JOB/AG/150  
 
3 December  2018 
(18-7597) Page: 1/21 
Committee on Agriculture  
Special Session  Original: English  
 
ANALYS IS AND OBSERVATIONS ON PRODUCT SPECIFIC SUPPORT  
SUBMISSION BY CANADA , ARGENTINA, AUSTRAL IA, BRAZIL,  CHILE,  
COLOMBIA, NEW ZEALAN D, PARAGUAY , PERU AND URUGUAY  
The following submission , dated 27 November 2018 , is being circulated at the request of the 
aforementioned Members . 
 
_______________  
 
 
1.   This paper delves deeper into the observations noted in the 11 July 2018 submission called 
Domestic Support in the WTO Agreement on Agriculture (AoA) (JOB/AG/138) .1 It examines the 
current trends in product specific support notified by Members . The objective of this paper is to 
provide data based analysis and observations to enhance Members ' understanding of the products 
or groups of products receiving domestic support. T he analysis could inform discussions on the 
development of new and effective rules on product specific support.  
 
SECTION 1: DEFINITIO N 
2.   Product specific support included in the Current Total AMS calculation is support that does 
not meet the criteria of Anne x 2 (Green Box) of the AoA, or trade and/or production distorting 
support that is not  exempted under Article 6.2 or 6.5 of the AoA, nor support that is considered to 
be "non-product  specific ". Common types of product specific support that are included in A MS 
include:  
• Market price support;  
• Non-exempt direct payments dependent on a price gap;  
• Non-exempt direct payments based on factors of production;  
• Other forms of support, including various forms of crop/production insurance.  
SECTION 2: METHODOLO GY 
3.   The analy sis in this paper provides a factual basis for further discussions on product specific 
support notified by WTO Members. It should be noted that this analysis does not make any 
assessments as to whether the methodology used to determine product specific sup port in a 
Member 's notification is consistent with the methodologies contained in the AoA.  
 
4.   The data used in the analysis is based on Members ' annual domestic support notifications to 
the Committee on Agriculture to the greatest extent possible.2 Where value of production data was 
not notified or incomplete, data from the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations 
(FAO) was used. To provide a comparison between Members, national currencies were converted 
to US dollars (USD) using Inte rnational Monetary Fund (IMF) exchange rates. In cases where 
Members deflate notified amounts to take into account inflation, this analysis converted the 
notified amounts back into nominal dollars.  
                                                
1 Submission by Canada, Argentina, Australia, Brazil, Guatema la, New Zealand, Paraguay, Peru  and 
Uruguay.  
2 Data from domestic support notifications was sourced fr om the WTO Secretariat database on 
4 September 2018 . JOB/AG/150  
 
- 2 - 
 
   
5.   To the greatest extent possible, no changes were made to the product categories as notified 
by Members. However, in order to enable a comparison against value of production, the European 
Union support for dairy products was combined into one category since  value of production data 
appears to be only available for total milk production.   
 
6.   For simplicity and continuity reasons, the analysis excludes data from Members who are now 
part of the E uropean Union. 
 
7.   One major constraint in this analysis is that not a ll Members are up to date with their domestic 
support notifications. This creates data gaps that reduces the scope of the analysis. In order to 
have a more complete picture on product specific support, Members are encouraged to ensure 
their annual domestic  support notifications are up to date.  
 
SECTION 3: KEY OBSER VATIONS  
8.   Product specific support continues to account for the majority of Article 6.3 (Current Total 
AMS) and Article 6.4 ( de minimis ) notified support. In 2001, 85% of combined Article 6.3 and 
Article 6.4 support was product specific. This number decreased to 64% in 2010.   
 
9.   While only a subset of Members (between 23 -31 Members) have notified product specific 
support, this group represents a diverse set of Members. This diversity includes develop ed and 
developing Members with Total AMS entitlements, developing Members without Total AMS 
entitlements, and Article 12 Members.  
 
10.   Despite significant decreases in product specific support by the E uropean Union since 2001, 
the European Union along with the  United States, and Japan continue to notify significant amounts 
of product specific support.  
 
11.   Product specific support is increasing for some developing country Members such as India, 
China, Pakistan, and Viet  Nam.   
 
12.   Product categories that receive the l argest amount of product specific support include cereals, 
dairy, and pork.  
 
13.   In general, it appears that product specific support is used as a policy tool that is applied 
consistently over time from year to year rather than  used in exceptional circumstance s. 
 
14.   For most Members, product specific entitlements under de minimis  continue to grow due to 
increasing values of agriculture production. The analysis shows that for some large Members there 
is an increasing amount of "water " between product specific suppo rt actually provided  and de 
minimis  entitlements.  
 
15.   For Members using Total AMS entitlements, in most cases significant amounts of "water " 
remains between applied support and bound Total AMS commitments.  
 
SECTION 4: CONCLUSIO NS FROM ANALYSIS  
16.   Based on the analysis presented in this paper, the following observations can be used to 
guide negotiations on developing disciplines on product specific support:  
 
a) Product specific support disciplines should include all product specific support 
provided under Article 6 .3 and 6.4 of the AoA. The analysis in this paper shows that 
Members notify product support within their Total AMS commitment but substantial and 
increasing amounts of product specific support are notified within the de minimis  
entitlement as Members ' value of agricultural production increases.   
b) The development of product specific disciplines should not a priori  exclude any 
Member from having product specific limits.  JOB/AG/150  
 
- 3 - 
 
  c) Flexibilities for developing country Members, in particular for Least Developed 
Countries (LDCs), should be considered.  
SECTION 5: ANALYSIS OF PRODUC T SPECIFIC SUPPORT U NDER ARTICLES 6.3 AN D 6.4 
OF THE AOA  
5.1  General Trends in Notified AMS support  
17.   Figure 1 below illustrates the changes in total AMS (sum of product specific support and non -
product specific support) notified to the WTO. In general terms, the amount of total notified AMS 
has decreased between 2001 and 2010 (i.e. the last year where key Members have all notified 
support). Notified AMS decreased from USD 75.5 billion to USD 66.2 b illion. During this period, 
total AMS shifted in part from product specific support to non -product specific support. Product 
specific support decreased from USD 64.4 billion in 2001 to USD 42.2 billion in 2010 while non -
product specific support increased f rom USD 11.1 billion in 2001 to USD 24.0 billion in 2010. This 
appears to be due, in a large part, to the internal reforms undertaken by the European Union. If 
the E uropean Union is excluded from the analysis, total AMS between 2001 and 2010 would have 
increased from USD 39.5 billion to USD 56.0 billion and product specific support would have 
increased from USD 28.9 billion to USD 33.0 billion.  
 
