RESTRICTED  WORLD TRADE  
ORGANIZATION  WT/TPR/G/160 
3 March 2006  
 
(06-0916) 
Trade Policy Review Body Original:  English 
   
 
  
 
TRADE POLICY REVIEW 
 
Report by the 
 
UNITED STATES 
 
  
 
Pursuant to the Agreement Establishi ng the Trade Policy Review Mechanism 
(Annex 3 of the Marrakesh Agreement Establishing the World Trade 
Organization), the policy statement by the United States is attached. 
 
 
Note: This report is subject to restricted circ ulation and press embargo until the end of the first 
 session of the meeting of the Trade Polic y Review Body on the United States. United States WT/TPR/G/160 
 Page 3 
 
 
CONTENTS 
  Page 
I. THE UNITED STATES IN THE MULTILATERAL SYSTEM 5 
II. THE UNITED STATES ECONOM IC AND TRADE ENVIRONMENT 7 
III. TRADE POLICY DEVE LOPMENTS, 2003-2005 10 
 (1) WTO  AGREEMENTS AND INITIATIVES  10 
 (i) U.S. Proposals in the Doha Development Agenda 10  (ii) Implementation of Existing Agreements 10 
 (2) R
EGIONAL INITIATIVES  11 
 (i) North American Free Trade Area 12  (ii) Free Trade Area of the Americas Negotiations 12 
 (iii) Central American  Free Trade Agreement 13 
 (iv) U.S. - Southern African Customs Union Free Trade Agreement 13  (v) Asia – Pacific Economic Cooperation 13 
 (vi) Enterprise for ASEAN Initiative 14 
 (vii) Middle East Free Trade Area 14  (viii) U.S.-Andean Fr ee Trade Negotiations 14 
 (ix) U.S.-EU Initiative to Enhance Transatlantic Economic Integration and 
Growth 15 
 (x) African Growth and Opportunity Act 16 
 (xi) The Caribbean Basin Initiative 17  (xii) Andean Trade Preferences 18 
 (3) B
ILATERAL INITIATIVES  18 
 (i) United States - Chile Free Trade Agreement 18  (ii) United States - Singa pore Free Trade Agreement 19 
 (iii) United States – Jordan Free Trade Agreement 19 
 (iv) United States – Israel Free Trade Agreement 19  (v) United States - Austra lia Free Trade Agreement 20 
 (vi) United States - Moro cco Free Trade Agreement 21 
 (vii) United States – Bahr ain Free Trade Agreement 21 
 (viii) United States – Thailand Free Trade Negotiations 21 
 (ix) United States – Panama Free Trade Agreement 22 
 (x) United States – Oman Free Trade Agreement 22  (xi) United States – United Arab  Emirates Free Trade Agreement 22 
 (4) T
RADE -RELATED CAPACITY BUILDING INITIATIVES  23 
 (5) L EGISLATIVE AGENDA  25 
 (6) L ABOR ISSUES  25 
 (7) E NVIRONMENTAL ISSUES  27 
 (8) A GRICULTURAL ISSUES  28 
IV. OPENNESS AND ACCOUNTABILITY:  BUILDING SUPPORT FOR TRADE 29 
V. LOOKING FORWARD 30 ANNEX 1: U.S. SUBMISSIONS TO THE WTO IN SUPPORT OF THE DOHA DEVELOPMENT 
  AGENDA  31 
  
 United States WT/TPR/G/160 
 Page 5 
 
 
 I. THE UNITED STATES IN THE MULTILATERAL SYSTEM 
1. As the World Trade Organization (WTO) enters  its second decade, the United States remains 
firmly committed to the liberal, transparent, ru les-based multilateral trading system.  As a key 
architect of the post-World War II trading system and a leader in the pursuit of successive trade 
liberalizations, the United States shares a co mmon purpose with our WTO partners:  expanding 
economic opportunities for the world’s citizens by reducing trade barriers.  The successful completion of the eight multilateral trade rounds following the es tablishment of the General Agreement on Tariffs 
and Trade (GATT), and the launch in 2001 of the D oha Development Round, stand as a testament to 
the strength and durability of this shared purpose.  Since the launch of the Doha Development Round 
in 2001, the United States has formally tabled 168 submissions (see list in Annex I) to dramatically 
reduce barriers to trade in services, agricultural products and industrial goods , and to strengthen the 
rules and disciplines of the WTO system. 
2. Following the course set by the Sixth WTO Ministerial Conference, held in Hong Kong in 
December, 2006 will be a year of challenge.  The Un ited States will continue to press other Members 
to join in moving toward a conclusion of the negotia tions that brings about bold and aggressive trade 
liberalization and agricultural reform.  Ambitious  results emerging from the DDA have the potential 
to provide a significant contribution to global development.  The United States and other WTO 
Members continue to provide unprecedented contri butions to strengthen technical assistance and 
capacity building to ensure the participation of a ll Members in the negotiations.  As the progress we 
have made since July 2004 has shown, this is work  that requires the focus, flexibility and political will 
of all Members.  The United States remains firmly  committed to meeting these requirements in order 
to reach an ambitious outcome in the DDA negotiations by the end of 2006. 
3. The fundamental features of U.S. trade policy -- maintenance of an open, competitive market 
at home, compliance with WTO obligations, and lead ership in the multilateral trading system -- are 
unchanged despite new challenges presented by a dynamic, global economy.  Over the period of 
review, rapidly expanding exports  were an important factor in the strong economic growth 
experienced by the U.S. economy, while strong U.S. import growth contributed to the export 
expansion of U.S. foreign trade partners around the globe.  Domestic economic growth produced 
increasing federal tax receipts, reducing the size of the U.S. federal budget deficit relative to GDP.  
U.S. leadership in global trade liberalization was bolstered domestically by the renewal of the 
Executive-Congressional partnership embodied in Trad e Promotion Authority (TPA) in 2002.  The 
law gives the President authority to negotiate tr ade agreements subject to consultation with the 
Congress during negotiations and, once an agreemen t has been completed, an up or down vote by 
both houses of Congress. 
4. At the request of the Administration, Congr ess extended TPA in 2005, but it expires on 
July 1, 2007.  Any agreement undertaken accordi ng to this authority must be signed before 
July 1, 2007.  The law also requires the Administ ration to notify Congress of the intention to sign an 
agreement 90 days before the projected signing date.  The law further requires notification of Congress 180 days prior to signature of the range of  proposals advanced in the negotiations that may 
be in the final agreement and could require changes in  trade legislation.  TPA extends past July 1 to 
cover the passage of required implementing legislati on for agreements finalized before that date.  
Thus, the DDA negotiations must be substa ntively complete by December 2006 for the 
Administration to meet its reporting obligations, and a ministerial conference similar to that held in 
1994 in Marrakech will have to c onvene not later than June 2007. WT/TPR/G/160 Trade Policy Review 
Page 6 
 
 
5. As part of its broader efforts to liberalize trad e, but still within the scope of WTO rules, the 
United States is pursuing several regional and bilateral initiatives for free trade areas.  The U.S. view 
that regional and bilateral agreements can act  as an incubator and catalyst for multilateral 
liberalization is not new.  Between  1934 and 1945, the United States ente red into thirty-two reciprocal 
trade agreements, many of which had clauses that fo reshadowed those currently in the GATT.  Since 
then, U.S. agreements have built on existing WTO commitments, and pushed for more.  For example, 
U.S. agreements provide duty free, quota fee acce ss for nearly all imports from its partners; they 
reaffirm WTO disciplines and increase IPR protecti on; they solidify and expand trade facilitation 
measures; and they introduce labor and environmenta l protection standards.  Overall, U.S. bilateral 
and regional agreements appear to be adding momentum to global trade liberalization, fostering trade 
and economic growth, and stimulating our FTA part ners to greater participation in the WTO. 
6. Pursuant to U.S. law, the United States ma intains various programs to consult with 
stakeholders in support for open international trad e policies.  The United States actively solicits input 
and advice from the public on key negotiations, an d conducts extensive outreach through a large 
network of congressionally ma ndated advisory committees1.  Representatives on these advisory 
committees are drawn from the business and agricultural communities, as well as labor, 
environmental, consumer and othe r domestic groups.  Such involvement  enables development of trade 
policies that support protection of the environment and other goals. 
7. As noted above, the United States steadfastly supports the multilateral trading system of the 
WTO.  An important element of this support is the recognition that the system, and the WTO, is a 
work in progress.  Members, therefore, must  take responsibility for important institutional 
improvements.  The United States will continue  to press for increased transparency in WTO 
operations, in WTO negotiations and in Members’ tr ade policies.  The WTO needs to expand public 
access to dispute settlement proceedin gs, to circulate panel decisions promptly, to encourage more 
exchange with outside organiza tions and continue to encourag e timely and accurate reporting by 
Members. 
8. The further integration of developing countries into the multilateral trading system is a high 
priority for the United States, including support for developing country participation in the negotiations and the development a nd implementation of trade policies within developing countries.  
The United States has contributed nearly $5 milli on to the WTO DDA’s Global Trust Fund for trade-
related technical assistance sin ce the DDA launch in November 2001.  Furthermore, the United States 
currently is the largest single-country provider of trade related assistance, wh ich includes trade-related 
physical infrastructure assistance.  Total U. S. f unding for Trade Capacity Building (TCB) activities in 
FY2005 was $1.34 billion, up 46 percent from $921 million in FY2004 (more than doubling since 
FY2001).  In December 2005, the United States announ ced that it would double its annual Aid for 
Trade contributions by 2010 to $2.7 billion.  The United States also supports the Integrated 
Framework (IF), both through contributions to the IF  Trust Fund and parallel bilateral activities in 
several least-developed countries.  To enhance ma rket access opportunities for beneficiary countries 
the United States provides duty-free access for most products from developing countries through several preferential trade programs.  These programs include the Generalized System of Preferences 
(GSP), the African Growth and Opportunity Act ( AGOA), the Caribbean Basin Trade Partnership Act 
(CBTPA) and the Andean Trade Preference and Drug Eradication Program (ATPDEP). 
                                                     
 
1 See Section 135 of the Trade Act of 1974, as amended. United States WT/TPR/G/160 
 Page 7 
 
 
 II. THE UNITED STATES ECONOMIC AND TRADE ENVIRONMENT 
Trade policy 
9. The WTO and the rules-based, multilateral trading system are central to U.S. trade policy.  
The Administration believes that the more integrated global economy of the 21st century offers 
unparalleled economic opportunities for the United States and its trading partners.  Open markets at 
home and free trade have made possible the American  dream.  With 95 percent of the world’s people 
living outside the United States, the Administrati on is committed to negotiating trade agreements, 
both multilateral and bilateral, that open forei gn markets to the manufactured goods, services and 
agricultural products that Americans produce so well .  Exports now support one in five manufacturing 
jobs.  Imports have lowered costs and increased choices for American consumers.  In fact, free trade 
lowers the risk of inflation, creating an environm ent in which the United States is experiencing low 
unemployment and low inflation. 
10. The current U.S. simple average tariff is 3.6 percent on a legally bound basis under the WTO.  
When GSP and other preferences are taken into account , the U.S. trade weighted average tariff is just 
1.4 percent on an applied basis.  Last year near ly 70 percent of all U.S. imports (including under 
preference programs) entered the United States duty free.  U.S. service markets are open to 
competition and U.S. regulatory processes are transparent and accessible to the public. 
Growth 
11. Advancing in recovery from the recession of 2 001, U.S. real gross domestic product (GDP) in 
2004 increased 4.2 percent and in 2005 by 3.5 per cent, on a year-over-year basis.  Increases in 
personal consumption expenditures accounted for 68 percent of the healthy two year growth 
performance, gross private domestic investment, 37 percent, and government expenditures and gross 
investment, 9 percent, while the increase in th e deficit in the goods-and-services trade balance 
reduced the growth in real GDP by nearly 15 per cent.  With respect to the growth of the major 
components of GDP, non-residential gross fixed privat e investment lead the way with an 18.7 percent 
increase during the two year period, followed by pr ivate residential investment at 18.2 percent, 
personal consumptions expenditures at 7.5 percen t and government consumption expenditures and 
gross investment, at 3.9 percent.  Real exports of goods and services increased by 15.7 percent in 
2004 and 17.6 percent in 2005.  At the same time, inflation for domestic products remained subdued 
with the implicit price deflator for overall GDP in creasing by 2.6 percent in 2004 and by 2.8 percent 
in 2005. 
12. As a result of the operation of the economy’s fiscal  stabilizers in the face of recession early in 
the decade and of discretionary fiscal policy measures aimed at restoring economic growth, the U.S. government budget balance recorded defic its equal to 3.5 percent in GDP in 2003 and 
3.6 percent in 2004.  Stronger economic grow th resulted in government receipts growing 
(14.6 percent) much more rapidly than government expenditures (7.8 percent) in 2005.  As a result the 
federal budget deficit fell to 2.6 percent of GDP in  2005.  The current budget of the United States 
Government foresees receipts rising from 17.5 per cent of GDP in 2005 to 17.7 percent in 2009 
(average annual growth of nominal receipts of 6.0 percent), while outlays would fall from 
20.1 percent to 19.1 percent (average annual growth of nominal spending of 4.3 percent).  The result 
would be further reduction in the U.S. federal budg et deficit from 2.6 percent of GDP in 2005 to 
1.4 percent in 2009.  The 40-year historical averag e of the U.S. budget deficit, as a share of GDP, is 
2.3 percent. WT/TPR/G/160 Trade Policy Review 
Page 8 
 
