WT/TPR/S/178/Rev.1 Trade Policy Review 
Page 14 
 
 
II. TRADE POLICY REGIME:  FRAMEWORK AND OBJECTIVES 
(1) OVERVIEW  
1. In Australia, the formulation and evaluation of  policy, including trade and related policy, 
continues to be highly transparent, which enhances government accountability.  This transparency has 
greatly facilitated the advancement of the economic  reform agenda, much of it involving unilateral 
trade liberalization.   
2. While the Doha multilateral trade negotiations remain Australia’s top priority, increased 
importance is being attached to the negotiatio n of regional trade agreements (RTAs).  The 
Government is also making efforts to multilate ralize, through WTO negotiations, some progress 
achieved in regional trade liberalization.   
(2) GENERAL CONSTITUTIONAL AND INSTITUTIONAL FRAMEWORK  
3. Australia's constitutional and institutional framewo rk has not changed since its previous Trade 
Policy Review (2002).1  Executive power is vested in the Head of State, represented by the Governor-
General.  Based on party strength in the House of  Representatives, the Governor-General appoints the 
Prime Minister.  On the advice of the Prime Minister, the Governor-General appoints Ministers of State, who, along with the Prime Minister, are accoun table to Parliament.  Legislative power lies with 
Parliament, comprising a 150-member House of Representatives (lower house) and a 76-member 
Senate (upper house);  the most recent elections for the House of Representatives and half of the 
Senate were held in October 2004.  All bills, apart from money and taxation bills, can be introduced in 
either House;  money and taxation bills must be introduced in the House of Representatives, and the 
Senate can request the omission or amendment of any items or provisions.  The Senate can amend, 
accept, or reject all other bills approved by the Hou se of Representatives.  Bills  that have been passed 
by both Houses and received assent from the Governor-Gen eral become law.  Judicial power is vested 
in the High Court of Australia, the final court of appe al, and in other courts such as the Federal Court, 
the Family Court, the Industrial Relations Court, and state and territory courts.
2 
4. Australia is a Federation of six states and two territories;  each state has its own constitution 
and government, and territories have their self-government arrangements.3  The Council of Australian 
Governments (COAG) was formed in 1992 to f acilitate consultation, cooperation, and policy 
coordination between the Commonwealth, states, and territories with a view to avoiding potential inconsistencies.  Its role is to initiate, develop, and monitor the implementation of policy reforms that 
are of national significance and require coopera tive action by Australian governments.  COAG 
meetings have often resulted in the formulation, review or update of intergovernmental agreements.
4 
                                                      
1 WTO (2003). 
2 The Federal Court sits in each state and territory.  The Family Court deals not only with matrimonial 
and associated issues, but also bankr uptcy, administrative law, and taxation appeals.  The Industrial Relations 
Court handles matters such as the interpretation and enforcement of industrial awards and certified agreements 
and various matters relating to unions.  The Federal Parliament is empowered under the Constitution to invest 
state courts with Federal jurisdiction.   
3 The six states are:  New South Wales, Queensla nd, South Australia, Tasmania, Victoria, and Western 
Australia.  The two territories are the Australian  Capital Territory, and the Northern Territory.  
4 For example, in 2002 the COAG and the New Zealand Government authorized the Productivity 
Commission (PC) to review the mutual recognition ag reement (MRA) between the Commonwealth, states, and 
territories, and the trans-Tasman mutual recogniti on arrangement (TTMRA) with New Zealand.  The 
Commission's report was published in December 2004, and concluded that the MRA and the TTMRA had been 
effective in improving economic integration and internat ional trade between the participants;  however, there 
was room for improvement in some areas.  On completion of the review, the Committee on Regulatory Reform Australia WT/TPR/S/178/Rev.1 
 Page 15 
 
 
(3) STRUCTURE OF TRADE POLICY FORMULATION  
5. Australia has a highly transparent trade policy formulation and evaluation structure, involving 
the executive branches of government, advisory bodies, and consultations with businesses, non-
governmental organizations (NGOs) , and other stakeholders.   
6. The Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade (DFAT), together with the Australian Trade 
Commission (Austrade), has administrative respons ibilities for all international treaties, including 
trade agreements;  bilateral, regional, and multila teral trade policies;  international trade and 
commodity negotiations;  and trade promotion.  Othe r agencies that have tr ade-related responsibilities 
include the Australian Customs Service (Table II.1). 
Table II.1 
Agencies and their trade-related responsibilities, 2006 
Department/Agency Main responsibility 
Department of Prime Minister and Ca binet  Supporting the Prime Minister and assisting in policy coordination 
Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade International relations and trade policy 
Austrade Trade promotion 
AusAID Management of Australia's overseas aid programme and international development 
cooperation 
EFIC Australia's export credit agency, ex port and overseas investment promotion 
Australian Customs Service Customs procedur es, anti-dumping and countervailing actions 
The Treasury Economic policy, taxation (including excise tax), international finance, foreign 
exchange, financial sector policy, forei gn investment policy, competition policy, 
prices surveillance 
Australian Competition and Consumer Commission National co mpetition enforcement and Australian energy regulator 
National Competition Council Policy advisory body on competition policy 
Foreign Investment Review Board Foreign investment 
Reserve Bank of Australia Monetary policy, overall fina ncial system stability and regulation of the payments 
system. 
Australian Taxation Office Taxation  
Department of Finance and Administration Budget policy, gov ernment finance, shareholder advice on government trading 
enterprises (GTEs) 
Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry Agriculture, fisheries, and forestry 
Australian Quarantine and Inspec tion Service Quarantine, health 
Department of Health and Aging Health 
Food Standards Australia Ne w Zealand Food standards 
Department of Industry, Tourism and Resources Investment pr omotion, innovation, tourism and small business, energy and 
resources 
Invest Australia Promotion of inward investment 
AusIndustry Supporting industry, research, and innovation 
Ministerial Council on Energy Energy 
IP Australia Intellectual property 
Department of Communications, Information 
Technology and the Arts Information and communications tech nology, postal and telecommunications, 
information economy 
Department of Transport and Regional Servi ces Aviation, maritime, rail, road, and othe r means of transport, safety and technica l 
requirements 
Australian Prudential Regulation Authority Prudential regul ator of the Australian financial services industry 
Australian Bureau of Statistics Provision of statistics on economic and social matters;  maintenance of statistical 
codes used in Australia's e xport and import classifications 
Attorney-General's Department Provision of advice on inte rnational law, copyright, legal services, and e-commerce
Productivity Commission Independent review and advisory body on micr oeconomic policy and regulation, 
including aspects of trade policy 
Source:  Australian Government online informati on.  Viewed at:  http://www.gold.gov.au. 
                                                                                                                                                                     
