United States

International Trade Commission

The Year in Trade 2013

Operation of the Trade Agreements 

Program

65th Report

July 2014

Publication Number: 4481
United States International Trade Commission

Commissioners

Meredith M. Broadbent, Chairman

Dean A. Pinkert

Irving A. Williamson

David S. Johanson

F. Scott Kieff

Rhonda K. Schmidtlein

Robert B. Koopman

Director, Office of Operations

Nannette Christ

Acting Director, Office of Economics 

Address all communications to

Secretary to the Commission

United States International Trade Commission

Washington, DC 20436
United States International Trade Commission

The Year in Trade 2013

Operation of the Trade Agreements

Program

65th Report

July 2014

Publication Number: 4481
United States International Trade Commission

This report was prepared principally by:

Project Leader

Cathy Jabara, Office of Industries

Deputy Project Leader

Joanne Guth, Office of Economics

Office of Economics

Dylan Carlson, Justino De La Cruz, William Greene,

Jeffrey Horowitz, Lin Jones, Alissa Tafti, and Edward Wilson

Office of General Counsel

William W. Gearhart

Office of Industries

Logan Cobb and Laura Rodriguez

Office of Investigations

Edward Petronzio

Office of Tariff Affairs and Trade Agreements

Naomi Freeman and Daniel Shepherdson

Office of Unfair Import Investigations

David Lloyd

Office of Analysis and Research Services

Russell Duncan and Jeremy Wise

Content Reviewer

Katherine Linton

Office of Economics Intern

Kimberly Lovejoy

Special Assistance

Peg Hausman and Cynthia Payne

Help Desk and Customer Service Division

Under the direction of 

Arona Butcher, Chief 

Country and Regional Analysis Division 
Preface

This report is the 65th in a series of annual reports submitted to the U.S. Congress under 

section 163(c) of the Trade Act of 1974 (19 U.S.C. 2213(c)) and its predecessor legislation. 

Section 163(c) of the Trade Act of 1974 states that “the International Trade Commission shall 

submit to the Congress at least once a year, a factual report on the operation of the trade 

agreements program.”

This report is one of the principal means by which the U.S. International Trade Commission 

provides Congress with factual information on trade policy and its administration for calendar 

year 2013. The trade agreements program includes “all activities consisting of, or related to, the 

administration of international agreements which primarily concern trade and which are 

concluded pursuant to the authority vested in the President by the Constitution” and 

congressional legislation.

1 
2 
Table of Contents

Preface................................................................................................................... 1

Abbreviations and Acronyms............................................................................... 11

Executive Summary.............................................................................................. 15

Chapter 1 Overview of U.S. Trade........................................................................ 33

Scope and Approach of the Report........................................................................................... 33

Overview of the U.S. Economy in 2013..................................................................................... 34

Exchange-Rate Trends........................................................................................................... 35

Balance of Payments............................................................................................................. 37

U.S. Trade in Goods in 2013 ...................................................................................................... 38

U.S. Merchandise Trade by Product Category ...................................................................... 38

Exports............................................................................................................................... 38

Imports............................................................................................................................... 39

U.S. Imports under Preferential Trade Programs and Free Trade Agreements.................... 40

U.S. Merchandise Trade with Selected Major Trading Partners........................................... 40

U.S. Trade in Services in 2013 ................................................................................................... 42

U.S. Services Trade by Product Category .............................................................................. 43

Exports............................................................................................................................... 43

Imports............................................................................................................................... 44

U.S. Services Trade with Leading Partners............................................................................ 44

Chapter 2 Administration of U.S. Trade Laws and Regulations............................. 47

Import Relief Laws..................................................................................................................... 47

Safeguard Actions.................................................................................................................. 47

Laws against Unfair Trade Practices.......................................................................................... 47

Section 301 Investigations..................................................................................................... 47

Section 301 Cases .............................................................................................................. 48

Special 301 ......................................................................................................................... 49

Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Investigations and Reviews..................................... 52

Antidumping Duty Investigations...................................................................................... 52

Countervailing Duty Investigations.................................................................................... 54

Reviews of Outstanding Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Orders/Suspension 

Agreements........................................................................................................................ 55

Section 337 Investigations..................................................................................................... 56

Trade Adjustment Assistance.................................................................................................... 57

Assistance for Workers.......................................................................................................... 58

Assistance for Firms............................................................................................................... 59

Tariff Preference Programs....................................................................................................... 60

Generalized System of Preferences ...................................................................................... 60

African Growth and Opportunity Act.................................................................................... 63

Andean Trade Preference Act ............................................................................................... 65

Caribbean Basin Economic Recovery Act.............................................................................. 68

3 
Haiti Initiatives................................................................................................................... 70

Chapter 3 The WTO, OECD, APEC, and TISA......................................................... 73

World Trade Organization......................................................................................................... 73

Ministerial Conference.......................................................................................................... 73

Agreement on Trade Facilitation ....................................................................................... 74

Agriculture ......................................................................................................................... 75

Development Issues........................................................................................................... 79