 
Saving 
13. Under the impact, in part, of the recession a nd the slow recovery of the government budget 
position, national saving in the United States fell from near 18 percent of gross national income (GNI) 
early in the decade to only somewhat above 13 per cent of GNI.  The gross sav ing rate remained at 
13.4 percent of GNI in 2003, 2004 and in the first three quarters of 2005.  Wh ile data are incomplete, 
a considerable decline of personal saving in the United States to slight dissaving in 2005 has been 
roughly offset by increases in undistributed corporat e profits.  The decline in personal saving during 
the period under review has been widely associat ed with U.S. asset price increases and rising 
household net worth.  Meanwhile, recovery from recession and expansion have strengthened gross 
domestic investment, rising from 15.2 percent of GDP in 2003 to 20.0 percent in 2005.  Static gross 
saving rates in the last three years of recovery an d rising gross domestic investment have, of course, 
been associated with rising fore ign net lending to/investment in the United States.  On a national 
income and product accounts basis, such net lendi ng to/investment in the United States rose from 
$508 billion in 2003 to $758 b illion (annual rate) in the fi rst three quarters of 2005. 
Labor Markets  
14. With continued recovery of the U.S. economy, employment returned to solid economic 
growth.  Between January 2004 and January 2006 the U.S. economy added nearly 4.2 million net new 
non-farm jobs, to reach a level of 132.4 million.  The rate of unemployment dropped from 5.7 percent 
to 4.7 percent over that period.  Manufacturing employ ment in the United States did not participate in 
this growth, being little changed at a level sligh tly over 14 million in the beginning and end of the 
period.  This period of stabilization of U.S. ma nufacturing employment follows a period (1998-2004) 
in which U.S. manufacturing employment declined by more than three million.  Over 83 percent of U.S. employment is in service producing industries. 
Productivity 
15. Labor productivity continued to gr ow at enhanced rates first visible a decade ago.  Within this 
10 year period the rate of growth has accelerated in the most recent years.  For the private sector 
overall, labor productivity grew at an average annual rate of 3 perc ent in between 2003 and 2005.  For 
manufacturing employment, output per hour worked grew  at a considerably faster rate, 5.1 percent 
annually over the period.  The rapid rates of labor  productivity growth have likely contributed to the 
reduction in overall manufacturing employment in the United States, as the figures above imply that a theoretic 5.1 percent annual gain in real output of manufactures could have been achieved with no 
increase in total hours worked.  The growth of real output of the U.S. manufacturing sector is reported 
to slightly exceed 9 percent in the period of review (in 2004 and 2005) 
16. The continuation of the stronger U.S. productivity growth for a decade is one of the most 
prominent features of the U.S. economy during the pe riod of review.  As is well known, rising labor 
productivity is perhaps the central factor underlying im provements in the material standard of living.  
Many factors could be mentioned to help account for the U.S. productivity resurgence, most notably 
technological advances.  As in the last U.S. review, it is appropriate to note that the United States also 
considers that its commitment to open markets a nd the fulfilment of its WTO obligations have 
contributed importantly to competition in the U. S. market, to the efficiency with which the 
United States employs current resources and invest s for the future, and to strong U.S. productivity 
growth and higher living standards. United States WT/TPR/G/160 
 Page 9 
 
 
 Business Investment  
17. More favourable business conditions have enc ouraged a recovery in business investment, 
while favourable credit conditions t ogether with substantial job and income growth have encouraged 
home purchase and construction.  In real terms, non-residential fixed investment rose at an average 
annual rate of 8.9 percent betw een 2003 and 2005, led by investme nt in equipment and software, 
which grew at an 11.3 percent annual rate.  At an 8.7 percent average annual rate, residential 
investment grew only slightly less rapidly than non -residential investment.  Both grew more than 
twice as fast as overall GDP.  As shares of nominal GDP, non-residential gross fixed investment rose from 9.9 percent in 2003 to 10.6 percent in 2005; the corresponding figures for residential investment 
are 5.2 percent and 6.1 percent.  As the comparison of  real growth rates to changes in nominal shares 
suggests, price inflation has been considerably higher for residential than non-residential fixed 
investment: an average annual increase in the implicit price deflator of the former is 5.7 percent, and 
of the latter is 1.7 percent. 
Exports, Imports, and Trade Balance  
18. U.S. trade recovered after a period of little grow th in the early part of decade.  Between 2003 
and 2005, real exports of goods and services grew at an  average annual rate of 7.6 percent while U.S. 
real imports of goods and services grew at an 8. 4 percent annual rate. As shares of nominal GDP, 
goods and services exports rose from 9.5 percent to 10.4  percent, while imports of goods and services 
rose from 14.1 percent in 2003 to 16.2 percent in 2005.   Import prices rose faster than export prices, 
with the implicit price deflator rising at an annual average of 3.6 percent for exports and 5.5 percent 
for imports.  
19. As a result of these factors, the U.S. goods a nd services trade deficit with other countries rose 
from $494.8 billion (4.5 percent of U.S. GDP) in 2003 to $725.8 billion (5.8 percent of GDP) on a 
balance-of-payments basis.  U.S. goods and service s imports in 2005 were $2.0 trillion, with imports 
rising by $479 billion from 2003 to 2005.  Imports, net of the U.S. export increase, rose by $231 billion over the same period.  Th e U.S. accounted for 21% of global imports of goods in services 
in 2004 (excluding intra-EU25 trade). 
Conclusion 
20. The U.S. real economy has done well during the period of review and, in fact, since the 
inception of the WTO in 1995.  Over the 11 years since, U.S. employment has grown by more than 18 million, with an unemployment rate falling from over 6 percent in 1994 to 5.1 percent in 2005 and 
4.7 percent on its latest reading (January 2006) .  Real gross domestic product has increased by 
42 percent, averaging 3.2 percent a year across the eleven year period.  Our average per capita real 
income was more than a quarter higher in 2005 than in 1994. 
21. We believe that the expanded openness of our  markets to domestic and international 
competition, in part achieved through our joint effort s in the WTO, together with an acceptance of the 
change and adjustment that such openness someti mes necessitates, have served our long run economic 
interests very well.  Our labor market offers ev idence of our acceptance of  change as the means to 
opportunity and growth.  The President’s Council of Economic Advisers has estimated that over the 
past decade, roughly two million net new jobs are generated by the U.S. economy in a given year.  
That annual net expansion of employment however has come about as a result of the loss of 
15 million long term employment positions on th e one hand and the creation of 17 million new 
positions in their place in the same year.  Whethe r the causes of this ongoing dynamic adjustment in WT/TPR/G/160 Trade Policy Review 
Page 10 
 
 
U.S. labor markets is technological or demographic,  consumer demand or trade driven, change is by 
and large accepted as the means to new oppor tunity and greater national prosperity. 
22. Because of our economic orientation and our belie f that such economic benefits are available 
to all countries, the United States is deeply comm itted to the WTO.  We adhere strongly to its 
objectives of a well functioning, rules-based trading system and the further reduction and elimination 
to restrictions and distortions of the free flow of international trade.  The functioning of the WTO and 
the ultimate success of the Doha Development Agenda is part of a U.S. vision for a healthy economic 
future for ourselves and for other industri alized and developing countries alike. 
III. TRADE POLICY DEVELOPMENTS, 2003-2005 
(1) WTO  AGREEMENTS AND INITIATIVES  
(i) U.S. Proposals in the Doha Development Agenda 
23. The United States played a critical role in launching the Doha round at the Fourth WTO 
Ministerial Conference in Doha, Qatar.  At the core of the Doha Round is creating new economic 
opportunities through new and real market openi ngs, as well as agricultural reform.  These 
negotiations, along with the day-to-day implementati on of the rules governing world trade, represent a 
dynamic approach to the furthering of global trade liberalization and strengthening of the rules-based 
trading system that is so vital to the growth of  the world economy and continued peace and prosperity.  
The United States has responded to the challenge  and opportunity presented by the Doha Round by 
making ambitious proposals to advance the negotiatio ns (See Annex I) and by working relentlessly to 
promote progress.  In a speech before the United Na tions in September 2005, President Bush stated 
forthrightly that the United States was ready to eliminate all tariffs, subsidies and other barriers to free 
flow of goods and services as other nations do the same. 
24. U.S. proposals have sustained momentum in the negotiations and have offered a path forward 
to final agreement in every negotiating area.  The United States will work with other WTO Members 
to pursue a successful and ambitious  outcome to the negotiations befo re the end of 2006.  Achieving 
new and real market openings in agriculture, indus trial products, and services is the key to achieving a 
final agreement.  Unless the negotiations in the co re areas progress early in 2006, the world will risk 
missing a unique opportunity to enhance globa l economic growth and alleviate poverty. 
(ii) Implementation of Existing Agreements 
25. Since entry into force of the Uruguay Round Ag reements in 1995, a central theme of U.S. 
policy has been to ensure the effective and tim ely implementation of our WTO commitments.  We 
believe it is not only important for American trad e interests, but for the WTO system as a whole to 
ensure all Members meet their commitments.  The various manifestations of this policy range from 
active and constructive participation in the delibera tions of WTO committees to the use of the dispute 
settlement mechanism.  U.S. trade policy seek s to support and advance the rule of law. 
26. The United States continues to be among the mo st active participants  in the WTO dispute 
settlement process, ensuring the enforcement of tr ade agreements and U.S. rights in the trading 
system.  Whenever possible we have sought to r each favorable settlements that resolve the problem 
without having to resort to panel proceedings. Since the establishment of the WTO in 1995, the 
United States has filed 70 complaints at the WTO, thus far successfully concluding 43 of them by 
settling 23 cases favorably and prevailing on 20 othe rs through litigation in WTO panels and the 
Appellate Body. United States WT/TPR/G/160 
 Page 11 
 
 
 27. The United States has accepted its responsibility to implement the rulings of the WTO 
Dispute Settlement Body (DSB) in cases to which we are a party; and where legislation has been required, we have worked with Congress to secure the necessary legislation and will continue to do 
so.  For example, we have invoked authority under U.S. law to make determinations in response to 
DSB recommendations and rulings involving anti-dum ping and safeguard investigations.  Congress 
has passed legislation in response to DSB recommendations and rulings concerning, for example, the 
1916 Act, the FSC/ETI legislation, the Continued Dumping and Subsidy Offset Act, and the Step 2 
cotton program.  We also agreed to the first ar bitration proceeding under Article 25 of the DSU in 
order to help resolve the dispute concerning section 110 of the U.S. copyright law, and Congress 
passed legislation necessary to fac ilitate a temporary resolution. 
(2) R
EGIONAL INITIATIVES  
28. The United States pursues an active agenda of ambitious trade liberalization on the 
multilateral, regional and bilateral le vels.  Regional and bilateral agreem ents that are fully consistent 
with WTO rules and objectives can both support an d expand trade liberalization in the multilateral 
trading system.  With this in mind, and in order to  capture and multiply the benefits of an expanding 
global trading system, the United States is activel y embarked on an agenda of greater commercial 
interaction, including in emerging markets. 
29. The United States is pursuing regional trade in itiatives in the Western Hemisphere, Asia, the 
Middle East, and Africa, including the Free Trade Area of the Americas (FTAA), the Enterprise for 
ASEAN Initiative (EAI), the Middle East Free Trad e Area (MEFTA), and a U.S–Southern African 
Customs Union (SACU) free trade agreement.  Re gional work also includes monitoring compliance 
with, and improving functioning of, current agreem ents and programs, including the North America 
Free Trade Area (NAFTA), the Asia Pacific Econom ic Cooperation (APEC), the African Growth and 
Opportunity Act (AGOA), the Cari bbean Basin Economic Recovery Ac t (CBERA), the Andean Trade 
Promotion and Drug Eradication Act (ATPDEA), and fr ee trade agreements with Israel, Jordan, Chile, 
Singapore, Australia, and Morocco.  The United St ates is in the process of implementing CAFTA-DR 
and the Bahrain FTA, and recently concluded FTA negotiations with Colombia, Oman, and Peru.  The 
United States is negotiating free trade agreements  with Ecuador, Panama, Thailand, and the United 
Arab Emirates  and recently announced its intenti on to negotiate a free trade agreement with South 
Korea.  We are also cultivating our economic ties and cooperation with Europe through the U.S.-EU 
Initiative to Enhance Transatlantic Economic Integration and Growth. 
30. Without exception, the regional initiatives in wh ich the United States is involved look to the 
WTO as a solid foundation upon which to build.  These  initiatives are recognition of the desirability 
of increasing freedom of trade by the developmen t, through voluntary ag reements, of closer 
integration between the economies of the count ries party to such agreements, as long as the 
agreements do not result in increasing the external barri ers of the parties.  Such agreements challenge 
the multilateral system to keep pace with the intere sts and needs of Members, and contribute to the 
WTO system by introducing inno vation and strengthened disciplines.  These agreements can become 
models for future multilateral liberalization in new areas, such as agriculture , services, investment, 
and environmental and labor standards.  All comp leted regional and bilateral free trade agreements 
have been notified to the WTO.  The United Stat es submitted requests for waivers for preferences 
provided under the AGOA, CBTPA and ATPA pr ograms in 2005, which are currently under 
consideration in the Council on Trade in Goods. Th e following regional initiatives are each examples 
of this potential. WT/TPR/G/160 Trade Policy Review 
Page 12 
 
