • United States  
 
- 274 - 
 
  appendix outlining the education and credentials needed to work as professionals.356 The medical 
and allied professions section of the appendix contains 12 professional categories, e.g.  dentist, 
pharm acist, and medical laboratory technologist; the appendix has the same provisions as in NAFTA. 
The FTAs with Chile and Singapore cover temporary entry of business professionals, but these are 
not specific to medical professionals . 
4.4.5   E-commerce  
4.307.   The U.S. retail  e-commerce is the second largest in the world with an estimated revenue of 
USD 870.8  billion in 2021.357 In the United  States, e -commerce accounts for approximately 12.5% 
of the trade of physical goods, i.e. business -to-business and business -to-consumer sales considered 
together. A small number of online platforms (Amazon, Facebook, eBay, Walmart) concentrat e 
several hundred  million monthly visitors to their websites; online platforms have also specialized 
themselves in different categories of products according to their business strategies. Licensed as a 
money transmitter at the state level, PayPal is the mo st used online payment service in the 
United  States.  
4.308.   Currently, online platforms do not uniquely focus on sales of physical products, but also 
advertise the provision of services – to be delivered physically or remotely, and the delivery of other 
digital s ervices, such as streaming, digital marketing, and cloud computing.  
4.309.   Various aspects of e -commerce are subject to federal and state measures in the 
United  States. U.S. laws seek to offer online consumers levels of protection similar to in -person 
consumers w ith regard to the use of their personal information, advertising, intellectual property, 
cybercrime, taxation, and online speech.  
4.310.   The enforcement authority of the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) over unfair and deceptive 
practices in commerce extends to var ious aspects of electronic transactions such as  online 
advertising, mobile and in -app payments, online medical claims, and consumer privacy. Regarding 
e-commerce activities, in 2020 and 2021, the FTC conducted 24 enforcement actions for alleged 
unfair or d eceptive privacy and data security practices. The Restore Online Shoppers' Confidence 
Act (P.L.  111-345) bans certain online negative option features358 unless sellers make appropriate 
disclosures, get proper consent, and provide simple ways to stop recurri ng charges. The FTC also 
takes actions to counter misleading online advertisements on the basis of regulations governing 
conventional advertisements. Commercial messaging through email, not only bulk emails, must 
comply with requirements established by the  CAN-SPAM Act359, including providing an opt -out 
option; violations may carry penalties and they can amount up to USD  46,517 for each separate 
non-complying email.360 
4.311.   The Electronic Signatures in Global and National Commerce Act of 2000 ( P.L. 106-229) 
provid es that generally an electronic signature, contract, or other record may not be denied legal 
effect solely because it is in electronic form. The Uniform Electronic Transactions Act aimed at 
harmonizing state laws in this regard and provided a model law tha t can be adopted by states.361 
The Internet Tax Freedom Act ( P.L. 105-277) prohibits state and local taxation of Internet access 
and multiple and discriminatory taxation on e -commerce; this prohibition has been indefinitely 
 
356 USMCA, Chapter 16, Temporary Entry for Business Persons, Annex  16-A, Section  D: Professionals . 
Viewed at: https://ustr.gov/sites/default/files/files/agreements/FTA/USMCA/Text/16_Temporary_Entry.pdf .  
357 U.S. Census Bureau (2022), Quarterly Retail E -Commerce Sales 4th Quarter 2021 . Viewed at: 
https://www.census.gov/retail/mrts/www/data/pdf/ec_current.pdf . 
358 The term "negative option feature" is defined as, in an offer or agreement to sell or provide any 
goods or services, a provision under which the customer 's silence or failure to take an affirmative action to 
reject goods or services or to cancel the agreement is interpreted by the seller  as acceptance  of the offer. 
16 C.F.R. 310.2(w).  
359 The Cont rolling the Assault of Non -Solicited Pornography and Marketing Act of 2003 (CAN -SPAM Act) 
(P.L. 108-187) sets the rules for commercial email, establishes requirements for commercial messages, and 
spells out penalties for violations.  
360 FTC, CAN-SPAM Act: A Compliance Guide for Business. Viewed at: https://www.ftc.gov/tips -
advice/business -center/guidance/can -spam -act-compliance -guide -business . Some specific conducts, such as 
the harvesting of email addresses, may be subject to criminal penalties, including imprisonment.  
361 The Uniform Electronic Transactions Act (UETA)  is one of the several United  States Uniform Acts 
proposed by the National Conferenc e of Commissioners on Uniform State Laws. As of 2021, 49  states, the 
District of Columbia, and the U.S. Virgin Islands have passed laws adopting this model.  WT/TPR/S/434 /Rev.1  • United States  
 
- 275 - 
 
  extended by the Trade Facilitatio n and Trade Enforcement Act ( P.L. 114-125). However, regarding 
taxation on sales online, the states may compel online retailers to charge sales tax regardless of a 
physical presence in the state362; small sales exceptions for sales tax registration depend o n 
economic thresholds that vary substantially across U.S. states.  
4.312.   Section  230 of the Communications Decency Act of 1996 (47 U.S.C. 230) provides immunity 
to interactive computer service users and providers, including online platforms such as Facebook 
and T witter, from civil liability based on third -party content and for the removal of content in certain 
circumstances.363 Section  512 of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (P.L.  105-304) shields online 
service providers from monetary liability and limits othe r forms of liability for copyright 
infringement  – referred to as safe harbors – in exchange for cooperating with copyright owners to 
expeditiously remove infringing content if the online service providers meet certain conditions.  
4.313.   There is no comprehensive federal consumer data protection and privacy regulation in the 
United  States; however, there are sector -specific federal laws. For instance, HIPAA ( P.L. 104-191) 
requires covered entities and their business associates to safeguard protected health informat ion 
they collect or process. HIPAA prohibits the sale of protected health information by a covered entity 
or business associate without the prior written consent of the patient. The Gramm -Leach -Bliley Act 
(P.L. 106-102) requires financial institutions to i nform consumers regarding their privacy practices, 
have processes in place to secure consumer financial information, and provide opt -out options if the 
institution shares consumer financial information with non -affiliated third parties. In addition, severa l 
states, including California and Virginia, have adopted horizontal data protection laws.  
4.314.   The country code top -level domain (ccTLD) for the United  States, ".us", can only be granted 
to U.S. citizens, U.S. permanent residents, or persons whose primary domi cile is the United  States; 
or to entities or organizations incorporated in the United  States or having a bona fide presence in 
the country. Most U.S. -based websites use the ".com" TLD and do not use a ccTLD.  
4.315.   The United  States keeps a decentralized, market -driven approach to regulate digital services 
through policies, regulations, and laws on specific issues and/or sectors that together support the 
progression of digital transformation. Although there is no general consensus on the contours of the 
digital ec onomy or of digital trade, concerns regarding data security as well as an open, 
non-discriminatory, and fair competition in the digital economy have been rising.  
4.316.   To counter counterfeit goods, narcotics, and contraband sent through the smaller express 
carrier or international mail services sold through online platforms, E.O. 13904, Ensuring Safe and 
Lawful E -Commerce for United  States Consumers, Businesses, Government Supply Chains, and 
Intellectual Property Rights Holders , prescribed the establishment of an importer of record program 
from which violators of import requirements are to be excluded.364 In October  2020, the Undertaking 
Spam, Spyware, And Fraud Enforcement With Enforcers Beyond Borders Act of 2006 (U.S. SAFE 
WEB Act of 2006) ( P.L. 109-455), which authorizes the FTC to take actions against cross -border 
fraud and deception occurring over the Internet, was reauthorized until FY2027 by P.L. 116-173. 
4.317.   To address competition issues, especially below -cost remuneration for  delivery of 
international packets, the United  States encouraged the revision of remuneration rates for bulky 
letters and small packets at the Universal Postal Union (UPU), whose 2019 Extraordinary Congress 
approved a self -declaration mechanism for such ra tes for the United  States from July  2021.365 
4.318.   As part of the responses to cyber  threats, the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security 
Agency (CISA) was established in November  2018 by the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security 
Agency Act of 2018 ( P.L. 115-278). CISA's responsibilities include leading cybersecurity and critical 
infrastructure security programs, operations, and associated policy. Since its establishment, CISA 
 
362 Supreme Court of the United  States, Syllabus, South Dakota v. Wayfair, Inc., et al., Certiorari t o the 
Supreme Court of South Dakota, No.  17–494. Viewed at: https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/17pdf/17 -
494_j4el.pdf . 
363 Section  230 may not protect users and providers, for exam ple, if they are responsible for the 
creation or development of content, in whole or in part, though they may ultimately not be liable for underlying 
claims for other reasons (e.g. lack of causation). Section  230 also contains some statutory exceptions.  
364 Federal Register  (2020), Vol.  85, No.  24, 5 February, pp.  6725-6729. Viewed at: 
https://www.federalregister.gov/d/2020 -02439 . 
365 UPU, Terminal Dues . Viewed at: https://www.upu.int/en/Postal -Solutions/ Program s-
Services/Remuneration/Terminal -Dues. WT/TPR/S/434 /Rev.1  • United States  
 
- 276 - 
 
  has, inter alia, focused on election security, mitigated supply chain risks from c yber threats, 
protected the .gov domain, and provided telework guidance during the pandemic, among others.366 
4.319.   Following E.O. 13636, Improving Critical Infrastructure Cybersecurity367, in 2013 the 
National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) develope d a Cybersecurity Framework 
guiding the (voluntary) use of better cybersecurity practices by both governmental and 
non-governmental actors. In April  2018, an updated version of the Framework was made available. 
In February  2022, NIST requested stakeholders  to assist in evaluating and improving its resources, 
including potential updates to the Cybersecurity Framework.368 Recognizing the limitations of small 
businesses and their exposure to cyber threats, the NIST Small Business Cybersecurity Act 
(P.L. 115-236) required NIST to consider SMEs' characteristics while developing standards to reduce 
cyber risks; NIST was also required to tailor its cybersecurity guidance documents and resources to 
SMEs.  
4.320.   In March  2019, FTC initiated a study on privacy practices among  the six largest broadband 
providers whose findings were published in October  2021.369 The FTC report found that Internet 
service providers collected and used data in ways that raise several privacy concerns for consumers; 
it underscored the importance of restricting such practices. In October  2019, FTC brought up its first 
case against sta lking apps on mobiles, which provided third -party access to sensitive data about 
device users (physical movements, online activities, data collection).370 
4.321.   In January  2020, NIST launched a Privacy Framework, which is a voluntary tool helping 
organizations identify and manage privacy risks and allowing them to continue building innovative 
products and services while protecting individuals' privacy.371 In December  2021, NTIA hosted three 
listening sessions concerning personal data (privacy, equit y, and civil rights) to gather information 
on the ways in which commercial data flows of personal information can lead to disparate impact 
and outcomes for marginalized or disadvantaged communities.  
4.322.   Three E.O.s i ssued i n August  2020 and January  2021 took a ctions to limit the functionalities 
of a dozen mobile applications identified as posing a threat to the privacy of U.S. citizens and 
residents.372 These decisions were later revoked by E.O. 14034 in June  2021373; however, this 
directive required instead that , not later than 180 days after the date of the order, the Secretary of 
Commerce  provide a report to the Assistant to the President and National Security Advisor 
recommending additional executive and legislative actions to address the risk associated with 
connected software applications that are designed, developed, manufactured, or supplied by persons 
owned or controlled by, or subject to the jurisdiction or direction of, a foreign adversary. The 
 
366 CISA, 2020 Year in Review . Viewed at: 
https://www.cisa.gov/sites/default/files/publications/CISA_Year_in_Review_2020_Final.pdf . 
367 Federal Register  (2013), Vol.  78, No.  33, pp.  11737 -11744. Viewed at: 
https://www.federalregister.gov/d/2013 -03915 . 
368 NIST, Evaluating and Improving NIST Cybersecurity Resources: The Cybersecurity Framework and 
Cybersecurity Supply Chain Risk Management, Federal Register  (2022), Vol. 87, No.  35, 22  February, 
pp. 9579-9581. Viewed at: https://www.federalregister.gov/d/2022 -03642 . 
369 FTC (2021), A Look at What ISPs Know About You: Examining the Privacy Practices of Six Major 
Internet Service Providers . Viewed at: https://www.ftc.gov/system/files/documents/reports/look -what-isps-
know -about -you-examining -privacy -practices -six-major -internet -service -
providers/p195402_isp_6b_staff_report.pdf .  
370 FTC. Viewed at: https://www.ftc.gov/enforcement/cases -proceedings/172 -3118/retina -x-studios -llc-
matter .  
371 The Privacy Framework is part of a broader privacy engineering program at NIST.  
372 E.O. 13942, Addressing the Threat Posed by TikTok, and Taking Additional Steps to Address the 
National Emergency With Respect to the Information and Communications Technology and Services Supply 
Chain, Federal Register  (2020), Vol.  85, No.  155, 11  August, pp.  48637 -48639. Viewed at: 
https://www.federalregister.gov/d/2020 -17699 ; E.O. 13943, Addressing the Threat Posed by WeChat, and 
Taking Additional Steps to Address the National Emergency With Respect to the Information and 
Communications Technology and Services Supply Chain, Federal Register  (2020), Vol.  85, Vol.  155, 11  August, 
pp. 48641 -48643. Viewed at: https://www.federalregister.gov/d/2020 -17700 ; and E.O. 13971, Addressing the 
Threat Posed by Applications and Othe r Software Developed or Controlled by Chinese Companies, Federal 
Register  (2021), Vol. 86, No.  5, 8 January, pp.  1249-1251. Viewed at: 
https://www.federalregister.gov/d/2021 -00305 . 
373 E.O. 14034, Protecting Americans' Sensitive Data From Foreign Adversaries, Federal Register  (2021), 
Vol. 86, No.  111, 11  June, pp.  31423 -31426. Viewed at: https://www.federalregister.gov/d/2021 -12506 . WT/TPR/S/434 /Rev.1  • United States  
 
- 277 - 
 
  Department of Commerce continues to work with the National S ecurity Council and the Assistant to 
the President and National Security Advisor on those recommendations.  
4.323.   The Internet of Things (IoT) Cybersecurity Improvement Act of 2020 ( P.L. 116-207) required 
NIST to develop and publish standards and guidelines for t he Federal Government on the appropriate 
use and management of IoT devices. The OMB must update policies and principles to be consistent 
with standards and guidelines established by NIST. Subsequently, NIST developed IoT -specific 
guidelines for federal age ncies and a collection of technical and non -technical cybersecurity 
capabilities required to implement the cybersecurity controls.374 
4.324.   At the multilateral level, the United  States is actively engaged in e -commerce issues in the 
WTO. It is a party to the expa nded Information Technology Agreement, participates in 
WTO program s covering certain aspects of e -commerce and digital trade, and adheres to the 
WTO moratorium on imposing customs duties on electronic transmissions. With 85 other parties, the 
United  States  participates in the ongoing plurilateral negotiation on e -commerce aiming to establish 
a global framework for a global digital market.  
4.325.   Since 2003, all trade agreements signed by the United  States include a chapter aimed at 
facilitating its development of cross-border e -commerce. In line with the approach adopted for its 
domestic market, the priorities for U.S. trade policy concerning e -commerce were set in the Trade 
Priorities and Accountability Act of 2015  (P.L. 114-26), or Trade Promotion Authority (TPA) . The 
recently signed USMCA, includes a chapter on digital trade that contains broad commitments on 
digital trade .375 Similar provisions are also reflected in the U.S. -Japan Digital Trade Agreement, an 
executive agreement entered into force in January  2020.  
4.326.   The United  States participates in the APEC Cross Border Privacy Rules (CBPR) system376, 
which is recognized in the USMCA as a mechanism to facilitate cross -border information transfers 
while protecting personal information. Similarly, the OECD/G20 Inclusiv e Framework on Base 
Erosion and Profit Shifting (IF) served as a venue for negotiations between 141  parties on a 
multilateral solution to address the tax challenges arising from the digitalization of the economy.377 
In 2019, the United  States initiated seve ral Section  301 investigations related to the implementation 
of digital services taxes on U.S. providers by some trading partners; in November  2021 the 
United  States agreed to suspend the proposed application of duties to seven trading partners during 
the interim period before Pillar 1 of the IF is fully implemented.  
4.327.   The United  States also works on a bilateral basis to facilitate the development and 
deployment of new technologies. For example, working groups of the U.S. -EU Trade and Technology 
Council are l ooking at data governance and tech platform regulation, misuse of technology 
threatening security and human rights, and information and communications technology and 
services (ICTS) security and competitiveness.  
 