18.   Despite increasing amounts of non -product specific support being notified, product specific 
support continues to account for the majority of notified AMS support from WTO Members.  
Figure 1 : Product S pecific and Non-Product Specific Support (USD million ) 
5.2  How many Members notify product specific support?  
19.   Table 1 shows that only a subset of WTO Members have  notified product specific support 
from 2001 -2014. The actual number of Members providing product specific support is likely higher 
since notifications of all Members are not up to date. The table below also excludes Members that 
have joined the E uropean Union during the 2001 -2015 period. If they were included, the number 
of Members providing product specific support would be higher.  
Table 1: Number of Members Providing Product Specific Support  
2001  2002  2003  2004  2005  2006  2007  2008  2009  2010  2011  2012  2013 2014  
26 28 29 31 28 29 31 29 29 27 27 25 26 23 
 0100002000030000400005000060000700008000090000
2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014
Product specific support Non product specific supportJOB/AG/150  
 
- 4 - 
 
  5.3  Who are the main notifiers of product specific support?  
20.   Table 2 below outlines which Members are providing product specific support. The table is 
ranked from highest to lowest notifiers  of product specific support in 2010 (the last year in which 
there is the most complete set notifications).  
 
21.   The table shows that only a subset of WTO Members notify the use of product specific 
support. However, this group is rather heterogeneous and conta ins a wide variety of large 
developed country Members, large developing country Members, and small developed and 
developing country Members.  
 
22.   The data shows that while the majority of product specific support is concentrated in the top 
ten notifiers, it i s gradually becoming less concentrated. For instance, from 2001 to 2006, 97 -98% 
of all product specific support was concentrated in just ten Members, however, in 2010 this figure 
decreased slightly to 91%.  
 
23.   By using 2010 as a benchmark, the E uropean Union, United States, and Japan remain the 
largest notifiers of product specific support. The table also illustrates the increasing amounts of 
product specific notified by developing country Members including China, India, Pakistan, and 
Viet Nam.   
 
24.   Support noti fied by G10 Members, including Japan, Switzerland, Norway, Israel, Iceland, 
Chinese Taipei, has remained relatively stable and among the largest notifiers of product specific 
support notified since 2001.  
 
25.   Product specific support notified by other Members such as Brazil, Canada, Mexico, Argentina, 
Colombia, has remained relatively stable over time.   
 
26.   Some Members have noticeably decreased the amount of product specific support notified, 
including the European Union, Republic of Korea and Australia.   
  JOB/AG/150  
 
- 5 - Table  2: Product Specific Suppor t in millions of USD (s um of Article 6.3 and 6.4  support ) (ranking based on 2010) (p art 1 of 2)  
Member  2001  2002  2003  2004  2005  2006  2007  2008  2009  2010  2011  2012  2013  2014  2015  2016  
European 
Union  35,481.6  27,858.9  35,881.1  39,944.1  35,590.2  33,968.5  19,012.3  17,760.0  15,715.9  9,293.2  9,968.4  8,846.4  9,329.5  9,963.8  9,760.8  N/A 
United States  14,706.3  11,227.2  7,386.2  12,308.8  13,060.7  7,913.1  6,496.8  12,057.7  10,953.0  9,229.6  12,616.3  14,706.4  13,995.2  8,065.5  9,006.0  N/A 
Japan  5,584.7  6,007.0  5,681.7  5,841.4  5,593.4  5,072.3  3,729.8  5,183.8  6,181.5  6,868.3  7,204.9  7,905.7  6,303.6  5,843.6  N/A N/A 
China  216.3  154.1  158.8  506.8  299.5  171.1  1,509.3  2,412.6  2,850.2  3,744.5  N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 
Switzerland  1,636.2  1,768.6  2,041.9  2,448.0  1,882.4  1,884.3  2,100.8  2,728.0  2,370.6  2,337.2  2,674.4  2,359.2  2,764.5  403.9  N/A N/A 
India 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.4 1.8 0.0 432.8  1,301.3  1,730.5  2,282.2  2,765.4  2,972.6  2,050.0  2,678.3  2,049.2  2,946.4  
Norway  1,186.5  1,312.8  1,534.5  1,599.1  1,705.5  1,687.1  1,792.7  2,059.7  1,639.1  1,614.6  1,789.7  1,831.5  1,715.4  1,591.6  1,359.7  1,323.7  
Mexico  821.6  681.6  692.7  668.1  760.0  827.1  1,023.1  1,354.0  1,042.0  1,307.5  1,383.3  858.0  1,070.5  937.0  1,093.6  518.8  
Brazil  235.8  211.8  249.5  278.7  185.8  307.5  778.1  610.7  463.1  951.4  795.5  244.4  320.6  399.5  216.9  68.9 
Canada  643.6  555.0  1,335.3  1,179.2  942.2  827.3  1,110.0  1,664.7  1,273.5  841.8  881.5  968.5  728.2  678.1  N/A N/A 
Pakistan  0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 263.7  659.7  574.0  609.1  647.2  N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 
Republic of 
Korea  1,400.8  1,462.5  1,427.4  1,362.1  182.8  1,129.0  635.1  390.4  88.0 564.3  709.6  N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 
Kingdom of 
Saudi Arabia  N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 411.8  431.6  899.9  713.0  561.3  462.9  N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 
Ukraine  N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 311.4  543.1  327.8  295.9  N/A N/A N/A N/A 
Israel  286.6  268.5  298.5  339.8  361.7  349.9  420.5  600.1  528.7  540.3  637.5  595.7  698.4  689.0  557.5  536.7  
Viet Nam  N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 8.1 15.9 407.5  369.5  515.7  572.0  777.0  N/A N/A N/A 
Philippines  61.2 39.4 37.1 25.1 9.7 10.2 5.0 193.2  152.9  159.1  51.4 69.3 72.7 6.1 41.0 N/A 
Chinese Taipei  N/A 215.8  229.5  151.8  135.6  138.3  120.1  137.0  126.9  132.9  273.6  305.3  N/A N/A N/A N/A 
Iceland  150.4  169.4  198.6  143.4  168.3  155.6  176.6  151.2  121.7  124.9  143.2  141.4  154.1  172.2  151.8  176.3  
Costa Rica  7.4 6.4 11.6 6.8 8.8 14.4 23.3 62.5 91.7 109.7  104.5  81.9 86.1 76.3 4.1 0.0 
 