 
(i) North American Free Trade Area 
31. On January 1, 1994, the North American Fr ee Trade Agreement between the United States, 
Canada and Mexico (NAFTA) entered into force.  NAFTA created the world’s largest free trade area, 
which now links 435 million peopl e producing $13.8 trillion worth of goods and services.  The 
dismantling of trade barriers and the opening of markets has led to economic growth and rising 
prosperity in all three countries.  The closer ec onomic relationship promoted by NAFTA also includes 
labor and environmental coopera tion agreements, which are among the most significant that the 
United States has negotiated as part of a trade ag reement.  The NAFTA has dramatically improved 
our trade and economic relations with our neighbors.  The net result of these efforts is more economic 
opportunity and growth, greater fairness in our tr ade relations, and a coordinated effort to better 
protect worker rights and the environment in North America. 
32. Trade between the United States and its NAFTA partners has soared since the Agreement 
entered into force.  U.S. two-way trade with Canada and Mexico exceeds U.S. trade with the 
European Union and Japan combined.  U.S. goods exports to NAFTA partners more than doubled 
between 1993 and 2004, from $142 bill ion to $299 billion, significantly  higher than export growth of 
60 percent for the rest of the world over the same period. 
33. By dismantling barriers, NAFTA has led to increased trade and investment, growth in 
employment, and enhanced competitiveness.  From 1994 to 2004, cumulative Foreign Direct 
Investment in the NAFTA countries has increased by over $1.8 trillion. Increased investment has 
brought more and better-paying jobs, as well as lo wer costs and more choices for consumers and 
producers. 
34. In 2005, following approval by the NAFTA Free Trade Commission (the central oversight 
body for the Agreement), the Parties implemented changes to the NAFTA rules covering approximately $20 billion in trilateral trade.  These changes included the first ever set of changes to 
the short supply provisions of the NAFTA.  Th e Free Trade Commission asked that its officials 
continue considering new requests for changes to the rules of origin from consumers and producers; 
and to examine the rules of origin in the free trade agreements that each country has negotiated 
subsequent to the NAFTA, to determine whether t hose rules should be applied to the NAFTA.  In 
December 2005, the NAFTA Working Group on Rules of  Origin agreed on a second and third set of 
changes to the rules of origin, which they aim to  implement in 2006.  Together, these changes will 
cover approximately $50 billion in total trilateral trade. 
(ii) Free Trade Area of the Americas Negotiations 
35. The year 2005 was the third year of the U.S. and Brazil Co-Chairmanship of the Free Trade 
Area of the Americas (FTAA) negotiating process.  The year culminated in a meeting of the Presidents and Prime Ministers of the Hemisphere at the Fourth Summit of the Americas in Mar del Plata, Argentina, on November 4-5, 2005.  At th e Summit, the vast major ity of leaders in the 
hemisphere, including President Bush, called for a continuation of the FTAA negotiations.  As the 
FTAA negotiations were suspended during much of  2004, all timelines for the FTAA, including the 
projected date of January 2005 for conclusion of the negotiation, were suspended as well.  While 
recognizing the difficulties encountered in the FTAA process over the last two years, these leaders 
remain committed to a balanced and comprehensive FTAA Agreement and called for trade officials to 
resume their meetings in 2006 to examine and overcome the difficulties in the FTAA process and 
advance the FTAA negotiations.  Some other leaders indicated that the conditions were not yet in 
place for achievement of the FTAA.  All 34 leaders agreed to explore these two positions in 2006.  In addition, President Bush met with Brazilian President Lula da Silva in Brazil, and they issued a joint United States WT/TPR/G/160 
 Page 13 
 
 
 statement on November 6, 2005, in which they  noted, as Co-Chairs of the FTAA process, the 
importance of continuing efforts to promote trade liberalization, reaffirmed their commitment to the 
FTAA process, and welcomed a hemispheric m eeting for the timely resumption of the FTAA 
negotiations. 
(iii) Central American Free Trade Agreement 
36. The United States began free trade negotiations  with five Central American countries 
(Costa Rica, El Salvador, Guatemala, Honduras, and Nicaragua) in January  of 2003 and concluded 
negotiations with all nations except Costa Rica in  December 2003.  The United States concluded 
negotiations with Costa Rica in January 2004, and later that year, the Central American countries 
engaged in negotiations with the Dominican Republic  to integrate that country into the free trade 
agreement.  On August 5, 2004, the seven c ountries signed the Dominican Republic – Central 
America – United States Free Trade Agreement (CAFTA-DR). 
37. To date all countries except Costa Rica have ratifie d the agreement.  El Salvador was the first 
CAFTA-DR partner to ratify, followed by Hond uras, Guatemala, the Dominican Republic, and 
Nicaragua.  The United States is working with a ll of the CAFTA-DR partners on implementation of 
the Agreement.  CAFTA-DR expands  economic freedom and opportunity for all people, and supports 
regional stability, democracy and economic development. 
38. The resulting free trade agreement (FTA) is the first FTA between the United States and a 
group of smaller developing economies.  The CAFT A-DR is a regional trade agreement among all 
seven signatories, and will contribute to the transfor mation of a region that was consumed by internal 
strife and border disputes just a decade ago.  This historic agreement will create new economic 
opportunities by eliminating tariffs, opening markets,  promoting transparency, and establishing state-
of-the-art rules for 21st century commerce.  It will facilitate trade and investment among the countries 
and further regional integration. 
39. Central America and the Dominican Republic ma ke up the second largest U.S. export market 
in Latin America, behind only Mexi co.  The CAFTA-DR nations covere d by this agreement buy more 
than $15 billion in U.S. exports annually.  In 2004, combined total two-way trade between the 
United States and the countries of Central Amer ica and the Dominican Republic was $33.4 billion. 
(iv) U.S. - Southern African Customs Union Free Trade Agreement 
40. On November 4, 2002, USTR notified Congress of  President Bush’s decision to negotiate a 
free trade agreement (FTA) with the five member countries of the Southern African Customs Union 
(SACU).  These nations—Botswana, Lesotho, Na mibia, Swaziland (BLNS), and South Africa—are 
key beneficiaries of AGOA with U.S. imports valu ed at $2.6 billion in 2004, and they comprise the 
largest U.S. export market in sub-Saharan Africa, with $3.3 billion in U.S. exports in 2004.  The 
negotiations began in Pretoria, S outh Africa in June 2003, and six s ubsequent rounds have been held 
since then.  The last full negotiating round was held in Atlanta in June 2004 and talks resumed in a 
“mini-round” held in September 2005. 
(v) Asia – Pacific Economic Cooperation 
41. The Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) fo rum has been instrumental in advancing 
regional and global trade and investment liberalizatio n since it was founded in 1989.  It has provided a 
forum for APEC Leaders to meet annually since 1993, when they met at Blake Island in the 
United States.  The 21 APEC Member Economies coll ectively account for 46 percent of world trade WT/TPR/G/160 Trade Policy Review 
Page 14 
 
 
and 57 percent of global GDP.  The growth in U. S. goods exports to APEC clearly demonstrates the 
benefits of open markets and trade liberalization.   Since 1994, U.S. exports to APEC increased by 
62 percent.  In 2004, two-way trade with APEC Member Economies totaled $1.5 trillion, an increase 
of 15 percent from 2003.  The United States consid ers APEC an important vehicle for building a 
regional economic structure to ensure prosperity and stability over the long term.  In the past few 
years, APEC has made concrete progress toward  its objectives of advancing economic cooperation 
and trade and investment liberalization and facilita tion, and toward the long- term goal of “free and 
open trade and investment” in the region. 
42. APEC Member Economies continued to exercise leadership in the WTO.  In November 2005, 
APEC Leaders issued a strong political statement of support for the DDA negotiations. In June 2005, 
APEC Trade Ministers unanimously endorsed an ambitious tariff-reducing formula (“Swiss formula”) for non-agricultural goods. The APEC Geneva Caucus , comprising the ambassadors to the WTO from 
APEC economies, continued to serve as an important  link between APEC and the WTO.  In 2005, the 
Caucus worked to advance the DDA negotiations in areas such as tariff elimination of information 
technology products and trade facilitation. 
(vi) Enterprise for ASEAN Initiative 
43. President Bush announced in October 2002 a majo r new initiative, the Enterprise for ASEAN 
Initiative (EAI).  The EAI is intended to strengthe n U.S. trade and investment ties with ASEAN both 
as a region and bilaterally.  With over $136 billion in two-way goods trade in 2004, the 10-member 
ASEAN group already is the United States’ fifth largest trading partner collectively.  The EAI will 
further enhance our already close relationship with this strategic and commercially important region.  
With continued economic growth in the A SEAN countries and a regional population of around 
500 million, the United States anticipates significant opp ortunities for U.S. companies, particularly 
agricultural exporters.  For ASEAN, this initiative w ill help boost trade and redirect investment back 
to the ASEAN region. 
(vii) Middle East Free Trade Area 
44. The United States Middle East Free Trade Ar ea initiative (MEFTA) seeks to promote trade 
expansion and economic reforms in North Africa and the Middle East leading to a Middle East Free 
Trade Area within a decade.  USTR made signifi cant progress in implementing the Middle East Free 
Trade Area (MEFTA) initiative in 2005.  The Unite d States – Morocco Free Trade Agreement (FTA) 
successfully entered into force on January 1, 200 6.  Congress approved the United States – Bahrain 
Free Trade Agreement (FTA) by significant margin s in both houses in December 2005 and President 
Bush signed the implementing legislation in Janua ry 2006.  FTA negotiations with Oman were 
successfully launched and conclude d in 2005, and FTA negotiations were launched with the United 
Arab Emirates.  Progress was also made with WTO accessions with Saudi Arabia joining the WTO in 
December 2005.  The United States actively suppor ts the WTO accession efforts of Iraq, Lebanon, 
Algeria and Yemen.  The United States also held Trade and Investment Framework (TIFA) 
discussions with other countries in the MEFTA in th e period under review, including Tunisia, Algeria, 
Yemen, and Egypt. 
(viii) U.S.-Andean Free Trade Negotiations 
45. On November 18, 2003, after consulting w ith relevant congressional committees and the 
Congressional Oversight Group, USTR notified the Congr ess of the President’s intent to initiate free 
trade agreement negotiations with Colombia, Pe ru, Ecuador, and Bolivia and identified specific 
objectives.  Negotiations on the United States – Andean Trade Promotion Agreement (USA-TPA) United States WT/TPR/G/160 
 Page 15 
 
 
 were launched on May 18, 2004 in Cartagena, Colo mbia. Through 2005 there we re twelve additional 
negotiating rounds involving the governments of Colombia, Peru, and Ecuador, with Bolivia 
observing the negotiations. 
46. The Andean region is important to the United States for a variety of reasons including its size 
and economic scale.  The four countries have a combined population of about 93 million people, 
which is about a third of that of the United St ates, and a combined gross domestic product, on a 
purchasing power parity basis, of about $453 billion.  The three Andean negotiating partners collectively represent a market of over $8 billion for U.S. exports, and are home to close to $8 billion 
in U.S. foreign direct investment. 
47. The United States and Peru announced on Decemb er 7, 2005 the conclusion of a free trade 
agreement.  This comprehensive agreement will eliminate tariffs and other barriers to goods and 
services and expand trade between the United States  and Peru.  In 2005, total two way goods trade 
with Peru was $7.4 billion.  U.S. goods exports  to Peru in 2005 were  $2.3 billion. Top export 
categories included machinery and electrical machin ery, plastic, cereals, and mineral fuel. U.S. 
exports of agricultural products to Peru totale d $212 million in 2005. Leading categories included 
wheat, cotton, and coarse grains.  The stock of fore ign direct investment (FDI) in Peru in 2004 was 
$3.9 billion. 
48. On February 27, 2006 the United States and Colombia also concluded free trade agreement 
negotiations.  In 2005, Colombia and the United States had $14.3 billion in two-way trade, and 
Colombia is currently the second largest agricultura l market for the United St ates in Latin America. 
U.S. goods exports to Colombia  in 2005 were $5.4 billion. Top export categories in 2005 were 
machinery, organic chemicals, elect rical machinery, and plastic.  U.S.  exports of agricultural products 
to Colombia totaled $677 million in 2005.  Leading cat egories included: coarse grains, wheat, cotton, 
and soybeans. U.S. foreign direct investment (FDI) in Colombia was $3.0 billion in 2004. 
49. The United States will continue free trade negotiations with Ecuador. 
(ix) U.S.-EU Initiative to Enhance Transatl antic Economic Integration and Growth 
50. The huge size, advanced integration, and generally  robust health of the transatlantic trade and 
investment relationship have provide d an anchor of prosperity for both sides of the Atlantic, even as 
economic conditions in other parts of the world fluc tuate.  Recognizing the benefits of preserving and 
enhancing these productive ties, the United States and th e EU for some time have been interested in 
exploring ways to create new opportunities for transatlantic economic activity.  The 1995 New 
Transatlantic Agenda, 1998 Transatlantic Economic Partnership and 2002 Positive Economic Agenda 
initiatives, all launched at various U.S.-EU Summits, had as their common goal the deepening and systematizing of bilateral coope ration in the economic field. 
51. At the June 2004 U.S.-EU Summit, President Bush, European Commission President Prodi 
and Irish Prime Minister Ahearn agreed to th e Joint Declaration on Strengthening Our Economic 
Partnership, which initiated a government disc ourse with business, labor, consumer and other 
elements of civil society on concrete ways for gove rnments to improve U.S.-EU economic interaction.  
The results of these stakeholder consultations yiel ded the U.S.-EU Initiative to  Enhance Transatlantic 
Economic Integration and Growth  which was announced at the June 2005 U.S.-EU Summit.  The 
Economic Initiative includes a forward-looking agen da of cooperative activities intended to expand 
economic opportunity, promote prosperity, and maintain  the health and safety of our citizens.  At the 
U.S.-EU Economic Ministerial in November 2005, the governments issued a work program that WT/TPR/G/160 Trade Policy Review 
Page 16 
 