 
 
374 NIST, NIST Cybersecurity for IoT Program, IoT Device Cybersecurity Guidance for the Federal 
Government: Establishing IoT Device Cybersecurity Requirements . Viewed at: https://www.nist.gov/itl/applied -
cybersecurity/nist -cybersecurity -iot-program/sp -800-213-series ; and NIST Special Publication 800 -213A, IoT 
Device Cybersecurity Guidance for the Federal Government: IoT Device Cybersecurity Requirement Ca talog. 
Viewed at: https://doi.org/10.6028/NIST.SP.800 -213A. 
375 Provisions in the agreement cover, inter alia, prohibitions on customs duties, non -discrimination, 
restrictions on cross -border data flow s and on localization requirements, forced disclosure of source code or 
algorithms, technology transfer, access to proprietary cryptography information, electronic signatures, 
authentication, and IPR protection.  
376 The APEC CBPR system is a multilateral framework establishing common privacy standards and 
mutual recognition of certifications issued in different jurisdictions.  
377 OECD, International Community Strikes a Ground -Breaking Tax Deal for the Digital Age . View ed at: 
https://www.oecd.org/tax/international -community -strikes -a-ground -breaking -tax-deal-for-the-digital -
age.htm .  WT/TPR/S/** • United States  
 
- 278 - 
 
  5  APPENDIX TABLES  
Table  A1.1 Merchandise exports by HS section and main chapter, 2017 -21 
(USD million and %)  
Description  2017  2018  2019  2020  2021  
Total exports  1,545,810  1,665,303  1,644,276  1,430,254  1,753,137    
(% of total exports)  
1 – Live animals; animal products  1.8 1.8 1.8 2.1 2.1  
02. Meat and edible meat offal.  1.1 1.0 1.1 1.3 1.3  
04. Dairy produce; birds' eggs; natural honey; edible 
products of animal origin.  0.3 0.3 0.3 0.4 0.4 
 
03. Fish and crustaceans, molluscs and other aquatic 
invertebrates.  0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 
2 – Vegetable products  4.4 4.0 3.9 5.1 5.0  
12. Oil seeds and oleaginous fruits; miscellaneous 
grains, seeds and fruit.  1.7 1.3 1.5 2.2 1.9 
 
10. Cereals.  1.2 1.3 1.0 1.4 1.7  
08. Edible fruit and nuts; peel of citrus fruit, etc.  1.0 0.9 0.9 1.0 0.9 
3 – Animal or vegetable fats and oils, etc.  0.2 0.2 0.2 0.3 0.2 
4 – Prepared foodstuffs; beverages, spirits, vinegar; 
tobacco  2.8 2.8 2.7 3.0 2.8 
 
23. Residues and waste from the food industries.  0.6 0.7 0.6 0.8 0.8  
21. Miscellaneous edible preparations.  0.6 0.5 0.6 0.6 0.6  
22. Beverages, spirits and vinegar.  0.5 0.5 0.5 0.6 0.5 
5 – Mineral products  9.6 12.2 12.8 11.5 14.3  
27. Mineral fuels, mineral oils, etc.  9.0 11.6 12.1 10.8 13.7 
6 – Products of the chemical or allied industries  10.3 10.3 10.6 11.6 12.1  
30. Pharmaceutical products.  2.9 2.9 3.3 3.8 4.4  
29. Organic chemicals.  2.3 2.4 2.4 2.4 2.4  
38. Miscellaneous chemical products.  1.8 1.8 1.9 2.2 2.1  
33. Essential oils and resinoids; perfumery, cosmetic 
or toilet preparations.  0.8 0.8 0.8 0.9 0.8 
7 – Plastics and articles thereof; rubber, etc.  4.9 4.8 4.8 5.0 5.0  
39. Plastics and articles thereof.  4.0 4.0 3.9 4.2 4.2 
8 – Raw hides and skins, leather, furskins  and articles 
thereof; travel goods, handbags; articles of animal gut  0.3 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 
9 – Wood and articles of wood; wood charcoal; cork and 
articles of cork  0.4 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.6 
10 – Pulp of wood or of other fibrous cellulosic material; 
paper and pap erboard and articles thereof  1.9 1.8 1.7 1.8 1.7 
 
48. Paper and paperboard; articles of paper pulp, of 
paper or of paperboard.  1.0 1.0 0.9 1.0 0.9 
 
47. Pulp of wood or of other fibrous cellulosic 
material; recovered paper.  0.6 0.6 0.5 0.5 0.6 
11 – Textiles and textile articles  1.7 1.6 1.6 1.6 1.5  
52. Cotton.  0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.4 
12 – Footwear, headgear, umbrellas; prepared feathers 
and articles; artificial flowers  0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 
13 – Articles of stone, plaster, cement, etc.; ceramic 
products; glass and glassware  0.8 0.7 0.7 0.7 0.7 
14 – Natural or cultured pearls, precious or semi -
precious stones, precious metals  3.9 3.8 3.6 4.1 4.6 
15 – Base metals and articles of base metal  4.4 4.4 4.1 4.0 4.3  
73. Articles of iron or steel.  1.2 1.2 1.1 1.1 1.1  
72. Iron and steel.  1.0 1.0 0.9 0.9 1.1  
76. Aluminium and articles thereof.  0.7 0.8 0.7 0.7 0.7 
16 – Machinery and mechanical appliances; electrical 
equipment; television image and sound recorders  24.3 23.4 23.1 24.2 22.5 
 
84. Nuclear reactors, boilers, machinery and 
mechanical appliances.  13.1 12.8 12.5 12.8 11.9 
 
85. Electrical machinery and equipment; sound 
recorders and reproducers.  11.3 10.6 10.5 11.4 10.6 
17 – Vehicles, aircraft, vessels, etc.  9.4 8.7 9.1 8.3 7.8  
87. Vehicles other than railway or tramway 
rolling -stock, parts and accessories.  8.4 7.9 8.1 7.4 7.0 
 
88. Aircraft, spacecraft, and parts thereof.  0.7 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.5 
18 – Optical, photographic, precision, medical or surgical 
instruments; clocks and watched; musical instruments  5.5 5.5 5.7 6.0 5.4 
 
90. Optical, photographic, cinematographic, 
measuring, precision, medical instruments, etc.  5.4 5.4 5.5 5.8 5.2 
19 – Arms and ammunition  0.3 0.3 0.4 0.3 0.2 
20 – Miscellaneous manufactured articles  1.3 1.2 1.2 1.1 1.0  
94. Furniture; bedding, mattresses, mattress 
supports, cushions and similar stuffed furnishings.  0.7 0.7 0.6 0.6 0.5 
21 – Works of art, collectors' pieces and antiques  0.8 0.9 0.8 0.6 0.5 
Other  10.8 10.8 10.6 8.0 7.5 
Source:  WTO Secretariat calculations, based on UN Comtrade database.  WT/TPR/S/434 /Rev.1  • United States  
 
- 279 - 
 
  Table  A1.2 Merchandise imports by HS section and main chapter, 2017 -21 
(USD million and %)  
Description  2017  2018  2019  2020  2021  
Total 2,405,277  2,611,432  2,567,492  2,405,382  2,932,976    
(% of total imports)  
1 – Live animals; animal products  1.4 1.3 1.3 1.4 1.5  
03. Fish and crustaceans, molluscs and other 
aquatic invertebrates.  0.7 0.7 0.7 0.7 0.8 
 
02. Meat and edible meat offal.  0.3 0.3 0.3 0.4 0.4 
2 – Vegetable products  2.0 1.9 2.0 2.1 2.0  
08. Edible fruit and nuts; peel of citrus fruit or 
melons.  0.8 0.7 0.8 0.8 0.8 
 
07. Edible vegetables and certain roots and 
tubers.  0.4 0.4 0.4 0.5 0.5 
3 – Animal or vegetable fats and oils  0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 
4 – Prepared foodstuffs; beverages, spirits and 
vinegar; tobacco  2.7 2.8 2.9 3.2 3.1 
 
22. Beverages, spirits and vinegar.  1.0 1.0 1.1 1.1 1.1 
5 – Mineral products  8.8 9.6 8.5 5.7 7.9  
27. Mineral fuels, mineral oils and products of 
their distillation.  8.5 9.3 8.2 5.4 7.6 
6 – Products of the chemical or allied industries  8.3 9.0 9.6 10.7 10.0  
30. Pharmaceutical products.  4.0 4.4 5.0 5.8 5.1  
29. Organic chemicals.  1.9 2.1 2.1 2.3 2.2  
38. Miscellaneous chemical products.  0.6 0.6 0.6 0.8 0.7 
7 – Plastics and articles thereof; rubber and 
articles thereof  3.4 3.5 3.5 3.8 4.2 
 
39. Plastics and articles thereof.  2.3 2.4 2.4 2.6 2.8  
40. Rubber and articles thereof.  1.2 1.1 1.2 1.2 1.4 
8 – Raw hides and skins, leather, furskins; etc. 0.6 0.6 0.5 0.4 0.5 
9 – Wood and articles of wood; wood charcoal; 
cork and articles of cork  0.6 0.6 0.8 1.0 1.3 
 
44. Wood and articles of wood; charcoal.  0.5 0.6 0.8 0.9 1.2 
10 – Pulp of wood or of other fibrous cellulosic 
material; paper and paperboard , etc. 1.0 1.0 1.0 0.9 0.9 
 
48. Paper and paperboard  0.7 0.7 0.7 0.7 0.6 
11 – Textiles and textile articles  4.7 4.6 4.7 4.9 4.4  
61. Articles of apparel and clothing accessories, 
knitted or crocheted.  1.9 1.8 1.9 1.6 1.8 
 
62. Articles of apparel and clothing accessories, 
not knitted or crocheted.  1.6 1.5 1.5 1.4 1.2 
12 – Footwear, headgear, umbrellas; prepared 
feathers and articles; artificial flowers  1.3 1.3 1.3 1.1 1.2 
13 – Articles of stone, plaster, cement, etc.; 
ceramic products; glass and glassware  1.0 0.9 0.9 0.9 1.0 
14 – Natural or cultured pearls, precious or semi -
precious stones, precious metals  2.4 2.3 2.2 4.4 3.1 
15 – Base metals and articles of base metal  5.5 5.6 5.1 4.7 5.8  
73. Articles of iron or steel.  1.6 1.7 1.6 1.5 1.6  
72. Iron and steel.  1.2 1.2 1.0 0.8 1.3  
76. Aluminium and articles thereof.  1.0 0.9 0.9 0.8 1.0 
16 – Machinery and mechanical appliances; 
electrical equipment; etc. 29.3 28.8 28.5 29.3 28.8 
 
84. Nuclear reactors, boilers, machinery and 
mechanical appliances.  14.5 14.8 14.8 15.0 14.6 
 
85. Electrical machinery and equipment; sound 
recorders and reproducers.  14.8 14.1 13.7 14.3 14.2 
17 – Vehicles, aircraft, vessels and associated 
transport equipment  13.7 13.1 13.6 11.9 10.7 
 
87. Vehicles other than railway or tramway 
rolling -stock, parts and accessories.  12.2 11.7 12.1 10.6 9.7 
 
88. Aircraft, spacecraft, and parts thereof.  1.3 1.2 1.4 1.2 0.9 
18 – Optical, photographic, precision, medical or 
surgical instruments; clocks and watche s; musical 
instruments  3.8 3.8 4.0 4.0 3.9 
19 – Arms an d ammunition  0.1 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.2 
20 – Miscellaneous manufactured articles  4.4 4.3 4.2 4.5 4.8  
94. Furniture; bedding, mattresses, etc. 2.8 2.8 2.6 2.7 2.8  
95. Toys, games and sports requisites; etc. 1.4 1.3 1.3 1.5 1.8 
21 – Works of art, collectors' pieces , antiques  0.4 0.5 0.5 0.2 0.3 
Other  4.1 4.1 4.4 4.3 4.1 
Source:  WTO Secretariat calculations, based on UN Comtrade database.   WT/TPR/S/434 /Rev.1  • United States  
 
- 280 - 
 
  Table  A1.3 Merchandise exports and by trading partner, 2017 -21 
(USD million and %)  
Description  2017  2018  2019  2020  2021  
Total exports  1,545,810  1,665,303  1,644,276  1,430,254  1,753,137   
(% of exports)  
Americas  43.7 43.8 43.2 41.8 43.2 
 Canada  18.3 18.0 17.8 17.8 17.5 
 Mexico  15.8 15.9 15.6 14.9 15.8 
 Brazil  2.4 2.4 2.6 2.5 2.7 
 Chile 0.9 0.9 1.0 0.9 1.0 
 Colombia  0.9 0.9 0.9 0.8 0.9 
 Dominican  Republic  0.5 0.5 0.6 0.5 0.6 
 Peru 0.6 0.6 0.6 0.5 0.6 
 Panama  0.4 0.4 0.5 0.4 0.5 
 Guatemala  0.4 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.5 
 Argentina  0.6 0.6 0.5 0.4 0.4 
 Costa Rica  0.4 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.4 
 Honduras  0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.4 
 Ecuador  0.3 0.4 0.3 0.3 0.3 
Europe  21.0 21.7 22.7 22.8 21.5 
 EU-27 14.7 15.2 16.3 16.2 15.5 
 Germany  3.5 3.4 3.6 4.0 3.7 
 Netherlands  2.7 2.9 3.1 3.2 3.1 
 Belgium  1.9 1.9 2.1 1.9 1.9 
 France  2.2 2.3 2.4 2.0 1.7 
 Italy 1.2 1.4 1.4 1.4 1.2 
 EFTA 1.8 1.7 1.4 1.5 1.6 
 Switzerland  1.4 1.3 1.1 1.3 1.4 
 Other Europe  4.5 4.9 5.1 5.1 4.4 
 United Kingdom  3.6 4.0 4.2 4.1 3.5 
 Türkiye  0.6 0.6 0.6 0.7 0.7 
Commonwealth of Independent States (CIS)a 0.6 0.5 0.5 0.4 0.5 
 Russian  Federation  0.5 0.4 0.4 0.3 0.4 
Africa  1.4 1.6 1.6 1.5 1.5 
 Egypt  0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 
 South  Africa  0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 
Middle East  4.2 3.8 4.0 3.3 3.0 
 United Arab Emirates  1.3 1.2 1.2 1.0 1.0 
 Israel  0.8 0.8 0.9 0.7 0.7 
 Saudi Arabia, Kingdom of  1.1 0.8 0.9 0.8 0.6 
Asia 29.1 28.6 27.9 30.2 30.3 
 China  8.4 7.2 6.5 8.7 8.6 
 Japan  4.4 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.3 
 Other Asia  16.4 16.9 16.9 17.0 17.4 
 Korea, Republic of  3.1 3.4 3.5 3.6 3.8 
 India 1.7 2.0 2.1 1.9 2.3 
 Chinese  Taipei  1.7 1.8 1.9 2.1 2.1 
 Singapore  1.9 2.0 1.9 1.9 2.0 
 Hong Kong, China  2.6 2.2 1.9 1.7 1.7 
 Australia  1.6 1.5 1.6 1.6 1.5 
Other  0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 
Memorandum:       
EU-28 18.3 19.1 20.5 20.4 19.0 
a Commonwealth of Independent States, including certain associate and former member States.  
Source:  WTO Secretariat calculations, based on UN Comtrade database.  
  WT/TPR/S/434 /Rev.1  • United States  
 
- 281 - 
 
  Table  A1.4 Merchandise imports by trading partner, 2017 -21 
(USD million and %)  
Description  2017  2018  2019  2020  2021  
Total imports  2,405,277  2,611,432  2,567,492  2,405,382  2,932,976   
(% of imports)  
Americas  30.9 30.7 31.2 29.1 30.0 
 Mexico  13.1 13.4 14.1 13.7 13.2 
 Canada  12.7 12.5 12.7 11.5 12.4 
 Brazil  1.3 1.2 1.2 1.0 1.1 
 Chile 0.5 0.5 0.4 0.5 0.5 
 Colombia  0.6 0.5 0.6 0.5 0.5 
 Ecuador  0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 
 Peru 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.2 0.3 
 Costa Rica  0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 
 Dominican  Republic  0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 
 Honduras  0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 
 Argentina  0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 
 Guatemala  0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 
 Nicaragua  0.1 0.1 0.2 0.2 0.2 
 Trinidad and Tobago  0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.2 
 El Salvador  0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 
Europe  20.7 21.5 23.1 23.7 22.2 
 EU-27 16.2 16.7 18.0 17.6 17.1 
 Germany  5.0 4.9 5.1 4.9 4.7 
 Ireland  2.0 2.2 2.4 2.7 2.5 
 Italy 2.1 2.2 2.3 2.1 2.1 
 France  2.1 2.1 2.3 1.8 1.8 
 Netherlands  0.8 1.0 1.2 1.2 1.2 
 EFTA 1.8 1.9 2.1 3.3 2.4 
 Switzerland  1.5 1.6 1.8 3.1 2.2 
 Other Europe  2.7 2.9 3.0 2.7 2.6 
 United Kingdom  2.3 2.4 2.5 2.1 1.9 
 Türkiye  0.4 0.4 0.4 0.5 0.6 
Commonwealth of Independent States (CIS)a 0.8 0.9 1.0 0.8 1.2 
 Russian  Federation  0.7 0.8 0.9 0.7 1.0 
 Kazakhstan  0.0 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.1 
Africa  1.4 1.4 1.2 1.0 1.3 
 South  Africa  0.3 0.3 0.3 0.5 0.5 
 Nigeria  0.3 0.2 0.2 0.1 0.1 
 Egypt  0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 
Middle East  2.7 2.8 2.1 1.5 1.8 
 Israel  0.9 0.8 0.8 0.6 0.6 
 Saudi Arabia, Kingdom of  0.8 0.9 0.5 0.4 0.5 
 United Arab Emirates  0.2 0.2 0.2 0.1 0.2 
Asia 43.4 42.7 41.4 43.8 43.6 
 China  21.9 21.6 18.4 19.0 18.5 
 Japan  5.8 5.6 5.7 5.1 4.8 
 Other Asia  15.7 15.5 17.3 19.7 20.3 
 Viet Nam 2.0 2.0 2.7 3.5 3.7 
 Korea, Republic of  3.1 2.9 3.1 3.3 3.4 
 Chinese  Taipei  1.8 1.8 2.2 2.6 2.8 
 India 2.1 2.2 2.3 2.2 2.6 
 Malaysia  1.6 1.5 1.6 1.9 2.0 
 Thailand  1.3 1.3 1.4 1.6 1.7 
 Singapore  0.8 1.0 1.0 1.3 1.0 
 Indonesia  0.9 0.8 0.8 0.9 1.0 
Memorandum:       
EU-28 18.5 19.1 20.5 19.8 19.1 
a Commonwealth of Independent States, including certain associate and former member States.  
Source:  WTO Secretariat calculations, based on UN Comtrade database.  
  WT/TPR/S/434 /Rev.1  • United States  
 