   
  JOB/AG/150  
 
- 6 - Table 2: Product Specific Support in millions of USD ( sum of Article 6.3 and  6.4 support ) (ranking based on 2010) (p art 2 of 2)  
Member  2001  2002  2003  2004  2005  2006  2007  2008  2009  2010  2011  2012  2013  2014  2015  2016  
Argentina  47.7  63.2  75.9  74.1  74.9  78.9  80.1  81.6  96.2  108.9  115.3  104.2  93.2  N/A N/A N/A 
Tunisia  3.8  11.4  14.2  16.7  10.8  11.5  30.5  40.7  39.7  42.9  45.4  24.9  45.4  32.0  0.0  0.0  
Colombia  34.9  75.8  23.4  32.4  30.6  18.1  24.8  17.8  25.3  25.6  5.4  31.7  20.2  20.0  11.5  N/A 
Jordan  17.0  12.0  14.3  32.3  31.2  41.7  84.1  90.4  88.2  24.8  38.3  55.5  75.0  43.5  N/A N/A 
Albania  0.0  0.0  0.0  0.0  0.0  0.0  0.0  0.0  10.2  8.0  N/A N/A 6.6  N/A N/A N/A 
Peru 0.0  6.2  5.4  7.0  7.9  6.9  6.2  5.8  5.9  6.9  5.3  0.0  5.3  0.0  N/A N/A 
Barbados  1.5  1.5  1.5  1.4  1.4  1.5  1.3  1.4  1.4  1.2  1.3  1.0  1.0  0.6  N/A N/A 
Australia  165.4  125.8  136.5  160.8  167.9  159.0  175.8  0.6  0.3  0.0  13.4  0.8  0.5  0.2  N/A N/A 
Republic of Moldova  0.1  0.6  0.3  2.4  3.3  9.9  3.8  5.1  0.0  0.0  0.0  0.0  0.0  0.0  0.0  N/A 
Panama  0.3  0.6  0.1  0.1  0.0  0.1  0.4  0.4  0.7  0.0  0.2  0.1  0.1  0.2  8.5  17.8  
Uruguay  3.0  1.9  1.4  1.5  0.7  0.7  0.0  0.0  0.0  0.0  0.0  0.0  0.0  0.0  0.0  0.0  
Lao People's Democratic  
Republic  N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 2.7  
The former Yugoslav 
Republic of Macedonia  N/A N/A 5.3  13.8  8.2  20.2  25.0  N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 
Montenegro  N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 11.1  N/A N/A N/A 
Morocco  26.5  24.6  39.1  43.4  46.0  40.4  4.6  N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 
Russian Federation  N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 1,183.7  1,437.7  1,126.6  751.7  626.4  
Thailand  482.3  471.4  349.8  454.5  466.4  386.6  476.0  903.3  N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 309.4  211.8  130.3  
Turkey  274.4  147.4  190.2  328.8  N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 
Seychelles  N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 0.3  0.3  0.3  N/A 
Bangladesh  N/A 0.0  N/A 0.0  N/A 0.0  N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 
 JOB/AG/150  
 
- 7 - 
 
  5.4  What products are receiving product specific support?  
27.   In a review of product categories  it appears that product specific support is concentrated in a 
few product categories. In 2010, 32% of notified product specific support was in cereals (e.g. rice, 
wheat), 27% in dairy, followed by pork 11%, beef 9%. Tables 3 and 4 also shows that since 20 01, 
product specific support is more and more concentrated into a few product categories.  
 
28.   The product categories that have seen the largest reduction in product specific support are 
fruits and vegetables, oilseeds and beef. A large portion of this can be attributed to reforms of the 
European Union.  
  
  JOB/AG/150  
 
- 8 - Table 3 : Total Product Specific Support by Product Category3 (in USD million)  
Product Category  2001  2002  2003  2004  2005  2006  2007  2008  2009  2010  2011  2012  2013  2014  
Beef 10,898  2,646  2,799  2,456  2,255  2,105  2,611  3,538  3,726  3,765  4,032  4,355  3,767  2,689  
Cereals  9,839  8,695  10,041  13,799  13,117  9,589  9,699  16,508  15,450  13,880  13,960  11,133  10,835  10,115  
Dairy  12,260  14,723  15,202  14,205  14,153  13,231  12,997  12,800  11,863  11,149  11,866  12,033  12,407  9,321  
Fibres (including Cotton)  3,622  2,229  1,620  3,535  2,876  1,660  1,242  2,439  1,236  1,192  961  946  619  1,311  
Fruits and  Vegetables  8,246  8,449  10,860  12,493  12,485  12,510  1,543  1,046  1,271  1,167  1,073  892  890  1,282  
Pork 2,760  2,844  3,285  3,296  3,039  2,984  3,522  5,133  4,729  4,712  5,086  5,447  4,810  3,492  
Oilseeds  6,410  2,435  3,542  4,235  517  435  439  1,847  1,800  1,636  1,787  1,709  1,808  353  
Other Categories  9,990  10,306  11,382  13,763  13,214  12,685  8,452  6,929  6,419  3,761  4,125  3,832  4,049  3,414  
Other Livestock  379  1,555  519  570  572  871  659  1,345  1,290  983  1,208  3,651  2,348  1,246  
 
  
                                                
3 The product categories used in this analysis are a reconfiguration of the broad categories in the domestic support database o f the WTO.   
  JOB/AG/150  
 
- 9 - Figure 2 : Product Specific Support, USD million, 2001 -14 
 
 02,0004,0006,0008,00010,00012,00014,00016,00018,000
2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014
Beef Cereals Dairy Fibers (including Cotton) Fruits and Vegetables
Pork Oilseeds Other Categories Other livestock 
  JOB/AG/150  
 
- 10 - Table 4 : Percentage of P roduct Specific Support by Product Category4 
Product Category  2001  2002  2003  2004  2005  2006  2007  2008  2009  2010  2011  2012  2013  2014  
Beef 17% 5% 5% 4% 4% 4% 6% 7% 8% 9% 9% 10% 9% 8% 
Cereals  15% 16% 17% 20% 21% 17% 24% 32% 32% 33% 32% 25% 26% 30% 
Dairy  19% 27% 26% 21% 23% 24% 32% 25% 25% 26% 27% 27% 30% 28% 
Fibres (including Cotton)  6% 4% 3% 5% 5% 3% 3% 5% 3% 3% 2% 2% 1% 4% 
Fruits and Vegetables  13% 16% 18% 18% 20% 22% 4% 2% 3% 3% 2% 2% 2% 4% 
Pork 4% 5% 6% 5% 5% 5% 9% 10% 10% 11% 12% 12% 12% 11% 
Oilseeds  10% 5% 6% 6% 1% 1% 1% 4% 4% 4% 4% 4% 4% 1% 
Other Categories  16% 19% 19% 20% 21% 23% 21% 13% 13% 9% 9% 9% 10% 10% 
Other Livestock  1% 3% 1% 1% 1% 2% 2% 3% 3% 2% 3% 8% 6% 4% 
                                                
4 The product categories used in this  analysis are a reconfiguration of the broad categories in the domestic support database of the WTO.  JOB/AG/150  
 
- 11 - 
 
  Figure 3:  Product Specific Support by Category, 2001  
 
 
Figure 4 : Product Specific Support by Category, 2010  
 
 
5.5  Product specific support  
29.   Table 5 shows the top 50 products receiving Product Specific support in USD million. The 
table is ranked from highest to lowest product specific support for a single product in 2010 (the 
last year in which there is the most complete set of notifications).  
 