 
details the specific activities U.S. and European offici als have agreed to pursue in a range of topics, 
including regulatory cooperation, innovation, capita l markets, trade and security, and intellectual 
property rights. 
(x) African Growth and Opportunity Act 
52. The African Growth and Opportunity Act (AGOA) , enacted in May 2000 as part of the Trade 
and Development Act of 2000, is the centerpiece of U.S. trade policy for sub-Saharan Africa.  AGOA 
provides a number of key economic benefits and incentives to promote economic reform and trade 
expansion in sub-Saharan Africa, including duty-free access to the U.S. market for almost all products 
made in beneficiary sub-Saharan African countri es.  The Act also institutionalizes a process for 
strengthening U.S. trade relations with sub-Sa haran African countries by establishing a regular 
ministerial-level forum with AGOA-eligible countries. 
53. The AGOA Acceleration Act of 2004 (“the Act”),  signed by President Bush into law on 
July 13, 2004, amended several key provisions of AGOA.  It extended the authorization of the overall 
AGOA program from 2008 to 2015 and extended AGOA’s sp ecial third-country fabric provision by 
three years, to September 30, 2007.  Under this provision, less-developed beneficiary countries are 
permitted to use regional or third-country fabric  in apparel imported into the United States under 
AGOA, subject to an overall cap.  The cap increased in years one and two of the extension and is reduced 50 percent in year three (FY2007).  The cap remained at the FY2004 level in years one and 
two of the extension and is being reduced 50 pe rcent in year three (FY2006).  The Act amended 
several technical aspects of AGOA’s apparel provisi ons to allow broader eligibility for products 
incorporating certain inputs.  The Act encouraged the Administration to develop policies that enhance 
trade capacity, support infrastructure projects and the ecotourism industry and expressed the Sense of 
Congress that African countries should participate in and support multilateral trade liberalization 
under the auspices of the WTO.  The Act mandate d a one-time study to identify competitive export 
sectors for each AGOA eligible c ountry, as well as barriers impeding growth in those sectors and 
recommendations for trade capacity assistance to a ddress the barriers.  This study was provided to 
Congress in July 2005.  
54. AGOA requires the President to determine annua lly whether sub-Saharan African countries 
are, or remain, eligible for benefits based on thei r progress in meeting criteria set out in the Act.  
These criteria include establishment of a market-based  economy and the rule of law, the elimination 
of barriers to U.S. trade and investment, implementation of economic policies to reduce poverty, the 
protection of internationally recognized worker ri ghts, and establishment of a system to combat 
corruption.  Additionally, countries cannot engage in :  (1) violations of internationally recognized 
human rights; (2) support for acts of internationa l terrorism; or (3) activities that undermine U.S. 
national security or foreign policy interests. 
55. An interagency AGOA Implementation Subcom mittee, chaired by USTR, conducts the 
annual eligibility review, drawing on informati on from the private sector, non-governmental 
organizations, U.S. government agencies, and pros pective beneficiary governments.  Following the 
eligibility review in the fall of 2005 and b ased on the recommendation of the U.S. Trade 
Representative, in December 2005 the President signed a Proclamation listing the 37
2 sub-Saharan 
African countries that meet the Act’s requirements for eligibility in 2006.  Mauritania was removed 
from eligibility due to a coup d’etat  that overthrew the democratica lly elected government.  Burundi 
was determined to be meeting the eligibility crite ria and was designated as a beneficiary country for 
the first time. 
                                                      
2 The list of eligible countries for AGOA and of those that have met requirements for textiles and 
apparel benefits can be found at http://www.agoa.gov. United States WT/TPR/G/160 
 Page 17 
 
 
 56. As of December 2005, 24 AGOA-eligible countries had instituted acceptable customs 
measures to prevent illegal trans-shipment and, accordingly, had been certified for AGOA’s textile 
and apparel benefits. 
57. AGOA establishes a U.S./Sub-Saharan Africa  Trade and Economic Cooperation Forum -- 
informally known as “the AGOA Forum” -- to a nnually discuss expanding trade and investment 
relations between the United States and sub-Saha ran African countries, and implementation of 
AGOA.  The fourth AGOA Forum was held in July 2005 in Dakar, Senegal.  Participants included the 
Secretaries of State and Agriculture, the Admini strator of the U.S. Agency for International 
Development, the Millennium Challenge Corporati on CEO, the U.S. Global AIDs Coordinator, and 
ministerial-level officials from almo st all AGOA-eligible countries.  It is expected that the next 
AGOA Forum will be held in Washington, D.C. in mid-2006. 
58. In 2005, President Bush announced the A frica Global Competitiveness Initiative (AGCI) 
which will provide an additional $200 million over the next five years for trade related capacity 
building.  AGCI will help build the capacity of African nations to take advantage of trade 
opportunities and increase their competitiveness.  As pa rt of the Administration’s goal to make trade 
capacity building assistance more accessible, a f ourth Trade Competitiveness Hub was opened in 
Dakar, Senegal in 2005.  Other regional trade competitiveness hubs ar e located in Ghana, Botswana, 
and Kenya.  Experts at the Hub are available to help African countries trade more effectively with each other and with the United States. 
(xi) The Caribbean Basin Initiative 
59. The Caribbean Basin Initiative (CBI) currently provides 24 beneficiary countries and 
territories with duty-free access to the U.S. market.  They are:  Antigua and Barbuda, Aruba, The 
Bahamas, Barbados, Belize, British Virgin Isla nds, Costa Rica, Dominica, Dominican Republic, 
El Salvador, Grenada, Guatemala, Guyana, Hai ti, Honduras, Jamaica, Montserrat, Netherlands 
Antilles, Nicaragua, Panama, St. Kitts and Nevis, St. Lucia, St. Vincent and the Grenadines, and 
Trinidad and Tobago. 
60. During 2004, the trade programs collectively k nown as the CBI remained a vital element in 
the U.S. economic relations with its neighbors in Central America and the Caribbean. CBI was 
initially launched in 1983 through the Caribbean Ba sin Economic Recovery Act (CBERA).  It was 
substantially expanded in 2000 through the United States - Caribbean Basin Trade Partnership Act 
(CBTPA). 
61. The Trade Act of 2002 increased the type and qua ntity of textile and apparel articles eligible 
for preferential tariff treatment accorded to d esignated beneficiary CBTPA countries.  Among other 
actions, the Trade Act of 2002 extended duty-free treat ment for clothing made in beneficiary countries 
from both U.S. and regional inputs, and increased the quantity of clothing made from regional inputs 
that regional producers can ship duty-free to the Unit ed States annually.  Apparel remains one of the 
fastest growing categories of imports from the CBI  countries and territories - growing from just 
5.5 percent of total U.S. imports from the region in 1984, to nearly 40 percent in 2005, valued at $10 billion. 
62. Since its inception, the CBERA program has help ed beneficiaries diversify their exports.  On 
a region-wide basis, this export diversification has led to a more balanced production and export base 
and has reduced the region's vulnerability to fluctu ations in markets for traditional products.  Since 
1983, the year prior to the implementation of the CBI , total CBI country non-petroleum exports to the WT/TPR/G/160 Trade Policy Review 
Page 18 
 
 
United States have more than tripled.  Light ma nufactures, principally printed circuit assemblies and 
apparel, but also medical instruments and chemical s, account for an increasing share of U.S. imports 
from the region and constitute the fastest growing sectors for new investment in CBERA countries 
and territories. 
63. In 2004, the Administration continued to work with Congress, the private sector, CBI 
beneficiary countries, and other interested parties to  ensure a faithful and effective implementation of 
this important expansion of trade benefits.  The United States has concluded negotiations, signed and 
ratified a free trade agreement (CAFTA-DR) with several CBI beneficiaries (El Salvador, Guatemala, Honduras, Nicaragua, Costa Rica, and the Dominican Repub lic), as called for in the legislation.  In the 
second quarter of 2004, USTR launched FTA negotia tions with Panama, another CBI beneficiary. 
64. When the CAFTA-DR enters into force, for El  Salvador, Guatemala, Honduras, Nicaragua, 
Costa Rica, and the Dominican Republic will no longer be eligible for the program benefits, although 
the CAFTA-DR will provide market access that is th e same or better than the access provided under 
the CBI program.  In co-production arrangement s with CAFTA-DR countries, the remaining CBI 
beneficiary countries will be able to continue to count inputs from the former beneficiaries towards 
qualifying for CBI benefits. 
(xii) Andean Trade Preferences 
65. President Bush signed the Andean Trade Pr omotion and Drug Eradication Act (ATPDEA) 
into law on August 6, 2002.  The signing renewed and expanded the product c overage of the Andean 
Trade Preference Act (ATPA), which had expired on December 4, 2001.  The ATPA was originally 
enacted in 1991 in order to provide incentives to Bo livia, Colombia, Ecuador and Peru to diversify 
their economies away from narcotics production.  It has strengthened the legitimate economies in 
these Andean countries and created viable alternativ es to the profitable drug trade.  The original 
ATPA enacted in 1991 provided beneficiary countri es duty-free treatment for most of their exports to 
the United States, except for textiles, apparel, footwear , leather, tuna in airtight containers, and certain 
other items. 
66. The ATPDEA restored all of the benefits of the original ATPA program, providing for 
retroactive reimbursement of duties paid during th e period since the program’s lapse in December 
2001.  It also expanded the list of items eligible for duty-free treatment to about 700 more products.  
The most significant expansion of benefits in the ATPA as amended by the ATPDEA is in the apparel 
sector. Other new products benefiting from the program  includes: tuna in pouches, leather products, 
footwear, petroleum and petroleum products, and watc hes and watch parts.  U.S. goods imports from 
ATPA countries totaled $15.5 billion in 2004, up  32.5% ($3.8 billion) from 2003.  Together, the 
ATPA beneficiaries would rank as the 19
th largest supplier of imported goods to the United States. 
(3) BILATERAL INITIATIVES  
(i) United States - Chile Free Trade Agreement 
67. The United States-Chile Free Trade Agreement t ook effect January 1, 2004.  The agreement 
eliminates tariffs and quotas covering all trade betwee n the two countries at the end of a twelve-year 
transition period, with 85 percent of goods traded re ceiving duty-free treatment in the first year.  In 
addition to trade in goods, the U.S. – Chile FTA  includes commitments on services, investment, 
competition policy, intellectual property, elect ronic commerce, telecommunications, financial 
services, government procurement, labor, envi ronment, sanitary and phytosanitary measures, 
technical barriers to trade, customs administration, dispute settlement and rules of origin.  The 
agreement is dramatically affecting bilateral trade.  U.S. exports to Chile in the first nine months of United States WT/TPR/G/160 
 Page 19 
 
 
 2005 totaled $3.89 billion, nearly double the $1.98 billi on exported to Chile in the first nine months of 
2003.  This growth surpasses the 26 pe rcent increase in U.S. exports to the world and the 40 percent 
increase in U.S. exports to Central and South Ameri ca and the Caribbean in the first nine months of 
2005 compared to the same time period in 2003.  U. S. imports from Chile grew from $2.82 billion in 
the first nine months of 2003 to $4.70 billion in the first nine months of 2005, an increase of 
67 percent. 
(ii) United States - Singapore Free Trade Agreement 
68. The United States-Singapore Free Trade Agreement, the first U.S. FTA with an Asian nation, 
entered into force on January 1, 2004.  The Agre ement covers aspects of trade in goods, services, 
investment, government procurement, protection of  intellectual property, competition policy and the 
relationship between trade and labor and environment.  More than 97 percent of U.S.-Singapore trade 
in goods is now free of duty, with  remaining tariffs scheduled for elimination within ten years of 
implementation of the FTA.  The Agreement also lo wers commercial barriers to bilateral trade in 
nearly all services sectors. 
69. Trade has grown during the first two years of the FTA.  U.S. goods exports to Singapore, the 
United States’ 11th largest export market in 2005, rose 23%  from 2003 to $20.4 billion in 2005.  U.S. 
exports of private commercial services (i.e., excl uding military and governme nt) to Singapore were 
$5.6 billion in 2004.  On the import side of the ledger, Singapore, which ranked 19th among U.S. 
import suppliers, sent the United States $14.3 billion in goods in 2005.  U.S. imports of private 
commercial services (i.e., excluding military and governm ent) rose 22% in 2004 to $2.7 billion.  U.S. 
foreign direct investment (FDI) in Singapore (s tock) was $56.9 billion in 2004, a 13.0 percent 
increase from 2003, while Singapore FDI in the United States (stock) was $1.8 billion in 2004, up 21.4 percent from 2003.  Sales of services in Singa pore by majority U.S.-owned affiliates were 
$6.7 billion in 2003 (latest data available), while sales of services in the United States by majority 
Singapore-owned firms were $1.5 billion. 
(iii) United States – Jordan Free Trade Agreement 
70. The U.S.-Jordan Free Trade Agreement, signe d in October 2000, entered into force in 
December 2001.  The Agreement eliminates virtuall y all tariffs on industrial goods and agricultural 
products, as well as commercial barriers to bilatera l trade in goods and services originating in the 
United States and Jordan.  Provisions address intellectual property rights protection, balance of payments, rules of origin, safeguards, labor, en vironment, electronic commerce, and procedural 
matters such as consultations and dispute settlement.   These measures have played a significant role in 
boosting United States-Jordanian economic ties.  In  1998, U.S. imports of goods from Jordan totaled 
only $16 million.  By 2004, U.S. goods  imports had increased to $1.1 billion, a total that Jordan looks 
set to pass in 2005.  In 2004, U.S. goods expor ts to Jordan were $552 million, up 12 percent from 
2003.  As of November 2005, U.S. exports to Jord an totaled $580 million, surpassing the total for the 
entire previous year. 
(iv) United States – Israel Free Trade Agreement 
71. 2005 marked the 20th anniversary of the 1985 U.S.-Israel FTA, the first FTA signed by the 
United States with any country.  The agreement continues to serve as a foundation for the expanding 
trade and investment relationship between the United States and Israel.  Israel is currently the United States' 21
st largest goods trading partner with $23.7 billion in total (two way) goods trade 
during 2004.  Bilateral trade in goods appears set to rise in 2005 with the total in November 2005 WT/TPR/G/160 Trade Policy Review 
Page 20 
 
