JOB/AG/102  
 
18 July 2017  
(17-3924) Page: 1/9 
Committee on Agriculture  
Special Session  Original: English  
 
ELIMINATION OF AMS T O REDUCE DISTORTIONS  
IN GLOBAL AGRICULTUR AL TRADE  
SUBMISSION BY CHINA AND INDIA  
The following submission, dated 17 July 2017, is being circulated at the request of the 
aforementioned Members.  
 
_______________  
 
 
Aggregate Measurement of Support (AMS) is the most trade distorting element in global trade in 
agriculture. In the Uruguay Round AMS entitlements were made available in the Agreement on 
Agriculture to developed Members and some developing M embers. Develope d Members have more 
than 90% of global AMS entitlements amounting to nearly US$  160 bn. As a result developed 
Members have access to huge amount of AMS beyond their de minimis . In contrast most 
developing M embers have access only to de minimis  resulting in  a major asymmetry in the rules 
on agricultural trade.  
 
I.  DISTORTIONS ON ACCOU NT OF FLEXIBILITIES IN PROVIDING PRODUCT -SPECIFIC 
AMS 
1.  Most of the developing M embers cannot provide product -specific Amber Box support exceeding 
10% of the value of production  of the agricultural product concerned . On the other hand, 
developed Members and some developing M embers are not constrained by the 10% limit. 
Theoretically speaking, the product -specific support on any product can be as high as the 
AMS limit. This provide s sign ificant flexibilities to these M embers to provide support to their 
agriculture, thereby distorting production and trade. The flexibilities include the following:  
i. providing significantly high amount of subsidies compared to the value of production 
of the products concerned;  
ii. concentrating the subsidies in a few products; and  
iii. shifting the products in which the subsidies are concentrated.  
2.  Based on an analysis of Domestic Supp ort notifications of a few WTO M embers, it is evident 
that in many products, the product -specific support is an extremely high proportion of the value of 
production of the product concerned. In certain instances it even exceeded the value of production 
of the product concerned. The Tables in Annex 1 provide illustrations of the pro duct-specific 
support exceeding 10% of the value of production of the product concerned. From the tables it is 
evident that not only are the farmers getting subsidies in excess of their value of production, in 
certain cases the subsidies are twice the value of production.  
3.  Another distor tion arises from the fact that M embers with AMS limits have the flexibility to 
concentrate the subsidies in just a few products. Tables in Annex 2 provide a few illustrations of 
the product -specific support being concentrated in a few products.  JOB/AG/102  
 
- 2 - 
 
  II.  FACTS  OF SOME MEMBERS  
United States  
4.  In respect of 30 products, the product -specific support was 10%, or more, of the value of 
production of the concerned product in at least one year during the period 1995 -2014. 
5.  Some of the products w ith subsidies exceeding 50% of the value of production include the 
following: dry peas (57%); rice (82%); canola (61%); flaxseed (69%); sunflower (65%); 
sugar  (66%); cotton (74%); mohair (141%),  and wool (215%).  
6.  Mohair (11 years), wool (12 years), dairy (1 5 years) and sugar ( 20 years) are products that 
have consistently benefitted from very high level of subsidies as a percentage of value of 
production.  
7.  In respect of mohair and wool in some years the product -support exceeded even the value of 
production.  
8.  In seven  out of 20 years more than 50% of the total product -specific support was concentrated 
in just one product – dairy.  
9.  In certain years more than 90% of the total product -specific support was concentrated in just 
two products  – dairy and sugar.  
Europe an Union  
10.  In respect of 43 products, the product -specific support was 10%, or more, of the value of 
production of the concerned product in at least one year during the period 2000 -2013. 
11.  Some of the products with subsidies exceeding 50% of the value of produ ction include the 
following: butter (71%); skimmed milk powder (67%); apples (68%); courgettes (51%); 
cucumber (86%); lemon (60%); pear for processing (82%); tinned pineapple (108%); tomatoes 
for processing (61%); rice (66%); olive oil (76%); whi te sugar ( 120%); tobacco (155%),  and 
silkworms (167%).  
12.  Barley ( ten years), common wheat (nine years) and tobacco ( 9 years) are products that have 
consistently benefited from very high level of subsidies as a percentage of value of production.  
13.  In respect of tinned pineapple, white sugar, tobacco, cotton and silkworms in some years the 
product -support exceeded even the value of production.  
14.  In respect of butter the value of production was not provided in EU's Domestic Support 
notifications for re cent years.  
15.  There is considerable concentration of product -specific support, in the range 38%-40%, in 
butter during 2010-2013. 
16.  During 201 0-2013, 64%-68% of the total product -specific support was accounted for by just 
two products – butter and common wheat . 
Canada  
17.  In respect of seven products, the product -specific support was 10% of the value of 
production, or more, of the concerned product in at least one year during the period 1995 -2013. 
18.  Milk (14 years), sheep meat ( nine years) and corn ( five years) are p roducts that have 
consistently benefited from very high level of subsidies as a percentage of value of production.  
19.  In respect of tobacco in 2009 the product -support was more than thrice the value of 
production.  JOB/AG/102  
 