  Beef
17%
Cereals
15%
Dairy
19%
Fibers (including 
Cotton)
6%Fruits and 
Vegetables
13%Pork
4%Oilseeds
10%Other Categories
15%Other Livestock
1%
Beef
9%
Cereals
33%
Dairy
26%Fibers (including 
Cotton)
3%Fruits and 
Vegetables
3%Pork
11%Oilseeds
4%Other Categories
9%Other Livestock
2%JOB/AG/150  
 
- 12 - 
 
  30.   The trend in product specific support for these 50 products is not uniform. From a global 
standpoint, the sum of the support for the identified products has decreased by USD 2.4 billion 
since 2001.5 However, on a product by product stand point, 30 prod ucts (or 60%) have recorded 
an increase in support.  
 
31.   The support for rice in India, common wheat in the E uropean Union, rice in China, maize in 
the U nited States and pork in Japan are, in order, the products that have recorded the largest 
increase in produ ct specific support since 2001. Each of these products has seen an increase in 
support by more than USD 1  billion.  
 
32.   The absolute level of product specific support has also greatly evolved since 2001. China and 
India have increased their support for rice fr om zero to comparable levels to the  products receiving 
the most support in the  United States, the E uropean Union and Japan. The U nited States  and the 
European Union have reduced their support for many products. Several countries that maintained 
price supports, such as Canada, Norway and Israel, continued to see increase in domestic support 
for a limited number of products.  
 
                                                
5 Comparison between 2001 (or earliest for countries who acceded after 2001) and latest notification.   
  JOB/AG/150  
 
- 13 - Table 5 : Top 50 Products Receivi ng Support in 2010, 2001 -2016 (p art 1 of 2), (in USD million)  
Member  Product  2001  2006  2007  2010  2011  2012  2013  2014  2015  2016  Δ 
European Union  Dairy (Butter, SMP, Milk)  5,392.5  5,849.3  5,324.8  5,393.7  5,681.1  5,243.1  5,345.2  5,987.3  5,698.4  N/A 305.9  
Japan  Meat of swine  2,075.2  2,178.9  2,146.9  3,550.9  3,904.4  4,154.6  3,339.3  3,076.1  N/A N/A 1,000.9  
United States  Dairy  4,483.3  5,044.1  5,016.5  2,846.2  3,255.2  3,335.0  3,209.3  14.2  0.0  N/A (4,483.3)  
European Union  Common wheat  1,106.6  2,183.4  2,257.3  2,497.9  2,682.5  2,395.8  2,677.3  2,937.0  2,521.6  N/A 1,415.0  
Japan  Beef & veal 1,591.4  808.3  884.0  2,458.4  2,575.0  2,886.3  2,254.2  2,154.9  N/A N/A 563.5  
India Rice 0.0  0.0  432.8  2,282.2  2,647.4  2,796.7  1,983.7  2,279.7  2,031.0  2,524.2  2,524.2  
United States  Corn 1,326.1  18.6  17.4  1,774.8  2,948.0  2,719.6  3,021.2  2,256.1  2,362.1  N/A 1,036.0  
United States  Sugar  1,061.0  1,279.6  1,235.8  1,295.3  1,447.2  1,454.3  1,445.2  1,468.0  1,524.9  N/A 463.9  
United States  Soybeans  3,622.6  64.8  5.2  1,193.8  1,619.1  1,479.3  1,539.0  145.8  1,391.5  N/A (2,231.1)  
China  Rice 0.0  0.0  454.9  1,116.2  N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 1,116.2  
China  Corn 0.0  45.9  49.0  885.3  N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 885.3  
China  Wheat  0.0  0.0  0.0  855.5  N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 855.5  
United States  Wheat  192.5  2.3  0.0  797.1  1,162.9  1,116.0  1,317.5  923.0  854.9  N/A 662.4  
Switzerland  Bovine meat  305.3  645.1  742.4  781.0  931.6  873.2  904.4  3.4  N/A N/A (301.9)  
Norway  Milk 422.9  572.8  681.2  749.1  829.8  854.1  882.5  843.0  696.5  663.8  240.9  
European Union  Wine 797.8  1,097.9  832.2  624.2  1,111.7  894.8  1,062.2  801.2  554.6  N/A (243.2)  
Pakistan  Wheat  0.0  0.0  263.7  609.1  647.2  N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 647.2  
Switzerland  Milk & milk products  601.0  390.1  391.0  551.2  564.3  452.6  617.2  320.4  N/A N/A (280.7)  
Republic of Korea  Rice 1,226.1  943.3  478.1  514.2  676.8  N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A (549.3)  
Switzerland  Meat of swine  399.4  425.7  474.5  492.8  507.4  424.1  653.1  0.0  N/A N/A (399.4)  
Canada  Milk 312.3  398.3  496.4  449.3  513.5  615.9  471.4  520.7  N/A N/A 159.0  
China  Cotton  216.3  110.4  538.9  439.7  N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 223.5  
Israel  Milk 210.8  266.7  333.9  434.9  481.5  445.5  529.9  511.1  418.8  367.3  156.5  
Mexico  Maize  (corn)  242.3  345.9  212.1  416.8  470.3  174.6  278.2  285.0  534.7  210.9  292.4  
United States  Cotton  2,810.1  1,365.2  207.9  400.8  894.4  636.2  573.5  956.4  853.1  N/A (1,957.0)  
 