 
amounting to $23.2 billion, a 7 percent increase over the same period in 2004.  Trade in services with 
Israel (exports and imports) totale d $4.1 billion in 2003 (latest data available).  The FTA has helped 
foster significant investment between the two countries,  as well.  Total U.S. foreign direct investment 
(FDI) in Israel was $6.2 billion in 2003 (latest da ta available), a 10.2 percent increase from 2002, and 
was concentrated in the manufacturing sector.  Is rael FDI in the United States was $3.8 billion in 
2003, up 3.6% from 2002.  Israeli direct investment in the U.S. is focused in the manufacturing and 
banking sectors. 
72. The U.S.-Israel FTA applies to trade in all goods between the two countries.  However, the 
United States and Israel held differing interpreta tions as to the meaning of certain rights and 
obligations related to agricultural goods under the Ag reement.  In 1996, in the interest of achieving 
practical improvements in agricultural trade between  the two countries and without prejudice to the 
parties’ rights and obligations under the FTA, the Un ited States and Israel signed an adjunct to the 
FTA, the U.S.-Israel Agreement on Trade in Ag ricultural Products.  The 1996 Agreement was 
extended twice, first through December 31, 2002, and then to December 31, 2003.  In July 2004, the 
United States and Israel concluded a new, five-y ear agricultural adjunct applicable to certain 
agricultural products during the period January 1, 2004, through December 31, 2008. 
73. Israeli agricultural exports to the United Stat es enter duty-free, except a few products that 
remain dutiable pending resolution of the parties’ differing interpretation of some aspects of the 
Agreement, as noted above.  These dutiable lines ar e the results of tariffication of previously 
applicable quotas on certain agricultural products unde r Section 22 of the U.S. trade laws (7 U.S.C. 
§ 624), and tariff rate quotas on unmanufactured tob acco established in October 1995.  Under the 
2004 Agreement, the United States liberalized access to its market by granting zero in-quota tariff 
rates to a specified portion of Israeli imports of so me of these products.  For its part, Israel granted 
additional access to its market for certain U.S. agricultural products ( e.g., wine, almonds and certain 
cheeses) under one of three different categories: duty-free access, tariff-rate quotas (TRQs) with duty-
free within-quota amounts, or preferential tariffs whic h are set at least 10 perc ent below Israel’s most-
favored nation (MFN) rates. 
(v) United States - Australia Free Trade Agreement 
74. The United States-Australia Free Trade Ag reement (FTA) entered into force on 
January 1, 2005. The FTA is comprehensive and covers industrial and agricultural goods, services, 
financial services, textiles, rules of origin, custom s administration, sanitary and phytosanitary (SPS) 
measures, technical barriers to trade, investment, telecommunications, competition policy, 
government procurement, electronic commerce, in tellectual property rights, labor, environment, 
transparency obligations, and dispute settlement.  Wh en the FTA entered into force, duties on more 
than 99 percent of tariff lines covering industria l and consumer goods were eliminated.  Duties on 
remaining manufactured goods will be phased out over periods of up to 10 years.  Duties on all U.S. 
agricultural exports to Australia were  eliminated immediately upon entr y into force of the Agreement.  
U.S. duties are maintained on Australian sugar and certain dairy products.  In addition, for certain 
products imported from Australia, including beef, dair y, cotton, peanuts and certain horticultural 
products, the Agreement includes other mechanisms , such as preferential tariff-rate quotas and 
safeguards. 
75. Increased access to Australia’s market under the FTA is already boosting trade in both goods 
and services, which will improve employment opportunities in both countries.  During the first year of 
the FTA, trade between the United States and Aust ralia increased, with U.S. goods exports to 
Australia up 11 percent over 2004.  Australia, the United States = 14th largest export market in 2004, 
purchased $14.2 billion in goods from the U.S., an 8.7% increase over the previous year, and United States WT/TPR/G/160 
 Page 21 
 
 
 $6.9 billion worth of U.S. private commercial services, a 13.2% rise over 2003 levels.  As the 30th 
largest importer to the U.S., Australia shipped goods  worth $7.5 billion in 2 004, 17.6% more than the 
previous year, and sold U.S. customers services wort h $3.9 billion, a value 19.8% higher than 2003.  
Agricultural exports to the U.S. totaled $2.5 billio n in 2004.  The stock of U.S. investment in 
Australia was $48.9 billion in 2003.  Australia’s FDI in the United States rose 12.6% in 2004 to 
$28.1 billion.  Sales of services in Australia by ma jority U.S.-owned affiliates were $18.7 billion in 
2003 (latest data available), while sales of services in  the United States by majority Australia-owned 
firms were $11.0 billion.  The FTA will encourage additional foreign investment flows between the 
United States and Australia, and streamline mutual access in intellectual property, services, 
government procurement, and electronic commerce. 
(vi) United States - Morocco Free Trade Agreement 
76. The U.S.-Morocco FTA entere d into force on January 1, 2006.  This comprehensive 
agreement covers agricultural a nd industrial goods, services, financial services, telecommunications, 
electronic commerce, textiles, government procurem ent, rules of origin, customs administration, 
intellectual property rights protection, labor, envi ronment, transparency obligations, and dispute 
settlement.  By the completion of the 18-year implementation period, the agreement will eliminate 
tariffs on substantially all bilateral trade.  Both c ountries also agreed to substantial improvements in 
services market access. 
77. Morocco was the United States = 80th largest import supplier in 2004, shipping $515 million 
in goods to the United States, a 33.8 percent in crease from 2003.  U.S. imports of agricultural 
products from Morocco totaled $68 m illion in 2004.  Morocco ranked 71st on the list of U.S. export 
markets in 2004, purchasing $526 million in goods , up 12.2 percent ($57 million) from 2003.  U.S. 
exports of agricultural products to Morocco totale d $169 million in 2004.  The stock of U.S. foreign 
direct investment (FDI) in Morocco was $306 million in 2004, a 0.3 percent decrease from 2003. 
(vii) United States – Bahrain Free Trade Agreement 
78. On May 21, 2003, the United States and Bahrai n announced their intention to negotiate a Free 
Trade Agreement (FTA).  After four months of  negotiations, the completed FTA was signed on 
September 14, 2004.  Bahrain’s Parliament passed and the King of Bahrain ratified the Agreement in 
July 2005.  The U.S. Congress enacted legislation approving and implementing the Agreement in December 2005, and the President signed the legi slation on January 11, 2006.  The Agreement is 
expected to enter into force in 2006. 
79. U.S. exports to Bahrain declined 40.6% fro m 2003 levels to $302 million, making it the 88
th 
largest goods export market for the United States.  Bahrain ranked 89th on the list of U.S. import 
suppliers in 2004, shippi ng goods valued at $405 million, a 7.1% increase over 2003.  The stock of 
U.S. foreign direct investment (FDI) in Bahrai n rose 24.8 percent from 2003 levels to $176 million in 
2004. 
(viii) United States – Thailand Free Trade Negotiations 
80. In October 2003, President Bush announced his intent to enter into FTA negotiations with 
Thailand, reaffirming his commitment under the En terprise for ASEAN Initiative (EAI) to strengthen 
trade ties with countries in the ASEAN region that are actively pursuing economic reforms.  During 
two rounds of FTA negotiations be tween the United States and Thailand in 2004 and four rounds in WT/TPR/G/160 Trade Policy Review 
Page 22 
 
 
2005, good progress was made on the text of all ch apters of the FTA, although substantial work 
remains. 
81. In 2004, U.S. goods exports to Thailand increas ed 9.1% to $6.4 billion, making Thailand the 
United States’ 23rd largest goods export market.  In addition, U.S. exports of private commercial 
services (i.e., excluding military and government) to Thailand were $1.1 billion in 2004, 5.8% ($62 
million) more than 2003.  As the United States = 16th largest supplier of goods imports in 2004, 
Thailand shipped $17.6 million dolla rs in goods, including agricultural products worth $1.1 billion.  
Total goods imports from Thailand rose 15.8% from 2003 levels.  U.S. imports of private commercial 
services (i.e., excluding military and government) were $903 million in 2004, up 25.8% over 2003.  
U.S. foreign direct investment (FDI) in Tha iland (stock) was $7.7 billion in 2004, a 9.1 percent 
increase from 2003. 
(ix) United States – Panama Free Trade Agreement 
82. In April 2004, the United States and Panama began negotiating a free trade agreement (FTA).  
U.S. and Panamanian negotiators continue to work through issues toward an FTA.  Negotiations have 
proceeded through nine rounds, the most recent of wh ich concluded in January 2006.  A bilateral FTA 
with Panama would be a natural extension of an already largely open trade and investment 
relationship.  Panama is unique in Latin Ameri ca, and is like the United States, in that it is 
predominantly a services-based economy, as services  represent about 80% of Panama’s GDP.  
Following the implementation of the CAFTA-DR, a bilateral FTA with Pana ma could further boost 
momentum for lowering trade and investment barriers throughout the region. 
83. U.S. goods exports to Panama, the United States’ 48th largest goods export market, were 
$1.8 billion in 2004, down 0.7% from 2003.  Mean while, Panama supplied $316 million in goods to 
the United States a 4.8 percent increase over 2003. Panama was the United States = 99th largest 
supplier of goods imports in 2004.  U.S. foreign direct investment (FDI) in Panama (stock) was 
$5.9 billion in 2004, up 6.0 percent from 2003.  Pa nama FDI in the United States (stock) was 
$10.7 billion in 2004, up 16.3% from 2003. 
(x) United States – Oman Free Trade Agreement 
84. On November 15, 2004, the Administration notified Congressional leaders of the 
United States’ intent to negotiate a Free Trade Ag reement (FTA) with Oman.  After seven months of 
negotiations, the completed FTA was si gned on January 19, 2006.  Ranking 83rd on the list of U.S. 
export markets, Oman purchased $330 million in goods  from the United States in 2004, up 2.4% from 
the previous year.  The United States imported $418 million from Oman, the 87th largest goods 
supplier to the United States, in 2004, a 39.8% decr ease from 2003.  U.S. foreign direct investment 
(FDI) in Oman (stock) was $438 million in 2004, up 22.4% from 2003. 
(xi) United States – United Arab Emirates Free Trade Agreement 
85. After consulting with Congress in Septembe r 2004, USTR announced on November 15, 2004 
the United States’ intent to negotiate a Free Trade Agreement (FTA) with the United Arab Emirates.  
Negotiations are ongoing and bega n in March 2005.  In 2004, the United Arab Emirates, the 
United States’ 29th largest goods export market, imported $4. 1 billion in goods, an increase of 16.5% 
over 2003.  Of that total, agricultural pr oducts amounted to $336 million.  Ranking 68th on the list of 
U.S. import suppliers, the UAE sold the United States  $1.1 billion in goods in 2004, a 1.3 percent rise 
over 2003 levels.  U.S. Foreign Direct Investment in  the UAE rose 17.5% in 2004 to a stock valued at United States WT/TPR/G/160 
 Page 23 
 
 
 $2.4 billion.  Meanwhile, UAE FDI in the United St ates declined 46.7% to a stock of $24 million 
during the same period. 
(4) TRADE -RELATED CAPACITY BUILDING INITIATIVES  
86. Trade Capacity Building (TCB) is a critical pa rt of the United States’ strategy to enable 
developing countries to negotiate and implem ent market-opening and reform-oriented trade 
agreements.  It is important to improve the li nkage between trade and development by providing 
developing countries with the tools to maximize tr ade opportunities.  “As partners with developing 
countries, and particularly the least developed, we share the goal of reducing poverty and building 
their capacity for trade,” said U.S. Trade Repres entative Rob Portman in his opening speech to the 
December 2005 WTO Ministerial in Hong Kong. 
87. The United States currently is the largest singl e-country provider of trade related assistance, 
which includes trade-related physical infrastructure assistance.  Total U. S. funding for TCB activities 
in FY2005 was $1.34 billion, up 46 percent fro m $921 million in FY2004 (more than doubling since 
FY2001).  In 2005, TCB was distributed as follows: 
• Asia:  $144 million, up 8.6 pe rcent from FY2004 ($133 million). 
• Central and Eastern Europe:   $73 million,  up 1.4 percent from FY2004 ($72 million). 
• Former Soviet Republics:  $80 million, up 27 percent from FY2004 ($63 million). 
• Latin America and Caribbean:  $523 million,  up 124 percent from FY2004 ($233 million). 
• Middle East and North Africa: $244 million, up 30 percent from FY2004 ($187 million). 
• Sub-Saharan Africa:  $199 million, up  10 percent from FY2004 ($181 million). 
In anticipation of a successful WTO Doha Develo pment Round, the United States has been, and will 
continue to be, an active participant in the Aid fo r Trade Initiative that aims to help the least trade 
active countries participate in the global trading system. 
88. The United States looks forward to contributing to the Aid for Trade discussion, as it does to 
the Integrated Framework Task Force.  In D ecember 2005, the U.S. Trade Representative announced 
that the United States will more than double its grant contributions to Aid for Trade, from $1.3 billion 
in 2005 growing to $2.7 billion annually by 2010, su bject to developing countries prioritizing trade in 
their development plans and the President’s bu dget request being approved.  U.S. cumulative 
spending in 2001-2005 tota led over $4.2 billion in grants and it is likely, given recent growth in U.S. 
trade-related assistance, that cumulative spending wi ll more than double over the next five years. 
89. The United States is a strong supporter of the Inte grated Framework (IF), and for most of the 
period under review, served as one of two bilateral donor coordinators in the Integrated Framework 
Working Group (IFWG).  As bilateral donor coordi nator in the IFWG, the United States spearheaded 
efforts to improve the IF process so that delivery of  assistance flows even more smoothly.  The United 
States is active in the recently established task fo rce which will examine three elements to accelerate 
the IF process: (1) increases in  resources for follow-up; (2) building the in-country capacity of 
countries in order to benefit from the IF; and (3) IF governance – to improve monitoring and 
dissemination of best practices. 
90. In September 2005, the United States initiated and organized an IF simulation exercise in 
Addis Ababa, Ethiopia to advance the objectives of  facilitating practical problem-solving, promoting 
the dissemination of best practices, and helping main tain the momentum of the IF in each country.  
Public and private sector representatives from 17 LDCs, 12 donor countries, and five multinational WT/TPR/G/160 Trade Policy Review 
Page 24 
 