- 282 - 
 
  Table  A1.5 U.S. trade in services by type of service (Modes 1, 2, and 4), 2017 -21 
(USD million)   
2017  2018  2019  2020  2021  
Exports of services  833,775  861,725  876,295  705,643  771,247  
Maintenance and repair services n.i.e.  23,239  28,036  27,698  13,278  12,048  
Transport  86,342  93,107  91,017  56,706  65,044  
Sea transport  18,211  19,019  18,222  17,782  19,558  
Freight  4,066  4,208  3,850  3,769  4,202  
Port 14,145  14,811  14,372  14,013  15,356  
Air transport  63,506  68,942  68,047  34,316  40,598  
Passenger  37,290  41,261  40,082  11,393  12,197  
Freighta 13,486  15,232  14,720  16,034  21,397  
Port 12,730  12,449  13,244  6,889  7,003  
Other modes of transport  4,625  5,146  4,748  4,608  4,888  
Postal services  737 949 891 1,004  .. 
Road and other transport  3,887  4,197  3,857  3,603  .. 
Travel (for all purposes including education)  196,469  200,724  199,364  72,813  68,759  
Business  38,351  37,855  37,916  11,933  12,865  
Expenditures by border, seasonal, short -term workers  8,458  8,484  9,542  6,772  7,813  
Other business travel  29,893  29,371  28,374  5,161  5,052  
Personal  158,118  162,868  161,448  60,879  55,894  
Health related  1,098  1,126  1,174  271 184 
Education related  44,825  47,263  47,857  38,962  31,801  
Other personal travel  112,195  114,480  112,416  21,646  23,908  
Construction  2,053  2,842  3,127  2,349  2,797  
Construction abroad  2,053  2,842  3,127  2,349  2,797  
Foreign contractors' expenditures in the United  States  .. .. .. .. .. 
Insurance servicesb 18,976  19,118  18,528  20,431  22,672  
Direct insurance  1,949  1,844  1,650  1,707  1,741  
Reinsurance  15,239  15,354  15,268  16,455  18,152  
Auxiliary insurance services  1,788  1,920  1,610  2,270  2,779  
Financial services  128,035  132,448  136,046  144,343  164,088  
Explicitly charged and other financial services  111,825  113,620  116,509  125,410  144,621  
Brokerage and market -making services  10,654  9,592  8,940  10,950  12,687  
Underwriting and private placement services  2,551  2,774  2,680  3,855  5,141  
Credit card and other credit -related services  22,997  25,711  28,452  23,901  29,144  
Financial management services  47,281  45,930  46,042  52,284  58,200  
Financial advisory and custody services  7,623  7,814  7,256  7,901  9,414  
Securities lending, electronic funds transfer, and other  20,720  21,799  23,139  26,519  30,035  
Financial intermediation services indirectly measured  16,209  18,828  19,537  18,933  19,467  
Charges for the use of intellectual property n.i.e.  118,147  114,819  115,529  113,779  124,827  
By type of intellectual property:           
Franchises and trademarks licensing fees  23,930  25,090  26,295  23,983  25,489  
Trademarks  18,724  19,534  19,590  19,550  .. 
Franchise fees  5,206  5,556  6,706  4,434  .. 
Licenses for the use of outcomes of R&Dc 51,595  47,523  48,193  50,473  57,771  
Licenses to reproduce /distribute computer software  38,406  37,587  36,145  34,115  36,885  
Licenses to reproduce /distribute audiovisual products  4,216  4,619  4,896  5,208  4,682  
Movies and television programming  1,581  1,524  1,623  1,699  .. 
Books and sound recordings  826 1,174  1,339  1,474  .. 
Broadcasting and recording of live events  1,810  1,921  1,933  2,034  .. 
By affiliation:           
Unaffiliated  38,666  35,258  36,468  34,665  .. 
Affiliated  79,481  79,561  79,062  79,113  .. 
U.S. parents' exports to their foreign affiliates  67,953  67,763  66,580  67,442  .. 
U.S. affiliates' exports to their foreign parent groups  11,528  11,798  12,482  11,671  .. 
Telecommunications, computer, and information services  47,657  49,245  54,766  56,682  58,142  
Telecommunications services  10,220  8,998  7,999  7,680  7,344  
Computer services  28,838  30,724  36,312  42,136  44,798  
Computer software, including end -user licenses  18,956  20,156  23,921  27,018  .. 
Cloud computing and data storage services  3,207  3,633  5,659  7,093  .. 
Other computer services  6,674  6,935  6,732  8,025  .. 
Information services  8,599  9,524  10,455  6,865  5,999  
News agency services  296 288 295 257 .. 
Database and other information services  8,303  9,236  10,160  6,608  .. 
Other business services  167,270  176,540  185,573  183,180  206,542  
Research and development services  45,550  47,857  49,446  44,858  47,818  
Work undertaken to increase the stock of knowledge  15,704  16,227  17,604  14,467  .. 
Provision of customized and non-customized R&D services  15,476  15,908  17,195  14,210  .. 
Sale of proprietary rights arising from R&D  229 319 409 256 .. 
Other research and development services  29,846  31,629  31,842  30,391  .. 
Professional and management consulting services  85,553  92,576  102,022  107,912  126,544  
Legal, accounting, management consulting, public relations 
services  67,891  73,511  80,597  86,046  .. 
Legal services  11,301  11,714  13,156  14,220  .. 
Accounting, auditing, bookkeeping, and tax consulting  2,490  2,604  2,569  3,370  .. 
Business and management consulting, public relations  54,100  59,193  64,872  68,456  .. 
Advertising and related services  17,663  19,065  21,425  21,865  .. 
Advertising services  14,524  16,397  19,266  19,656  .. 
Market research and public opinion polling services  3,001  2,571  2,088  2,158  .. 
Trade exhibition and sales convention services  137 97 72 51 .. 
Technical, trade -related, and other business services  36,167  36,107  34,104  30,410  32,180  
Architectural, engineering, scientific, other  14,955  14,981  12,360  10,415  .. 
Architectural services  927 845 942 816 .. 
Engineering services  13,720  13,791  11,075  9,201  .. WT/TPR/S/434 /Rev.1  • United States  
 
- 283 - 
 
   
2017  2018  2019  2020  2021  
Scientific and other technical services  308 344 344 398 .. 
Waste treatment, de -pollution, agricultural, mining serv.  3,215  3,239  2,664  2,377  .. 
Waste treatment and de -pollution services  12 8 (D) 18 .. 
Services incidental to agriculture, forestry, and fishing  12 14 (D) 26 .. 
Services incidental to mining, and oil and gas extraction  3,191  3,217  2,607  2,333  .. 
Operating leasing services  7,179  6,650  6,869  6,564  .. 
Trade -related services  2,177  2,495  2,097  1,786  .. 
Other business services n.i.e.d 8,641  8,743  10,114  9,269  .. 
Personal, cultural, and recreational services  25,664  22,715  22,193  20,442  22,965  
Audiovisual services  21,500  19,160  17,871  14,213  14,431  
Audiovisual production services  736 752 (D) (D) .. 
Rights to use audiovisual products  20,741  18,402  (D) (D) .. 
Movies and television programming  18,553  16,084  15,033  (D) .. 
Books and sound recordings  2,188  2,319  (D) (D) .. 
Audiovisual originals  23 5 6 9 .. 
Movies and television programming  (D) 4 4 (D) .. 
Books and sound recordings  (D) 2 2 (D) .. 
Artistic -related services  711 595 659 465 457 
Other personal, cultural, and recreational services  3,454  2,960  3,662  5,764  8,077  
Health services  (D) (D) (D) 1,339  .. 
Education services  2,444  1,965  2,287  (D) .. 
Heritage and recreational services  (D) (D) (D) (D) .. 
Government goods and services n.i.e.  19,924  22,131  22,453  21,642  23,364  
Imports of services  547,172  563,926  591,121  460,301  541,245  
Maintenance and repair services n.i.e.  6,796  7,354  8,866  6,090  7,514  
Transport  96,515  110,441  112,798  72,411  104,806  
Sea transport  31,362  33,292  32,663  34,158  55,905  
Freight  29,252  31,034  30,757  32,176  53,919  
Port 2,111  2,258  1,907  1,982  1,985  
Air transport  61,275  73,296  76,376  34,722  44,830  
Passenger  40,359  50,678  52,795  13,032  16,181  
Freighta 7,869  8,983  8,495  9,343  13,601  
Port 13,047  13,635  15,086  12,348  15,048  
Other modes of transport  3,877  3,853  3,759  3,530  4,072  
Postal services  333 339 304 327 .. 
Road and other transport  3,544  3,514  3,456  3,203  .. 
Travel (for all purposes including education)  117,931  126,139  133,285  35,808  57,940  
Business  19,240  19,081  18,414  4,852  8,126  
Expenditures by border, seasonal, short -term workers  1,404  1,531  1,669  1,057  1,064  
Other business travel  17,836  17,550  16,745  3,795  7,062  
Personal  98,691  107,059  114,871  30,955  49,814  
Health related  639 677 716 235 312 
Education related  10,776  11,553  12,112  6,626  5,595  
Other personal travel  87,276  94,829  102,043  24,094  43,908  
Construction  1,950  3,077  1,377  1,131  1,262  
Construction in the United  States  806 959 961 851 915 
U.S. contractors' expenditures abroad  1,144  2,119  417 280 346 
Insurance servicesb 53,267  43,797  51,632  55,617  57,658  
Direct insurance  4,012  3,837  4,317  4,860  5,232  
Reinsurance  47,399  38,261  45,412  48,422  49,877  
Auxiliary insurance services  1,855  1,699  1,903  2,335  2,550  
Financial services  36,649  39,445  41,210  42,256  44,966  
Explicitly charged and other financial services  30,048  32,102  33,927  34,795  37,788  
Brokerage and market -making services  4,592  4,968  4,936  5,233  5,486  
Underwriting and private placement services  803 575 656 697 1,018  
Credit card and other credit -related services  8,154  9,402  10,529  8,692  10,109  
Financial management services  9,524  9,733  9,832  12,252  13,380  
Financial advisory and custody services  2,940  3,147  3,274  3,247  3,456  
Securities lending, electronic funds transfer, other  4,034  4,277  4,701  4,675  4,340  
Financial intermediation services indirectly measured  6,601  7,342  7,284  7,461  7,177  
Charges for the use of intellectual property n.i.e.  44,405  42,736  41,730  42,984  46,849  
By type of intellectual property:           
Franchises and trademarks licensing fees  4,661  4,617  4,636  4,816  5,237  
Trademarks  4,526  4,489  4,494  (D) .. 
Franchise fees  136 128 142 (D) .. 
Licenses for the use of outcomes of R&Dc 28,623  24,164  23,324  25,559  27,338  
Licenses to reproduce/distribute computer software  9,868  10,971  11,887  11,360  11,340  
Licenses to reproduce /distribute audiovisual products  1,253  2,985  1,883  1,248  2,933  
Movies and television programming  130 269 239 311 .. 
Books and sound recordings  232 274 322 325 .. 
Broadcasting and recording of live events  891 2,441  1,322  612 .. 
By affiliation:           
Unaffiliated  9,124  11,048  10,536  12,639  .. 
Affiliated  35,282  31,688  31,195  30,345  .. 
U.S. parents' imports from their foreign affiliates  7,780  7,455  7,389  8,564  .. 
U.S. affiliates' imports from foreign parent groups  27,502  24,233  23,806  21,781  .. 
Telecommunications, computer, and information services  43,091  41,701  42,961  38,594  41,358  
Telecommunications services  5,766  5,686  5,007  4,659  5,221  
Computer services  34,694  34,056  35,203  30,929  32,686  
Computer software, including end -user licenses  13,378  12,399  11,585  11,885  .. 
Cloud computing and data storage services  883 785 535 475 .. 
Other computer services  20,433  20,872  23,083  18,569  .. 
Information services  2,632  1,959  2,750  3,006  3,451  
News agency services  76 80 15 20 .. 
Database and other information services  2,556  1,879  2,735  2,986  .. WT/TPR/S/434 /Rev.1  • United States  
 
- 284 - 
 
   
2017  2018  2019  2020  2021  
Other business services  106,991  107,435  112,776  117,673  126,780  
Research and development services  37,059  34,261  33,375  33,290  36,843  
Work undertaken to increase the stock of knowledge  22,357  20,543  12,837  12,432  .. 
Provision of R&D services  22,139  20,399  12,775  12,403  .. 
Sale of proprietary rights arising from R&D development  219 144 62 29 .. 
Other research and development services  14,702  13,718  20,538  20,858  .. 
Professional and management consulting services  47,109  52,380  54,944  60,453  62,065  
Legal, accounting, management consulting, public relations 
services  40,609  45,811  48,955  55,832  .. 
Legal services  3,584  3,950  4,433  4,951  .. 
Accounting, auditing, bookkeeping, tax consulting  3,220  3,395  5,086  6,354  .. 
Business and management consulting, public relations  33,805  38,466  39,436  44,527  .. 
Advertising and related services  6,500  6,569  5,989  4,621  .. 
Advertising services  4,485  4,550  4,955  3,793  .. 
Market research and public opinion polling services  1,928  1,956  972 771 .. 
Trade exhibition and sales convention services  87 63 62 57 .. 
Technical, trade -related, and other business services  22,823  20,794  24,457  23,931  27,872  
Architectural, engineering, scientific, and other  6,104  6,028  7,816  8,119  .. 
Architectural services  283 144 136 134 .. 
Engineering services  5,591  5,596  7,583  7,933  .. 
Scientific and other technical services  230 289 96 52 .. 
Waste treatment, de -pollution, agricultural, mining serv.  1,126  771 783 950 .. 
Waste treatment and de -pollution services  24 22 21 21 .. 
Services incidental to agriculture, forestry, and fishing  3 2 24 21 .. 
Services incidental to mining, and oil and gas extraction  1,100  746 738 908 .. 
Operating leasing services  3,512  2,254  1,803  1,740  .. 
Trade -related services  2,234  2,438  2,518  2,457  .. 
Other business services n.i.e.d 9,845  9,304  11,537  10,665  .. 
Personal, cultural, and recreational services  17,530  18,825  20,486  23,185  26,952  
Audiovisual services  14,328  16,015  17,408  20,142  23,453  
Audiovisual production services  1,555  1,817  1,807  (D) .. 
Rights to use audiovisual products  12,711  14,169  15,565  17,880  .. 
Movies and television programming  6,803  6,832  7,385  7,152  .. 
Books and sound recordings  5,908  7,337  8,179  10,728  .. 
Audiovisual originals  63 29 36 (D) .. 
Movies and television programming  8 (D) (D) (D) .. 
Books and sound recordings  55 (D) (D) 4 .. 
Artistic -related services  1,325  1,038  754 359 331 
Other personal, cultural, and recreational services  1,877  1,772  2,324  2,684  3,167  
Health services  146 (D) 588 (D) .. 
Education services  1,731  1,586  1,661  1,926  .. 
Heritage and recreational services  (*) (D) 76 (D) .. 
Government goods and services n.i.e.  22,047  22,975  24,000  24,553  25,160  
Balance on services (exports less imports)  286,603  297,799  285,174  245,342  230,001  
Addenda:           
Exports of services by affiliation:       
Unaffiliated  568,967  592,739  595,388  427,777  .. 
Affiliated  264,808  268,986  280,907  277,866  .. 
U.S. parents' exports to their foreign affiliates  211,906  215,136  224,331  223,339  .. 
U.S. affiliates' exports to their foreign parent groups  52,902  53,851  56,576  54,527  .. 
Imports of services by affiliation:       
Unaffiliated  375,105  397,421  423,566  295,408  .. 
Affiliated  172,067  166,504  167,555  164,893  .. 
U.S. parents' imports from their foreign affiliates  113,507  113,963  114,811  113,177  .. 
U.S. affiliates' imports from their foreign parent groups  58,560  52,542  52,744  51,715  .. 
(*) Transactions between zero and +/ - USD 500,000.  
(D) Suppressed to avoid the disclosure of data of individual companies.  
n.i.e. Not included elsewhere.  
.. Not available.  
a Courier services are included in "Air transport, freight" but are not separately identifiable.  
b Insurance services transactions are considered to be unaffiliated even when they are between 
affiliated companies because the services are conside red to be provided to the policyholders who pay 
the insurance premiums and who are unaffiliated with either company. The only insurance services 
considered to be affiliated are primary insurance transactions between a U.S. company that is not an 
insurance company and an affiliated foreign insurance company, such as a captive foreign insurance 
affiliate. Data on these affiliated insurance services are not separately available.  
c Outcomes of research and development include patents, industrial processes, and trade secrets.  
d This category includes installation, alteration, and training services; contract manufacturing 
services; photographic services (including satellite photography services); and other business 
services n.i.e.  
Source:  Bureau of Economic Analys is, interactive data tables, International transactions, services and IIP, 
U.S. trade in services , table 2.1 ; and International transactions (ITA) tables 1.2 and 3.1. Viewed at: 
https:/ /apps.bea.gov/iTable/iTable.cfm?ReqID=62&step=1 . WT/TPR/S/434 /Rev.1  • United States  
 