(CRR) under the COAG recommended that the COAG and the New Zealand Government endorse 29 of the 
PC's findings (concerning, inter alia,  standards, and quarantine).  The Australian and New Zealand 
Governments adopted recommendations in relation to the remaining 45 findings in 2005. WT/TPR/S/178/Rev.1 Trade Policy Review 
Page 16 
 
 
7. The Productivity Commission (PC) remains th e Government's principal evaluation and 
advisory body on microeconomic policy and regulation.5  In addition, several consultative 
mechanisms provide advice on the effectiveness of government policies.6  In particular, the Trade 
Policy Advisory Council (TPAC) provides the Mini ster for Trade with a business perspective on 
international trade and investment issues.7  In May 2005, an FTA Export Advisory Panel was 
established to promote the benefits of free-trad e agreements, by offeri ng advice on implementation 
and market access issues, and by identifying sp ecific trade and investment opportunities created by 
such agreements.8  The Government also establishes task forces to carry out inquiries from time to 
time.  The role of transparency, especially the u se of independent institutions, such as the PC to 
evaluate government policy, has greatly fac ilitated the economic reforms and ensured their 
continuation (Box II.1). 
Box II.1:  Institutionalization of transp arency and its role in economic reform 
During the past two decades, Australia's economic pe rformance has benefited gr eatly from its structural 
reforms:  a key feature has been un ilateral trade liberalization, includin g tariff reductions (Chapter I).  
However, while economic reform provides benefits to certain groups of the economy, it also imposes costs 
on others.  Thus, transparency, through institutions su ch as the Productivity Commission (PC), has played an 
important role in facilitating economic reforms. 
The PC is the Australian Government's principal review and advisory body on microeconomic policy and 
regulation.  Its independence and transparent advice contributes to well-informed policy and decision 
making.  The origin of the PC is an institution that pr otected domestic industries, while avoiding "excessive" 
protection.  In 1921, a Tariff Board was created as an independent inquiry and advisory body on tariff 
making, which, reflecting the consensus of the time , made policy recommendations to protect domestic 
industries.  In the mid-1960s, the Board began to question the long-term effect s on the wider economy of 
protecting individual industries, and began to estimate and publish information on the relative industrial 
protection levels, using the effective rates of  protection and costs of the protection.   
The Tariff Board evolved into the Industries Assistance Commission (IAC) in 1974, which provided advice 
about the costs and benefits of not only tariffs, but also other forms of government assistance to industries.  
Since then, transparency, independence, and the evaluatio n of economy-wide effect of policies have become 
three fundamental principles of the IAC and its successors, the Industry Commission (1990-98) and the 
Productivity Commission (since 1998).  Thus, since its es tablishment in 1998, these principles have been 
realized in the Productivity Commission by, inter alia :  subjecting its advice to public scrutiny; operating 
independently under the protection and guidelines of its own legislation;  and reflecting the interests of the 
community at large.  
Box II.1 (cont'd) 
                                                      
5 Details of the PC's role, functions, and policy guidelines were outlined in its first annual report 
(Productivity Commission, 1998). 
6 These include, inter alia , the Australian Bureau of Agricultu ral and Resource Economics (ABARE), 
the Quarantine and Exports Advisory Council (QEAC), the National Alternative Dispute Resolution Advisory 
Council (NADRAC), the Australian Ph armaceutical Advisory Council (APAC) , the Medical Services Advisory 
Committee (MSAC), the Advisory Council on Intellectua l Property (ACIP), and the Corporation and Markets 
Advisory Committee (CAMAC). 
7 The TPAC is the Minister for Trade's major source of advice from the Australian business community 
on trade issues.  Other trade-related consultative mech anisms include the WTO Advisory Group, Agricultural 
Trade Consultative Group, Automotive Council, AF TA-CER Business Council (ACBC), APEC Business 
Advisory Council (ABAC), APEC Au stralian Business Forum (DFAT online information.  Viewed at:  
http://www.dfat.gov.au/trade/formal_consultativ e_mechanisms.html [23 February 2006]). 
8 DFAT (2006a), p. 55. Australia WT/TPR/S/178/Rev.1 
 Page 17 
 
 
 
Transparency is an integral part of the PC's operation.   Once the PC is authorized  to conduct an inquiry, 
public opinions are collected through hearings, submissions, and feedback on draft reports.  Consequently, 
the PC assists structural reforms in a number of ways.  By subjecting th e arguments of vested interests to 
vigorous scrutiny, the PC has provided the Government with advice concerning the long-term interests of the 
community as a whole.  The PC's findings and recommendations have been based on extensive public input and feedback on draft reports;  which, in some cases, changed the PC's final findings substantially.  The 
inclusion of public submissions, he arings, and feedback on draft reports to reach final recommendations 
helps to make the Government aware of the likely reactions of the community and interest groups to different policy approaches.  This can reduce the possi bility of unexpected responses, which could lead to 
policy reversals.  All the PC's reports are published.  These reports and analyses assist the Government in 
designing reform policies, and contribute to a wider aw areness within the community of the costs of existing 
policies and the benefits from reform.  The Government may refer any matters it considers appropriate to the 
PC, but  is not obliged to take its advice.  
Other independent advisory bodies (section (3)), as well as various task forces, notably the recent regulation 
taskforce (section (4)), have contributed to the evaluation, and thus the transparency, of government policies.  
These bodies, too, have provided impetus to structural reforms.  In addition, the National Competition Policy has provided a mechanism for the coordination of pro-competition reforms across the jurisdictions of the 
Australian federation, and this effort is continuing under the National Reform Agenda agreed by the COAG 
at its 10 February 2006 meeting.  Government departments also conduct their own internal evaluations of 
policies and policy measures with a view to reform. 
Source : Productivity Commission (2003b);  and Banks (2005).  
(4) TRADE LAWS AND REGULATIONS  
8. Australian trade laws essentially take the fo rm of statutes and implementing regulations.9  Its 
international treaty obligations, including the WTO Agreements, must be enacted domestically in 
order to carry the force of law.   
9. As part of the National Competition Policy (NCP ), the Commonwealth and state and territory 
governments agreed to a legislative review pr ogramme (LRP), under which governments committed 
to review and change legislation that may restrict  competition.  It was agreed that, in principle, 
legislation should not restrict competition unless it can be demonstrated that:  (i) the benefits of the 
restriction to the community as a whole outweigh the costs, and (ii) the objectives of the legislation can be achieved only by restricting competition (Chapter III(4)(iii)(a)).  An inquiry into the NCP, completed by the Productivity Commission in April 2005, concluded that the legislative review 
programme had been important in reducing barriers to competition and promoting efficiency across a 
wide range of economic activities.  It was suggested that the LRP be completed, and followed by ad hoc reviews focusing on areas where reform of anti-comp etitive legislation is likely to be of benefit to 
the wider community, i.e. anti-dumping, pharmaceu ticals, grain marketing, and insurance services.
10  
Taking into account the findings of the Productivity Commission, the COAG al so reviewed the NCP 
and agreed to complete outstanding priority le gislative reviews.  In February 2006, the COAG 
endorsed a new National Reform Agenda, whic h included competition and regulation reforms 
(Chapter III(4)(iii)(a)).  
10. The number of newly issued regulations has incr eased substantially in recent years, triggering 
concerns in Australia that they were overwhelming Parliament's ability to consider them properly, and 
                                                      
