. /.   WORLD TRADE  
ORGANIZATION  G/STR/Q1/USA/12 
9 October 2007 
 (07-4321) 
Working Party on 
State Trading Enterprises Original:   English 
 
 
 
STATE TRADING 
 
Questions Posed by AUSTRALIA Concerning the  
New and Full Article XVII Notification of the UNITED STATES1 
 
  The following communication, dated 8 October 2007, is being circulated at the request of the Delegation of Australia.    
_______________ 
 
  The United States will recall Australia's earlier questions about whether the Capper Volstead 
Act confers agricultural cooperatives special privile ges under Article XVII of GATT 1994.  Australia 
understands that US exporters can apply for certain legal protection from antitrust laws, for example, 
under the Export Trading Company Act 1982  and the Agricultural Marketing Agreement Act .  
Australia considers that providing exporters i mmunity from anti-competition laws can potentially 
distort trade through, for example, reducing or eliminating the risk of liability from anti-competition laws which others are not granted.  We note that  such exemptions given to agricultural producers, 
processors, handlers and associations of producers et c could be seen as a special privilege that would 
impact on their trading activities within the meaning of the Article XVII of GATT 1994.   
 
• What is the US reasoning for allowing scope for agricultural entities to enjoy a lesser standard 
of antitrust compliance than other companies doing business?   
• Could the United States provide details on the names and number of entities granted 
certificates of exemption under the Export Trading Company Act 1982 ?   
• Could the United States provide details on th e number and names of entities which have 
entered into marketing arrangements under the Agricultural Marketing Agreement Act?    
 
 Australia understands that the Agricultural Marketing Agreement Act  provides antitrust 
immunity to marketing agreements formed under th e direction of the Secretary of Agriculture.  
Australia understands that this Ac t is intended to establish and main tain orderly marketing conditions 
for agricultural commodities in interstate and also  foreign commerce so that farmers receive higher 
prices.   
 
• Could the United States provide details on the Agricultural Marketing Agreement Act , 
including in particular in regard to the objective and operation of orderly marketing in 
international trade?   
• Could the United States explain whether consid eration has been given to limiting the scope 
for creation of cartels which can result in raised prices?   
• Could the United States provide further in formation on how surplus commodities are 
disposed and reserve pools are established under this Act?    
                                                     
 
1 G/STR/N/11/USA.   G/STR/Q1/USA/12 
Page 2  
 
  • Does this Act confer privileges to entities wh ich enable them to purchase commodities under 
favourable circumstances for later export?   
  Australia notes that the United States has recen tly finalised a comprehensive review of the 
US antitrust laws to determine whether such laws should be modernised.  The Antitrust Modernisation 
Commission's report of April this year recommended that statutory immunities should be disfavoured, 
amongst other things.    
• Can the United States provide further info rmation on to what extent the report's 
recommendations have been adopted as it rela tes to agricultural entities, including those 
granted immunities from anti-trust laws under the Capper Volstead Act , the Export Trading 
Company Act  and the Agricultural Marketing Agreement Act ?   
 
 
__________