- 3 - 
 
  20.  In eight years during the period 1995 -2013, more than 50% of the total product -specific 
support was concentrated in just one product – milk. In 1997 it was as high as 7 3%. 
III.  CONCLUSION  
21.  From the analysis it is clear that the imbalance in th e existing AoA where only some M embers 
have access to boun d AMS allows them much more policy space. On the other hand, most 
developing M embers are strictly limited by their de minimis . Any overall capping or reduction in 
their de minimis  will further reduce their policy space. Therefore, i n order to achieve the l ong 
outstanding reforms in agriculture subsidies the  AMS entitlements of developed M embers must be 
eliminated as a pre -requisite for consideration of other reforms in domestic support negotiations. 
Only in this way will it help reduce  some of the inequities built into the WTO rules in favour of the 
developed Members.  
 
 
_______________  
  
  JOB/AG/102  
 
- 4 - ANNEX 1  
UNITED STATES  – PRODUCT -SPECIFIC SUPPORT AS % OF VALUE OF  PRODUCTION  
Product/Year  
1995 
1996 
1997 
1998 
1999 
2000 
2001 
2002 
2003 
2004 
2005 
2006 
2007 
2008 
2009 
2010 
2011 
2012 
2013 
2014 
Apples  
(incl. Pears in 2002)  - - - - 6% 13%  - - - - - - - 1% 2% 2% 2% 2% 2% 2% 
Barley  - - - 12%  7% 11%  3% 1% - 12%  9% 2% - 4% 5% 2% 5% 4% 4% 4% 
Canola  - - - 5% 37%  61%  13%  - 5% 3% 9% - - 10%  7% 6% 11%  7% 10%  9% 
Chickpeas  - - - - - - - - 11%  18%  13%  - - - - - - - - - 
Corn - - 1% 8% 15%  15%  7% 1% 1% 13%  20%  - - 4% 5% 3% 4% 4% 5% 4% 
Cotton  - - 7% 19%  54%  21%  74%  27%  7% 39%  28%  27%  4% 35%  8% 5% 11%  8% 9% 16%  
Crambe  - - - - 44%  42%  18%  6% 5% 7% - - - - - - - - - - 
Cranberries  - - - - 18%  - - - - - - - - - 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 
Dairy  23%  20%  21%  19%  20%  24%  18%  30%  22%  17%  19%  21%  14%  11%  12%  9% 8% 9% 8% - 
Dry peas  - - - - - - - - 36%  48%  57%  35%  - 4% 5% 5% 5% 5% 5% 4% 
Flaxseed  - - - 6% 37%  69%  24%  - - - - - - 7% 8% 4% 6% 6% 7% 6% 
Honey/apiculture  - - - - - 22%  - - - 1% - - - - - 2% 2% 5% 6% 5% 
Lentils  - - - - - - - 7% - 1% 21%  36%  - - - - - - - - 
Millet  - - - - - - - - - - - - - 8% 11%  5% 7% 6% 12%  14%  
Mohair  68%  - - 2% 18%  22%  - 141%  124%  103%  31%  20%  20%  27%  27%  - - - - - 
Mustard  - - - - 13%  8% - - - - - - - 8% 4% 6% 6% 7% 6% 3% 
Oats - - - 10%  17%  25%  2% - 2% 2% - - - 2% 4% 2% 2% 2% 3% 2% 
Peanuts  41%  29%  30%  30%  36%  49%  30%  11%  3% 4% 11%  3% - 4% 4% 4% 3% 3% 3% 16%  
Pumpkins  - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 79%  - - - - - 
Rapeseed  - - - - 11%  24%  11%  - - - - - - - - - - - - - 
Rice 1% - - 1% 35%  59%  82%  73%  31%  8% 8% - - 1% 2% 2% 2% 1% 1% 2% 
Safflower  - - - - 4% 11%  - 7% - - - - - 2% 4% 4% 3% 4% 3% 4% 
Sesame  - - - - - 5% - - - - - - - - - - 13%  10%  34%  57%   
  JOB/AG/102  
 