   
  JOB/AG/150  
 
- 14 - Table 5 : Top 50 Products Receiving Support in 2010, 2001 -2016 ( part 2 of 2) (in USD million)  
Member  Product  2001  2006  2007  2010  2011  2012  2013  2014  2015  2016  Δ 
Norway  Pork 200.1  268.1  293.9  334.7  389.9  373.4  347.5  325.9  302.2  295.5  95.4  
Mexico  Bovine animals  0.0  198.2  394.1  307.9  253.7  247.8  214.9  207.2  88.9  42.5  88.9  
Kingdom of Saudi Arabia  Poultry  N/A 64.3  69.3  293.6  175.6  N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 111.3  
Brazil  Maize  56.3  129.1  101.8  292.7  423.0  0.0  0.0  196.2  68.1  0.0  (56.3)  
Brazil  Cotton  52.1  82.7  341.8  269.0  0.0  0.0  0.0  0.0  62.7  0.0  (52.1)  
Japan  Sugar  454.2  445.4  203.8  260.9  190.5  211.8  192.6  169.0  N/A N/A (285.3)  
Japan  Milk 296.2  245.1  250.5  259.7  286.9  338.4  258.2  237.9  N/A N/A (58.4)  
Ukraine  Sugar beets  N/A N/A N/A 258.0  278.0  262.3  N/A N/A N/A N/A 209.1  
Switzerland  Poultry  87.5  117.8  137.3  190.1  228.6  230.5  244.8  0.0  N/A N/A (87.5)  
European Union  Dried fodder  283.8  198.8  190.9  187.0  137.6  0.0  0.0  0.0  0.0  N/A (283.8)  
Ukraine  Milk N/A N/A N/A 182.5  0.0  0.0  N/A N/A N/A N/A (127.3)  
Norway  Sheep  100.0  161.2  180.5  173.4  184.3  183.5  113.4  40.0  32.0  34.3  (65.8)  
Mexico  Wheat  119.8  95.1  149.6  172.7  313.5  132.4  137.3  91.1  124.6  74.6  4.7  
Philippines  Rice 61.2  10.2  5.0  156.2  51.3  69.1  69.6  4.8  40.7  N/A (20.5)  
China  Rapeseed  0.0  0.8  132.1  151.1  N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 151.1  
China  Soybean  0.0  13.9  14.6  145.3  N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 145.3  
Mexico  Sorghum  80.7  52.1  37.2  141.4  172.3  135.1  137.1  98.4  153.3  34.7  72.6  
Kingdom of Saudi Arabia  Livestock  N/A 124.7  133.0  138.8  175.6  N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 50.9  
Brazil  Coffee  11.7  0.0  82.0  137.0  0.0  0.0  0.0  108.0  21.6  13.4  1.8  
Canada  Beef 50.3  125.4  214.3  132.6  159.5  110.7  81.3  40.1  N/A N/A (10.2)  
European Union  Nuts 0.0  118.2  118.4  129.3  121.9  1.0  9.7  0.0  0.0  N/A 0.0  
Brazil  Rice 13.3  57.9  74.5  125.8  110.2  149.9  0.1  0.0  0.0  0.0  (13.3)  
European Union  Sugar  5,129.4  8,488.5  4,859.2  124.6  32.3  75.3  29.2  5.6  2.7  N/A (5,126.7)  
Kingdom of Saudi Arabia  Wheat  N/A 212.4  217.2  116.5  99.1  N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A (113.3)  
Viet Nam  Rice N/A N/A 6.5  109.7  160.3  331.5  339.6  N/A N/A N/A 333.1  JOB/AG/150  
 
- 15 - 
 
  5.6  De Minimis  Entitlement  
33.   Table 6 shows the evolution of de minimis entitlement by product of the 50 most supported 
products in 2010. The de minimis  entitlement is calculated by multiplying the de minimis  threshold 
by the value of production of a product. The de minimis  threshold is set at 10% of the value of 
production of the product for developing countries , at 5% for developed countries and 8.5% for 
China and Kazakhstan.  
 
34.   The vast majority of products have seen an increase in their value of production and 
therefore an increase in their respective de minimis entitlement. Of the 50 products listed, only 
four s aw a decrease in their de minimis entitlement.  
 
35.   Since 2001, the de minimis entitlement of the 50 products has increased globally by USD 
27.6 billion. This equates to an average increase of USD 575 million per product.  
 
36.   As a percentage, the de minimis entitlement of the 50 products increased in total by 139% or 
133% on average.  
 
37.   India (rice), China (rice, corn, wheat, cotton), the European Union (dairy products and 
common wheat) and the United States (corn and soybeans) recorded an increase in their de 
minim is entitlement of more than USD 1 billion per product.  
 
38.   Brazil had the largest percentage increase in its de minimis  entitlement for coffee (869%), 
cotton (546%) and maize (305%). India (rice), the European Union (common wheat), China 
(cotton, soybeans, ra peseed), Pakistan (wheat) and the Philippines (rice) all experienced an 
increase in their de minimis  entitlement of more than 200%.  
 
39.   Whether due to inflation or increases in production, the trend in production values of the top 
50 products that have received the most support continued to increase. If this trend continues, the 
de minimis  rule will continue to allow the largest users of product specific support to increase their 
levels of product specific support.  
  