- 285 - 
 
  Table  A2.1 Activity in WTO dispute settlement to which the United  States is a Partya, 
August  2018 -March  2022  
Subject/  WTO  document  series  Respondent / 
Complainant  Consultations 
Request  date Status  
(as at 31  March  2022)  
United  States as a co mplainant  
India – Additional  Duties on Certain  Products  from the 
United  States  /WT/DS585  India 03/07/2019  Panel established, on -going 
panel proceedings  
Russian  Federation  – Additional  Duties  on Certain  
Products  from the United  States  / WT/DS566  Russian  
Federation  27/08/2018  Panel established, on -going 
panel proceedings  
United  States  as a respondent  
United  States  – Origin  Marking  Requirement  /WT/DS597  Hong Kong, China  30/10/2020  Panel established, on -going 
panel proceedings  
United  States  – Tariff  Measures  on Certain  Goods from 
China  III /WT/DS587  China  02/09/2019  Consultations  
United  States  – Anti-Dumping  Measures  on Carbon -
Quality  Steel from Russian  Federation  /WT/DS586  Russian   
Federation  05/07/2019  Consultations  
United  States  – Anti-dumping  and Countervailing  Duties 
on Ripe Olives from Spain / WT/DS577  European  Union  29/01/2019  Report adopted on 
20 December  2021 
United  States  – Measures  Relating  to Trade in Goods and 
Services  /WT/DS574  Bolivarian Republic 
of Venezuela  28/12/2018  Requests for consultations 
and panel establishment, 
thereafter removed from DSB 
agenda  
United  States  – Tariff  Measures  on Certain  Goods  from 
China  II /WT/DS565  China  23/08/2018  Consultations  
United  States  – Certain  Measures  on Steel and 
Aluminium  Product s /WT/DS564  Türkiye  15/08/2018  Panel established, on -going 
panel proceedings  
United  States  – Certain  Measures  Related  to Renewable  
Energy  /WT/DS563  China  14/08/2018  Consultations  
Implementation (Articles 21.5 and 22.6)  
United  States  – Countervailing  Measures  on 
Supercalendered  Paper  /WT/DS505  Canada  Recourse to Article  22.6 by the US on 
26/06/2020 ; arbitrator composed on 6 /08/2020  
United  States  – Countervailing  Duty Measures  on Certain  
Products  /WT/DS437  China  Recourse to Article  22.6 by the US on 
25/10/2018 ; arbitrator composed 15 /11/2019  
United  States  – Anti-Dumping  Measures  on Certain  Oil 
Country  Tubular  Goods  /WT/DS488  Korea , Republic of  Recourse to Article  22.6 by the US on  
29 July 2019 
Indonesia  – Import  Licensing  Regimes  /WT/DS478  Indonesia  Recourse to Article  22.6 by Indonesia on 
15/08/2018  
China  – Domestic  Support  for Agricultural  Producers  
/WT/DS511  China  Recourse to Article  22.6 by China on 
27/07/2020 . /Recourse to Article  21.5 by China 
on 5/08/2020  
China  – Tariff Rate Quotas for Certain  Agricultural  
Products  /WT/DS517  China  Recourse to Article  22.6 by China on 
26/07/2021  /Recourse to Article  21.5 by China 
on 15 /07/2021  
Appeals to the Appellate Body  
United  States  – Anti-Dumping  and Countervailing  Duties  
on Certain  Products  and the Use of Facts Available  
/WT/DS539  Korea , Republic of  19/03/2021b US appealed  
United  States  – Tariff  Measures  on Certain  Goods  
/WT/DS543  China  26/10/2020b US appealed  
United  States  – Countervailing  Measures  on Softwood  
Lumber  /WT/DS533  Canada  28/09/2020b US appealed  
United  States  – Countervailing  Measures  on Certain  Hot-
Rolled  Carbon  Steel Flat Products  /WT/DS436  India 18/12/2019b US appealed  
United  States  – Certain  Measures  Relating  to the 
Renewable  Energy  Sector  /WT/DS510  India 15/08/2019b US appealed  
United  States  – Countervailing  Measures  on Certain  Pipe 
and Tube Products  /WT/DS523  Türkiye  25/01/2019b US appealed  
United States – Anti-Dumping  Measures  Applying  
Differential  Pricing  Methodologies  to Softwood  Lumber  
/WT/DS534  Canada  04/06/2019b Canada appealed  
India – Export  Related  Measures  /WT/DS541  India 19/11/2019b India appealed  
European  Communities  and Certain  Member  States  – 
Measures  Affecting  Trade  in Large  Civil Aircraft  /DS/316  EU 06/12/2019b EU appealed  
United  States  – Safeguard  Measure  on Imports  of 
Crystalline  Silicon  Photovoltaic  Products  /WT/DS562  China  16/09/2021b China appealed  
a Actions initiated during the period.  
b Dates of the notice of appeal . 
Source:  WTO Secretariat.   WT/TPR/S/434 /Rev.1  • United States  
 
- 286 - 
 
  Table  A2.2 Selected U.S. notifications to the WTO, August  2018 -March  2022  
WTO  Agreement / 
Description  Document symbol /Date  
Agreement on Agriculture  
Articles 10 and 18.2 (ES:1, 
ES:2, ES:3). Export subsidies 
commitments: budgetary 
outlays and quantity reduction 
commitments; and notification 
of total exports  G/AG/N/USA/159, 28/10/2021; G/AG/N/USA/154, 16/08/2021; G/AG/N/USA/151, 
31/05/2021; G/AG/N/USA/144, 26/02/2021; G/AG/N/USA/139, G/AG/N/USA/138, 
G/AG/N/USA/137, G/AG/N/USA/136, 18/08/2020; G/AG/N/USA/133, G/AG/N/USA/132, 
G/AG/N/USA/131, 16/06/2020; G/AG/N/USA/128, G/AG/N/U SA/127, G/AG/N/USA/126, 
26/08/2019.  
Article  16.2 NF:1 (1) -(4). 
Net-Food Importing Developing 
Country (NFIDC) Decision  G/AG/N/USA/160, 01/12/2021; G/A/N/USA/146, G/AG/N/USA/145, 01/03/2021; 
G/AG/N/USA/129, 16/12/2019.  
Article  18.2 (DS:1). Domestic 
support  G/AG/N/USA/157, 30/09/2021; G/AG/N/USA/135/Rev.1, G/AG/N/USA/150, 
08/04/2021; G/AG/N/USA/135, 24/07/2020; G/AG/N/USA/123, 31/10/2018  
Article  18.3 (DS:2). Domestic 
support  G/AG/N/USA/156, 07/10/2020; G/AG/N/USA/143 01 /10/2021;  
G/AG/N/USA/134/Rev.1, 06/08/2020; G/AG/N/USA/134, 10/07/2020.  
Article  18.2 (MA:1 and MA:2)  
Administration of tariff and other 
quota commitments  G/AG/N/USA/158, 01/10/2021; G/AG/N/USA/15531/08/2021; G/AG/N/USA/153, 
03/06/2021; G/AG/N/USA/149, G/A G/N/USA/148, G/AG/N/USA/147,02/03/2021; 
G/AG/N/USA/125, G/AG/N/USA/124, 07/02/2019; G/AG/N/USA/122, 15/10/2018  
Articles 5.7 and 18.2 (MA:5). 
Special safeguard provisions  G/AG/N/USA/152, 31/05/2021; G/AG/N/USA/142, G/AG/N/USA/141, G/AG/N/USA/140, 
20/08/2020; G/AG/N/USA/130, 15/05/2020  
Enabling clause  
Paragraph 4(a) of the Decision 
of 28 November  1979 WT/COMTD/N/1/Add.12, 04/02/2022; WT/COMTD/N/1/Add.11, 27/03/2020; 
WT/COMTD/N/1/Add.10, 17/06/2019  
General Agreement on Trade in Services (GATS)  
Article  V:7(a). / Notification of 
Regional Trade Agreement: 
Agreement between Canada, the 
United  States of America, and 
the United Mexican States; and 
the Republic of Korea and the 
United  States  S/C/N/4/Add.1, 09/10/2020; S/C/N/1017, 17/09/2020; S/C/N/621/Add.1, 07/03/2019  
Agreement on the Implementation of Article  VI of the GATT  1994 (Anti -dumping Agreement)  
Article  16.4 – semi-annual  / 
Anti-dumping actions (taken 
within the preceding six months)  G/ADP/N/357/USA, 13/10/2 021; G/ADP/N/350/USA, 15/04/2021; G/ADP/N/342/USA, 
09/10/2020; G/ADP/N/335/USA, 25/06/2020; G/ADP/N/328/USA/Rev.1, 19/12/2019; 
G/ADP/N/328/USA, 23/10/2019; G/ADP/N/322/USA, 19/03/2019; G/ADP/N/314/USA, 
18/09/2018  
Article  16.4 – ad hoc / 
Anti-dumping actions 
(preliminary and final)  G/ADP/N/367, 15/03/2022; G/ADP/N/365, 24/01/2022; G/ADP/N/362, 16/11/2021; 
G/ADP/N/359, 09/08/2021; G/ADP/N/358, 15/07/2021; G/ADP/N/356, 09/06/2021; 
G/ADP/N/354, 13/04/2021; G/ADP/N/353, 10/03/2021; G/ADP/N/352, 23 /02/2021; 
G/ADP/N/351, 26/01/2021; G/ADP/N/349, 17/12/2020; G/ADP/N/348, 13/11/2020; 
G/ADP/N/346, 09/09/2020; G/ADP/N/345, 19/08/2020; G/ADP/N/343, 18/06/2020; 
G/ADP/N/341, 20/05/2020; G/ADP/N/340, 24/04/2020; G/ADP/N/339, 30/03/2020; 
G/ADP/N/334, 15/11/20 19; G/ADP/N/332, 14/08/2019; G/ADP/N/331, 28/06/2019; 
G/ADP/N/329, 28/06/2019; G/ADP/N/327, 29/05/2019; G/ADP/N/326, 25/04/2019; 
G/ADP/N/325, 01/04/2019; G/ADP/N/323, 25/01/2019; G/ADP/N/321, 07/01/2019; 
G/ADP/N/320, 29/11/2018; G/ADP/N/319, 18/10/2018; G/ ADP/N/317, 21/08/2018  
Article  16.5 / Competent 
authorities  G/ADP/N/14/Add.54, 21/04/2021; G/ADP/N/14/Add.49, 05/11/2019  
Article  18.5 / Laws and 
regulations, and changes 
thereto, including changes in the 
administration of such laws  G/ADP/N/1/USA/1/Supp.3 1, 01/10/2021; G/ADP/N/1/USA/1/Suppl.30, 
G/ADP/N/1/USA/1/Suppl.29, 16/07/2020; G/ADP/N/1/USA/1/Suppl.28, 17/04/2020; 
G/ADP/N/1/USA/1/Suppl.27, G/ADP/N/1/USA/1/Suppl.26, 31/03/2020  
GATT  1994  
Article  XVII:4(a) and 
Paragraph  1 of the 
Understanding on the 
Interpretation of Article  XVII / 
State -trading activities  G/STR/N/18/USA, 15/06/2020  
Article  XXIV:7(a) / Notification 
of Regional Trade Agreement: 
Agreement between Canada, the 
United  States of America, and 
the United Mexican States; and 
the Republic of Korea and the 
United  States  WT/REG407/N/1, 17/09/2020; WT/REG4/N/1, 09/10/2020; WT/REG311/N/1/Add.1, 
07/03/2019  
Article  XXVIII:5  / Invocation of 
para. 5  G/MA/389, 26/11/2020  
Paragraph 3(c)  / Notification and 
statistical data  WT/L/1121, 11/12/2021; WT/L/1108, 14/01/2020; WT/L/1078, 28/11/2019; 
WT/L/1055, 09/01/2019  
Agreement on Government Procurement 1994  
Article  XIX:5 / Statistical 
submissions  GPA/123/Add.8/Rev.1, 14/02/2020; GPA/123/Add.8, 29/10/2019; GPA/119/Add.7, 
31/10/2018  
Agreement on Government Procurement 2012  
Article  XIX / Modifications  GPA/MOD/USA/18, 27/11/2020  
Article  XVI: 4 -5 / Statistics  GPA/STAT(18)/USA/1, 25/11/2020; GPA/STAT(17)/USA/1, 29/10/2019; 
GPA/142/Add.10, 31/10/2018; GPA/130/Add.11, 25/11/2020  
Appendix  I / Thresholds  GPA/THR/USA/2, 01/08/2020  WT/TPR/S/434 /Rev.1  • United States  
 
- 287 - 
 
  WTO  Agreement / 
Description  Document symbol /Date  
Agreement on Import Licensing  
Article  5.1 to 5.4 /New 
legislation or procedures  G/LIC/N/2/USA/5, 03/08/2021; G/LIC/N/2/USA/4, 25/02/2021  
Article  7.3 /Replies to the 
questionnaire  G/LIC/N/3/USA/18, 05/10/2021; G/LIC/N/3/USA/17, 14/12/2020; G/LIC/N/3/USA/16, 
28/01/2020; G/LIC/N/3/USA/1505/10/2018  
Agreement on Trade Facilitation  
Articles 1.4, 10.4.3, 10.6.2, 
12.2.2, 22.1, and 22.2 / 
Notifica tion of category 
commitments  G/TFA/N/USA/5, 08/06/2021; G/TFA/N/USA/1/Rev.1, 26/10/2020; G/TFA/N/USA/4, 
08/10/2020; G/TFA/N/USA/3, 13/05/2019  
Decision on Notification Procedures for Quantitative Restrictions  
G/L/59/Rev.1 / Notification of 
QRs G/MA/QR/N/USA/5/Add.3, 21/03/2022; G/MA/QR/N/USA/5/Add.2, 16/09/2021; 
G/MA/QR/N/USA/5/Add.1, 01/02/2021; G/MA/QR/N/USA/5, 06/10/2020; 
G/MA/QR/N/USA/4/Add.2, 01/09/2020; G/MA/QR/N/USA/4/Add.1, 14/05/2020; 
G/MA/QR/N/USA/4, 03/10/2018  
Agreement on Rules of O rigin  
Paragraph 4 of Annex  II and 
Paragraph 4.3 of the 2015 
Ministerial Decision on 
preferential rules of origin for 
least developed countries.  G/RO/N/210, 04/02/2021; G/RO/LDC/N/USA/4, 30/11/2018  
Agreement on Subsidies and Countervailing Measures  
Article  25.1 and GATT  1994 
Article  XVI:1 /Subsidies  G/SCM/N/372/USA, 14/07/2021; G/SCM/N/343/USA/Suppl.1, 01/04/2021; 
G/SCM/N/343/USA/Corr.1, 27/08/2019; G/SCM/N/343/USA, 16/07/2019  
Article  25.11 – ad hoc  / 
Countervailing duty actions 
(preliminary and final)  G/SCM/N/389, 08/03/2022; G/SCM/N/387, 18/01/2022; G/SCM/N/384, 11/11/2021; 
G/SCM/N/381, 06/08/2021; G/SCM/N/380, 06/07/2021; G/SCM/N/378, 03/06/2021; 
G/SCM/N/376, 09/04/2021; G/SCM/N/375, 11/03/2021; G/S CM/N/374, 19/02/2021; 
G/SCM/N/373, 21/01/2021; G/SCM/N/370, 07/12/2020; G/SCM/N/369, 06/11/2020; 
G/SCM/N/367, 08/09/2020; G/SCM/N/366, 20/08/2020; G/SCM/N/364, 12/06/2020; 
G/SCM/N/337/Rev.1, 19/05/2020; G/SCM/N/362, 15/05/2020; G/SCM/N/361, 
24/04/2020; G/S CM/N/360, 18/03/2020; G/SCM/N/355, 07/11/2019; G/SCM/N/353, 
24/09/2019; G/SCM/N/352, 14/08/2019; G/SCM/N/350, 28/06/2019; G/SCM/N/348, 
29/05/2019; G/SCM/N/347, 18/04/2019; G/SCM/N/346, 20/03/2019; G/SCM/N/344, 
25/01/2019; G/SCM/N/341, 18/12/2018; G/SCM/N/3 40, 28/11/2018; 
G/SCM/N/33916/10/2018; G/SCM/N/33730/08/2018  
Article  25.11 – semi-annual /  
Countervailing duty actions 
(taken within the preceding six 
months)  G/SCM/N/379/USA, 08/10/2021; G/SCM/N/371/USA,07/04/2021; 
G/SCM/N/363/USA/corr.1, 28/10/2020; G/S CM/N/363/USA, 16/10/2020; 
G/SCM/N/356/USA, 25/06/2020; G/SCM/N/349/USA, 23/10/2019; G/SCM/N/342/USA, 
16/04/2019; G/SCM/N/334/USA, 27/09/2018  
Article  25.12 / Competent 
authorities  G/SCM/N/18/Add.54, 21/04/2021;  G/SCM/N/18/Add.49, 05/11/2019  
Article  32.6 / Laws/regulations 
and changes thereto, including 
changes in administration of 
such laws  G/SCM/N/1/USA/1/Suppl.32, 01/10/2021; G/SCM/N/1/USA/1/Suppl.31, 02/10/2020; 
G/SCM/N/1/USA/1/Suppl.30, 01/10/2020; G/SCM/N/1/USA/1/Suppl.29, 
G/SCM/N/1/USA/ 1/Suppl.28, 16/07/2020; G/SCM/N/1/USA/1/Suppl.27, 17/04/2020; 
G/SCM/N/1/USA/1/Suppl.26, G/SCM/N/1/USA/1/Suppl.25, 31/03/2020.  
Agreement on Safeguards  
Termination /N o measure 
imposed  G/SG/N/9/USA/5, 06/04/2021  
Article  12.1(a) / Initiation of an 
investigation  G/SG/N/6/USA/13/Corr.1, 21/10/2020; G/SG/N/6/USA/13/Suppl.1, 12/10/2020; 
G/SG/N/6/USA/13, 08/10/2020; G/SG/N/6/USA/11/Supp.4, 01/10/2021; 
G/SG/N/6/USA/11/Suppl.3, 19/08/2021; G/SG/N/6/USA/11/Suppl.2, 10/08/2021  
Article  12.1(b) / Finding a 
serious injury or threat thereof  
Article  12.1(c) / Decision to apply 
or extend a safeguard measure  G/SG/N/10/USA/8/Suppl.7, 22/01/2021; G/SG/N/10/USA/8/Suppl.6, 15/12/2020; 
G/SG/N/10/USA/8/Suppl.5, 22/10/2020;  G/SG/N/10/USA/7/Suppl.12, 20/10/2020;  
G/SG/N/10/USA/7/Suppl.11, 15/06/2020;  G/SG/N/10/USA/7/Suppl.10, 22/04/2020; 
G/SG/N/10/USA/7/Suppl.9, 12/02/2020; G/SG/N/10/USA/7/Suppl.8, 06/01/2020; 
G/SG/N/10/USA/7/Suppl.7, 20/12/2019; G/SG/N/10/USA/7/Suppl.6, 09/10 /2019;  
G/SG/N/10/USA/7/Suppl.1, 24/09/2019; G/SG/N/10/USA/8/Suppl.4, 09/08/2019; 
G/SG/N/10/USA/7/Suppl.5, 07/08/2019; G/SG/N/10/USA/7/Suppl.4, 14/06/2019 ; 
G/SG/N/8/USA/9/Suppl.6, G/SG/N/10/USA/7/Suppl.3, G/SG/N/10/USA/8/Suppl.3, 
G/SG/N/11/USA/6/Suppl.2, G/SG/N/8/USA/10/Suppl.5, G/SG/N/11/USA/7/Suppl.2, 
G/SG/N/8/USA/10/Suppl.5, G/SG/N/8/USA/9/Suppl.6, 07/06/2019; 
G/SG/N/8/USA/9/Suppl.5/Corr.1, G/SG/N/10/USA/7/Suppl.2/Corr.1, 
G/SG/N/11/USA/6/Suppl.1/Corr.1, G/SG/N/10/USA/8/Suppl.2/Corr.1, 
G/SG/N/8/USA/10/Supp l.4/Corr.1, G/SG/N/11/USA/7/Suppl.1/Corr.1, 
G/SG/N/8/USA/10/Suppl.4/Corr.1, G/SG/N/8/USA/9/Suppl.5/Corr.1, 27/05/2019; 
G/SG/N/8/USA/9/Suppl.5, G/SG/N/10/USA/7/Suppl.2, G/SG/N/11/USA/6/Suppl.1, 
G/SG/N/10/USA/8/Suppl.2, G/SG/N/8/USA/10/Suppl.4 G/SG/N/11/USA/ 7/Suppl.1, 
G/SG/N/8/USA/10/Suppl.4, G/SG/N/8/USA/9/Suppl.5, 22/05/2019 ; 
G/SG/N/10/USA/8/Suppl.1 , 26/02/2019  
Article  12.6 / Laws and 
regulations  G/SG/N/1/USA/1/Suppl.2, 08/10/2020  
Article  9.1 footnote 2 
/Notification pursuant to 
Article  9.1, footnote 2  G/SG/N/10/USA/7/Suppl.12, 20/10/2020; G/SG/N/10/USA/7/Suppl.11, 15/06/2020; 
G/SG/N/10/USA/7/Suppl.10, 22/04/2020; G/SG/N/10/USA/7/Suppl.9, 12/02/2020; 
G/SG/N/10/USA/7/Suppl.8, 06/01/2020; G/SG/N/10/USA/7/Suppl.7, 20/12/2019; 
G/SG/N/10/USA/8/Supp l.7, 22/01/2021; G/SG/N/10/USA/8/Suppl.6, 15/12/2020; 
G/SG/N/10/USA/8/Suppl.5, 22/10/2020;; G/SG/N/10/USA/7/Suppl.6, 09/10/2019; 
G/SG/N/10/USA/8/Suppl.4, 09/08/2019; G/SG/N/10/USA/7/Suppl.5, 07/08/2019; WT/TPR/S/434 /Rev.1  • United States  
 