- 5 - Product/Year  
1995 
1996 
1997 
1998 
1999 
2000 
2001 
2002 
2003 
2004 
2005 
2006 
2007 
2008 
2009 
2010 
2011 
2012 
2013 
2014 
Sorghum  - - - 7% 16%  10%  1% - 2% 15%  19%  1% - 7% 8% 6% 11%  9% 11%  8% 
Soybeans  - - - 9% 23%  29%  29%  - - 3% - - - 5% 4% 3% 4% 3% 4% - 
Sugar  51%  44%  49%  50%  56%  57%  52%  63%  55%  66%  62%  53%  58%  55%  49%  39%  43%  39%  58%  59%  
Sunflower  - - - 4% 42%  65%  17%  - - - 4% - - 10%  12%  8% 11%  7% 12%  8% 
Tobacco  - - - - 39%  27%  - 4% 1% 1% - - - 2% 3% 3% 3% 3% 3% 3% 
Wheat  - - - 8% 17%  15%  4% - 1% 1% - - - 6% 14%  6% 8% 6% 9% 8% 
Wool 58%  - - - 49%  215%  - 36%  25%  25%  25%  30%  22%  15%  34%  17%  2% - - - 
 
EUROPEAN UNION – PRODUCT -SPECIFIC SUPPORT AS % OF VALUE OF PRODUCTION  
Product/Year  
2000 
2001 
2002 
2003 
2004 
2005 
2006 
2007 
2008 
2009 
2010 
2011 
2012 
2013 
Beef 52% 47% - - - - - - - - - - - - 
Butter  71% 71% 71% 71% 69% 67% - - - - - - - - 
SMP 67% 61% 67% 67% 65% 63% - - - - - - - - 
Apples  68% 48% 45% 56% 51% 51% 42% - - - - - - - 
Apricots  32% 20% 27% 18% 19% 31% 24% - - - - - - - 
Artichokes  15% 26% 25% 25% 25% 28% 31% - - - - - - - 
Bananas  - - - - 12% - 9% - - - - - - - 
Cherries  18% 15% 19% 28% 32% 18% 20% - - - - - - - 
Chick -peas ETC  14% - - - - - - - - - - - - - 
Clementines  18% 14% 20% 18% 27% 22% 18% - - - - - - - 
Courgettes  22% 23% 51% 50% 14% 13% 25% - - - - - - - 
Cucumbers  34% 34% 80% 85% 86% 53% 55% - - - - - - - 
Figs for processing  53% 46% - - - - - - - - - - - - 
Lemons  60% 41% 59% 52% 57% 44% 52% - - - - - - -  
  JOB/AG/102  
 