  JOB/AG/150  
 
- 16 - Table 6 : De minimis  Entitlement for Top 50 Products Receiving Support in 2010 ( part 1 of 2) (in USD million)  
Member  Product  De minimis  limit  2001  2006  2007  2010  2011  2012  2013  2014  2015  2016  Δ Δ% 
India Rice 10% 1,742.5  3,602.7  4,984.4  6,871.2  8,052.1  7,626.1  6,712.0  6,897.6  6,928.4  7,017.7  5,275.2  303%  
China  Rice 8.5%  2,290.5  5,114.2  3,588.1  4,935.2  N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 2,644.7  115%  
China  Corn 8.5%  1,511.4  3,248.5  2,502.5  4,121.0  N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 2,609.6  173%  
United States  Corn 5% 944.4  1,604.7  2,604.5  3,226.5  3,832.6  3,707.8  3,096.4  2,647.6  2,467.0  N/A 1,522.5  161%  
European Union  Dairy  5% 1,795.7  2,681.6  3,312.1  3,136.1  3,583.4  3,338.1  4,089.4  4,028.2  2,904.3  N/A 1,108.6  62% 
China  Wheat  9% 1,012.2  1,633.8  1,923.1  2,736.0  N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 1,723.8  170%  
China  Cotton  9% 538.3  1,083.8  1,392.3  2,014.1  N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 1,475.8  274%  
United States  Soybeans  5% 630.3  1,020.8  1,337.6  1,878.6  1,927.1  2,186.2  2,179.1  1,973.7  1,759.6  N/A 1,129.3  179%  
United States  Dairy  5% 1,244.7  1,177.9  1,782.6  1,576.8  1,986.8  1,861.5  2,023.8  2,479.5  1,795.2  N/A 550.5  44% 
European Union  Common  wheat  5% 402.0  823.8  1,374.7  1,354.7  1,840.2  1,723.8  1,614.2  1,587.9  1,317.8  N/A 915.9  228%  
Viet Nam  Rice 10% N/A N/A 587.9  1,162.1  1,230.8  1,120.4  1,108.0  N/A N/A N/A 520.1  88% 
Republic of Korea  Rice 10% 1,156.4  1,143.7  1,180.5  949.0  1,027.8  N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A (128.6)  -11% 
China  Soybean  8.5%  311.3  529.0  597.2  946.8  N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 635.5  204%  
Brazil  Maize  10% 291.1  514.8  894.5  941.0  1,425.2  1,610.3  1,622.6  1,485.3  1,177.8  1,178.1  887.0  305%  
European Union  Wine 5% 622.5  952.7  1,089.9  855.5  1,002.4  1,106.4  1,407.4  1,441.0  1,266.1  N/A 643.6  103%  
Brazil  Coffee  10% 69.6  207.4  265.8  718.7  1,085.5  921.0  689.8  778.5  561.3  674.9  605.3  869%  
China  Rapeseed  8.5%  210.2  246.0  294.5  689.8  N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 479.7  228%  
Pakistan  Wheat  10% 241.8  379.5  415.7  686.8  864.3  N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 622.5  257%  
United States  Wheat  5% 270.3  386.3  664.3  627.7  723.8  882.0  732.1  606.6  502.6  N/A 232.3  86% 
Japan  Beef & veal 5% 334.6  510.1  510.4  616.0  617.3  680.7  599.5  595.5  N/A N/A 260.8  78% 
Mexico  Maize (corn)  10% 312.7  403.9  525.4  519.4  578.9  671.9  597.3  545.6  533.3  534.4  221.6  71% 
Philippines  Rice 10% 206.5  316.6  394.5  514.0  587.0  691.8  741.6  851.9  684.9  N/A 478.3  232%  
Mexico  Bovine animals  10% 349.2  451.2  462.3  458.6  496.9  507.1  579.8  684.3  728.9  636.8  287.6  82% 
United States  Cotton  5% 189.5  250.7  259.8  416.8  420.0  387.4  312.3  308.1  246.1  N/A 56.6  30% 
Ukraine  Milk 10% N/A N/A N/A 406.5  412.5  369.2  N/A N/A N/A N/A 93.7  34% 
 
   
  JOB/AG/150  
 
- 17 - Table 6: De minimis  Entitlement for Top 50 Product s Receiving Support in 2010 ( part 2 of 2)  (in USD million)  
Member  Product  De minimis  limit  2001  2006  2007  2010  2011  2012  2013  2014  2015  2016  Δ Δ% 
Brazil  Rice 10% 127.4  240.7  283.6  399.2  449.8  365.2  425.8  421.7  296.4  274.0  146.6  115%  
Japan  Milk 5% 280.7  277.4  268.3  387.9  418.2  431.8  350.0  331.9  N/A N/A 51.2  18% 
Japan  Meat of swine  5% 219.5  232.2  241.6  328.3  357.0  343.6  311.0  330.9  N/A N/A 111.4  51% 
Canada  Beef 5% 254.5  279.8  295.2  297.8  316.4  326.2  330.2  443.9  N/A N/A 189.4  74% 
Canada  Milk 5% 133.7  213.5  242.4  268.1  293.9  296.1  286.1  274.5  N/A N/A 140.8  105%  
European Union  Sugar  5% 399.9  239.3  237.8  200.2  253.5  254.6  303.1  303.2  166.6  N/A (233.3)  -58% 
Brazil  Cotton  10% 68.4  125.2  203.4  168.4  472.1  567.8  388.0  486.5  391.6  441.6  373.2  546%  
Kingdom of  
Saudi Arabia  Poultry  10% N/A 118.0  136.0  166.9  197.5  N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 79.5  67% 
United States  Sugar  5% 101.4  121.2  106.2  164.1  169.2  184.4  125.0  124.6  133.1  N/A 31.7  31% 
Kingdom of  
Saudi Arabia  Livestock  10% N/A 98.8  114.0  160.5  205.3  N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 106.5  108%  
Mexico  Sorghum  10% 69.7  79.2  109.2  124.7  178.6  180.6  144.2  150.3  97.7  82.9  13.2  19% 
Switzerland  Milk & milk products  5% 88.3  108.2  111.4  118.1  141.6  128.5  136.9  147.8  N/A N/A 59.6  67% 
Ukraine  Sugar beets  10% N/A N/A N/A 79.6  99.2  80.8  N/A N/A N/A N/A 30.0  59% 
Mexico  Wheat  10% 42.9  52.0  66.7  78.4  105.0  89.7  93.4  93.7  89.4  75.7  32.8  76% 
Israel  Milk 10% 41.1  42.8  51.8  63.2  80.6  77.3  86.7  88.4  73.9  72.8  31.7  77% 
Switzerland  Bovine meat  5% 28.7  47.2  50.1  58.1  68.8  66.1  68.4  70.3  N/A N/A 41.6  145%  
Norway  Milk 5% 28.7  42.2  50.7  55.5  62.0  62.6  62.4  62.4  53.0  51.2  22.5  79% 
Switzerland  Meat of swine  5% 30.8  33.3  36.1  39.9  44.6  39.7  49.8  48.3  N/A N/A 17.5  57% 
Japan  Sugar  5% 40.8  38.6  33.2  37.9  39.8  41.4  32.2  31.0  N/A N/A (9.8) -24% 
Kingdom of  
Saudi Arabia  Wheat  10% N/A 72.7  59.5  36.0  31.6  N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A (41.2)  -57% 
Norway  Pork 5% 12.0  17.6  22.0  27.1  30.6  28.3  26.1  25.5  23.2  22.6  10.6  89% 
Switzerland  Poultry  5% 5.7  7.7  8.9  11.9  14.7  14.5  15.7  16.7  N/A N/A 11.0  193%  
Norway  Sheep  5% 3.9  5.7  6.5  7.5  8.1  8.2  9.1  9.2  7.8  6.9  3.0  76% 
European Union  Nuts 5% N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 
European Union  Dried fodder  5% N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A JOB/AG/150  
 
- 18 - 
 
  5.7  Water  
40.   Table 7 presents the difference between notified product specific support and entitlements 
using the de minimis  entitlement for each product. This variable, also known as "water ", combines 
the information included in Tables 5 and 6 (domestic support and the de minimis  entitlement).  
 