 
corporations came together to identify best prac tices and concrete steps for strengthening the IF 
process in each participating country.  The United States provided financial support for this event, as 
did the United Kingdom, Norway, and Denmark.  In addition, the USAID missions in Mali and 
Mozambique are currently serving as IF donor facilitators  in the field, and several other missions have 
offered to assume this role in other IF countries.  The United States has contributed funds for the past 
few years to the Integrated Framework Trust Fund  to finance Diagnostic Trade Integration Studies 
(DTIS) and Window II projects.  Further, USAID’s bilateral assistance to LDC participants supports 
initiatives both to integrate trade into national ec onomic and development strategies and to address 
high priority “behind the border ” capacity building needs designed to  accelerate integration into the 
global trading system.  The total FY2005 bilateral TCB assistance was $133 million to the IF 
countries.  Many of these countries also benefit fro m part of the $136 million in regional funding. 
91. The United States directly supports the WTO’s trade-related technical assistance.  In May 
2005, the U.S. Trade Representative announced that the United States would contribute approximately 
$1 million for trade-related assistance to the WTO.   The latest contribution brought total U.S. 
contributions to WTO Doha Development Agenda‘s  Global Trust Fund to almost $5 million since the 
launch of negotiations.  In add ition, the United States has provided developing countries access to 
three tools provided by the WTO/UNCTAD’s Internati onal Trade Centre to help them to participate 
in the negotiations:  Market Access Map, Product Map, and Trade Map. 
92. The United States spent $367 million in FY2005 on trade facilitation activities, up from 
$278 million in FY2004.  In doing so, the United States has looked to support the WTO discussions 
by providing assistance to developing countries that seek help in responding that tracks the regulatory 
proposals being made by members in the Negotia ting Group on Trade Facilitation.  One area of 
particular development potential for developing co untries is services. According to the World Bank, 
the services industry represented 54 percent of the GDP in low and middle income countries in 2000, 
up from 46 percent in 1990.  To support requests for support in this area, the United States has reached an agreement with the WTO/UNCTAD’s Inte rnational Trade Centre in Geneva extending a 
grant that would fund services capacity assessments in  four countries: Uganda, Zambia, Nigeria, and 
Tunisia.  The United States previously funded services capacity assessments for Bangladesh, Indonesia, Kenya, and Rwanda.  In FY2005, the U. S. Government spent $26 million on activities that 
support services trade development. 
93. In 2005, the United States continued to fully m obilize its development agencies to address the 
obstacles faced by West African countries — part icularly Benin, Burkina Faso, Chad, Mali and 
Senegal — in the cotton sector.  The Millennium Challenge Corporation (MCC), USAID, USDA, and the United States Trade and Development Agency (USTDA) all continued work on a coherent long-term development program  based on the priorities of the West Africans.  The MCC provides key 
countries like Benin, Burkina Faso, Mali and Senegal with access to our largest, most flexible and 
most sought-after grant facility.  In November 2005, the United States launched the West Africa 
Cotton Improvement Program (WACIP)  to help improve production, transformation, and marketing 
of cotton.  The United States continues to coor dinate with the WTO, World Bank, the African 
Development Bank, and others as part of the multila teral effort to address the development aspects of 
cotton. 
94. The United States also supports countries that have acceded or are in the process of acceding 
to the WTO.  For example, USAID has provided WTO accession and implementation services to 
Nepal (which officially became  a WTO member in 2003), Cape Ve rde, Ethiopia, Ukraine and a 
number of other countries in Eastern Europe and the fo rmer Soviet Union.  In 2005, the United States 
also provided accession support to Algeria,  Lebanon, Yemen, Iraq and Afghanistan. United States WT/TPR/G/160 
 Page 25 
 
 
 95. Although the WTO and the Integrated Framework are priorities, they are only part of the U.S. 
TCB effort.  In order to help our FTA partners pa rticipate in negotiations, implement the rules, and 
benefit over the long-term, USTR has created TCB working groups in free trade negotiations with 
developing countries.  Trade capacity building is a fundamental feature of bilateral cooperation in 
support of the completed Dominican Republic-Central America-United States Free Trade Agreement 
(CAFTA-DR) and the U.S. – Peru Trade Prom otion Agreement, and our planned free trade 
agreements with the SACU countries (for Botswa na, Lesotho, Namibia, and Swaziland), with the 
Andean TPA negotiating countries (Colombia and Ecuador, as well as FTA observer Bolivia), with 
Panama, and with Thailand. 
96. Finally, the Millennium Challenge Corporati on (MCC), established by the United States in 
2004, provides a significant new source of bilateral assistance for trade capaci ty building efforts by 
eligible countries that can provide meaningful support for key issues in the Doha negotiations.  By giving eligible countries the opp ortunity to identify their own priorities and develop their own 
proposals, MCC enables countries to address long -term development obstacles and tap into the 
potential for trade to spur economic growth and reduce poverty. 
(5) L
EGISLATIVE AGENDA  
97. President Bush’s legislative agenda for inte rnational trade demonstrates his continued 
commitment to opening global markets, which will lead to lower prices, more employment 
opportunities, and greater worldwide choices for consumers, farmers, manufacturers, service providers, and other industries.  The Bush Administ ration will continue to work in close partnership 
with the Congress to maintain Am erican leadership in trade. 
98. Consultations with the Congress enabled USTR to conclude free trade negotiations with 
Australia, Bahrain, Central America and the Dominican Republic, and the Kingdom of Morocco. 
Congress enacted legislation approving and implem enting these agreements with strong bipartisan 
support.  USTR also worked with the Congress to successfully implement enhancements to the 
African Growth and Opportunity Act.  USTR also  worked closely with Congress on the successful 
conclusion of negotiations on agreem ents with Colombia, Oman, and Peru.  The President signed the 
agreement with Oman on January 19, 2006 and announ ced his intention to enter into an agreement 
with Peru on January 6. 
99. USTR continues its consultations with  the Congress on negotiations on the Doha 
Development Agenda, and ongoing FTA negotiations , including those with Panama, Colombia, 
Ecuador, Thailand, the United Arab Emirates (UAE),  the Southern African Customs Union (SACU) 
and the Free Trade Area of the Americas (FTAA).  The President announced his intention to enter 
into FTA negotiations with Korea on February 2, 2006. 
100. A priority of the President’s legislative trade agenda is to work with the Congress to comply 
with WTO rulings.  In the period under review, Cong ress repealed the foreign sales corporation/extra-
territorial income (FSC/ETI) tax regime; 
 the Continued Dumping and Subsidies Offset Act (the 
"Byrd Amendment");  the 1916 antidumping act;  a nd the Upland Cotton User Marketing Certificate 
Program (known as “Step-2”). 
(6) LABOR ISSUES  
101. The trade policy agenda of the United States includes a strong commitment to protecting the 
rights of workers both in America and in our tradin g partners, and ensuring that American workers 
remain the most competitive, best trained workfor ce in the world.  Expanded trade benefits all WT/TPR/G/160 Trade Policy Review 
Page 26 
 
 
Americans through lower prices and greater choices in products available to consumers.  Many 
American workers benefit from expanded employment  opportunities created by trade liberalization.  
The Bush Administration has consistently suppor ted workers through both trade negotiations and the 
use of safeguard trade laws to ensure a level intern ational playing field.  A concerted focus on worker 
training and education policies will continue to ensu re that the American workforce can compete with 
anyone.  For workers displaced by trade, the Tr ade Adjustment Assistance (TAA) Reform Act of 
2002 [Title XXI of the Trade Act of 2002] modifies and expands the TAA program.  TAA provides transitional assistance to workers adversely aff ected by foreign trade through the provision of 
re-employment services, including skills training for displaced workers, income support while in 
training and job search and relocation assistance.  Im portant changes to the program introduced in 
2002 include expanded eligibility to more worker gro ups, increased benefits and tax credits for health 
insurance coverage assistance.  In pursuing trade liberalization, we rely on the congressional guidance 
contained in the Bipartisan Trade Promotion Author ity Act of 2002 (“TPA”) to bring the benefits of 
trade and open markets to America and the rest of the world. During this past year, USTR continued 
to consult with Congress on the labor provisions of each agreement throughout the negotiations. 
USTR also continued to work cooperatively with other U.S. agencies in multilateral, regional and 
bilateral fora to promote respect for core labor sta ndards, including the abolition of the worst forms of 
child labor, in pursuing labor provisions in numerous trade agreements consistent with the bipartisan 
guidance contained in the Trade Act of 2002. 
102. In pursuing free trade agreement negotiations, the Administration relies on the congressional 
guidance contained in the Bipartisan Trade Promo tion Authority Act of 2002 (“TPA”) to include in 
our trade agreements obligations to ensure our tradin g partners enforce their labor laws and protect the 
rights of workers.  During this past year, USTR  continued to consult with Congress on the labor 
provisions of each agreement throughout the ne gotiations.  USTR also continued to work 
cooperatively with other U.S. agencies in multilateral,  regional and bilateral fo ra to promote respect 
for core labor standards, including the a bolition of the worst forms of child labor. 
103. The labor-related overall U.S. trade negotiating obj ectives are threefold.  The first objective is 
to promote respect for worker rights and the rights of  children consistent with the core labor standards 
of the International Labor Organization (ILO).  TPA de fines core labor standards as:  (1) the right of 
association;  (2) the right to organize and bargain collectively;  (3) a prohibition on the use of any 
form of forced or compulsory labor;  (4) a minimum age for the employment of children;  and (5) 
acceptable conditions of work with respect to minimum wages, hours of work, and occupational 
safety and health.  The second objective is to strive to ensure that parties to trade agreements do not 
weaken or reduce the protections of domestic labor laws as an encouragement for trade.  The third 
objective is to promote the universal ratification of, and full compliance with, ILO Convention 182 – 
which the United States has ratified – concerning the elimination of the worst forms of child labor. 
104. The principal trade negotiating objectives in TPA include, most importantly for labor, the 
provision that a party to a trade agreement with th e United States should not fail to effectively enforce 
its labor laws in a manner affecting trade.  TPA  recognizes that the United States and its trading 
partners retain the sovereign right  to establish domestic labor laws , and to exercise discretion with 
respect to regulatory and compliance matters, and to make resource allocation decisions with respect 
to labor law enforcement.  To strengthen the capacity  of our trading partners to promote respect for 
core labor standards is an additional principal negot iating objective, as is to ensure that labor, health 
or safety policies and practices of our trading partne rs do not arbitrarily or unjustifiably discriminate 
against American exports or serve as disguised trad e barriers.  A final principal negotiating objective 
is to seek commitments by parties to trade agreements  to vigorously enforce their laws prohibiting the 
worst forms of child labor. United States WT/TPR/G/160 
 Page 27 
 
 
 105. In addition to seeking greater cooperation betw een the WTO and the ILO, other labor-related 
priorities in TPA include the establishment of consultative mechanisms among parties to trade 
agreements to strengthen their capacity to promot e respect for core labor standards and compliance 
with ILO Convention 182.  The Department of La bor is charged with cons ulting with any country 
seeking a trade agreement with the United States concerning that country’s labor laws, and providing 
technical assistance if needed.  Finally, TPA manda tes a series of labor-related reviews and reports to 
Congress in connection with the negotiation of new tr ade agreements.  These include an employment 
impact review of future trade agreements, the pr ocedures for which are modelled after the Executive 
Order establishing environm ental impact reviews of trade agreements.  A meaningful labor rights 
report, and a report describing the extent to whic h there are laws governing exploitative child labor, 
are also required for each of the countries with which we are negotiating. 
106. WTO ministers renewed their commitment to the observance of internationally recognized 
core labor standards in the 2001 Doha Ministerial Declar ation.  In that spirit, we are including, in this 
statement, relevant information on U.S. labor la w and practice as it relates to fundamental workers' 
rights. 
United States Labor Law and Practice 
107. U.S. labor law is consistent with the principles underlying fundamental workers' rights.  For 
example, the U.S. Constitution assures the right of freedom of association.  National legislation, 
including the National Labor Relations Act (NLR A) of 1935 and the Railway Labor Act of 1926, 
provides the right to organize and bargain collec tively.  Section 7 of the NLRA guarantees that 
"[e]mployees shall have the right to self organization,  to form, join or assist labor organizations, to 
bargain collectively through representatives of their own choosing. ..." 
108. The Thirteenth Amendment of the United Stat es Constitution, ratified in 1865, provides that 
"[n]either slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted, shall exist within th e United States, or any place subject to their 
jurisdiction."  Implementing federal legisla tion prohibits forced or compulsory labor. 
109. The United States applies and seeks to enforce prohibitions against ha rmful child labor.  
The United States has also ratified the ILO Conve ntion 182 Concerning the Worst Forms of Child 
Labor (1999).  The Fair Labor Standards Act prohi bits "oppressive child labor" and the interstate 
transportation of products made w ith such labor.  Similarly, U.S. laws - both Federal and State - 
prohibit discrimination with respect to occupati on and employment on the grounds of race, creed, 
national origin, or gender.  Such laws are vigorously  enforced in both the public and private sectors to 
assure non-discrimination at work. 
(7) E
NVIRONMENTAL ISSUES  
110. The United States believes that international tr ade, complemented by appropriate national 
environmental policies, can make an important co ntribution to environmental protection.  Such 
policies can serve this purpose by reducing market dist ortions that interfere with cost internalization; 
helping governments generate the resources that they need to address environmental challenges;  and 
creating markets for environmental goods, services, and technologies. 
111. As provided for in the Trade Act of 2002, and consistent with Executive Order 13141 (1999) 
and its implementing guidelines, the Administrati on conducts environmental reviews of ongoing trade 
negotiations.  These reviews are the product of rigorous interagency consultations and are an 
increasingly important dimension of trade policy fo rmulation.  The reviews identify environmental WT/TPR/G/160 Trade Policy Review 
Page 28 
 