9 WTO document G/TRIMS/N/2/Rev.9, 28 September 2001, and WTO (2003). 
10 Productivity Commission (2005c), Chapter 9. WT/TPR/S/178/Rev.1 Trade Policy Review 
Page 18 
 
 
generating compliance burdens on business.11  In response, on 12 October 2005, the Government 
appointed a taskforce (the Banks Taskforce) to address these issues.12  The taskforce made 
178 recommendations on reducing red tape;  priority  actions include reduci ng inter-jurisdictional 
overlaps and inconsistencies, removing redundant or unjustifie d regulations, and improving 
regulation-making processes.  The taskforce also iden tified priorities for further review, covering anti-
dumping regulations, and the single-desk export arrangement for wheat.13  The Government published 
its final response in August 2006, agreeing fully or partly to 158 of the 178 recommendations.  It considers that a key step in reducing regulat ory burden is to avoid introducing unnecessary 
regulations and to improve the quality of existing ones, by, inter alia,  requiring cost-benefit analysis 
on existing regulation and before issuing new ones, and screening all regulations  at least every five 
years.
14  In addition, the Government agreed to an annual review process by the Productivity 
Commission to examine the cumulative stock of regul ations and identify an annual red tape reduction 
agenda.  As cooperation between governments facilitates regulatory reform and helps to reduce red 
tape, governments agreed under the COAG to, inter alia,  maximize the efficiency of new and 
amended regulations and avoid unnecessary complia nce costs and restrictions on competition.15   
(5) TRADE POLICY OBJECTIVES  
11. Based on the understanding that trade openness,  economic performance, and living standards 
are strongly interlinked, Australia's trade policy agenda continues to focus on improving market 
access for its exports of goods and services, and to create jobs and opportunities for business in 
Australia.  The Government pursues market opening through a combined multilateral, regional, and 
bilateral approach.  
12. Successful completion of the Doha Round remains Australia’s highest trade policy priority.  
Australia believes that the Round is crucial for providing its exporters with improved access to 
international markets.  Australia also pursues bila teral and regional trade agreements where it feels 
that these would yield more significant and fast er market access than through the multilateral 
framework.  The authorities consider that comprehe nsive and high-quality regional trade agreements 
can complement the multilateral system. 
                                                      
11 Productivity Commission (2005b), p. 3.   From 2001/02 to 2004/05, the number of newly-issued 
regulations increased from 1,918 to 2,552.  The Business Council of Australia (BCA) considered that new 
regulations generated significant compliance burdens on business and the community and higher administrative costs for the Government, in addition to any unintended and undesirable impacts. 
12 Regulation Taskforce (2006). 
13 Banks (2006).  Other priority areas for further review include superannuation tax provisions, 
directors' liability provisions under the Corporations Act,  privacy laws, and private health insurance regulations.  
14 Treasury (2006b).   
15 Furthermore, in February 2006 the COAG agr eed to address six priority areas where cross-
jurisdictional overlap is impeding economic activity:  ra il safety regulation, occupational health and safety, 
national trade measurement, chemicals and plastics, assessment arrangement, and building regulation.  The 
COAG agreed to address an additional four areas of cross-jurisdictional overlap in July 2006:  environmental 
agreements, product safety, personal property securities registration, and business registration processes.  
Moreover, under the Trade Modernization Amendments to the Customs Act 1901, a number of regulations on 
cargo reporting practices were enacted, to improve the standard and consistency of many cargo reports required.  
Most of these regulations did not impose additional burden on industry;  some have been introduced because of increased security concerns since 2001. Australia WT/TPR/S/178/Rev.1 
 Page 19 
 
 
(6) TRADE AGREEMENTS AND ARRANGEMENTS  
(i) WTO 
13. As an original Member, Australia supports  the WTO as the forum for global trade 
liberalization, and grants at least most-favoured-na tion (MFN) treatment to all its trading partners.  
Australia is not a member of any of the WTO plurilateral agreements.  During the period under 
review, Australia has made numerous  WTO notifications (Table AII.1), as well as tariff and trade data 
submissions to the Integrated Database.  
(a) The Doha Round 
14. Currently, Australia's highest trade priority is  to secure an ambitious outcome from the Doha 
Round of trade negotiations.16  Its key objectives in the Round are to secure improved market access 
in agriculture, industrial goods, and services, and to  reduce domestic support in agriculture.  As the 
chair of the Cairns Group of Fair Agricultural Tr aders, Australia participated actively in the 
agriculture negotiations that produced the July 2004 Framework Agreement.17  It is estimated that a 
relatively ambitious, market-oriented outcome to  the Doha Round could increase the value of 
Australia's major agricultural exports by 15% in 2011 (compared to the value if the existing trade 
barriers were maintained).18 
15. Australia is pursuing further reductions in ta riff and non-tariff barriers to non-agricultural 
products and services.  In addition to pushing fo r an ambitious result in the NAMA negotiations, 
Australia has made market access requests in financial, telecommunications, and professional 
services, as well as in mining, education, and freight  logistics.  Following consultations with state and 
territory governments as well as industry and commun ity groups, Australia revised its offer in the 
services negotiations with a view to expanding the scope of its initial offer, while  retaining the right to 
regulate public services, such as water supply, public health, and education.19   
16. Australia believes that improving disciplines on regional trade agreements (RTAs) in the 
WTO will deliver tangible benefits for the par ties involved, and will encourage further global 
liberalization in the long run.20  It also encourages transparency in and clarification of anti-dumping 
practices and has been an active proponent for clarif ying rules on subsidies in the rules negotiations, 
supports enhanced disciplines on fisheries subsidie s, and attaches great importance to intellectual 
property issues.  Australia is of the view that tr ade and environmental obligations can be implemented 
in mutually supportive ways, and that environmen tal measures should not be used for protectionist 
purposes.  In addition, it considers that the inter ests and needs of developing countries are central to 
the Doha Round and that an ambitious conclusi on of the Round would contribute to sustained 
economic growth in the developing world.21 
                                                      