41.   In general, the water increased for a majority of products. In fact, 36 of the 50 p roducts 
registered an increase in water.  
 
42.   Overall, the water for the 50 selected products has also increased in recent years. In total, 
the water of the 50 selected products increased by USD 29.7 billion.6 
 
43.   The European Union (sugar), the United States (da iry and cotton), the Republic of Korea 
(rice) and Switzerland (beef and pork) recorded significant increases in their water due to a 
reduction in product specific support.  
 
44.   India (rice) and China (wheat, corn, rice and cotton) recorded a large increase in their 
respective values of production combined with a large increase in support per product. As the 
increase in de minimis  entitlement was well above the increase in domestic support, India (rice) 
and China (Wheat, Corn, Rice and Cotton) recorded significa nt increase in their water by product.  
 
45.   Brazil has combined a large increase in its value of production as well as a significant 
reduction in its support by product resulting in a significant increase in water for cotton, maize and 
coffee.  
 
46.   Several countri es who have maintained price support policies such as Canada, Norway and 
Israel have notified a higher increase in product specific support than the increase in their de 
minimis  space, resulting in an overall decrease in water.  
 
47.   In 2010, 27 of the 50 produ cts had water. All products from Members without a Total AMS 
commitment had water. Unsurprisingly, many products from Members with Total AMS commitment 
had a negative water, suggesting that these Members are using their AMS entitlements.  
 
48.   India (corn), Ch ina (wheat, corn, rice and cotton), the United States (corn) and Viet Nam 
(rice) had the highest water in 2010. Several countries with a Total AMS commitment, including 
Canada (beef), Brazil (coffee, rice and maize) and Ukraine (milk) also had water in 201 0. 
 
49.   In order to fairly compare water across Members, it is necessary to take into account the 
Total AMS commitment of several Members which allows them to notify product specific support 
over the de minimis threshold for those products.  
 
                                                
6 Sum of variation between earliest and latest domest ic support notifications.   
  JOB/AG/150  
 
- 19 - Table 7 : Notified Support Compared to De minimis  Entitlement (negative number indicates over de minimis  support ) (part 1 of 2) (in 
USD million)  
Member  Product  AMS Commitment  2001  2006  2007  2010  2011  2012  2013  2014  2015  2016  Δ 
India Rice No 1,742.5  3,602.7  4,551.6  4,589.0  5,404.7  4,829.4  4,728.3  4,618.0  4,897.5  4,493.5  2,751.0  
China  Rice No 2,290.5  5,114.2  3,133.2  3,819.0  N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 1,528.5  
China  Corn No 1,511.4  3,202.5  2,453.5  3,235.6  N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 1,724.2  
China  Wheat  No 1,012.2  1,633.8  1,923.1  1,880.5  N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 868.3  
China  Cotton  No 322.0  973.4  853.4  1,574.3  N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 1,252.3  
United States  Corn Yes (381.6)  1,586.1  2,587.1  1,451.7  884.6  988.2  75.2  391.5  104.9  N/A 486.5  
Viet Nam  Rice Yes N/A N/A 581.4  1,052.4  1,070.5  788.9  768.4  N/A N/A N/A 186.9  
China  Soybean  No 311.3  515.0  582.6  801.5  N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 490.2  
United States  Soybeans  Yes (2,992.4)  956.0  1,332.4  684.8  308.0  706.9  640.2  1,828.0  368.1  N/A 3,360.4  
Brazil  Maize  Yes 234.8  385.7  792.7  648.3  1,002.2  1,610.3  1,622.6  1,289.1  1,109.7  1,178.1  943.3  
Brazil  Coffee  Yes 58.0  207.4  183.7  581.8  1,085.5  921.0  689.8  670.5  539.7  661.5  603.5  
China  Rapeseed  No 210.2  245.2  162.4  538.7  N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 328.6  
Republic of Korea  Rice Yes (69.7)  200.4  702.4  434.8  350.9  N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 420.6  
Philippines  Rice No 145.3  306.5  389.5  357.8  535.7  622.7  671.9  847.1  644.2  N/A 498.9  
Brazil  Rice Yes 114.2  182.8  209.1  273.4  339.6  215.3  425.7  421.7  296.4  274.0  159.8  
European Union  Wine Yes (175.4)  (145.2)  257.8  231.3  (109.3)  211.6  345.2  639.7  711.4  N/A 886.8  
Ukraine  Milk Yes N/A N/A N/A 224.1  412.5  369.2  N/A N/A N/A N/A 221.0  
Canada  Beef Yes 204.2  154.3  80.8  165.2  156.9  215.5  248.9  403.8  N/A N/A 199.6  
Mexico  Bovine animals  Yes 349.2  253.0  68.2  150.8  243.1  259.3  364.9  477.1  640.0  594.2  198.7  
Japan  Milk Yes (15.5)  32.4  17.7  128.1  131.2  93.4  91.8  94.1  N/A N/A 109.6  
Mexico  Maize (corn)  Yes 70.4  58.0  313.3  102.5  108.6  497.4  319.1  260.6  (1.3) 323.5  (70.7)  
Pakistan  Wheat  No 241.8  379.5  152.0  77.7  217.1  N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A (24.7)  
European Union  Sugar  Yes (4,729.4)  (8,249.2)  (4,621.4)  75.6  221.2  179.3  273.9  297.6  163.9  N/A 4,893.3  
Kingdom of  
Saudi Arabia  Livestock  Yes N/A (25.9)  (19.0)  21.8  29.7  N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 55.6  
United States  Cotton  Yes (2,620.7)  (1,114.5)  51.9  15.9  (474.5)  (248.7)  (261.3)  (648.3)  (607.0)  N/A 2,013.6  
 