 
issues to be taken into account during trade nego tiations and inform the public about trade and 
environment interactions in the context of specifi c negotiations.  In 2005, the program of work on 
reviews included preparation and release of interim reviews for the United States-Andean, United States-Oman, United States-UAE  and United States-Thailand FTAs; completion of a final 
review for the United States-DR-CAFTA;  and si gnificant progress on the interim review for the 
WTO Doha Round.  USTR and the Council on Envir onmental Quality (CEQ) also continued their 
joint effort to assess cumulative experiences with envi ronmental reviews of trade agreements in order 
to provide a basis for gauging success. 
112. The United States continues to take an ac tive role in the WTO Committee on Trade and 
Environment (CTE) to put into effect our commit ment to the simultaneous promotion of expanded 
trade, environmental improvement, a nd economic growth and development. 
113. The Congress specified certain objectives with resp ect to trade and environment in the Trade 
Act of 2002, and USTR took these into account in  coordinating interagency development of 
negotiating positions.  Also during 2005, USTR  consulted closely with Congress on the 
environmental provisions of each FTA throughout the negotiations. 
114. In addition, USTR has participated both in multilateral and regional economic fora and in 
international environmental agreements, in conjunc tion with other U.S. agencies.  USTR also has 
worked bilaterally with U.S. trading partners to  avert or minimize potential trade frictions arising 
from foreign and U.S. environmental regulations. 
(8) A
GRICULTURAL ISSUES  
115. Domestic agricultural programs are governed  until 2008 by the Farm Security and Rural 
Investment Act of 2002 (commonly referred to as the 2002 Farm Bill), signed into law on May 13, 
2002.  Its provisions support the production of a re liable, safe, and affordable supply of food and 
fiber;  promote stewardship of agricultural land and water resources;  facilitate access to American 
farm products at home and abroad;  encourage con tinued economic and infrastructure development in 
rural America;  and ensure continued research to ma intain an efficient and innovative agricultural and 
food sector. 
116. The Commodity Credit Corporation (CCC) is the entity responsible for managing U.S. farm 
programs through loans, purchases, payments, and ot her operations.  CCC total net direct payments in 
2003 were $12.9 billion, a 35% declin e from the average over 1999 and 2000.3  These net direct 
payments are notified as a mix of blue and green box measures.  CCC Commodity loan program net 
outlays–a significant component of U.S. amber box s upport–declined 32% over this  period.  Trends in 
outlays, as well as the nature of new programs, suggest  that the United States will continue to meet its 
Agreement on Agriculture domestic support obligations .  If the Secretary of Agriculture determines 
that the AMS ceiling will be exceeded, the 2002 Farm Bill has a provision by which the Secretary shall, to the maximum extent practicable, adjust expenditures to avoid exceeding allowable levels.  
Before making any adjustments, the Secretary is  required to submit a report to Congress on the 
adjustments to be made. 
117. In July 2005, the United States announced a number  of measures it was taking to comply with 
a WTO ruling in United States – Subsidies on Upland Cotton , a dispute with Brazil regarding certain 
U.S. agricultural programs primarily benefiting co tton.  Immediately following these announcements, 
the United States ceased accepting applications fo r a long-term export credit guarantee program at 
                                                     
 
3 The average of 1999 and 2000 is used here because approximately $5 billion in payments made 
during the 1999 crop year were counted as CCC outlays for 2000. United States WT/TPR/G/160 
 Page 29 
 
 
 issue in the dispute and adopted a “risk-based” fee structure for two shorter-term export credit 
guarantee programs.  On February 8, 2006, the Presi dent signed legislation to repeal the Upland 
Cotton User Marketing Certificate Program (known as  “Step-2”), effective August 1, 2006.  Payments 
under this program totalled $363 million in fiscal year 2004 and $582 million for fiscal year 2005.  
Payments are estimated at $397 million for fiscal year 2006. 
IV. OPENNESS AND ACCOUNTABILITY:  BUILDING SUPPORT FOR TRADE 
118. Building support for trade among our diverse do mestic constituencies and the international 
community is one of the most important challe nges the WTO and its members face.  Improving the 
transparency and openness of both the WTO and our individual domestic processes, and ensuring that 
we hear the concerns of stakeholders are among th e keys to meeting this challenge.  These issues are 
of great importance in the United States and are f undamental to the way our government operates and 
interacts with the American citizenry.  We thi nk it important that other WTO Members know more 
about how our system works, as they consider ho w best to build support for trade in their own 
countries and as we collectively explore how to address the same issues for the WTO. 
The U.S. System 
119. Consulting with those interested in and affected by issues is an important part of any 
government’s responsibility, and is a hallmark of th e U.S. system.  Advice from stakeholders is both a 
critical and integral part of the trade policy pro cess.  The United States government consults with 
interested parties on a regular basis through a variet y of mechanisms, both formal and informal.  U.S. 
Government agencies regularly solicit public comment on trade issues. 
Advisory Committee Process 
120. The U.S. Congress established the private sector  advisory committee system in 1974 to ensure 
that U.S. trade policy and trade negotiation obj ectives adequately reflect U.S. commercial and 
economic interests.  Congress expanded and enhanced the role and objectives of this system in three 
subsequent Trade Acts.  The system is arranged in  three tiers: the President’s Advisory Committee for 
Trade Policy and Negotiations (ACTPN);  four polic y advisory committees dealing with environment, 
labor, agriculture, and intergovernmental issues;  and 22 technical and sectoral advisory committees in 
the areas of industry and agriculture.  These comm ittees are managed jointly by the U.S. Trade 
Representative and the Secretaries of Commerce, Ag riculture, and Labor.  Additional information on 
the advisory committee can be found on the US TR website (http://www.ustr.gov/outreach/advise. 
shtml). 
121. The President appoints up to 45 ACTPN member s for two-year terms; membership must 
broadly represent key economic sectors affected by trade.  The committee considers trade policy 
issues in the context of the overall national inter est.  Representatives are drawn from the agriculture, 
business, labor, environmental, and consumer communities. 
122. The policy advisory committees are the Inte rgovernmental Policy Advisory Committee 
(IGPAC), Agricultural Policy Advisory Committee (APAC), Labor Advisory Committee (LAC), and 
Trade and Environment Policy Advisory Committee (TEPAC).  Each committee provides advice based upon the perspective of its specific sector or area. 
123. In 2004, the number of industry committees at the technical level was streamlined and 
consolidated to better reflect the composition of the U.S. economy, in response to recommendations 
by the U.S. Government Accountability Office (GAO).  The system currently consists of 27 advisory WT/TPR/G/160 Trade Policy Review 
Page 30 
 
 
committees. Currently, there are approximately 700 a dvisors and membership can grow to a total of 
up to 1,000 advisors.  Recommendations for candida tes for committee membersh ip are collected from 
a number of sources, including Members of Congress,  associations and organizations, publications, 
other federal agencies, and individuals who have dem onstrated an interest or expertise in U.S. trade 
policy. Membership selection is based on qualifica tions, geography, and the needs of the specific 
committee.  Members pay for their own travel and other related expenses. 
124. Private sector advice is both a critical and inte gral part of the trade policy process. USTR 
maintains an ongoing dialogue with interested private sector parties on trade agenda issues.  The advisory committee system is unique since the committees meet on a regular basis and receive 
sensitive information about ongoing trade nego tiations and other trade policy issues and 
developments. Committee members are required to have a security clearance. 
125. The Trade Act of 2002 requires these committee s to prepare reports on proposed trade 
agreements subject to Trade Promotion Authority (TPA) for the USTR, the President, and the Congress, assessing the expected effects of the trad e agreement on the particular sectors.  These 
reports are made public on USTR 's website at www.ustr.gov. 
V. LOOKING FORWARD 
126. Pursuit of trade liberalization continues to be at the forefront of U.S. international economic 
policy.  The powerful and positive impact of the multila teral trading system over the past half century 
cannot be overstated.  The Doha Development Ag enda of the WTO continues to hold the greatest 
potential for catalyzing global economic growth through further trade liberalization.  As has always 
been true of the GATT/WTO, the extent of liberaliz ation – and to a large degree the distribution of the 
benefits of that liberalization – depends on the participation by each of the WTO Members.  In the 
DDA, the United States will continue to work toward s an ambitious conclusion to the Round in order 
to reduce poverty and raise living standards across the globe.  Expanding market access in the three 
key sectors of the international economy:  industr ial and consumer goods, ag ricultural products and 
services will yield the greatest impact on trade flows, thereby reducing poverty and raising living 
standards.  An ambitious result in market access w ill be the greatest legacy of our work in the DDA. 
127. The President’s 2006 Trade Agenda also calls for advancing free trade through regional and 
bilateral agreements with our trading partners.  Ou r aim in all of the negotiations for new agreements 
is comprehensive trade coverage, innovative and strengthened disciplines on trade and consistency 
with our WTO obligations. 
128. The United States will encourage increased trad e with many developing countries through our 
preferential trade measures, such as the Generalized System of Preferences, the African Growth and 
Opportunity Act, the Andean Trade Promotion a nd Drug Eradication Act, and the Caribbean Basin 
Economic Recovery Act.  The United States will al so continue its commitment to increasing trade 
capacity in developing countries. 
129. By undertaking these various elements – forg ing global, regional, and bilateral trade 
agreements;  encouraging developing countries’ mu ltilateral integration;  building support for open 
trade;  encouraging sustainable development and core labor standards;  and fostering greater transparency – the United States will continue to play  its traditional leadership role in promoting trade 
liberalization and developing a trading system of benefit to all. United States WT/TPR/G/160 
 Page 31 
 
 
 ANNEX 1 
U.S. SUBMISSIONS TO THE WTO IN SUPPORT  
OF THE DOHA DEVELOPMENT AGENDA  
(WTO Document Symbol in Parentheses)  
 
Committee on Agriculture, Special Session  
 
• Export Competition, Market Access and Domestic Support (JOB(02)/122)  
• Joint EC-US Paper on Agriculture (JOB(03)/157)  
• Proposal for Tariff Rate Quota Reform (G/AG/NG/W/58)  
• Proposal for Comprehensive Long-Term Ag ricultural Trade Reform (G/AG/NG/W/15)  
• Note on Domestic Support Reform (G/AG/NG/W/16)  
 
Council on Trade in Services, Special Session  
 
• Framework for Negotiation (S/CSS/W/4)  
• Proposals for Negotiation (JOB(00)/8376)  
• Accounting Services (S/CSS/W/20)  
• Audiovisual and Related Services (S/CSS/W/21)  
• Distribution Services (S/CSS/W/22)  
• Higher (Tertiary) Education, Adult Education and Training (S/CSS/W/23)  
• Energy Services (S/CSS/W/24)  
• Environmental Services (S/CSS/W/25)  
• Express Delivery Services (S/CSS/W/26)  
• Financial Services (S/CSS/W/27)  
• Legal Services (S/CSS/W/28)  
• Movement of Natural Persons (S/CSS/W/29)  
• Market Access in Telecommunications and Complementary Services (S/CSS/W/30)  
• Tourism and Hotels (S/CSS/W/31)  
• Transparency in Domestic Regulation (S/CSS/W/102)  
• Advertising and Related Services (S/CSS/W/100)  
• Desirability of a Safeguard Mechanism for Serv ices:  Promoting Liberalization of Trade in 
 Services (S/WPGR/W/37)  
• Modalities for the Special Treatment For Least-Developed Country Members in the 
 Negotiations on Trade In Services – JOB(03)/133  
• U.S. Government Points of Contact in Least-Developed Country Members (JOB (03)/33)  
• Small and Medium Sized Enterprises (TN/S/W/5)  
• Initial Offer (TN/S/O/USA)  
• An Assessment of Services Trade and Liberalization in the United States and Developing 
 Economies (TN/S/W/12)  
• Joint Statement on Market Access in Services (JOB(04)/176)  
• U.S. Proposal for Transparency Disciplines  in  Domestic Regulation:  Building on Existing 
 International Disciplines and Proposals (JOB(04)/128)  
• Classification in the Telecommunications Sector under the WTO-GATS Framework 
 (TN/S/W/35 and S/CSC/W/45)  
• Guidelines for Scheduling Comm itments Concerning Postal and Courier Services, including 
 Express Delivery (TN/S/W/30)  
• Joint Statement on Liberalization of Logistics Services (TN/S/W/34)  WT/TPR/G/160 Trade Policy Review 
Page 32 
 
 
• Joint Statement on Legal Services (TN/S/W/37 and S/CSC/W/46)  
• Legal Services – Objectives for Further Libe ralisation and Limitations to be Removed 
 (JOB(05)/276)  
• Joint Statement on Liberalization of Cons truction and Related Engineering Services 
 (JOB(05)/130)  
• Joint Statement on Liberalization of  Financial Services (JOB(05)/17)  
• Working Toward a Productive Information Excha nge (in the Working Party on GATS Rules) 
 (JOB(05)/5) 
 Negotiating Group on Market Access
 