16 DFAT (2006a), p. 45. 
17 The Framework included a commitment to abolish agricultural export subsidies.  In addition, 
Members agreed to pursue reductions in  domestic support so that higher levels of domestic support would be 
subject to deeper cuts;  they also agreed to negotiate  a "tiered approach" to tariff reductions with the highest 
tariffs being cut the most (WTO document WT/GC/W/535 Annex A, 31 July 2004). 
18 Ash (2006). 
19 DFAT online information.  Viewed at:  h ttp://www.dfat.gov.au/trade/wto_public_discussion_ 
paper_0905.html [02 March 2006].   
20 DFAT online information.  Viewed at:  h ttp://www.dfat.gov.au/trade/wto_public_discussion_ 
paper_0905.html [02 March 2006].   
21 Australia continues to advance the interests of developing countries in a broad range of trade and 
trade-related areas, such as technical assistance, capacity  building, market access, f ood security, and governance WT/TPR/S/178/Rev.1 Trade Policy Review 
Page 20 
 
 
(b) Dispute settlement  
17. Australia considers the WTO dispute settleme nt system essential to ensuring an open, 
equitable, and enforceable international trading regime.22  During the period under review, Australia's 
measures on imports of fresh fruit and vegetables , and its quarantine regime were subject to 
consultations under the WTO dispute settlement mechan ism.  Australia was the complainant in a case 
against the United States involving the Byrd Am endment, and in cases against the European 
Communities on export subsidies on sugar and trade ma rks and geographical indications.  It has also 
been an active third-party participant in other disputes (Table AII.2). 
18. Australia also seeks to resolve disputes through international agreements that include dispute 
settlement provisions.23  Dispute resolution services are provided by, inter alia : the Institute of 
Arbitrators and Mediators Australia;  the Austra lian Commercial Disputes Centre, which aims to 
resolve disputes outside of the court system thr ough negotiation and concilia tion;  and the Lawyers 
Engaged in Alternative Dispute Resolution (LEADR) organization.   
(ii) Preferential and regional agreements 
(a) Unilateral preferential arrangements  
19. Australia provides unilateral preferences for goods  originating in:  least developed countries 
(LDCs) and developing countries under the Australian System of Tariff Prefer ences (ASTP);  Forum 
Island countries under the South Pacific Regi on Trade and Economic Cooperation Agreement 
(SPARTECA);  Papua New Guinea under the Papua New Guinea and Australia Trade and 
Commercial Relations Agreement (PATCRA).  In a ddition to Papua New Guinea, as of 1 July 2003, 
Australia has provided duty-free and quota-free acce ss for all goods originating in the 50 countries 
designated as LDCs (Chapter III(2)(ii)).24   
(b) Regional trade agreements (RTAs) 
20. Australia considers that "high quality", amb itious and comprehensive RTAs can complement 
and provide momentum to its multilateral trade objec tives;  it also believes that when RTAs provide 
genuine liberalization, they are likely to be trade cr eating rather than trade diverting.  It has proposed 
in the WTO Negotiating Group on Rules that, when negotiating RTAs, duties must be eliminated on 
                                                                                                                                                                     
issues.  Its trade-related technical assistance (TRTA) reached over $A 32  million in 2004/05.  Since the 
commencement of the Doha Round, Australia has committed around $A 275 million to multi-year TRTA 
programmes.  In December 2005, Aust ralia committed another $A 4 million for Aid For Trade activities arising 
from the Doha Round negotiations.  It also provided $A 500,000 to the WTO Global Trust Fund, and nearly 
$A 2 million to finance technical assistance activities and to ensure that developing countries are fully engaged 
in the negotiations. 
22 DFAT online information.  Viewed at:  http://www.dfat.gov.au/tr ade/negotiations/wto_ 
disputes.html [02 March 2006].  Reflecting its importance, a WTO Trade Law Branch was established in the 
DFAT in early 2001.  The Branch, with legal expertise and trade policy knowledge, functions as a specialized 
centre on WTO Agreements. 
23 Australia is a party to:  the New York Convention, the Convention on the Settlement of Investment 
Disputes, and the UNCITRAL Model Law on Interna tional Commercial Arbitration (the Model Law) 
(APEC, 2004).  In addition, dispute settlement provisio ns have been included in IPPAs between Australia and 
Argentina, Chile, China, th e Czech Republic, Hong Kong , China, Hung ary, India, Indonesia , Laos, Lithuania, 
Pakistan, Papua New Guinea, Peru, the Philippines, Pola nd, Romania, Sri Lanka, and Viet Nam, as well as in 
the regional trade agreements with Singapore, Thailand, and the United States. 
24 WTO document WT/COMTD/N/18, 21 January 2004.  The list of the 50 LDCs is available at:  
http://www.un.org/special-rep/ohrlls /ldc/list.htm  [11 July 2006]. Australia WT/TPR/S/178/Rev.1 
 Page 21 
 