   
  JOB/AG/150  
 
- 20 - Table 7 : Notified S upport Compared to De minimis  Entitlement (negative number indicates over de minimis  support ) (part 2 of 2) (in 
USD million)  
Member  Product  AMS  
Commitment  2001  2006  2007  2010  2011  2012  2013  2014  2015  2016  Δ 
Mexico  Sorghum  Yes (11.0)  27.2  72.0  (16.8)  6.3  45.4  7.0  52.0  (55.6)  48.1  (59.4)  
Kingdom of  
Saudi Arabia  Wheat  Yes N/A (139.7)  (157.8)  (80.6)  (67.5)  N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 72.2  
Mexico  Wheat  Yes (76.9)  (43.1)  (82.9)  (94.3)  (208.6)  (42.7)  (44.0)  2.6  (35.2)  1.1  28.0  
Brazil  Cotton  Yes 16.3  42.5  (138.4)  (100.6)  472.1  567.8  388.0  486.5  328.9  441.6  425.3  
Kingdom of  
Saudi Arabia  Poultry  Yes N/A 53.7  66.7  (126.7)  21.9  N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A (31.9)  
Norway  Sheep  Yes (96.1)  (155.5)  (174.0)  (165.9)  (176.2)  (175.3)  (104.3)  (30.8)  (24.2)  (27.4)  68.8  
United States  Wheat  Yes 77.8  384.1  664.3  (169.5)  (439.1)  (234.0)  (585.4)  (316.4)  (352.3)  N/A (430.2)  
Switzerland  Poultry  Yes (81.7)  (110.1)  (128.4)  (178.2)  (213.9)  (215.9)  (229.1)  16.7  N/A N/A 98.5  
Ukraine  Sugar beets  Yes N/A N/A N/A (178.5)  (178.8)  (181.5)  N/A N/A N/A N/A (179.2)  
Canada  Milk Yes (178.6)  (184.8)  (254.0)  (181.2)  (219.6)  (319.8)  (185.3)  (246.2)  N/A N/A (18.2)  
Japan  Sugar  Yes (413.4)  (406.8)  (170.6)  (222.9)  (150.7)  (170.4)  (160.4)  (138.0)  N/A N/A 275.5  
Norway  Pork Yes (188.1)  (250.4)  (271.9)  (307.7)  (359.4)  (345.1)  (321.3)  (300.5)  (279.0)  (272.9)  (84.8)  
Israel  Milk Yes (169.7)  (223.9)  (282.1)  (371.7)  (400.9)  (368.2)  (443.2)  (422.8)  (344.9)  (294.5)  (124.8)  
Switzerland  Milk & milk 
products  Yes (512.8)  (281.8)  (279.6)  (433.1)  (422.7)  (324.1)  (480.3)  (172.6)  N/A N/A 340.2  
Switzerland  Meat of 
swine  Yes (368.6)  (392.4)  (438.4)  (452.8)  (462.8)  (384.5)  (603.3)  48.3  N/A N/A 416.9  
Norway  Milk Yes (394.2)  (530.6)  (630.5)  (693.5)  (767.8)  (791.5)  (820.1)  (780.6)  (643.4)  (612.6)  (218.4)  
Switzerland  Bovine meat  Yes (276.6)  (597.9)  (692.3)  (722.9)  (862.8)  (807.1)  (836.0)  66.9  N/A N/A 343.5  
United States  Sugar  Yes (959.5)  (1,158.4)  (1,129.6)  (1,131.1)  (1,278.0)  (1,269.9)  (1,320.2)  (1,343.4)  (1,391.7)  N/A (432.2)  
European Union  Wheat  Yes (704.6)  (1,359.6)  (882.6)  (1,143.2)  (842.4)  (672.0)  (1,063.1)  (1,349.1)  (1,203.7)  N/A (499.1)  
United States  Dairy  Yes (3,238.6)  (3,866.2)  (3,233.9)  (1,269.5)  (1,268.4)  (1,473.5)  (1,185.5)  2,465.3  1,795.2  N/A 5,033.8  
Japan  Beef & veal Yes (1,256.7)  (298.2)  (373.6)  (1,842.4)  (1,957.7)  (2,205.6)  (1,654.7)  (1,559.4)  N/A N/A (302.7)  
European Union  Dairy  Yes (3,596.8)  (3,167.7)  (2,012.7)  (2,257.6)  (2,097.6)  (1,905.0)  (1,255.8)  (1,959.1)  (2,794.1)  N/A 802.8  
Japan  Meat of  
swine  Yes (1,855.7)  (1,946.6)  (1,905.2)  (3,222.6)  (3,547.5)  (3,811.0)  (3,028.3)  (2,745.2)  N/A N/A (889.5)  
European Union  Nuts Yes N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 
European Union  Dried fodder  Yes N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 
 JOB/AG/150  
 
- 21 - 
 
  5.8  Final Bound Total AMS commitment usage  
50.   Table 8 shows the Final Bound Total AMS (FBTAMS ) utilization rate for Members included in 
the previous tables. These utilization rates compare the level of support that has exceeded the de 
minimis  threshold, or Current Total AMS (CTAMS) with the FBTAMS.  
 
51.   Table 8  shows that FBTAMS usage is trending down ward since 2001  as the majority of 
Members listed below decreased their Current Total AMS to F BTAMS ratio.  
 
52.   Considering only the most recent annual domestic support notification from each o f these 
Members, eight  Members had a utilization rate of less than or equal to 25%, one Member had a 
utilization rate between 25% and 50%, one Member had a rate of between 50% and 75% and two 
Members had a utilization rate greater than 75%.  
 
53.   Apart from Norway and Israel, all the Members listed below have space within thei r AMS 
entitlement to absorb an increase in their product specific domestic support.  
Table 8: Percentage of FBTAMS C ommitment Used for Members in Top 50 Products 
Receiving Support  
Member  Currency  FBTAMS  2001 2006 2007 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 
Brazil  USD 912 0% 0% 37% 29% 23% 1% 0% 0% 0% 0% 
Canada  CAD 4,301  66% 14% 20% 11% 12% 19% 12% 14% N/A N/A 
European 
Union EURO  72,244  55% 37% 17% 9% 9% 8% 8% 9% N/A N/A 
Israel  USD 569 46% 60% 71% 93% 110%  102%  121%  116%  95% 88% 
Japan  YEN 3,972,900  17% 14% 10% 15% 14% 15% 15% 15% N/A N/A 
Republic of 
Korea  KRW 1,490,000  95% 65% 2% 1% 0% N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 
Mexico  Mexican Peso  25,161.2  19% 7% 14% 19% 19% 10% 18% 6% 60% 6% 
Norway  NOK 11,449  93% 94% 91% 84% 86% 91% 86% 85% 94% 95% 
Kingdom of 
Saudi Arabia  SAR 3,218  N/A 39% 41% 48% 12% N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 
Switzerland  CHF 4,257  65% 55% 59% 57% 56% 52% 60% 32% N/A N/A 
Ukraine  UAH 3,043  N/A N/A N/A 72% 73% 69% N/A N/A N/A N/A 
United States USD 19,103  76% 41% 33% 27% 37% 36% 36% 20% 20% N/A 
Viet Nam  VND 3,961,590  N/A N/A 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% N/A N/A N/A 
 
 
__________