 
• Tariffs & Trade Data Needs Assessment (TN/MA/W/2)  
• Negotiations on Environmental G oods (TN/MA/W/3 and TN/TE/W/8)  
• Modalities Proposal (TN/MA/W/18)  
• Proposal on Modalities for Addressing Non-Tari ff Barriers (NTBs) (TN/MA/W/18/Add.1)  
• Revenue Implications of Trade Liberalization (TN/MA/W/18/Add.2)  
• Vertical NTB Modality (TN/MA/W/18/Add.3)  
• Contribution on an Environmental Goods M odality (TN/TE/W/38) & (TN/MA/W/18/Add.5)  
• Liberalizing Trade in Environmental Goods (TN/MA/W/3, TN/MA/W/18/Add.4, Add.5, and 
 Add.7)  
• Non-Tariff Barrier Notifications (TN/MA/W/46/Add.8)  
• Non-Tariff Barrier Notifications – Revision (TN/MA/W/46/Add.8/Rev.1)  
• Non-Agricultural Market Access:  Modalities (TN/MA/W/44)  
• Contribution by Canada, European Communities and United States, Non-Agricultural Market 
 Access:  Modalities (JOB(03)/163)  
• Progress Report:  Discussions on Forestry NTBs (TN/MA/W/48/Add.1)  
• Negotiating NTBs Related to Remanufacturi ng and Refurbishing (TN/MA/W/18/Add.11)  
• A View To Harmonize Textile, Apparel,  and Footwear Labeling Requirements 
 (TN/MA/W/18/Add.12)  
• Progress Report: WTO NAMA Discussions on Autos NTBs (TN/MA/W/18/Add.9)  
• Tariff Elimination in the Gems and Jewelry Sector  (TN/MA/W/61)  
• Tariff Liberalization in the Forest Products Sector (TN/MA/W/64)  
• Tariff Elimination in the Electronics/Electrical Sector (TN/MA/W/59)  
• Initial List of Environmental Goods  (TN/MA/W/18/Add.7 or TN/TE/W/52)  
• Treatment of Non Ad Valorem Tec hnical Tariffs (TN/MA/W/18/Add.8)  
• Tariff Liberalization in the Chemicals Sector (TN/MA/W/58)  
• How to Create a Critical Mass Sectoral Initiative (TN/MA/W/55)  
• U.S. Proposal on Negotiating NTBs Related to the Auto Sector (TN/MA/W/18/Add.6)  
• Non-Tariff Barriers Building Codes and the Wood Products Sector (TN/MA/W/48) 
 
Negotiating Group on Rules  
 
• Fisheries Subsidies -- Joint Communication from the United States, Australia, Chile, Ecuador, 
 Iceland, New Zealand, Peru, and the Philippines (TN/RL/W/3)  
• Fisheries Subsidies (TN/RL/W/21)  
• OECD Steel Paper (TN/RL/W/24)  
• Questions on Papers Submitted to Rules Negotiating Group (TN/RL/W/25)  
• Basic Concepts of the Trade Remedies Rules (TN/RL/W/27)  
• Special and Differential Treatment and the Subsidies Agreement (TN/RL/W/33)  United States WT/TPR/G/160 
 Page 33 
 
 
 • Second Set of Questions from the United States on Papers Submitted to the Rules Negotiating 
 Group (TN/RL/W/34)  
• Investigatory Procedures under the Antidumpi ng and Subsidies Agreements (TN/RL/W/35)  
• Communication from the United States Attach ing a Communiqué from the Organization For 
 Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) (TN/RL/W/49)  
• Circumvention (TN/RL/W/50)  
• Replies to Questions Presented to the United States on Submission TN/Rl/W/27 
 (TN/RL/W/53)  
• Third Set of Questions from the United States on Papers Submitted to the Rules Negotiating 
 Group (TN/RL/W/54)  
• Responses by the United States  to Questions from Australia on Investigatory Procedures 
 under the Anti-Dumping and Subsidies Agreements (TN/RL/W/71)  
• Identification of Certain Major Issues under the Anti-Dumping and Subsidies Agreements 
 (TN/RL/W/72)  
• Possible Approaches to Improved Disciplines on Fisheries Subsidies (TN/RL/W/77)  
• Subsidies Disciplines Requiring Clarification and Improvement (TN/RL/W/78)  
• Elements of a Steel Subsidies Agreement  (TN/RL/W/95)  
• Identification of Additional Issues under th e Anti-dumping and Subsidies Agreements 
 (TN/RL/W/98)  
• Fourth Set of Questions from the United States on Papers Submitted to the Rules Negotiating 
 Group (TN/RL/W/103)  
• Further Issues Identified under The Anti-Dum ping And Subsidies Agreements for Discussion 
 by the Negotiating Group on Rules (TN/RL/W/130)  
• Replies to the Questions from India on TN/RL/W/35 (TN/RL/W/147)  
• Three Issues Identified by the United States (TN/RL/W/153)  
• Accrual of Interest (TN/RL/W/168)  
• Additional Views on the Structure of the Fisheries Subsidies Negotiations (TN/RL/W/169)  
• Fisheries Subsidies (TN/RL/W/196) (co-sponsor ed with Brazil, Chile, Colombia, Ecuador, 
 Iceland, New Zealand, Pakistan and Peru)  
• Allocation of Subsidy Benefits over Time (TN/RL/GEN/4)  
• Exchange Rates (TN/RL/W/GEN/5)  
• New Shipper Reviews (TN/RL/GEN/11)  
• Allocation Periods for Subsidy Benefits (TN/RL/GEN/12)  
• Prompt Access to Non-Confidential Information (TN/RL/GEN/13)  
• Conduct of Verifications (TN/RL/GEN/15)  
• All-Others Rate (TN/RL/GEN/16)  
• Expensing Versus Allocating Subsid y Benefits (TN/RL/GEN/17/Rev.1)  
• Preliminary Determinations (TN/RL/GEN/25)  
• Circumvention (TN/RL/GEN/29)  
• Fisheries Subsidies – Programmes for Decommissioning of Vessels and Licence Retirement 
 (TN/RL/GEN/41)  
• Further Submission on When and How to Allocate Subsidy Benefits over Time 
 (TN/RL/GEN/45) 
• Further Comments on Lesser Duty Proposals (TN/RL/GEN/58) 
 
• Causation (TN/RL/GEN/59)  
 
• Submission on Circumvention (TN/RL/GEN/71)  WT/TPR/G/160 Trade Policy Review 
Page 34 
 
 
• Identification of Parties (TN/RL/GEN/89) (co-sponsored with Brazil)  
• Access to Non-Confidential Information (TN/RL/GEN/90)  
• New Shipper Reviews (TN/RL/GEN/91)  
 
Committee on Antidumping Practices  
 
• Proposal for Operationalization of Art. 15 (G/ADP/AHG/W/138)  
• Draft Recommendation on Operationalizing Art. 15 (G/ADP/AHG/W/143)  
• Para. 7.4:  Annual Reviews of th e Antidumping Agreement (G/ADP/W/427)  
 
Committee on Subsidies and Countervailing Measures  
 
• Approval of Qualifying Requests under SCM Article. 27.4, Joint communication from the 
United States, Australia, Canada, the EU, Japan and Switzerland (G/SCM/W/521)  
 
Dispute Settlement Body, Special Session  
 
• Contribution of the United States  to the Improvement of the Dispute Settlement 
 Understanding of the WTO-Related to Transparency (TN/DS/W/13)  
• Negotiations on Improvements And Clarificati ons of the Dispute Settlement Understanding 
 on Improving Flexibility and Member Control in WTO Dispute Settlement (TN/DS/W/28)  
• Further Contribution of The United States to The Improvement of The Dispute Settlement 
 Understanding of the WTO Related to Transparency  (TN/DS/W/46)  
• Negotiations on Improvements and Clarifications of the Dispute Settlement Understanding on 
 Improving Flexibility and Member Control in WTO Dispute Settlement, Joint communication 
 from United States and Chile (TN/DS/W/52)  
• Some Questions for Consideration on Item(f) (TN/DS/W/74)  
• Contribution of the United States on Some Practi cal Considerations in Improving the Dispute 
• Settlement Understanding of the WTO Relate d to Transparency and Open Meetings 
 (TN/DS/W/79)  
• Further Contribution of the United States on Improving Flexibility and Member Control in 
 WTO Dispute Settlement (TN/DS/W/82)  
• Further Contribution of the United States on Improving Flexibility and Member Control in 
 WTO Dispute Settlement, Addendum (TN/DS/W/82/Add.1)  
• Further Contribution of the United States on Improving Flexibility and Member Control in 
 WTO Dispute Settlement, Addendum, Corrigendum (TN/DS/W/82/Add.1/Corr.1)  
 
Trade Facilitation  
 
• Article VIII - Fees and Formalities (G/C/W/384)  
• Article X - Publication and Administration (G/C/W/400)  
• Integrated and Comprehensive Approach to Special and Differential Treatment (G/C/W/451)  
• Communication on Trade Facilitation (JOB(04)/103)  
• Introduction to Proposals by the United States of America (TN/TF/W/11)  
• Advance Binding Rulings (TN/TF/W/12)  
• Proposal on Transparency and Publication (TN/TF/W/13)  
• Communication from the United States (TN/TF/W/14)  
• Express Shipments (TN/TF/W/15)  
• Release of Goods (TN/TF/W/21)  United States WT/TPR/G/160 
 Page 35 
 
 
 • Consularization - Proposal from Uganda and the United States (TN/TF/W/22)  
• Multilateral Mechanism - Proposal from I ndia and the United States (TN/TF/W/57)  
• United States Assistance on Trade Facilitation (TN/TF/W/71)  
 
Committee on Trade and Environment, Regular and Special Session  
 
• Sub-Paragraph 31 (i) of the Doha D eclaration (TN/TE/W/20 and TN/TE/W/40)  
• Sub-Paragraph 31 (ii) of the Doha Declaration (TN/TE/W/5)  
• Sub-Paragraph 31(iii) of the Doha Declara tion (TN/TE/W/8, TN/TE/W/34, TN/TE/W/38, 
 TN/TE/W/52)  
• Paragraph 33 of the Doha Declaration (WT/CTE/W/227)  
 
Four dual submissions on Envir onmental Goods to the Committee on Trade and Environment Special 
Session and the Negotiating Group on Market Access  are also listed under the Negotiating Group on 
Market Access.  
 
Council on TRIPS, Regular & Special Session  
 
• Questions and Answers:  Comparison of Proposals (TN/IP/W/1)  
• Issues for Discussion, Article 23.4 (TN/IP/W/2)  
• Proposal for a Multilateral System of Registra tion and Protection of Geographic Indications 
 for Wine & Spirits Based on Article 23. 4 of the TRIPS Agreement (TN/IP/W/5)  
• Multilateral System of Registration and Protec tion of Geographic Indications for Wine & 
 Spirits (TN/IP/W/6)  
• Paragraph 6 of the Doha Declaration on TRIPS and Public Health (IP/C/W/340)  
• Second Submission on Paragraph 6 of the Doha  Declaration on TRIPS and Public Health 
 (IP/C/W/358)  
• Implications of Article  23 Extension (IP/C/W/386)  
• Moratorium to Address Needs of Developing and Least-Developed Members with No or 
 Insufficient Manufacturing Capacities in the Pharmaceutical Sector (IP/C/W/396)  
• Joint Proposal for a Multilateral System of Notification and Registration of Geographical 
 Indications for Wines and Spirits (TN/IP/W/9)  
• Article 27.3 (B), Relationship between th e TRIPS Agreement and the CBD, and the 
 Protection of Traditional Know ledge and Folklore (IP/C/W/434)  
• Technology Transfer Practices of the U.S. National Cancer Institute's Departmental 
 Therapeutics Program (IP/C/W/341)  
• Access to Genetic Resources:  Regime of the United States’ National Parks (IP/C/W/393)  
• Proposed Draft TRIPS Council Decision on the Establishment of a Multilateral System of 
 Notification and Registration of Geographical Indications for Wines and Spirits (TN/IP/W/10 
 and Add.1)  
• Article 27.3(B), Relationship between the TRI PS Agreement and the CBD and the Protection 
 of Traditional Knowledge and Folklore (IP/C/W/449)  
• Comments on Implementation of the 30 August 2003 Agreement (Solution) on the TRIPS 
 Agreement and Public Health (IP/C/W/444)  
 
Committee on Trade and Development, Special Session  
 
• Remarks on the Review of Special and Differential Treatment (TN/CTD/W/9)  
• Monitoring Mechanism (TN/CTD/W/19)  WT/TPR/G/160 Trade Policy Review 
Page 36 
 
 
• Approach to Agreement-Specific Proposals (TN/CTD/W/27)  
 
Working Group on Transparency in Government Procurement  
 
• Capacity Building Questions (WT/WGTGP/W/34)  
• Workplan Proposal (WT/WGTGP/W/35)  
• Considerations Related to Enforcement of an  Agreement on Transparency in Government 
 Procurement (WT/WGTGP/W/38)  
 
Work Program on Electronic Commerce  
 
• Work Program on Electronic Commerce (WT/GC/W/493/Rev.1)  
 
Working Group on the Relationship between Trade and Investment  
 
• Covering FDI & Portfolio Investment in an Agreement (WT/WGTI/W/142)  
 
Working Group on the Interaction be tween Trade and Competition Policy  
 
• Technical Assistance (WT/WGTCP/W/185)  
• Hardcore Cartels (WT/WGTCP/W/203)  
• Voluntary Cooperation (WT/WGTCP/W/204)  
• Transparency & Non-discrimination (WT/WGTCP/W/218)  
• Procedural Fairness (WT/WGTCP/W/219)  
• The Benefits of Peer Review in the WTO Competition Context (WT/WGTCP/W/233)  
 
__________