 
at least 70% of all tariff lines at the six-digit leve l when the agreement enters into force, and on at 
least 95% of all tariff lines at the six-digit leve l ten years after the agreement's entry into force.25   
Asia Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) 
21. Australia continues to pursue regional trade a nd investment liberalization through the Asia 
Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) forum, and is to host the APEC Leaders' meeting in 2007 in 
Sydney.26  APEC members accounted for 73.6% of Austra lia's merchandise exports in 2005 (72.5% in 
2002).27  Like other members, Australia submits an annual Individual Action Plan (IAP), which sets 
out the measures it has taken or intends to take to achieve the Bogor goals.  Australia was reviewed 
most recently under APEC's peer review process in 2003.  The review found that in tariffs, non-tariff 
measures, services, and investment, Australia had liberalized unilaterally beyond its Uruguay Round 
commitments, and was far ahead of many APEC  economies in developi ng competition policy and 
deregulation.28 
Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) 
22. Australia is one of ASEAN's ten dialogue partners.29  Merchandise trade with ASEAN has 
grown faster than with any of Australia’s lead ing trade partners, except India and China.  The 
20th ASEAN-Australia Forum was held in Canberra on 16 September 2004, and agreed that more 
effort should be made to enhance trade, and par ticularly investment, between ASEAN and Australia.  
In December 2005, Australia participated in the fi rst East Asia Summit (EAS) along with ASEAN, as 
well as China, India, Japan, the Republic of Kor ea, and New Zealand.  Australia acceded to the 
ASEAN Treaty of Amity and Cooperation in December 2005.30 
The Australia–New Zealand Closer Economic  Relations Trade Agreement (ANZCERTA) 
23. The ANZCERTA is Australia's longest-standing fr ee-trade agreement (the provisions on trade 
in goods entered into force in 1983 and those on trade in services in 1989).  The agreement is 
supported by a network of bilateral arrangements on various issues, including the movement of 
people, mutual recognition of standards, government procurement, and aviation.  In addition, imports 
from New Zealand are not subject to anti-dumping ac tions (such actions are handled by competition 
laws) or safeguard measures31;  however, countervailing actions may be applied 
(Chapter III(2)(vi)(a)).32  It is estimated that betwee n 1983 and 2005, two-way trade in goods 
increased at an annual average rate of around 9%33, and New Zealand is currently Australia's fifth 
largest market for goods and services.  
                                                      
25 WTO document TN/RL/W/180, 13 May 2005. 
26 Australia accepted the Investment Experts Group (IEG) chair's position in 2005, preliminary work 
under way included cooperation with the UNCTAD in the area of dispute settlement (FIRB online information.  
Viewed at:  http://www .firb.gov.au/content/international/a pec.asp?pf=1 [10 March 2006]). 
27 UNSD, Comtrade database (SITC Rev.3). 
28 APEC online information.  Viewed at:  ht tp://www.apec-iap.org/document/AUS_2003_Annex_1_-
_Summary_Peer_Review.pdf [6 February 2006]. 
29 The ten dialogue partners are:  Australia, Canada, China, EU, India, Japan, New Zealand, Republic 
of Korea, Russia, and the United States.   
30 DFAT online information.  Viewed at:  http://www.dfat.gov.au/asean/ [7 June 2006]. 
31 WTO document G/SG/N/1/AUS/2, 2 July 1998. 
32 During the period under review, there were four countervailing initiations, making initiations six 
overall.  No countervailing action has been adopted against imports from New Zealand.  
33 UNSD, Comtrade database (SITC Rev.3) . WT/TPR/S/178/Rev.1 Trade Policy Review 
Page 22 
 
 
24. ANZCERTA provides for duty-free access for goods originating in New Zealand.  Under 
current rules of origin, duty-free access for a pro duct is available as long as the last manufacturing 
process took place in New Zealand, and that process involved at least 50% of the product’s factory cost.  This method is, however, considered to be complex, as companies have to keep comprehensive 
records to ensure that they do no t fall short of the 50% requirement.
34  Thus, new rules of origin, to be 
adopted from 1 January 2007, will be based on a cha nge to the tariff classification at the HS 6-digit 
level.  
25. Trade in services is covered by the Services Protocol to the ANZCERTA;  exceptions are 
contained in the "negative inscription list".35  Australia's current inscription list includes air transport, 
coastal shipping (cabotage), broadcasting and televi sion, third-party insurance, and postal services.36  
Although the ANZCERTA does not have a specific ch apter on investment, it has facilitated bilateral 
cooperation in this regard;  two-way investment in creased at an annual average rate of 18.6% between 
1983 and 2003.37  An ANZCERTA Investment Protocol is currently under negotiation;  Australia is 
the third largest investor in New Zealand and New Zealand ranks seventh as an investor in Australia. 
Singapore–Australia Free Trade Agreement (SAFTA)38 
26. Singapore is Australia's largest trade and investment partner in South-East Asia.39  When the 
SAFTA entered into force on 28 July 2003, tariffs  on all goods imported from the other party were 
eliminated.  The two countries also agreed not to  use export subsidies or apply safeguard measures 
against each other.   
27. The SAFTA commits both countries to appl ying national treatment and to removing 
quantitative and other market access restrictions on  services and investment.  SAFTA uses a negative 
list containing exemptions to these commitments, and no changes are required under the SAFTA to 
Australia's foreign investment screening processes, nor the current restrictions on foreign equity 
restrictions including on companies such as Telstra and Qantas.   
28. According to the Australian Government, the SAFTA does, nonetheless, provide a more open 
and predictable business environment (for the partner) across a range of areas through transparency 
provisions on trade in goods, services, investment , government procurement, competition policy, and 
electronic commerce.40  Since SAFTA's entry into force in 2003, Australia's merchandise exports to 
Singapore have increased by 27.3% (in 2005)41, and its services exports by 11% (in 2004/05).42  Both 
governments agreed to regularly explore the possib ility for further integration of the two economies.43  
                                                      
34 DFAT (2006a), p. 62. 
35 WTO (1998). 
36 DFAT online information.  Viewed at:  h ttp://www.dfat.gov.au/geo/n ew_zealand/anz_cer/annex_ 
990309.html [24 July 2006]. 
37 FTA online information.  Viewed at:  http:// www.fta.gov.au/default.aspx?FolderID=283&Article 
ID=229 [6 March 2006]. 
38 The full text of SAFTA is included in WT/REG158/1, 7 October 2003, and is available at:  
http://www.dfat.gov.au/trade/negotiations /safta/index.html [6 March 2006]. 
39 FTA online information.  Viewed at:   http://www.fta.gov.au/default. aspx?FolderID=271&ArticleID= 
217 [3 March 2006]. 
40 DFAT online information.  Viewed at:  h ttp://www.dfat.gov.au/trade/negotiations/australia_ 
singapore_agreement.html [6 March 2006].  According to the authorities, SAFTA contains provisions that 
provide a consistent, rules-based approach to trade.  In addition, the investment chapter contains provisions on 
investor-state dispute settlement, which provide investor s with the right to challenge the Government of the 
partner country for breaching oblig ations under the agreement. 
41 UNSD, Comtrade database (SITC Rev.3) . Australia WT/TPR/S/178/Rev.1 
 Page 23 
 
