WT/REG419/2  
 
10 June 2022 
(22-4095) Page: 1/3 
Committee on Regional Trade Agreements  Original: English /Spanish  
 
AGREEMENT ON TRADE CONTINUITY BETWEEN THE UNITED KINGDOM AND CANADA, 
GOODS AND SERVICES  
QUESTIONS AND REPLIES  
 The following communication, dated 8 June 2022, is being circulated at the request of the 
delegations of  the United Kingdom and C anada . 
 
_______________  
 
 
Question from the European Union  
 
1.1.  Paragraph 4.42: Unlike its GATS commitments, for legal services (part of CPC 861) 
and R&D services on social sciences and humanities (part of CPC 85201) the UK's specific 
commitments are narrower under the incorporated FTA schedule.  
 Could you please clarify in what sense are the commitments on legal services and 
R&D narrower than in the GATS?  
 
Response from the United Kingdom  
 
 Agreements that the UK has transitioned since leaving the EU replicate, as far as possible, the 
effects of previous EU agreements. The commitments referred to as narrower are substantively the 
same in the UK -Canada Agreement as those found in the EU -Canada  Agreement.  
 
 The UK -Canada Agreement, like the EU -Canada Agreement, contains ambitious and 
liberalising provisions for trade in services, widening sectoral coverage and deepening commitments 
in many services sectors, when compared to the UK 's commitments  under the GATS.  
 
Questions from Japan  
 
Provisions on trade in services and investment  
 
Scope and definitions  
 
1.2.  Paragraph 4.3.: According to paragraph 4.3. of the Factual Presentation, "certain 
sections of the incorporated Chapter 8 do not apply to measur es with respect to (i) for 
the UK, audio -visual services and (ii) for Canada, cultural industries."  
Under footnote 68, the scope of "cultural industries" for Canada is explained.  
 
 Could the UK provide the scope of "audio -visual services" in a more specif ic manner?  
 
Response from the United Kingdom  
 
 The UK's approach  in this agreement  mirrors  the approach  we take in all our bilateral  FTAs,  
namely,  not to define  the term.  
 
 
 WT/REG419/2  
 
- 2 - 
 
  General provisions of the agreement  
 
Dispute settlement  
 
1.3.  Paragraphs 5.19: With regards to the ICS mechanism, which is subject to a 
comprehensive review that will be commenced within 90 days after the entry into force 
of the Agreement, are there any specific issues either in the UK or in Canada which 
prevented the system from bei ng provisionally applied?  
Joint response from the United Kingdom and Canada  
 
 No, there are no issues that would have prevented the investment dispute mechanism from 
being applied if the two Parties chose to. However, it was originally negotiated and inte nded to apply 
between 28 countries. Because the TCA was only a replication exercise, Canada and the UK wanted 
a further opportunity to bilaterally review the procedures for the resolution of investment disputes 
that would apply between our two countries on ce the UK would have left the European Union and 
recovered its full ability to negotiate.  
 
Questions from Mexico  
 
Provisions on trade in goods  
 
1.4.  Paragraph 3.86: The Parties' authorities shall consider information provided as to 
whether imposing an antidumping or countervailing duty would not be in the public 
interest. They may consider whether the amount of the anti -dumping or countervailing 
duty to be imposed shall be the full margin of dumping or amount of subsidy or a lesser 
amount, in accordance  with its laws (incorporated Article 3.3).  
 Could the Parties please indicate, in general terms, what criteria or guidelines are 
considered to determine that imposing an anti -dumping or countervailing duty would not 
be in the public interest?  
 
Response fro m Canada  
 
 Once anti -dumping and/or countervailing duties are in place, the Canadian International Trade 
Tribunal may decide to investigate whether they are in the broader public interest if they appear to 
negatively impact downstream users of the goods an d/or consumers. Public interest inquiries can 
be initiated by the Tribunal itself or upon request from an interested party.  
 
 In conducting a public interest inquiry, the Tribunal must take into account any factor that it 
considers relevant, including:  
 
1. whether goods of the same description are readily available from countries or exporters to 
which the order or finding does not apply;  
2. whether the imposition of full anti -dumping and/or countervailing duties has had or is 
likely to have the following effect s:  
a. substantially lessen or eliminate competition in the domestic market in respect of 
like goods,  
b. cause significant damage to producers in Canada that use the goods as inputs in 
the production of other goods and in the provision of services,  
c. significantly  impair competitiveness by limiting access to:  
i. goods that are used as inputs in the production of other goods and in the 
provision of services, or  
ii. technology,  
d. significantly restrict the choice or availability of goods at competitive prices for 
consumers o r otherwise cause them significant harm;  
 
3. whether a reduction or elimination of anti -dumping and/or countervailing duties is likely to 
cause significant damage to domestic producers of inputs, including primary commodities, 
used in the domestic production of like goods.  WT/REG419/2  
 
- 3 - 
 
  At the conclusion of a public interest inquiry, the Tribunal may recommend to the Minister of Finance 
that the duties should be reduced in part or in full to balance competing interests between domestic 
producers and the downstrea m users and/or consumers of the foreign goods.  
 
Response from the United Kingdom  
 
 The UK Taxation (Cross -Border Trade) Act sets out the economic factors that must be 
considered by the Trade Remedies Authority (TRA), to determine whether applying a measur e is in 
the economic interests of the UK. It is intended to consider whether measures will have 
disproportionate impacts on the UK economy by examining impacts on different groups in the UK, 
including geographical or distributional impacts, as well as mark et structure. A measure cannot be 
recommended to the Secretary of State unless it meets the UK's economic interests.  
 
 The Secretary of State for International Trade must also consider, when determining whether 
to impose a measure, if to do so is in the wi der public interest.  
 
__________