- 288 - 
 
  WTO  Agreement / 
Description  Document symbol /Date  
G/SG/N/10/USA/7/Suppl.4, 14/06/2019; G/SG/N/10/USA/7/S uppl.3, 
G/SG/N/11/USA/6/Suppl.2, G/SG/N/8/USA/9/Suppl.6, G/SG/N/10/USA/8/Suppl.3, 
G/SG/N/8/USA/10/Suppl.5, G/SG/N/11/USA/7/Suppl.2, 07/06/2019; 
G/SG/N/10/USA/7/Suppl.2/Corr.1, G/SG/N/10/USA/8/Suppl.2/Corr.1, 
G/SG/N/8/USA/10/Suppl.4/Corr.1, G/SG/N/11/USA/7/ Suppl.1/Corr.1, 
G/SG/N/8/USA/9/Suppl.5/Corr.1, G/SG/N/11/USA/6/Suppl.1/Corr.1, 27/05/2019; 
G/SG/N/10/USA/7/Suppl.2, G/SG/N/8/USA/10/Suppl.4, G/SG/N/11/USA/6/Suppl.1, 
G/SG/N/10/USA/8/Suppl.2, G/SG/N/11/USA/7/Suppl.1, G/SG/N/8/USA/9/Suppl.5, 
22/05/2019; G/SG /N/10/USA/8/Suppl.1, 26/02/2019; G/SG/N/10/USA/7/Suppl.1, 
24/09/2018.  
Agreement on the Application of Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures  
Article  7 Annex  B. Sanitary and 
phytosanitary regulations  Some 300 notifications (series G/SPS/N/USA/ http://spsims.wto.org/ ) 
Agreement on Technical Barriers to Trade  
Annex  C. Notification of 
acceptance of the Code of Good 
Practice  G/TBT/CS/N/202, 10/01/2022; G/TBT/CS/N/1 99, 20/02/2019  
Article  10.7. Agreement with 
any other country on issues 
related to technical regulations, 
standards or conformity 
assessment procedures which 
may have a significant effect on 
trade  G/TBT/10.7/N/158, G/TBT/10.7/N/157, 23/02/2021  
Article  2.10 
Notification of technical 
regulations  G/TBT/N/USA/1764, 17/08/2021; G/TBT/N/USA/1700, 18/02/2021; 
G/TBT/N/USA/1688, 11/01/2021; G/TBT/N/USA/1561/Add.2, 12/08/2020; 
G/TBT/N/USA/1561/Add.1, 21/04/2020; G/TBT/N/USA/1561, 14/01/2020; 
G/TBT/N/USA/1 551/Add.4, 18/06/2020; G/TBT/N/USA/1551/Add.3, 21/04/2020; 
G/TBT/N/USA/1551/Add.2, 12/03/2020; G/TBT/N/USA/1551/Add.1, 27/01/2020; 
G/TBT/N/USA/1551, 25/11/2019; G/TBT/N/USA/1546, 13/11/2019; 
G/TBT/N/USA/1542/Add.1, 29/01/2020; G/TBT/N/USA/1542, 25/10/2019;  
G/TBT/N/USA/1541/Add.1, 29/01/2020; G/TBT/N/USA/1541, G/TBT/N/USA/1540, 
22/10/2019  
Articles 2.10 and 5.7. Technical 
regulations and conformity 
assessment procedures  G/TBT/N/USA/1602/Add.1, 31/08/2020; G/TBT/N/USA/1602, 15/04/2020  
Article  2.9. Technical regulations  Some 600 notifications (series G/TBT/N/USA/ http://tbtims.wto.org/ ) 
Articles 2.9 and 5.6. Technical 
regulations and conformity 
assessment procedures  Some 200 notifications (series G/TBT/N/USA/ http://tbtims.wto.org/ ) 
Article  3.2. Technical regulations 
(local government)  Some 90 notifications (series G/TBT/N/USA/ http://tbtims.wto.org/ ) 
Articles 3.2 and 7.2. Technical 
regulations and conformity 
assessment (local government)  G/TBT/N/USA/1842, 07/03/2022; G/TBT/N/USA/1737, 07/06/2021; 
G/TBT/N/USA/1664/Add.1, 01/04/2021; G/TBT/N/USA/1664, 28/10/2020; 
G/TBT/N/USA/1633, G/TBT/N/USA/1632, 16/07/2020; G/TBT/N/USA/871/Rev.1, 
08/07/2020; G/TBT/N/USA/1574, 10/02/2020; G/TBT/N/USA/295/Rev.1/Add.1, 
22/09/2020; G/TBT/N/USA/295/Rev.1, 06/11/2019; G /TBT/N/USA/1489/Add.1 , 
10/12/2019 ; G/TBT/N/USA/1489, 04/06/2019; G/TBT/N/USA/1452/Add.1, 18/05/2019; 
G/TBT/N/USA/1452, 01/04/2019 ; G/TBT/N/USA/1407/Add.1, 11/04/2019 ; 
G/TBT/N/USA/1408 , 30/10/2018; G/TBT/N/USA/1406 , G/TBT/N/USA/1407, 
29/10/2018; G/TBT/N/USA /1403/Add.1 , 25/10/2019; G/TBT/N/USA/1403 , 25/10/2018; 
G/TBT/N/USA/1344/Add.1, G/TBT/N/USA/1365/Add.1 , 15/08/2018; 
G/TBT/N/USA/1361/Add.1 , 21/02/2019; G/TBT/N/USA/1344/Add.2 , 18/05/2021.  
Article  5.6. Conformity 
assessment procedures  G/TBT/N/USA/1720, 20/0 4/2021; G/TBT/N/USA/1646, 14/09/2020; 
G/TBT/N/USA/1606/Add.1, 21/04/2021; G/TBT/N/USA/1606/Corr.1, 03/06/2020; 
G/TBT/N/USA/1606, 20/04/2020; G/TBT/N/USA/1477/Add.1, 12/03/2020; 
G/TBT/N/USA/1477, 29/04/2019; G/TBT/N/USA/1412, 05/11/2018; 
G/TBT/N/USA/1397/Co rr.1, 25/10/2018; G/TBT/N/USA/1397, 05/10/2018; 
G/TBT/N/USA/1173/Add.1, 04/03/2019  
Article  5.7. Conformity 
assessment procedures  G/TBT/N/USA/1673, 02/12/2020  
Article  7.2. Conformity 
assessment (local government)  G/TBT/N/USA/1795, 02/11/2021; G/TBT/N/USA/ 1741, 29/06/2021; 
G/TBT/N/USA/1613, 21/04/2020  
Unspecified. Notification (other)  Some 270 notifications (series G/TBT/N/USA/ http://tbtims.wto.org/ ) 
Agreement on Trade -Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights  
Article  63.2. Notification of laws 
and regulations  IP/N/1/USA/66; IP/N/1/USA/T/8, 04/02/2022; IP/N/1/USA/65; IP/N/1/USA/P/17, 
25/09/2020; IP/N/1/USA/64; IP/N/1/USA/P/16, 25/09/2020; IP/N/1/USA/63; 
IP/N/1/USA/C/8, 13/02/2019; IP/N/1/USA/62;  IP/N/1/USA/C/7, 13/02/2019; 
IP/N/1/USA/61; IP/N/1/USA/P/15, 13/02/2019  
Source:  WTO Secretariat.  
  WT/TPR/S/434 /Rev.1  • United States  
 
- 289 - 
 
  Table  A3.1 Summary analysis of United  States MFN tariff, 2021  
Description  MFN 
No. of 
lines  Average 
(%) Range (%)  Coefficient of 
variation 
(CV) Bound 
averagea 
(%) 
Total  10,905  4.8 0 – 439.9  2.8 4.8 
HS 01 -24 1,928  8.2 0 – 439.9  3.5 8.2 
HS 25 -97 8,977  4.1 0 – 59 1.4 4.1 
By WTO category  
WTO agriculture  1,708  9.2 0 – 439.9  3.3 9.2 
- Animals and products thereof  162 3.3 0 – 26.4 1.8 3.3 
- Dairy products  167 27.0 0 – 354.8  1.4 27.0 
- Fruit, vegetables and plants  532 5.4 0 – 131.8  2.1 5.4 
- Coffee and tea  82 9.8 0 – 140 1.6 9.8 
- Cereals and preparations  190 9.4 0 – 220.5  2.2 9.4 
- Oil seeds, fats and oils and their products  107 7.2 0 – 163.8  3.3 7.2 
- Sugars and confection ery 53 9.9 0 – 70.5 1.2 9.9 
- Beverages, spirits and tobacco  153 22.7 0 – 439.9  3.5 22.7 
- Cotton  16 3.2 0 – 16.9 1.5 3.2 
- Other agricultural products n.e.s.  246 1.5 0 – 37.8 2.1 1.6 
WTO non -agriculture (incl. petroleum)  9,197  4.0 0 – 59 1.4 4.0 
- WTO non -agriculture (excl.  petroleum)  9,165  4.0 0 – 59 1.4 4.0 
 - – Fish and fishery products  368 1.4 0 – 35 2.5 1.4 
 - – Minerals and metals  1,567  2.6 0 – 38 1.6 2.6 
 - – Chemicals and photographic supplies  1,941  3.7 0 – 6.5 0.7 3.7 
 - – Wood, pulp, paper and furniture  605 1.1 0 – 16 2.4 1.1 
 - – Textiles  1,099  7.9 0 – 40.2 0.7 7.9 
 - – Clothing  647 11.3 0 – 32 0.7 11.3 
 - – Leather, rubber, footwear and travel 
goods  421 7.5 0 – 59 1.5 7.4 
 - – Non-electric machinery  820 1.3 0 – 9.9 1.4 1.3 
 - – Electric machinery  543 1.7 0 – 15 1.4 1.7 
 - – Transport equipment  261 2.4 0 – 25 1.9 2.4 
 - – Non-agriculture articles n.e.s.  893 2.8 0 – 32 1.4 2.8 
- Petroleum  32 2.1 0 – 7.1 1.3 2.2 
By HS section  
 01 Live animals & prod.  605 8.5 0 – 354.8  2.7 8.6 
 02 Vegetable products  563 3.9 0 – 163.8  3.0 3.9 
 03 Fats & oils  69 3.7 0 – 36.3 1.5 3.7 
 04 Prepared food etc.  691 12.0 0 – 439.9  3.4 12.0 
 05 Minerals  204 0.6 0 – 14 2.7 0.7 
 06 Chemical & prod.  1,804  3.5 0 – 15.2 0.8 3.5 
 07 Plastics & rubber  376 3.7 0 – 14 0.7 3.7 
 08 Hides & skins  231 4.9 0 – 20 1.1 4.9 
 09 Wood & articles  299 2.3 0 – 18 1.4 2.3 
 10 Pulp, paper etc.  275 0.0 0 – 0 n.a. 0.0 
 11 Textile & articles  1,675  9.0 0 - 32 0.7 9.0 
 12 Footwear, headgear  197 13.4 0 - 59 1.1 13.4 
 13 Articles of stone  317 5.4 0 - 38 1.1 5.4 
 14 Precious stones, etc.  105 3.0 0 - 13.5 1.1 3.1 
 15 Base metals & prod.  988 2.0 0 - 24.6 1.5 2.0 
 16 Machinery  1,383  1.4 0 - 15 1.4 1.5 
 17 Transport equipment  272 2.3 0 - 25 1.9 2.4 
 18 Precision equipment  518 2.6 0 - 31.8 1.5 2.6 
 19 Arms and ammunition  33 1.9 0 - 9.5 1.3 1.9 
 20 Miscellaneous manufacturing  293 3.5 0 - 32 1.2 3.4 
 21 Works of art, etc.  7 0.0 0 - 0 n.a. 0.0 
n.a. Not applicable.  
a Bound tariff is in the same HS17 nomenclature as the MFN tariff, however, it is based on the draft 
HS17 CTS submission and is not certified as at March  2022.  
Note:  The table uses average rates, thus in certain cases the average applied may marginally exceed the 
average bound due to unique circumstances such as nomenclature changes and AVE calculations.  
Source:  WTO Secretariat calcula tions, based on data provided by the authorities.  
  WT/TPR/S/434 /Rev.1  • United States  
 