 
The Thailand–Australia Free Trade Agreement (TAFTA)44 
29. When the TAFTA entered into force on 1 January 2005, Australia bound its current 
zero tariffs on 3,080 tariff items for goods of Thai or igin, and eliminated tariffs on 2,003 tariff items.  
Tariffs on a further 786 tariff items are to be elimin ated by 2010;  tariffs on the remaining 239 tariff 
items of apparel and certain finished textiles, cu rrently at 12.5%, are to be eliminated in 2015.45  
Following the entry into force of the TAFTA, two-way merchandise trade grew by 33.7% (in 2005), with Australia's exports to Th ailand growing by 39.6% and Tha iland's exports to Australia by 
28.4%.
46  Thailand now ranks as Australia's tent h largest merchandise trading partner. 
30. The TAFTA also contains provisions on services.  By and large, Australia's commitments in 
services sectors are not as comprehensive as those offered under SAFTA47, although commitments on 
the movement of natural persons and e-commerce go beyond those under GATS.  Another difference 
from the SAFTA is that the TAFTA takes a positi ve list approach to scheduling commitments on 
services and investment.  TAFTA contains special safeguard provisions, covering prepared or preserved tunas, skipjack and bonito, as well as pineapples and pineapple juices, from 2005 to 2008.
48  
In addition, the TAFTA includes a commitment to fu rther negotiations within three years on services, 
investment, government procurement, and business mobility. 
The Australia–United States Free Trade Agreement (AUSFTA)49 
31. The AUSFTA also came into force on 1 January  2005, as a result of which all agricultural 
imports, and more than 99% of all non-TCF tariff lines for imports from the United States enter duty 
free into Australia.50 
                                                                                                                                                                     
42 DFAT (2006b). 
43 Accordingly, a "forward" work programme was endorsed by Ministers at their first review meeting.  
Issues to be considered in the programme, and to be discussed in the second review meeting, include:  ongoing 
cooperation on e-commerce and telecommunications;  regu latory reforms covering competition, education, 
industry, and other government policies;  improvement to the rules in SAFTA, particularly in relation to investment, and the rules of origin;  commitments under government procurement;  and ways to promote closer 
business links through SAFTA.  
44 The full text of TAFTA is included in WT/REG1 85/1, 18 February 2005, and is available at:  
http://www.dfat.gov.au/trade/ne gotiations/aust-thai/tafta_toc.html  [6 March 2006]. 
45 DFAT online information.  Viewed at:  http://www.dfat.gov.au/trade/negotiations/aust-thai/ 
goods_tariff_commitments.html [11 July 2006].   
46 UNSD, Comtrade database (SITC Rev.3) . 
47 CIE (2004). 
48 DFAT online information.  Viewed at:  http://www.dfat.gov.au/trade/negotiations/aust-thai/ 
tafta_annex_5.html [21 Sept 2006]. 
49 The full text of AUSFTA is included in WT/REG184/1, 11 February 2005, and is available at:  
http://www.dfat.gov.au/trade/negotiations/us_ft a/final-text/index.html [7 March 2006]. 
50 Under the AUSFTA, goods are grouped into categories A, B, C, D, E.  Duties on goods in category 
A were eliminated entirely on 1 January 2005, and goods in category E remain duty free.  Duties on goods in the 
other three categories are to be removed gradually, and fully eliminated as of 1 January 2009, 2013, and 2015, respectively (DFAT online information.  Viewed at:  http://www.dfat.gov.au/trade/negotiations/us_fta/final-
text/chapter_2.html [19 July 2006]).  The list of products that do not enter Australia duty free is available online 
at:  http://www.customs.gov.au/webdata/resources/files/Ta rSch5_AUSFTArates.pdf.  [15 September 2006].  For 
lines up to HS 5007.1010, excise duties rather than tari ff duties are listed;  these are applied to both domestic 
products and imports from the United States.  The remain ing 826 tariff lines (13.5% of total tariff lines), 
covering mainly TCF products, as well as PMV, some glass and glassware, and some furniture, would be phased out under the AUSFTA, and all tariffs on U.S. imports are due to be eliminated by 1 January 2015.   WT/TPR/S/178/Rev.1 Trade Policy Review 
Page 24 
 
 
32. The agreement requires both parties to provide  national treatment and MFN treatment to 
investors from the other party, and eliminated local commercial presence requirements for services 
suppliers.  However, it contains a negative list, under which Australia took out limited sectoral 
restrictions and could continue to screen investme nt from the United States above certain thresholds, 
which are higher than for investment from other countries (section (7)).  In particular, AUSFTA 
establishes a Professional Services Working Group to investigate ways to promote mutual recognition 
and other issues related to professional services.  AUSFTA also contains comprehensive provisions 
on government procurement.  In addition, some of Australia's intellectual property legislation had to 
be changed owing to the signing of the AUSFTA, and some further amendments to the Copyright Act 
1968 are to be made (Chapter III(4)(v)).  Under the AUSFTA, Australia and the United States have 
also agreed to cooperate in the enforcement of  competition laws through the Australian Competition 
and Consumer Commission (ACCC) and the U.S. Federal Trade Commission. 
Other actual and potential bilateral arrangements 
33. Australia has bilateral trade agreements with Canada and Malaysia.  The Canada–Australia 
Trade Agreement (CANATA) was negotiated in 1960 and amended in 1973.  The Malaysia–Australia 
Trade and Economic Cooperation Agreem ent entered into force in 1998.  Australia is also pursuing 
new opportunities for its exports at the regional and bilateral levels .  Negotiations have commenced 
with key trading partners, including Chile, Chin a, Japan and Malaysia, and negotiations on an 
ASEAN–Australia–New Zealand trade agreement are also under way.  Discussions with Egypt have 
commenced on a trade and investment framework , as well as studies on how to strengthen economic 
relations with the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) countries and the Republic of Korea.51 
34. Although Australia's active participation in regi onal trade agreements affects many aspects of 
its trade policy, including tariffs, contingency meas ures, rules of origin, investment, services, and 
government procurement, the Government believes it is important that RTAs contribute to the 
multilateral trading system, and thus ensures that its RTAs meet WTO rules and procedures.  The authorities state that Australia's commitments in its RTAs go beyond the current WTO agreements in 
a number of areas, including services and investment .  The Government hopes that any progress in 
regional trade liberalization could be multilatera lized through WTO negotiations.  For example, 
Australia applies the rules on government procur ement agreed under the AUSFTA to suppliers from 
all countries. 
(7) F
OREIGN INVESTMENT REGIME  
(i) Overview 
35. Australia encourages foreign investment.  It s foreign investment regime is generally 
transparent and liberal, although it contains foreign e quity restrictions in certa in "sensitive" sectors, 
and a screening process to ensure that foreign investment  is not contrary to the "national interest".  Its 
foreign investment policy operates under the pres umption that foreign investment proposals are 
generally in the "national interest" and should be approved.  The Foreign Investment Review Board 
(FIRB) screens and provides advice on investme nt proposals.  However, where the Treasurer 
considers the proposal is "contrary to the nationa l interest", he may reject it under the Foreign 
                                                      