- 6 - Product/Year  
2000 
2001 
2002 
2003 
2004 
2005 
2006 
2007 
2008 
2009 
2010 
2011 
2012 
2013 
Mandarins  18% 23% 23% 22% 12% 21% 17% - - - - - - - 
Oranges  17% 18% 20% 20% 23% 22% 14% - - - - - - - 
Peaches for processing  47% 38% - - - - - - - - - - - - 
Peaches/nectarines  22% 20% 23% 16% 24% 24% 15% - - - - - - - 
Pears  48% 33% 39% 37% 42% 40% 31% - - - - - - - 
Pears for processing  68% 82% - - - - - - - - - - - - 
Plums  15% 15% 15% 13% 19% 16% 21% - - - - - - - 
Plums for processing  37% 51% - - - - - - - - - - - - 
Satsumas  24% 13% 24% 21% 21% 18% 19% 1% - - - - - - 
Table grapes  16% 13% 9% 11% 11% 11% 22% - - - - - - - 
Tinned pineapple  108% 108% - - - - - - - - - - - - 
Tomatoes  29% 22% 35% 34% 36% 25% 39% - - - 1% - - - 
Tomatoes for processing  49% 61% - - - - - - - - - - - - 
Barley  41% 33% 34% 32% 33% 35% 32% 19% 22% 34% - - - - 
Common wheat  22% 14% 14% 13% 14% 16% 13% 8% 10% 13% 9% 7% 7% 8% 
Maize  16% 9% 8% 7% 8% 9% 8% 5% 6% - - - - - 
Rice 66% 52% 54% 58% 3% 3% - - 2% - - - - - 
Rye 43% 34% 38% 41% - - - - - - - - - - 
Sorghum  22% 15% - - - - - - - - - - - - 
Triticale  39% 34% - - - - - - - - - - - - 
Olive oil  26% 26% 50% 76% 46% - - - - - - - - 1% 
Hops - - 10% 9% - - - - - - 1% 1% 1% 1% 
Seed for sowing  - - 17% 15% - - - - - - - - - - 
Sugar  - - - - - - 177%  102%  60% 58% 3% 1% 1% - 
White sugar  66% 64% 116% 107% 120% 68% - - - - - - - - 
Ethyl alcohol of agricultural origin  - - - 13% - - - - - - - - - -  
  JOB/AG/102  
 
- 7 - Product/Year  
2000 
2001 
2002 
2003 
2004 
2005 
2006 
2007 
2008 
2009 
2010 
2011 
2012 
2013 
Tobacco  96% 95% 155% 144% 146% 142% - 86%  75%  49%  - - 1% - 
Cotton  64% 52% 53% 139% 59% 60% - - - - - - - - 
Silkworms  - - - - 167% - - 167% 133% 100% 133% 100% 133% 133% 
 
CANADA – PRODUCT -SPECIFIC SUPPORT AS % OF VALUE OF PRODUCTION  
Product/Year  
1995 
1996 
1997 
1998 
1999 
2000 
2001 
2002 
2003 
2004 
2005 
2006 
2007 
2008 
2009 
2010 
2011 
2012 
2013 
Corn 1% 1% 1% 8% 14%  22%  14%  6% 7% 19%  16%  9% 5% - 1% 3% - - 1% 
Soybeans  - - - 2% 6% 15%  20%  4% - 8% 4% 1% 3% - - - - - - 
Tobacco  - - - - - 6% - - - 17%  37%  3% - - 375%  6% - - - 
Pork 5% 4% - 7% 7% 1% 1% 3% 5% 1% - 3% 6% 13%  8% 3% 4% 5% 3% 
Sheepmeat  8% 6% 8% 8% 9% 9% 11%  11%  16%  17%  11%  10%  9% 15%  10%  7% 9% 8% 12%  
Milk 22%  17%  14%  14%  14%  13%  12%  9% 12%  12%  11%  9% 10%  13%  10%  8% 9% 10%  8% 
Beef 1% 2% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 18%  9% 3% 2% 4% 9% 5% 2% 3% 2% 1% 
 