- 290 - 
 
  Table  A3.2 Tariff -rate quotas and fill rates, agricultural products, 2018 -20 
ID Description of products /Tariff item numbers  Tariff quota 
quantity  Fill rate 
2018  Fill rate 
2019 Fill rate 
2020  
USAQ001  Beef: fresh, chilled or frozen. Additional U.S. Note 3 to chapter 2. 
/0201.10.10; 0201.20.10; 0201.20.30; 0201.20.50; 0201.30.10; 
0201.30.30; 0201.30.50; 0202.10.10; 0202.20.10; 0202.20.30; 
0202.20.50; 0202.30.10; 0202.30.30; 0202.30.50  696,621 mt  71% 64.9%  65.3%  
USAQ002a Milk and cream, fluid or frozen, fresh or sour, containing over 6% but not 
over 45% by weight of butterfat. Additional U.S. Note 5 to 
chapter  4/0401.40.05; 0401.50.05; 0403.90.04  6,694,840  l 15.2%  13.6%  15.2%  
USAQ004a Butter, and fresh or sour cream containing over 45% by weight of 
butterfat. Additional U.S. Note 6 to chapter 4: 0401.50.50; 0403.90.74; 
0405.10.10  6,977,000  kg 99% 98.5%  96.7%  
USAQ006a Dried milk, whether or not containing added sugar or other sweetening  
matter. Additional U.S. Note 7 to chapter 4. / 0402.10.10; 0402.21.05  5,261,000  kg 6.8%  2.5%  1.8%  
USAQ008a Dried milk and dried cream, whether or not containing added sugar or 
other sweetening matter. Additional U.S. Note 8 to chapter 4. / 
0402.21.30; 0403.90.51  3,321,300  kg 43.6%  52.9%  92.7%  
USAQ009a Dried milk and dried cream, whether or not containing added sugar or 
other sweetening matter. Additional U.S. Note 9 to chapter 4. /  
0402.21.75; 0403.90.61  99,500  kg 0.1%  56.5%  9.3%  
USAQ010a Dairy products described in additional U.S. note 10 to chapter 4./  
0402.29.10, 0402.99.70, 0403.10.10, 0403.90.90, 0404.10.11, 
0404.90.30, 0405.20.60, 1517.90.50, 1704.90.54, 1806.20.81, 
1806.32.60, 1806.90.05, 1901.10.21, 1901.10.41, 1901.10.54, 
1901.10.64, 1901.20.05, 1901.20.45, 1901.90.61, 1901.90.64, 
2105.00.30, 2106.90.06, 2106.90.64, 2106 .90.85, 2202.99.24  4,105,000  kg 79.6%  81% 80.6%  
USAQ012a Milk and cream, condensed or evaporated. Additional U.S. Note 11 to 
chapter 4. 0402.91.10; 0402.91.30; 0402.99.10; 0402.99.30  6,857,300  kg 78.6%  79.8%  77.4%  
USAQ013a Dried milk, dried cream and dried whey, the foregoing whether or not 
containing added sugar or other sweetening matter. Additional U.S. Note 
12 to chapter 4 / 0403.90.41; 0404.10.50  296,000  kg 38.3%  10.8%  55.5%  
USAQ014a Butter substitutes containing over 45% by weight of butterfat. Additional 
U.S. Note 14 to chapter 4 / 0405.20.20; 0405.90.10; 2106.90.24; 
2106.90.34  6,080,500  kg 92.2%  99.7%  93.7%  
USAQ016a Cheeses and substitutes for cheese (except (i)  cheese not containing cow's 
milk; (ii)  soft ripened cow's milk cheese; (iii)  cheese (except cottage 
cheese)) containing 0.5% or less by weight of butterfat; and, (iv)  articles 
within the scope of other. Additional U.S. Note 16 to chapter 4. 
/0406.10.04; 0406.10.84; 0406.20.89; 0406.30.89; 0406.90.95  48,627,859  kg 76.3% 79% 66.5%  
USAQ017a Blue mold cheese (except Stilton produced in the United  Kingdom) and 
cheese and substitutes  for cheese containing, or processed from, 
blue-mold cheese. Additional U.S. Note 17 to chapter 4. / 0406.10.14; 
0406.20.24; 0406.20.61; 0406.30 .14; 0406.30.61; 0406.40.54; 
0406.40.58; 0406.90.72  2,911,001  kg 96.6%  95.9%  58.4%  
USAQ018a Cheddar cheese and cheese and substitutes for cheese containing, or 
processed from Cheddar cheese. Additional U.S. Note 18 to chapter 4. / 
0406.10.24; 0406.20.31; 0406.20.65; 0406.30.24; 0406.30.65; 
0406.90.08; 0406.90.76  13,256,306  kg 59.7%  56.9%  54.5%  
USAQ019a American -type cheese, including Colby, washed curd and granular cheese 
(but not including Cheddar cheese), and cheese and substitutes for cheese 
containing, or processed from, such American -type cheese. Additional U.S. 
Note 19 to chapter 4.  /0406.10.34; 0406.20.36; 0406.20.69; 0406.30.34; 
0406.30.69; 0406.90.52; 0406.90.82  3,522,556  kg 2.3%  1.7%  0% 
USAQ020a Edam and Gouda cheeses and of cheese and substitutes for cheese 
containing, or processed from, Edam and Gouda cheese. Additional U.S. 
Note 20 to chapter 4. / 0406.10.44; 0406.20.44; 0406.20.73; 0406.30.44; 
0406.30.73; 0406.90.16; 0406.90.86  6,816,402  kg 98.8%  99.1%  95.2%  
USAQ021a Italian -type cheeses, made from cow's milk, in original  loaves (Romano 
made from cow's milk, Reggiano, Parmesan, Provolone, Provoletti and 
Sbrinz); and Italian -type cheeses, made from cow's milk, not in original 
loaves (Romano made from cow's milk, Reggian o). Additional U.S.  Note 21 
to chapter 4. / 0406.10.54; 0406.20.51; 0406.20.77; 0406.30.77; 
0406.90.31; 0406.90.36; 0406.90.41; 0406.90.66  13,481,064  kg 70.2%  71.2%  70.1%  
USAQ022a Swiss or Emmentaler cheese other than with eye formation, Gruyere -
process cheese and of cheese and substitutes for cheese containing, or 
processed from, such cheeses. Additional U.S. Note 22 to chapter 4. 
/0406.10.64; 0406.20.81; 0406.30.51; 0406.30.81; 0406.90.90  7,854,833  kg 38.4%  40.4%  32.8%  
USAQ023a Cheese and substitutes for cheese, containing 0.5% or less by weight of 
butterfat (except articles within the scope of other import quotas provided 
for in additional U.S. notes 16 through 22, inclusive, or additional 
U.S. notes 24 and 25 to this chapter). /0406.10.74; 0406.20.85; 
0406.30.85; 0406.90.93; 1901.90.34  5,474,908  kg 0.3%  0.1%  1.9%  
USAQ024a Swiss and Emmentaler cheese with eye formation. Additional U.S. Note 25 
to chapter 4. / 0406.90.46  34,475,276  kg 64.3%  61.9%  51.9%  
USAQ025  Green whole olives. Additional U.S. Note 4 to chapter 20. / 0711.20.18; 
2005.70.06  4,400 mt  8.9%  100%  100%  
USAQ026a,b Peanuts. Additional U.S. Note 2 to chapter 12. / 1202.30.40; 1202.41.40; 
1202.42.20; 2008.11.25; 2008.11.45  52,906 mt  29.9%  33.2%  32% 
USAQ028b Sugars, syrups and molasses. Additional U.S. Note 5 to chapter 17. 
/1701.12.10; 1701.91.10; 1701.99.10; 1702.90.10; 2106.90.44  22,000 mt  100%  100%  100%  WT/TPR/S/434 /Rev.1  • United States  
 
- 291 - 
 
  ID Description of products /Tariff item numbers  Tariff quota 
quantity  Fill rate 
2018  Fill rate 
2019 Fill rate 
2020  
USAQ030b Articles containing over 10% by dry weight of sugars described in 
additional U.S. Note 8 to chapter 17. / 1701.91.54; 1704.90.74; 
1806.20.75; 1806.20.95; 1806.90.55; 1901.10.74; 1901.90.69; 
2101.12.54; 2101.20.54; 2106.90.78; 2106.90.95  64,709 mt  85.6%  81.7%  97.3%  
USAQ033b Raw cane sugar. Additional U.S. Note 5 to chapter 17. / 1701.13.10; 
1701.14.10  1,117,195 mt  85.1%  95% 100%  
USAQ034  Cocoa powder containing over 10% by dry weight of sugars derived from 
sugar cane or sugar beets, whether or not mixed with other ingredients. 
Additional U.S. Note 1 to chapter 18. / 1806.10.10; 1806.10.34; 
1806.10.65  2,313 mt  100%  100%  100%  
USAQ035a Chocolate containing over 5.5% by weight of butterfat (excluding articles 
for consumption at retail as candy or confection). Additional U.S. Note 2 to 
chapter 18. / 1806.20.24; 1806.32.04; 1806.90.15  26,167,700  kg 58.2%  66.3%  66.2%  
USAQ036a Chocolate and low fat chocolate crumb containing 5.5% or less by weight 
of butterfat (excluding articles for consumption at retail as candy or 
confection). Additional U.S. Note 3 to chapter 1 8. /1806.20.34; 
1806.20.85; 1806.32.14; 1806.90.25  2,122,834  kg 0% 0% 0% 
USAQ037  Infant formula containing oligosacchaarides, approved by the Food and 
Drug Administration. Additional U.S. Note 2 to chapter 19. / 1901.10.11; 
1901.10.33  100 mt  100%  97% 99% 
USAQ038  Mixes and doughs. Additional U.S. note 3 to chapter 19. / 1901.20.30; 
1901.20.65  5,398 mt  89.2%  99.9%  100%  
USAQ039a Peanut butter and paste. Additional U.S. Note 5 to chapter 20. 
/2008.11.05  20,000 mt  87.3%  89.3%  87.7%  
USAQ040  Green ripe olives. / 2005.70.02  730 mt     
USAQ041  Place packed stuffed olives. / 2005.70.16  2,700 mt  19.9%  19.7%  27.4%  
USAQ042  Green olives, other. / 2005.70.91  550 mt  77.5%  75.1%  62.4%  
USAQ043  Mandarin Oranges (satsuma). / 2008.30.42  40,000 mt  100%  99.9%  100%  
USAQ044b Mixed condiments and mixed seasonings. Additional U.S.  Note 4 to chapter 
21. /2103.90.74  689 mt  98.4%  99.7%  100%  
USAQ045a Ice Cream. Additional U.S.  Note 5 to chapter 21. / 2105.00.10  5,667,846  l 71.9%  72.7%  87.5%  
USAQ046a Animal feed containing milk or milk derivatives. Additional U.S. Note 2 to 
chapter 23. / 2309.90.24; 2309.90.44  7,399,700  kg 0% 0% 0% 
USAQ047b Tobacco. Additional U.S.  Note 5 to chapter 24. / 2401.10.63; 2401.20.33; 
2401.20.85; 2401.30.33; 2401.30.35; 2401.30.37; 2403.11.00; 
2403.19.60; 2403.91.45; 2403.99.60  150,700 mt  42.2%  50.9%  42.9%  
USAQ049b Cotton, not carded or combed, the product of any country or area 
including the United  States, having a staple length under 28.575  mm 
(1-1/8 inches) (except harsh or rough cotton, having a staple length under 
19.05  mm (3/4  inch)). Additional U.S.  Note 5 to chapter 52. / 5201.00.14  20,207 mt  0% 0% 0% 
USAQ050  Harsh or rough cotton, not carded or combed, the product of any country 
or area including the United  States, having a staple length of 
29.36875  mm (1 -5/32 inches) or more but under 34.925  mm 
(1-3/8 inches) and white in color (except cotton of perished staple, 
grabbots and cotton pickings). Additional U.S. Note 6 to chapter 52. /  
5201. 00.24  1,400 mt  0% 0% 0% 
USAQ051  Cotton, not carded or combed, the product of any country or area 
including the United  States, having a staple length of 28.575  mm 
(1-1/8 inches) or more but under 34.925  mm (1 -3/8 inches) (except harsh 
or rough cotton, not carded or combed, having a staple length of 
29.36875  mm (1 -5/32 inches) or more but under 34.925  mm 
(1-3/8 inches) and white in color (except cotton of perished staple, 
grabbots and cotton pickings)). Additional U.S. Note 7 to chapter 52./  
5201.00.34  11,500 mt  0% 0% 0% 
USAQ052  Cotton, not carded or combed, the product of any country or area 
including the United  States, having a staple length of 34.925  mm 
(1 3/8 inches) or more. Additional U.S. Note 8 to chapter 52./ 5201.00.60  40,100 mt  1.8%  0% 1.2%  
USAQ053b Card strips made from cotton having a staple length under 30.1625  mm 
(1-3/16 inches), and lap waste, silver waste and roving waste of cotton, all 
the foregoing the product of any country or area including the 
United  States. Additional U.S.  Note 9 to chapter 52. / 5202. 99.10  3,335,427  kg 27.8%  25.4%  47.3%  
USAQ054b Fibers of cotton processed but not spun. Additional U.S. Note  10 to chapter 
52. /5203.00.10  2,500  kg 0% 0% 0% 
a Does not include quantities reserved for Mexico under NAFTA.  
b Not on a calendar year basis.  
Notes:  In cases where in -quota imports exceed the TRQ quantities, fill rates are capped at 100%.  
 Tariff lines are from the 2020  U.S. Harmonized Tariff Schedule.  
 All are on a calendar year basis unless otherwise indicated.  
Source:  WTO documents G/AG/N/USA/147 and G/AG/N/USA/148, 2  March  2021; and G/AG/N/USA/153, 
3 June 2021.  
  WT/TPR/S/434 /Rev.1  • United States  
 
- 292 - 
 
  Table  A3.3 Import prohibitions, restrictions, and other measures 2022  
General description / Legal basis  WTO 
Justification 
/Agency  
Prohibition of importation of shrimp and shrimp products harvested with commercial fishing technology that may 
adversely affect sea turtles. /Section  609, P.L. 101-162, 1990; 16  U.S.C. 1537.  (1) /State  
Prohibition on importation of yellowfin tuna caught using purse seine fishing gear in the Eastern Tropical Pacific 
Ocean.  Implementation of the International Dolphin Conservation Agreement Program (AIDCP). /Marine Mammal 
Protection Act of 1972, Section  101 (16  U.S.C. 1371)  (2) /NOAA  
Prohibition on the importation of marine mammals and marine mammal products /Marine Mammal Protection Act 
of 1972, (16  U.S.C.  1371-1372)  (1) /NOAA, FWS  
Prohibition on the importation of certain toxic substances. / Toxic Substances Control Act of 1976 (15  U.S.C. 2601 
et seq.) (2) /EPA  
Prohibition on the importation of certain ozone -depleting substances. Implementation of the Montreal Protocol. 
/Clean Air Act Amendments of  1990 (42  U.S.C.  7671o)  (2) /EPA  
Prohibition on importing, transporting, selling, receiving, acquiring, or purchasing in interstate or foreign commerce 
any fish, wildlife or plant, taken, possessed, transported or sold in violation of relevant U.S. or foreign laws.  /Lacey 
Act Amendments of 1981, as amended. (16  U.S.C. 3371 ) (1) /FWS  
Prohibition on importing, transporting, selling, receiving, acquiring, or purchasing in interstate or foreign commerce 
any live lion, tiger, leopard, snow leopard, clouded leopard, jaguar, cheetah, or cougar, or any hybrids of any of 
these specie s, with some exceptions. /Captive Wildlife Safety Act, (16  U.S.C. 3371)  (1) /FWS  
Prohibition on the importation of species, including offspring and eggs, designated through statute or regulation to 
be injurious to human beings, to the interests of agriculture, horticulture, forestry, or to wildlife or the wildlife 
resources of the United  States, with some exceptions. / Lacey Act of 1900, as amended (18  U.S.C. 42(a) -(b)); 
18 U.S.C. §  42(a)(1); 50  C.F.R. §§ 16.3 -16.15.  (2) /FWS  
Prohibition on the imp ortation of endangered and threatened species. /Endangered Species Act of  1973, Section  9 
(16 U.S.C. 1538)  (1) /FWS, NOAA, 
APHIS  
Prohibition on the importation of certain species pursuant to Convention on International Trade in Endangered 
Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES). / Endangered Species Act of  1973, Section  9 (16 U.S.C. 1538)  (1) /FWS, NOAA, 
APHIS  
Import prohibition of African elephant ivory. /African Elephant Conservation Act (16  U.S.C. 4201)  (1) /FWS  
Prohibition on sale, or import of any product, item, or substance intended for human consumption or application 
containing, or labeled or advertised as containing, any substance derived from any species of rhinoceros or tiger. 
/Rhinoceros and Tiger Conserv ation Act (16  U.S.C. 5301 et seq.) (1) /FWS  
Prohibition on the import of exotic bird species. /Wild Bird Conservation Act (16  U.S.C. 4901 et  (1) /FWS  
Prohibition on the import of bald and golden eagles. /Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act (16 U.S.C. 668)  (1) /FWS  
Prohibition on the import of migratory birds. /Migratory Bird Treaty Act (16  U.S.C. 703 et seq.) (1) /FWS  
Import quota on steel mill products from Korea, Rep. of. / Trade Expansion Act of 1962, Section  232 (19  U.S.C. 
1862)  GATT A rticle XXI 
/BIS 
Import quota on steel mill products from Argentina. /Trade Expansion Act of 1962, Section  232  Article  XXI /BIS  
Import quota on steel mill products from Brazil. / Trade Expansion Act of 1962, Section  232  Article  XXI /BIS  
Import quota on aluminum products from Argentina. / Trade Expansion Act of 1962, Section  232  Article  XXI /BIS  
Prohibition on the importation, distribution, transport, manufacture or sale of products containing dog and cat fur. 
/Dog and Cat Protection Act  of 2000  (1) /CBP  
The importation of rough diamonds into the United  States requires a Kimberley Process Certificate. /Clean Diamond 
Trade Act, P. L. 108 -19 (5) /CBP  
Import of white phosphorus matches is prohibited, 19 C .F.R. 12.34/ An Act to Provide for a Tax Upon White 
Phosphorus Matches and for Other Purposes  (2) /CBP  
The transportation, importation, sale, or possession of the skins of fur seals or sea otters is prohibited except under 
special permit. /58 Stat. 100 -104; U. S. Marine Mammal Protection Act (16  U.S.C. 3371 ) (1) /NOAA, FWS  
Importation of switchblade knives is prohibited unless for use primarily as utilitarian knives. /19 C .F.R. 12.96; 
Switchblade Knife Act of 1958 (15  U.S.C. §1241 -1245)  (4) /CBP  
Importation of pre -Columbian monumental or architectural sculpture or mural is prohibited except if permitted by 
the exporting country. /19 C .F.R. 12.106; 19  U.S.C. 2091 – 2095 (P.L.  92-587) (3) /State  
Allowance Allocation and Trading Program restricts im ports. /American Innovation and Manufacturing Act of 2020 
(AIM Act)  (2)/ EPA  
Certain cultural property is restricted unless allowed through exporting country certification /19 C .F.R. 12.104  (3) /State  
Imports of viruses, therapeutic serum, toxin, antitoxin, or analogous product, or arsphenamine or its derivatives, 
applicable to the prevention, treatment, or cure of diseases or injuries of man are prohibited. /Public Health Service 
Act, § 351(a)&(i)(42  U.S.C. § 262(a)&(i))  (2) /HHS  
Infectious biological materials that could causing communicable disease in humans. /42 C .F.R. 71.54  (2) /HHS  
Books, writings, advertisements, circulars, or pictures advocating or urging treason or insurrection against the 
United  States are prohibited. /Se ction 305, Tariff Act of 1930  (4) /CBP  
Imports of goods, wares, articles, and merchandise mined, produced, or manufactured wholly or in part in any 
foreign country by convict labor or/and forced labor are prohibited. /19  U.S.C. Chap. 4  Article  XX(e)/ 
CBP 
Import prohibition of seafood products derived from fisheries found not to have comparable protections for marine 
mammals. /58 Stat. 100 -104; U.S. Marine Mammal Protection Act; MMPA Import regulations (80 C .F.R. 54390)  (1) /NOAA  
Note:  (1) Conservation of  exhaustible natural resources ; (2) Protection of human, animal or plant life or 
health ; (3) Protection of national artistic, historic, or archaeological treasures ; (4) Protection of 
public morals ; (5) Kimberley Process Certification Scheme.  
 Institutions: State: U.S. Department of State; NOAA: National Oceanic and Atmospheric 
Administration, (USDOC); FWS: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Department of the Interior; EPA: U.S. 
Environmental Protection Agency; U.S. Department of Agriculture, Anima l and Plant Health 
Inspection Service (APHIS); BIS: Bureau of Industry and  Security, USDOC; CBP: U.S.  Customs and 
Border Protection; HHS: Department of Health and Human Services . 
Source:  WTO document G/MA/QR/N/USA/5; CBP . Viewed  at: 
https://www.cbp.gov/sites/default/files/assets/documents/2017 -
Aug/ACE%20PGA%20Import%20Forms%20 -%20August%202017_0.pdf ; 
https://www.cbp.gov/sites/default/files/documents/Importing%20into%20the%20U.S.pdf ; Title 19, 
Chapter 4, Subtitle II, Part I -Miscellaneous; 19 C .F.R. Part 12-Special Classes of Merc handise .  WT/TPR/S/434 /Rev.1  • United States  
 