 51 In addition, the Government is advancing Austra lia's trade interests in many countries through 
various agreements, including a Trade and Economic Framework with India, a Trade and Investment 
Framework with Indonesia, a Pacific Plan endorsed at the 2005 Pacific Islands Fo rum in Papua New Guinea, 
investment protection and promotion agreements as well as  air services agreements with some South American 
countries, such as Mexico  and Brazil (DFAT, 2006a). Australia WT/TPR/S/178/Rev.1 
 Page 25 
 
 
Acquisition and Takeover Act 1975 (FATA).52  "National interest" concerns seem to include 
consistency with existing government  policies and laws (for example,  environmental regulations and 
competition policy), as well as national security interests and economic development.53  In 2004/05, 
decisions on 4,927 foreign investment proposals we re taken (5,112 in 2002/03 and 4,830 in 2003/04);  
88.5% were approved, down from 92.1% in 2003/04.  Re jections related to residential real estate 
rather than business proposals;  no business proposals ha ve been rejected since 2001.  The time limit 
for reaching a decision is 30 days, with up to a further ten days to advise the parties.  88% of cases were decided within the 30-day statutory period;  for cases that took more than 30 days, the Government stated that "this generally reflected delays in receiving sufficient information from the 
parties or because the case involved sign ificant complexity or sensitivity".
54   
36. Since its establishment in 1997, Invest Au stralia has functioned as a national inward 
investment agency.  It provides a wide range of ser vices to companies seeking to invest in Australia, 
and supports the Strategic Investment Coordinator,  who advises the Prime Minister and the Cabinet 
on investment promotion and facilitation.  A strategic investment project is one involving an investment of more than $A 50 million, or one prov iding benefits in terms of employment, technology 
transfer, R&D, cluster development or si gnificant benefits to Australian regions.
55 
(ii) Changes in the policy framework 
37. Since 2002, changes in Australia's foreign invest ment policy have been primarily the result of 
the Australia–United States Free Trade Agreement (AUSFTA), which provides preferential treatment 
to U.S. investors vis-à-vis other trading partners.56  Following the implementation of the AUSFTA, 
thresholds for notification and prior approval, ap art from those in prescribed sensitive sectors, are 
higher for U.S. investors than for others;  as of 2006, the thresholds are indexed annually to Australia’s GDP deflator (Table II.2).  Prescrib ed sensitive sectors for investors from the United 
States include:  media, telecommunications, trans port, defence, goods and technology that have 
military applications, encryption and security t echnologies, the extraction of uranium, and the 
operation of nuclear facilities;  they also correspon d to areas that are more likely to raise "national 
interest" concerns and where there are statutory r estrictions on foreign investment.  Acquisitions by 
U.S. private investors of Australian financial institutions covered by the Financial Sector 
(Shareholdings) Act 1998 are exempted from FATA screening. 
38. On 13 July 2006, the Government announced that foreign media ownership restrictions would 
be reformed and the current media-specific and ne wspaper-specific restrictions would be removed.  
                                                     
 
52 Responsibility for foreign investment policy rests with the Commonwealth Government.  The 
country's foreign investment legislation comprises the Foreign Acquisitions and Takeovers Act 1975 (FATA), regulations made under the FATA, ministerial statemen ts, and sector- or compan y-specific legislation.  
53 Economic development may be relevant to "nationa l interest" concerns, for example, in relation to 
resource or land, if it is believed that  a foreign investor may intend to "lock-up" resources rather than develop 
them.  Resource development was a consideration in the deci sion in April 2001 to reject Shell’s bid to acquire 
exclusive control over the No rth West Shelf LNG project. 
54 FIRB (2005), pp. 5, 8.  
55 APEC (2004). 
56 Both the SAFTA and the TAFTA contain an investment chapter, which ensures national treatment 
for investment that does not require foreign investment screening, and investment that has been approved.  Essentially, no changes are required for Australia's foreign investment screening processes, or for current 
restrictions on foreign ownership control on, inter alia , institutions such as Tels tra and Qantas (DFAT online 
information.  Viewed at:  http://www.dfat.gov. au/trade/negotiations/safta /safta_background.html 
[12 July 2006]). WT/TPR/S/178/Rev.1 Trade Policy Review 
Page 26 
 
