G/SPS/GEN/2112  
 
28 March 2023  
(23-2192) Page: 1/2 
Committee on Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures  Original: English  
 
EUROPEAN UNION  IMPORT TOLERANCES FOR CERTAIN PESTICIDES  
TO ACHIEVE ENVIRONMENTAL OUTCOMES IN THIRD   
COUNTRIES  – SPECIFIC TRADE CONCERN 534  
SUBMISSION BY THE UNITED STATES  OF AMERICA  
The following submission, received on 27 March 2023, is the statement made by the United States 
of Amer ica at the 22 -24 March 2023 WTO SPS Committee, and is being circulated at the request of 
the Delegation of the United States of America . 
 
_______________  
 
 
1.  The United States thanks Australia, China, Ecuador, and other WTO members for again raising 
concerns with the European Union's approach.  
2.  The United States shares the European Commission's goals for more sustainable food systems, 
and we recognize the importance of considering the economic, social, and environmental dimensions 
of sustainability. We  also note that Members' sustainability actions must be consistent with their 
obligations under relevant WTO Agreements.  
3.  The United States reiterates its concerns with the application of EU domestic environmental 
policies to food and agricultural products imported from third countries. We echo the comments of 
the many WTO Members who rightly understand that countries require the use of diverse 
approaches, tools, and technologies to meet their sustainability objectives.  
4.  We can all agree that pest control and  crop protection needs vary by crop and by country and 
region. National competent authorities must remain empowered to establish the measures necessary 
for the protection of human, animal, or plant life or health within their own territories.  
5.  The EU's rece ntly implemented regulation, which was notified in G/TBT/N/EU/908 , requires food 
and agricultural products from third countries to meet reduced MRLs for two neonicotinoids 
pesticides even though the EU's scientific justification remains unclear for demonstrating how 
the reduction of these two pesticide MRLs contributes to protecting global pollinator health, 
the stated objective of the EU's measure.  
6.  The United States is also concerned that pesticide MRLs are not an appropriate tool for achieving 
the EU's domestic environmental objecti ves. Pesticide MRLs are the highest level of pesticide residue 
that is legally tolerated in or on food or feed; pesticide MRLs are not an appropriate indicator of 
environmental health because MRLs are not developed to address this objective.  
7.  The most recent European Food Safety Authority (EFSA), US Environmental Protection Agency 
(EPA), and Codex science -based human health risk assessments confirmed that existing MRLs above 
the limit of determination (LOD) for clothianidin and thiamethoxam do not pose a food safety risk 
for consumers. Pesticide MRLs are not an environmental safety metric, and using them as such may 
result in unintended consequences and undermine the use of international standards for food safety.  
8.  The United States shares the EU 's concerns about pollinator health and is actively working to 
protect bees and other pollinators in the United States. We note the widely shared scientific 
understanding that complex interactions among multiple factors affect bee colony and wild pollinato r 
health, including the presence of pests, pathogens, and diseases; pesticide use; poor nutrition due G/SPS/GEN/2112  
 
- 2 - 
 
  to loss of foraging habitats and monoculture; bee management practices; and lack of genetic 
diversity.  
9.  However, the United States has concerns with the sc ientific evidence that the European  Union  
used to demonstrate the relationship between their proposed measure and the stated regulatory 
objectives of protecting animal or plant life or health and protection of the environment in a manner 
that is no more tr ade restrictive than necessary.  
10.  The European  Union  has also not provided data demonstrating that the use of these substances 
at current MRL levels poses an actual risk to pollinators, either in the European  Union  or globally. 
The studies cited only evaluat e European production systems and a limited number of pollinators 
found in Europe and do not take into account regional conditions, practices, and fauna in other parts 
of the world.  
11.  Further, WTO Members rely on pesticide MRLs, including MRLs established by  Codex to ensure 
food safety for consumers and to facilitate trade in agricultural products. The United States reminds 
the European  Union  that the Codex Committee on Pesticide Residues (CCPR) confirmed that 
consideration of environmental issues of global c oncern was not within its mandate and that 
environmental issues are not included in CCPR risk management principles.  
12.  The United States requests that the European  Union  provide additional scientific evidence to 
support the reduction of these MRLs, especiall y given that EFSA has permitted the necessary 
continued use of clothianidin and thiamethoxam under emergency authorization use in the 
European  Union . 
13.  Global challenges require collaboration across the global community; unilateral approaches 
based on questi onable and incomplete science may complicate or further delay meaningful progress 
on these pressing issues while unnecessarily affecting agricultural production and trade. In place of 
the EU's regulation, the United States would welcome a collaborative app roach to protecting 
pollinators and the opportunity to exchange resources, scientific expertise, and new ideas.  
 
__________