- 293 - 
 
  Table  A3.4 Products subject to import licensing, 2022  
Products  Agency  Purpose /Legal reference  License conditions  
Automatic     
Certain aluminum products 
including unwrought aluminum; 
bars, rods, and profiles; plates, 
sheet, and strip; wire; foil; pipe 
and tubes; castings and forgings  ITA, USDOC  Monitoring of import surges of specific 
aluminum products through the Aluminum 
Import Monitoring and Analysis (AIM) 
system. / 13  U.S.C. 301(a) and 302  Importer s, importing agents, or 
brokers may apply for the 
license. Foreign filers may apply 
if they have a valid U.S. address.  
All basic steel mill products (over 
700 products)  ITA To provide fast and reliable statistical 
information on steel imports to the 
Government and the public through the 
Steel Import Monitoring and Analysis 
(SIMA) system. / 85 FR 56162  Only registered users may file 
for steel licenses  
Non-automatic     
Certai n live animals, animal 
derived products/by -products, 
organisms and vectors, and 
veterinary biologics  Department of 
Agriculture  To protect domestic agriculture from 
animal diseases not present in the 
United  States. /Title 9 C .F.R., Parts 92 
through 98, 104 and 122  All persons, firms and 
institutions in the United  States 
may apply for permits  
Controlled substances and listed 
chemicals  Department of 
Justice, Drug 
Enforcement 
Administration  To: restrict the quantity of imports of 
controlled substances and listed chemicals; 
maintain a monitoring system; and meet 
the obligations under UN Conventions on 
these substances. / Title 21, C .F.R., 
Parts 1300, 1310, 1312, 1313; 21  U.S.C. 
Sections  822, 823, 826, 952, 953, 957 and 
958 Importation only by approved, 
registered importers who must 
be inspected for adequate 
records, security, etc. prior to 
DEA registration.  
Certain butter, dried skim milk, 
dried whole milk, dried 
buttermilk & whey, butt er 
substitutes, and certain cheeses.  Department of 
Agriculture  An administrative tool that governs imports 
of certain dairy products subject to TRQs 
resulting from the Uruguay Round 
Agreement. /7 C .F.R. 6.20-6.36 Importers or manufacturers of 
dairy product s may apply for 
licenses . Importers must meet 
the Import Regulation 
performance criteria on the 
quantity of imports entered in a 
previous 12 -month period. 
Manufacturers must meet a 
specified level of dairy 
production in a previous 12 -
month period and be li sted in 
USDA's "Dairy Plants Surveyed" 
For items other than cheese, 
applicants may qualify by 
meeting minimum export 
requirements.  
Distilled spirits, wine, and malt 
beverages for non -industrial use.  Department of 
the Treasury, 
Alcohol and 
Tobacco Tax 
and Trade 
Bureau  To protect consumers by oversight of 
labelling and advertising, to prevent unfair 
trade practices, and enforce federal laws 
on spirits, wine, and malt beverages. 
/Federal Alcohol Administration Act, 27 
C.F.R. Part 1.  Any person, firm or in stitution 
may apply for a license  as long 
as they are citizens or legal 
residents, or the firm/institution 
is incorporated in the 
United  States.  
Distilled spirits or alcohol for 
industrial use, including alcohol 
for fuel use.  Department of 
the Treasury, 
Alcohol and 
Tobacco Tax 
and Trade 
Bureau  To prevent tax fraud / 26 U.S.C. 5001, 
5002(a), 5171, 5181, 5271; 27  C.F.R. 
Part 19 Any person, firm or institution 
may apply for a license  as long 
as they are citizens or legal 
residents, or the firm/institution 
is incorporated in the 
United  States.  
Explosives, blasting agents and 
detonators  Department of 
Justice, Bureau 
of Alcohol, 
Tobacco, 
Firearms and 
Explosives  To keep explosives out of the hands of 
persons, prohibited by law from receiving 
or possessing explosives and to ensure 
safe and secure storage. /  
18 U.S.C. Chapter  40; 27  C.F.R. Part 555  All persons, firms, and 
institutions may apply for a 
license or permit  
Firearms and ammunition  Department of 
Justice, Bureau 
of Alcohol, 
Tobacco, 
Firearms and 
Explosives  Licensing provisions under the Gun Control 
Act, the Arms Export Control Act, and 
National Firearms Act. / 18 U.S.C., Chapter 
44; 22  U.S.C., § 2778, 26  U.S.C. Chapter 
53 All persons, firms, and 
institutions may apply for a 
license or permi t 
Defense articles on the U.S. 
Munitions Import list  Department of 
Justice, Bureau 
of Alcohol, 
Tobacco, 
Firearms and 
Explosives  To regulate permanent importation of U.S. 
Munitions Import List defense articles 
consistent with U.S. national security and 
foreign policy. /18  U.S.C. Chapter 44, 
22 U.S.C. § 2778, 26  U.S.C. Chapter 53  All persons, firms, and 
institutions may apply for a 
license or permit  
Fish and wildlife, alive or dead, 
including endangered species  Department of 
the Interior, 
U.S. Fish and 
Wildlife Service  To: identify commercial importers and 
exporters of wildlife; require records of 
each importation or exportation of w ildlife 
and the subsequent disposition of the 
wildlife by the importer or exporter, and 
assist in efforts to conserve endangered 
and threatened species. / 50 C.F.R. Part 14  All persons, firms, and 
institutions may apply for a 
license  WT/TPR/S/434 /Rev.1  • United States  
 
- 294 - 
 
  Products  Agency  Purpose /Legal reference  License conditions  
Natural gas, including LNG, CNG, 
and compressed gas liquid  Department of 
Energy  To fulfil the requirements of the Natural 
Gas Act requiring authorization to import. 
/Section  3, Natural Gas Act; 15  U.S.C. 
717b; 10 C .F.R. Part 590  All persons, firms, and 
institutions may import natural 
gas 
Pesticides, toxic and hazardous 
substances, and pesticide devices  Protection of 
human, animal 
or plant life or 
health, 
inter alia The Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and 
Rodenticide Act 1976, as amended, 7  U.S.C. 
136; 19 C.F.R. Parts 12.110 -117. /U.S. 
Environmental Protection Agency   
Production and utilization 
facilities, special nuclear 
materials, source materials, and 
by-product materials, including 
when such materials are 
contained in radioactive waste  Nuclear 
Regulatory 
Commission  To protect public health and safety and the 
environment, and maintain the common 
defense and security of the United  States, 
by exercising controls over the possession, 
use, distribution, and transport of such 
items. / Atomic Energy Act , 10 C .F.R. 
Part 110 All persons, firms and 
institutions must have a 
permanent (physical) address 
within the United  States  
Certain plant and plant products  Department of 
Agriculture  To protect against the entry of plant pests 
and diseases, and to protect endangered 
plant species. /Section  412 of the Plant 
Protection Act, 7  U.S.C. 7712, the 
Endangered Species Act, and Title 7 C .F.R. 
Part 319 Any individual, partnership, 
corporation, association, joint 
venture, or other legal entity 
may be eligible t o apply for 
licenses.  
All basic steel mill products (over 
700 products)  Department of 
Commerce, 
International 
Trade 
Administration  To provide fast and reliable statistical 
information on steel imports to the 
Government and the public through the 
Steel Imp ort Monitoring and Analysis 
(SIMA) system. / 85 FR 56162  Only registered users may file 
for steel licenses  
Raw and refined sugar, syrups  Department of 
Agriculture  To administer the sugar TRQs  and the 
sugar reexport program, including the 
Certificate of Quota Eligibility (CQE) 
program. / 15 C.F.R. 2011, Sub -part A and 
Sub-part B; 7 C .F.R. 1530 All importers are eligible to apply 
for certificates for specialty 
sugars. Only U.S . refiners may 
apply  for licenses  to import 
quota -exempt sugar under the 
reexport program. CQE s are 
issued by the exporting country.  
Tobacco products, processed 
tobacco, and proprietors of 
export warehouses  Department of 
the Treasury, 
Alcohol and 
Tobacco Tax 
and Trade 
Bureau  Primary purpose is to ensure proper 
collection of Federal excise tax revenue on 
tobacco products. /Title 26 U.S.C. 
Chapter  52 Any person, firm or institution 
may apply for a license  as long 
as they are citizens or legal 
residents, or the firm/instit ution 
is incorporated in the 
United  States.  
TSCA Import Requirements: 
https://www.epa.gov/tsca -import -
export -requirements/tsca -
requirements -importing -
chemicals#uses  Protection of 
human, animal 
or plant life or 
health, 
inter alia Toxic Substances Control Act. /U.S. 
Environmental Protection Agency   
Source:  WTO documents G/LIC/3/USA/16, 28  January  2020; G/LIC/N/3/USA/18, 5  October  2021; 
G/LIC/N/2/USA/5, 3  August  2021; "ACE PGA Import Forms"; information compiled by the 
Secretariat from sources listed in the table and information provided by the authorities.  
  WT/TPR/S/434 /Rev.1  • United States  
 
- 295 - 
 
  Table  A3.5 Final c hanges in U.S. export controls, August  2018 -January  2022  
Date Title / Citation  Purpose  
2018    
01/08  Addition of Certain Entities; and Modification of Entry on 
the Entity List /83 FR 37423  44 entities added (destination China), one entry 
modified  
03/08  U.S.-India Major Defense Partners: Implementation Under 
the EAR of  India's Membership in the Wassenaar 
Arrangement /3 FR 38018  EAR amende d to recognize and implement India's 
membership in the Wassenaar Arrangement . Addition of 
India to Country Group A:5/  
03/08  Revision of Export and Reexport License Requirements for 
Republic of South Sudan Under the Export Administration 
Regulations (EAR) / 83 FR 38021  EAR updated to restrict exports and re -exports of 
certain items on the CCL to South Sudan  
30/08  Final rule reflecting changes to the Missile Technology 
Control Regime Annex agreed in October  2017 / 83 FR 
44216  Revisions to the Export Administr ation Regulations 
Based on the 2017 Missile Technology Control Regime 
Plenary Agreements  
04/09  Addition of Certain Persons to the Entity List, Revision of 
Entries on the Entity List and Removal of Certain Entities 
From the Entity List (final rule) /83 FR 44821  15 entities added (China; Hong Kong, China; Pakistan; 
Russian  Federation; Kingdom of Saudi Arabia; Türkiye ; 
the UAE; and the United  Kingdom).  
26/09  Addition of Certain Entities to the Entity List, and Removal 
of an Entity From the Entity List / 83 FR 48532  14 entities added (destination Belarus, Islamic Republic 
of Iran, Russian  Federation, and Singapore).  
24/10  Wassenaar Arrangement 2017 Plenary Agreements 
Implementation (Final Rule) / 83 FR 53742  Final rule implementing changes to List of Dua l-Use 
Goods and Technologies agreed in December  2017  
30/10  Addition of an Entity to the Entity List / 83 FR 54519  One entity added (destination China)  
19/11  Review of Controls for Certain Emerging Technologies / 83 
FR 58201  Advance notice of proposed rulemaking seeking public 
comment (by 10  January  2019).  
20/12  Control of Military Electronic Equipment and Other Items 
the President Determines No Longer Warrant Control 
Under the United  States Munitions List (USML) / 83 FR 
65292  Correcting two e ntries on the CCL that control global 
navigation satellite systems receiving equipment  
2019    
11/04  Revisions to the Unverified List (UVL) / 84 FR 14608  50 persons added. One entry modified  
13/05  Addition of Certain Entities to the Entity List, Revision  of an 
Entry on the Entity List, and Removal of an Entity from the 
Entity List / 84 FR 21233  12 entities added (destination China; Hong Kong, 
China; Pakistan; and the UAE).  
21/05  Huawei and Affiliates Entity List Rule / 84 FR 22961  Huawei Technologies Co., Ltd and 68 of its non -U.S. 
affiliates (in 26 destinations) added  
22/05  Temporary General License / 84 FR 23468  90-day license  partially restoring licensing requirements 
to Huawei and 68 non -U.S. affiliates  
23/05  Implementation of Certain New Controls on Emerging 
Technologies Agreed at Wassenaar Arrangement 2018 
Plenary / 84 FR 23886  Final rule implementing changes to the Wassenaar 
Arrangement List of Dual -Use Goods and Technologies 
agreed in 2018  
24/05  Revisions to Country Group Designations for Venezuela 
and Conforming Changes for License Requirements / 84 FR 
24018  Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela moved to Country 
Group D:1 (national security concern) and Country 
Groups D:2 -4 (nuclear, weapons, and missile 
techno logy concern)  
05/06  Restricting the Temporary Sojourn of Aircraft and Vessels 
to Cuba / 84 FR 25986  Tightening of travel restrictions  
24/06  Addition of Entities to the Entity List and Revision of an 
Entry on the Entity List / 84 FR 29371  Five entities added (destination China). One entry 
modified  
27/06  Revisions to the  UVL / 84 FR 30593  Eight persons removed, one name corrected  
14/08  Addition of Certain Entities to the Entity List, Revision of 
Entries on the Entity List, and Removal of Entiti es from the 
Entity List / 84 FR 40237  17 entities added (Armenia; Belgium; Canada; China; 
Georgia; Hong Kong, China; Malaysia; Netherlands; 
Russian  Federation; UAE; United  Kingdom).  
21/08  Temporary General License: Extension of Validity, 
Clarifications to Authorized Transactions - Extension through 18  November  2019 for Huawei and 
its listed non -U.S. affiliates / 84 FR 43487  
21/08  Addition of Entities to the Entity List / 84 FR 43493  46 entities added (all non -U.S. affiliates of Huawei)  
09/10 Addition of Entities to the Entity List / 84 FR 54002  28 entities added (destination China)  
21/10  Restricting Additional Exports and Reexports to Cuba/  84 
FR 56117  Tightening of sanctions towards Cuba  
13/11  Addition of Certain Entities to the Entity List / 84 FR 61538  22 entities added ( the Kingdom of Bahrain, France, the 
Islamic Republic of Iran, Jordan, Lebanon, Oman, 
Pakistan, the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, Senegal, Syria, 
Türkiye , UAE, and United  Kingdom)  
20/11  Temporary General License: Extension of Validity, effective 
18 November  2019 / 84 FR 64018  Extension through 16  February  2020 for Huawei and its 
listed non -U.S. affiliates  
2020    
06/01  Addition of Software Specially Designed to Automate the 
Analysis of Geospatial Imagery to the Ex port Control 
Classification Number 0Y521 Series / 85 FR 459  Interim final rule imposing a license  requirement for 
export and re -export of related software to all 
destinations, except Canada  
23/01  Control of Firearms, Guns, Ammunition and Related 
Articles the President Determines No Longer Warrant 
Control under the USML / 85 FR 4136  Final rule incorporating comments received on the 
transfer of items from Categories I, II and III of the 
USML to the CCL  
18/02  Temporary General License: Extension of Validity,  effective 
13 February  2020 BIS Final rule / 85 FR 8722  Temporary general license  for Huawei and non -U.S. 
affiliates (114) extended through 1  April 2020 
24/02  Amendments to Country Groups for Russian  Federation 
and Yemen Under the E AR / 85 FR 10274  Russian  Federation moved to Country Groups D:2 and 
D:4, Yemen moved to Country Group D:1  
06/03  Amendments to Country Groups for Russian  Federation 
and Yemen Under the E AR / 85 FR 13009  Correction (removing Yemen from Country Group B)  
12/03 Temporary General License: Extension of Validity final rule Temporary general license  for Huawei and non -U.S. WT/TPR/S/434 /Rev.1  • United States  
 