 
However, the media would remain a sensitive sector, and foreign investment proposals in the media 
sector, irrespective of size, will remain s ubject to prior approval by the Treasurer.57  
Table II.2 
Foreign investment require ments and limitations, 2006 
For all foreign investors For U.S. investors 
Prior approval/notification req uirement for all activities  
Acquisitions of substantial interest s in existing Australian businesses 
with total assets over $A 50 million,  or where the proposal values the 
business at over $A 50 million;  takeovers of offshore companies whose 
Australian subsidiaries or assets are valued at over $A 50 million Acquisitions of substantial interests in existing Australian 
businesses with total assets over $A 800 million in 2005 
(annually adjusted and increased to $A 831 million in 2006) 
(except for businesses within prescribed sensitive sectors) 
Acquisitions of substantial interests in existing Australian 
businesses within the following pr escribed sensitive sectors:  
media, telecommunications, transportation, supply of goods and services to the Australian Defence Force or other defence 
forces, goods or technology that  has military applications, 
encryption and security technologies, the extraction of uranium or plutonium, and the operation of  nuclear facilities with total 
assets of more than $A 50 million in 2005(increased to 
$A 52 million in 2006) 
Acquisitions of substantial interests in existing Australian 
financial institutions subject to  screening under the Financial 
Sector (Shareholdings) Act 1998 (FSSA) are exempt from 
screening under the FATA 
New businesses involving a total investment of $A 10 million or more New business propos als by U.S. investors, except an entity  
controlled by the U.S. Governme nt, do not require notification, 
but remain subject to other relevant policy requirements 
Direct investment by foreign governme nts or their agencies irrespective 
of size Same as for all other foreign governments and their agencies 
Acquisitions of interests in urban land  (including interests that arise via 
leases, financing and profit-sharing arrangements, and the acquisition of 
interests in urban land corporations and trusts) that involve:  developed 
non-residential commercial real estate , where the property is subject to 
heritage listing, valued at $A 5 million or more;  developed non-
residential commercial real estate, where the property is not subject to 
heritage listing, valued at $A 50 million or more;  accommodation facilities irrespective of value;  vacant real estate irrespective of value;  
residential real estate  irrespective of value Same as for all foreign investors, except that a threshold of 
$A 800 million in 2005 (annually adjusted to $A 831 million in 
2006) applies to U.S. acquisitions  of developed non-residential 
commercial real estate (other  than acquisitions by entities 
controlled by the U.S. Government) 
Proposals where any doubt exists as to whether they need to be notified  Same as for all foreign investors 
Sector-specific foreign investment restrictions   
Banking   
Foreign investment to be consis tent with the Banking Act 1959, the 
Financial Sector (Shareholdings) Act 1998 (FSSA), and banking policy, 
including prudential requirements.  Foreign takeover or acquisition of 
Australian banks considered on a case-by-case basis U.S. investments in authorized  deposit-taking institutions (as 
well as authorized insurers and their respective holding 
companies) are exempt from FATA screening where they are screened under the FSSA   
Banking policy, including pruden tial requirements, continues 
to apply   
Civil aviation   
Up to 100% equity in an Austra lian domestic airline (other than 
Qantas), and up to 49% in an Australia n international carri er (other than 
Qantas).  Aggregate foreign owners hip in Qantas restricted to 49%, 
aggregate ownership by foreign ai rlines restricted to 35%, and 
individual foreign ownership restri cted to 25%.  National interest 
criteria apply (relating to the nationality of Board members and operational location of the enterprise). Same as for all foreign investors 
Table II.2 (cont'd)
                                                      
57 DCITA media release.  Viewed at:  http://www. minister.dcita.gov.au/media/media_releases/ 
new_media_framework_for_australia [15 September 2006]. Australia WT/TPR/S/178/Rev.1 
 Page 27 
 
 
For all foreign investors For U.S. investors 
Airports   
Aggregate foreign ownership limite d to  49%, with a 5% limit on 
airlines (regardless of nationality ) and 15% cross-ownership limits 
between Sydney Airport (together with Sydney West) and Melbourne, 
Brisbane and Perth airports Same as for all foreign investors 
Shipping   
For a ship to be register ed in Australia, it must be majority Australian 
owned, unless it is designated as ch artered by an Australian operator Same as for all foreign investors 
Media   
Prior approval required for portfolio investment in the media of 5% or 
more, and all non-portfolio investment, irrespective of size 
Foreign persons may not have cont rol for a commercial television 
licence, or have company interests in such a licence exceeding 15%, or 
20% in aggregate held by two or mo re foreign persons.  Up to 20% of 
directors may be foreign persons 
Up to 20% individual share, a nd 35% aggregate share, of any 
subscription TV broadcaster Same as for all foreign investors 
Limited ownership in mass circula tion newspapers.  Case-by-case 
examination of foreign acquisition of  more than 5% in an existing 
newspaper or to establish a new newspaper.  Up to 30% aggregate 
foreign investment in national a nd metropolitan newspapers, with any 
individual foreign shareholder limited to a maximum 25% (in which 
case unrelated foreign interests may hold a further 5%).  Up to 50% 
aggregate foreign investment in pr ovincial and suburban newspapers   Same as for all foreign investors 
Telecommunications   
51.8% of Telstra owned by the Government (this share was reduced to 
17% in November 2006).  Of the privatized equity, up to 35% aggregate 
foreign ownership is permitted, and up to 5% individual foreign 
ownership  Same as for all foreign investors 
Source:  FIRB (2006), and USTR (2004). 
(iii) International investment agreements 
39. Australia has bilateral investment promoti on and protection agreements (IPPAs) with a 
number of countries.58  Since 2002, agreements have been  signed with Mexico, Sri Lanka, and 
Turkey, but are not yet in force.59  Australia is currently negotiating a range of IPPAs.  The IPPAs 
grant MFN treatment for foreign investment, provi de nationalization/expropriation guarantees, and 
establish dispute settlement mechanisms (section (6)(i )(b)).  A typical IPPA gives foreign investors 
the same access to courts and tribunals as domest ic investors, provided that jurisdiction over the 
dispute can be established.  The authorities state that there have not been any investment disputes 
involving foreign companies since 2002.  Australia is  a member of the International Centre for the 
Settlement of Investment Disputes (ICSID).60 
                                                      
58 WTO (2003), p. 26.   
59 FIRB online information.  Viewed at:  http://www.firb.gov.au /content/international/ 
bilateral.asp?NavID=27 [9 March 2006]. 
60 WTO (2003).  Australia also observes the notifi cation and transparency pr ovisions of the OECD 
Code on Liberalization of Capital Movements, subscribes to the OECD Declaration on International Investment 
and Multinational Enterprises (the Decl aration), as well as the OECD Guidelines for Multinational Enterprises 
(the Guidelines).  The latter includes standards of behaviour supplemental to Australian law, but does not 
override or contradict Australian laws.  In addition, Australia pursues its interests in international investment 
through the WTO Working Group on the Relationship between Trade and Investment (WGTI), and it has complied with its TRIMs commitments. WT/TPR/S/178/Rev.1 Trade Policy Review 
Page 28 
 
 
40. Australia negotiates double taxation avoidance (DTA) treaties on a case-by-case basis, 
reflecting the needs of particular markets.  During the period under review, new DTA treaties with Mexico and Russia entered into force.  Treaties with France, Malaysia, New Zealand, Norway, the 
United Kingdom, United States, and Viet Nam have been updated.
61  Currently, the tax treaty with the 
Philippines is Australia's only treaty th at contains a "tax sparing" provision.62 
 
                                                      
61 The list of Australia's DTA agreements is  available at:  http://www.treasury.gov.au/ 
documents/625/XLS/Australian_Tax_treaty_table.xls [9 March 2006].  Australia also entered into a bilateral tax arrangement with East Timor with respect to the Timor Sea Joint Petroleum Development Area. 
62 Historically, a number of Australia’s tax treaties contained "tax sparing" provisions, which are now 
either discontinued or have been removed from the treaty.  Australia's treaty with the Philippines is the only one 
that now contains such a provision.  It is no longer Australia's policy to agree to "tax sparing" in its tax treaties.