   
  JOB/AG/102  
 
- 8 - ANNEX 2  
UNITED STATES – CONCENTRATIO N OF PRODUCT -SPECIFIC SUPPORT ( AS % OF TOTAL PRODUC T-SPECIFIC SUPPORT ) 
Product/Year  
1995 
1996 
1997 
1998 
1999 
2000 
2001 
2002 
2003 
2004 
2005 
2006 
2007 
2008 
2009 
2010 
2011 
2012 
2013 
2014 
Corn 1% - 2% 15%  15%  16%  9% 2% 3% 25%  34%  - - 18%  20%  19%  23%  19%  22%  28%  
Cotton  1% - 7% 9% 14%  6% 19%  11%  6% 18%  12%  17%  3% 11%  3% 4% 7% 4% 4% 12%  
Dairy  74%  79%  69%  43%  28%  30%  30%  56%  64%  38%  39%  64%  77%  33%  27%  31%  26%  23%  23%  - 
Livestock  - - - - - - - 10%  - - - - - - 1% - 2% 18%  12%  11%  
Soybeans  - - 1% 12%  17%  21%  25%  - - 4% 1% 1% - 12%  13%  13%  13%  10%  11%  2% 
Sugar  17%  15%  16%  10%  7% 7% 7% 12%  17%  10%  9% 16%  19%  10%  12%  14%  11%  10%  10%  18%  
Wheat  - - 1% 5% 6% 5% 1% - 1% 1% - - - 8% 14%  9% 9% 8% 9% 11%  
 
EUROPEAN UNION – CONCENTRATION OF PRODUCT -SPECIFIC SUPPORT ( AS % OF TOTAL PRODUC T-SPECIFIC SUPPORT ) 
Product/Year  
1995 
1996 
1997 
1998 
1999 
2000 
2001 
2002 
2003 
2004 
2005 
2006 
2007 
2008 
2009 
2010 
2011 
2012 
2013 
Beef 28% 27% 27% 29% 27% 26% 25%  - - - - - - - - - - - - 
Butter  8% 8% 8% 9% 9% 10% 11% 16%  17% 14% 15% 13% 20% 23% 23% 38% 39% 40%  39%  
Skimmed Milk Powder  4% 3% 3% 3% 3% 3% 3% 6% 5% 4% 3% 3% 7% 7% 8% 14% 15% 17% 16%  
Apples  5% 4% 4% 4% 5% 5% 5% 8% 9% 9% 10% 10% - - - - - - - 
Tomatoes  9% 10% 9% 4% 5% 6% 5% 7% 6% 5% 6% 8% - - - - - - - 
Barley  4% 5% 5% 6% 5% 5% 4% 6% 6% 6% 6% 7% 14% 18% 18% - - - - 
Common wheat  5% 6% 6% 7% 6% 5% 3% 5% 5% 6% 6% 6% 12% 17% 16% 26% 27% 27% 29%  
Olive oil  3% 4% 5% 4% 4% 5% 7% 7% 8% 8% - - - - - - - - 1% 
Sugar  - - - - - - - - - - - - - 15% 16% 1% - 1% - 
White sugar  12% 12% 12% 12% 12% 13% 15%  20%  19% 23% 25% 25% 26% - - - - - - 
Wine 3% 4% 4% 4% 4% 2% 2% 3% 2% 2% 3% 3% 4% 7% 7% 9% 11% 10% 11%   
  JOB/AG/102  
 
- 9 - CANADA – CONCENTRATION OF PRODUCT -SPECIFIC SUPPORT ( AS % OF TOTAL PRODUC T-SPECIFIC SUPPORT ) 
Product/Year  
1995 
1996 
1997 
1998 
1999 
2000 
2001 
2002 
2003 
2004 
2005 
2006 
2007 
2008 
2009 
2010 
2011 
2012 
2013 
Wheat and durum  4% 10%  5% 5% 6% 8% 5% 14%  1% 3% 3% 2% 1% - - 2% 1% - - 
Corn 2% 1% 1% 9% 13%  17%  16%  10%  5% 13%  15%  13%  9% - 1% 8% - - 4% 
Soybeans  - - - 1% 4% 10%  9% 3% - 5% 3% 1% 2% - - - - - - 
Tobacco  - - - - - 2% - - - 3% 6% 1% - - 20%  1% - - - 
Beef 6% 8% 11%  8% 6% 6% 8% 10%  51%  30%  16%  15%  19%  32%  21%  16%  18%  11%  11%  
Pork 10%  11%  - 16%  14%  2% 2% 10%  10%  3% 1% 11%  16%  23%  17%  11%  17%  22%  16%  
Milk 72%  63%  73%  52%  48%  46%  49%  45%  29%  36%  45%  48%  45%  38%  38%  53%  58%  64%  65%  
 
 
__________