- 296 - 
 
  Date Title / Citation  Purpose  
10/03/20 / 85 FR 14416  affiliates (114) extended through 15  May 2020 
16/03  Addition of Entities to the Entity List, and Revision of Entry 
on the Entity List / 85 FR 14794  24 entities added (China, Islamic Republic of Iran, 
Pakistan, Russian  Federation, and the UAE).  
02/04  Control of Firearms, Guns, Ammunition and Related 
Articles the President Determines No Longer Warrant 
Control Under the USML  / 85 FR 18438  Alerting the public of interim measures applied following 
a court order issued on 6  March  2020 
28/04  Expansion of Export, Reexport, and Transfer (in -Country) 
Controls for Military End Use or Military End Users . Final 
rule, effective 29  June 2020 / 85 FR 23459  Tightening the control of items intended for military end 
use or military end users in China, the 
Russian  Federation, or the Bolivarian Republic of 
Venezuela  
28/04  Elimination of License Exception Civil End Users (CIV) Final 
Rule, ef fective 29  June 2020 / 85 FR 23470  Requiring a license  for all national security controlled 
items to countries of national security concern  
18/05  Temporary General License: Extension of Validity final rule 
15/05/20 / 85 FR 29610  Temporary general license  for Huawei and non -U.S. 
affiliates (114) extended until 13  August  2020 
19/05  Amendments to General Prohibition Three (Foreign -
Produced Direct Product Rule) and the Entity List / 85 FR 
29849  New control over certain foreign -produc ed items when 
there is knowledge that they are destined to a 
designated entity on the Entity List - 
03/06  Expansion of Export, Reexport, and Transfer Controls for 
Military End Use or Military End Users / 85 FR 34306  Correction to final rule published on 28  April 2020 
05/06  Addition of Entities to the Entity List, and Revision of Entry 
on the Entity List / 85 FR 34495  24 entities added (China; Hong Kong, China; and the 
United  Kingdom).  
05/06  Addition of Entities to the Entity List, and Revision of Entry 
on the Entity List  / 85 FR 34503  Nine entities added (destination China).  
17/06  Implementation of the February  2020 Australia Group 
Intersessional Decisions: / 85 FR 36483  Final rule implementing changes agreed in the Australia 
Group  List 
18/06  Release of ''Technology'' to Entities on the Entity List in the 
Context of Standards Organizations / 85 FR 36719  Authorizing the release without a license  of certain 
technology to Huawei and its listed non -U.S. affiliates  
22/07  Addition of Certain Entities to the Entity List; Revision of 
Existing Entries on the Entity List / 85 FR 44159  11 entities added (destinat ion China). 37 entries 
modified or revised  
31/07  Revision to the E AR: Suspension of License Exceptions for 
Hong Kong, China / 85 FR 45998  Suspending the availability of all license  exceptions for 
Hong Kong, China  
20/08  Addition of Huawei Non -U.S. Affili ates to the Entity List, 
Removal of Temporary General License  / 85 FR 51596  Final rule implementing three sets of changes to 
controls of Huawei and its listed non -U.S. affiliates  
20/08  Requirements for Listed Entities When Party to a 
Transaction final rule on public display / 85 FR 51335  Clarifying the supplemental license  requirements for 
parties on the Entity List  
27/08  Addition of Entities to the Entity List, and Revision of 
Entries on the Entity List / 85 FR 52898  60 entities adde d (China; France; Hong Kong, China; 
Indonesia; Malaysia; Oman; Pakistan; 
Russian  Federation; Switzerland; and the UAE).  
11/09  Wassenaar Arrangement 2018 Plenary Agreements 
Implementation; and other Revisions Related to National 
Security Controls / 85 FR 56294  Final rule implementing changes to the Wassenaar 
Arrangement List of Dual -Use Goods and Technologies 
and Munitions List agreed in 2018  
22/09  Addition of Entities to the Entity List; Corrections to 
Certain Existing Entries on the Entity List / 85 FR 59419  47 entities added (Canada; China; Hong Kong, China; 
Islamic Republic of Iran; Malaysia; Oman; Pakistan; 
Thailand; Türkiye ; the UAE; and the United  Kingdom).  
05/10  Implementation of Certain New Controls on Emerging 
Technologies Agreed at Wassenaar Arrangement  2019 final 
rule / 85 FR 62583  Implementing multilateral controls on six recently 
developed or developing technologies  
06/10  Information Sharing for Purposes of Judicial Review 2019 
final rule/ 85 FR 63011  Procedure for classified nat ional security information 
submitted ex parte  and in camera  to a court reviewing 
any agency action under the EAR  
06/10  Amendment to Licensing Policy for Items Controlled for 
Crime Control Reasons / 85 FR 63007  Human rights concerns  
06/10  Controls on Expo rts and Reexports of Water Cannon 
Systems / 85 FR 63009  Imposing a license requirement on exports and 
re-exports of water cannon systems  
09/10  Revisions to the Unverified List (UVL) / 85 FR 64014  40 persons removed and 26 persons added  
29/10  Amendments to National Security License Review Policy 
under the E AR / 85 FR 68448  Revising the license review policy for items destined to 
China, the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela, or the 
Russian  Federation  
18/11  Revisions to Export Enforcement Provisions  / 85 FR 73411  Amending and clarifying certain provisions of the EAR  
04/12  Wassenaar Arrangement 2018 Plenary Decisions 
Implementation / 85 FR 78684  Correcting errors in the Federal Register publication of 
11 September  2020 
22/12  Addition of Entities to the Entity List, Revision of Entry on 
the Entity List, and Removal of Entities from the Entity 
List, effective 18  December  2020. / 85 FR 83416  77 entities added (China; Bulgaria; France; Germany; 
Hong Kong, China; Italy; Malta; Pakistan; 
Russian Federation; UAE). Four removed (Israel ; UAE) 
23/12  Addition of "Military End User" (MEU) List to the Export 
Administration Regulations and Addition of Entities to the 
MEU List. / 85 FR 83793  Final rule amending the EAR by adding a Military End 
User (MEU) List including the first tranche of entities 
(China, Russian  Federation, and the Bolivarian Republic 
of Venezuela)  
23/12  Removal of Hong Kong, China as a Separate Destination 
under the E ARs / 85 FR 83765  Implementing Sections  2 and 3 of Executive Order 
13936 of 14  July 2020 
28/12  Amendment to Country Groups for Ukraine, Mexico and 
Cyprus Under the E ARs / 85 FR 84211  Ukraine moved to Country Group B, Mexico and Cyprus 
added to Country Group A: 6 
2021    
06/01  Technical Amendments to the E AR: Export Control 
Classification Number 0Y521 Series Supplement — 
Software Specially Designed To Automate the Analysis of 
Geospatial Imagery Classification / 86 FR 461  Extending controls by one year  
07/01  Chemical Weapons Convention Regulations and the E AR: Reflecting recent additions to the CWC  WT/TPR/S/434 /Rev.1  • United States  
 
- 297 - 
 
  Date Title / Citation  Purpose  
Additions to Schedule 1(A) of the Annex on Chemicals to 
the Chemical Weapons Convention (CWC) / 86 FR 936  
07/01  Commerce Control List: Clarifications to the Scope of 
Export Control Classification Number 1C991 / 86 FR 944  Clarifying the scope of export controls applicable to 
certain vaccines  
11/01  Revisions to the Unverified List (UVL) / 86 FR 1766  Three persons removed  
12/01  Change to the License Review Policy fo r Unmanned Aerial 
Systems (UAS) / 86 FR 2252  U.S. UAS Export Policy  change reflecting announcement 
by the President on 24  July 2020 
15/01  Addition of Entity to the Entity List, and Addition of Entity 
to the Military End -User (MEU) List  / 86 FR 4862  One en tity added (destination China). One entity added 
to the MEU List and duplicate entry removed  
15/01  Expansion of Certain End -Use and End -User Controls and 
Controls on Specific Activities of U.S. Persons / 86 FR 4865  Interim final rule to implement provisions of the ECRA 
regarding certain military intelligence end uses and end 
users  
19/01  Implementation in the E AR of the United  States' Rescission 
of Sudan's Designation as a State Sponsor of Terrorism / 
86 FR 4929  Rescission of Sudan's designation resulting in a 
relaxation of measures  
18/02  Burma: Implementation of Sanctions Effective: 17/02/21 / 
86 FR 10011  Limit exports and re -exports of sensitive goods to the 
military and security services of Myanmar  
04/03  Addition  of Certain Entities to the Entity List; Correction of 
Existing Entries on the Entity List / 85 FR 12529  14 entities added (Germany, Russian  Federation, and 
Switzerland).  
08/03  Burma: Implementation of Sanctions / 85 FR 13173  Final rule implementing sanc tions on Myanmar  
08/03  Additions of Entities to the Entity List / 85 FR 13179  Four entities added (destination Myanmar)  
17/03  Expansion of End -Use and End -User Controls and Controls 
on Specific Activities of U.S. Persons  / 86 FR 14534  Correction of interim final rule  
18/03  Chemical and Biological Weapons Control and Warfare 
Elimination Act of 1991 /  86 FR 14689  Sanctions imposed on the Russian  Federation  
29/03  Wassenaar Arrangement 2019 / 86 FR 16482  Final rule revising the CCL and pa rts of the EAR  
09/04  Addition of Entities to the Entity List  / 86 FR 18437  Seven entities added (destination China)  
09/04  Expansion of Certain End -Use and End -User Controls and 
Controls on Specific Activities of U.S. Persons; Corrections; 
and Burma Sanctions / 86 FR 18433  Interim final rule expanding controls on certain military -
intelligence end uses and end users. Sanctions on 
Myanmar tightened  
01/06  Control of Firearms, Guns, Ammunition and Related 
Articles the President Determines No Longer Warra nt 
Control Under the USML  / 86 FR 29189  Transfer of jurisdiction of certain "software" and 
"technology" resulting from action by the Court of 
Appeals for the Ninth Circuit  
01/06  Revision of Entry and Removal of Entity from the Military 
End-User List (MEU)  / 86 FR 29190  Eight entities added (Pakistan and the UAE). Revisions 
and removals (China and Pakistan)  
09/06  EARs: Termination of U AE Participation in the Arab League 
Boycott of Israel / 86 FR 30535  Antiboycott provisions not applicable after 
16 August  2020 
16/06  Removal of Entity from the Entity List  / 86 FR 31909  One entity removed  
24/06  Addition of Entities to the Entity List / 86 FR 33119  Five entities added (destination China)  
06/07  Addition of Entities to the Entity List / 86 FR 35389  Four entities added (destination Myanmar)  
12/07  Addition of Certain Entities to the Entity List; Removal of 
Entity from the Unverified List; a nd Addition of Entity to 
the MEU List / 86 FR 36496  34 entities added, one entry revised, and one entry 
removed from the Entity List. One entity added to the 
MEU List  
19/07  Addition of Entities and Revision of Entry on the Entity List 
/ 86 FR 37901  Six entities added and one entry corrected (destination 
Russian  Federation)  
02/08  Effect of Imports of Uranium on the National Security  / 86 
FR 41540  Publication of Section  232 Report. Summary of the 
findings of the investigation  
19/08  Control of Firearms, G uns, Ammunition and Related 
Articles the President Determines No Longer Warrant 
Control under the USML / 86 FR 46590  Corrections and clarifications to the Jan. 2020 rule 
transferring items on the USML (Cat. I, II, and III) to 
the CCL  
05/10  Export Administ ration Regulations / 86 FR 54807  Editorial corrections and clarifications  
05/10  Commerce Control List: Expansion of Controls on Certain 
Biological Equipment "Software" / 86 FR 54814  Final rule implementing a decision of the Australia 
Group  
06/10  Control of Deuterium That is Intended for Use Other Than 
in a Nuclear Reactor Under EAR /86 FR 55492  Final rule transferring the licensing authority from the 
NRC to the BIS  
21/10  Information Security Controls: Cybersecurity Items / 86 FR 
58205  Interim fin al rule and requesting public comment by 
12 December  2021 
22/10  Clarifications of Availability and Expansion of Restrictions 
on Availability of License Exception Strategic Trade 
Authorization Under the E AR / 86 FR 568615  Proposal to amend the EAR to clari fy and expand 
restrictions on the availability of STA  
04/11  Addition of Certain Entities to the List / 86 FR 60759  Four entities added (Israel, Russian  Federation,  
Singapore)  
26/11  Addition of Entities and Revision of Entries on the Entity 
List; and Addition of Entity to the Military End -User (MEU) 
List / 86 FR 67317  27 entities added (China, Japan, Pakistan, and 
Singapore). One entity in the Russian  Federation added 
to the MEU List  
09/12  Revision to Controls for Cambodia under the Export 
Administrat ion Regulations / 86 FR 70015  More restrictive treatment of exports, re -exports, and 
in-country transfers to Cambodia  
17/12  Addition of Entities and Revision of Entries on the Entity 
List / 86 FR 71557  37 entities added and one entry revised (destination 
China, Georgia, Malaysia, and Türkiye ) 
29/12  Additional Protocol Regulations: Mandatory Electronic 
Submission of Reports through the Additional Protocol 
Reporting System (APRS) / 86 FR 74006  Mandatory filing of reports and other documents 
electronically replacing existing manual reporting and 
processing procedures  WT/TPR/S/434 /Rev.1  • United States  
 
- 298 - 
 
  Date Title / Citation  Purpose  
2022    
06/01  Export Control Classification Number 0Y521 Series 
Supplement —Extension of Controls on an Emerging 
Technology /87 FR 729  Extending controls in place since 6  January  2020 
Source:  WTO Secretariat, based on Bureau of Industry and Security online information. Viewed at: 
https://www.bis.doc.gov/index.php/ federal -register -notices . 
  WT/TPR/S/434 /Rev.1  • United States  
 
- 299 - 
 
  Table  A3.6 Summary of IP protection, December  2021  
Form  Main legislation  Coverage  Duration  
Copyright and 
related rights  -Copyright Act  of the 
United  States (1976), as 
amended, and as incorporated 
in Title 17 of the U.S. Code.  
-Marrakesh Treaty 
Implementation Act, 
10 October  2018 (modified 
copyright exceptions for blind 
or print disabled persons).  
-Music Modernization Act 
(MMA), 11  Octobe r 2018.  
 -Subtitle A of Title I of 
Division Q of the Consolidation 
Appropriations Act, 2021  Authors' economic and moral 
rights in original works of 
authorship. The Act also provides 
rights of attribution and integrity 
for authors of works of visual art. 
Other federal and state laws 
address additional protection for 
the attribution and integrity of 
other works and authors. Works 
must be original creations.  
Registration is not required for 
protection.  
The MMA modified copyright -
related issues due to ne w forms of 
technology like digital streaming  Life of author plus 70 years for 
works created on or after 
1 January  1978. Anonymous and 
pseudonymous works and works 
made for hire are protected for 
95 years after publication or 
120 years after creation, 
which ever expires first.  
Patents  -Patent Law  of the 
United  States, as incorporated 
in Title 35 of the U.S. Code  
-Leahy -Smith America Invents 
Act (AIA) of 2011. Patent Law 
Treaties Implementation Act of 
2012 Inventions that are new, useful, 
and nonobvious are p atentable.  
 
Patents may be granted for a 
process, machine, manufacture or 
composition of matter, or 
improvements thereof.  20 years from filing date  
Industrial 
designs  -Patent Law  of the 
United  States, as incorporated 
in Title 35 of the U.S. Code  
-Patent Law Treaties 
Implementation Act of 2012  Any new, original and ornamental 
design for an article of 
manufacture  For applications filed before 
13 May 2015, 14  years from the 
date of g rant; for applications 
filed on or after 13  May 2015, 
15 years from the date of grant  
Trademarks  -Lanham Act  of 1946, as 
amended (15  U.S.C. 1051 ) et 
- Modernization Trademark Act 
of 2021.  Any sign used to identify and 
distinguish goods or services of 
one enterprise from those of 
another enterprise  10 years from registration date; 
renewable indefinitely as long as 
the trademark is in use in 
commerce that is lawfully 
regulated by Congress  
Geographical 
indications  -Lanham Act  of 1946, as 
amended and state laws, and 
supplemented with the Federal 
Alcohol Administration Act of 
1935 Geographic signs and names of 
viticultural significance  10 years from registration date; 
renewable indefinitely as long as 
the trademark is in use in 
commerce that is lawfully 
regulated by Congress  
New plant 
varieties  -Plant Variety Protection Act  
Amendments of 1994 
(7 U.S.C. 2321 et seq.) 
Amended by the 2018 Farm 
Bill, P.L. 115-334, 
20 December  2018 New plant varieties  reproduced by 
seed or tuber -propagated, or 
asexually reproduced, not 
previously sold in the 
United  States for purposes of 
exploitation of the variety, more 
than 1 year prior to the date of 
filing; or in any area outside the 
United  States more than 4  years 
prior to the filing da te, or, in the 
case of a tree or vine, over 6 years 
prior to the filing date  20 years from date of issue of 
the certificate in the 
United  States  
 -Patent Law of the 
United  States, as incorporated 
in Title 35 of the U.S. Code  Plant patents may be granted to 
asexually -reproduced plant 
varieties that are distinct and new . 20 years from date of filing  
Layout 
designs of 
integrated 
circuits  Semiconductor Chip Protection  
Act of 1984 (17  U.S.C. 901 
et seq.) Topography of microelectronic 
semiconductor products, provided 
it is original and is not staple, 
commonplace or familiar in the 
industry at the time of creation  10 years from filing date (or , if 
earlier, from first use)  
Trade secrets  -Economic Espionage Act  of 
1996 and state laws.  
-Defend Trade Secrets Act, 
P.L. 114-153, 2016 amended 
the Economic Espionage Act.   Any information, not generally 
known to the relevant portion of 
the public, that provides an 
economic benefit to its holder, and 
is the subject of reasonable efforts 
to maintain its secrecy  Indefinite  
Source:  WIPO; USDOC; and notifications to the WTO.  
 
__________