General Council ..................................................................................................................... 80

Work Programs, Decisions, and Reviews........................................................................... 80

Accessions.......................................................................................................................... 81

Selected Plurilateral Agreements.......................................................................................... 83

Agreement on Government Procurement ........................................................................ 83

Agreement on Trade in Civil Aircraft ................................................................................. 83

Information Technology Agreement ................................................................................. 84

Dispute Settlement Body....................................................................................................... 85

New Requests for Consultations and New Panels Established ......................................... 89

Panel and Appellate Body Reports Issued and/or Adopted during 2013 that Involve 

the United States............................................................................................................... 91

Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development ................................................... 93

Ministerial Council Meeting .................................................................................................. 93

Trade Committee................................................................................................................... 94

Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation........................................................................................... 97

The Bogor Goals, FTAAP, and Related APEC Commitments ................................................. 97

Regional Economic Integration, Connectivity, and Sustainable Growth .............................. 99

Negotiations on a Trade in Services Agreement..................................................................... 100

Chapter 4 U.S. Free Trade Agreements.............................................................. 103

U.S. Trade with FTA Partners in 2013 ..................................................................................... 103

Developments in FTA Negotiations during 2013 .................................................................... 107

Negotiations and Consultations toward the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) 

Agreement .......................................................................................................................... 107

U.S. Trade with TPP Partners........................................................................................... 110

Negotiations and Consultations toward the Transatlantic Trade and Investment 

Partnership (TTIP) Agreement............................................................................................. 112

Developments in FTAs Already in Force during 2013 ............................................................. 113

U.S.-Bahrain FTA: Consultation with Bahrain to Protect Worker Rights ............................ 114

CAFTA-DR............................................................................................................................. 114

Enforcement Plan Relating to Labor Rights in Guatemala .............................................. 114

Meeting to Discuss Environmental Issues....................................................................... 115

U.S.-Chile FTA: Environmental Affairs Council Meeting...................................................... 115

U.S.-Colombia TPA: Labor Issues Discussion with Colombia............................................... 116

U.S.-Jordan FTA: U.S.-Jordan Agreement to Boost Investment and ICT Services, and 

Enhance Labor Cooperation................................................................................................ 116

U.S.-Korea Free Trade Agreement (KORUS FTA): Environment and Labor Councils and 

Joint Committee Meetings.................................................................................................. 117

4 
U.S.-Morocco FTA: New Trade Facilitation Agreement ...................................................... 117

U.S.-Peru TPA....................................................................................................................... 118

Progress on Environmental Matters................................................................................ 118

Free Trade Commission Meeting..................................................................................... 119

North American Free Trade Agreement ................................................................................. 119

Free Trade Commission....................................................................................................... 119

Commission for Labor Cooperation .................................................................................... 120

Commission for Environmental Cooperation...................................................................... 120

Dispute Settlement.............................................................................................................. 123

Chapter 11 Dispute Settlement Developments............................................................... 123

Chapter 19 Dispute Panel Reviews.................................................................................. 123

Trade and Investment Framework Agreements and Other Agreements............................... 124

Developments in New TIFAs during 2013 ........................................................................... 124

Developments in Existing TIFAs during 2013 ...................................................................... 125

Other Agreements............................................................................................................... 125

Chapter 5 U.S. Relations with Selected Major Trading Partners......................... 127

European Union....................................................................................................................... 127

Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership................................................................ 129

Beef Trade ........................................................................................................................... 131

Canada..................................................................................................................................... 132

Softwood Lumber................................................................................................................ 134

Regulatory Cooperation Council ......................................................................................... 135

Intellectual Property............................................................................................................ 135

China........................................................................................................................................ 136

Intellectual Property Rights Enforcement........................................................................... 139

Industrial Policies................................................................................................................. 140

Export Restraints on Raw Material Inputs .......................................................................... 140

Agriculture........................................................................................................................... 141

Services................................................................................................................................ 142

U.S.-China Bilateral Investment Treaty ............................................................................... 143

Mexico ..................................................................................................................................... 144

High Level Economic Dialogue............................................................................................. 146

High-Level Regulatory Cooperation Council........................................................................ 147

Work Plan......................................................................................................................... 147

2013 Progress Report ...................................................................................................... 148

Cross-Border Trucking between the United States and Mexico......................................... 149

Japan........................................................................................................................................ 150

TPP Negotiations and Dialogue ........................................................................................... 152

Passenger Vehicle Market Access....................................................................................... 153

Japan Post............................................................................................................................ 154

Agriculture Products............................................................................................................ 155

Republic of Korea .................................................................................................................... 156

U.S.-Korea FTA..................................................................................................................... 158

Beef...................................................................................................................................... 159

5 
Brazil........................................................................................................................................ 159

Agreement on Trade and Economic Cooperation............................................................... 161

Taiwan ..................................................................................................................................... 161

U.S.-Taiwan Trade and Investment Framework Agreement............................................... 162

Beef and Beef Products....................................................................................................... 164

Rice ...................................................................................................................................... 164

India......................................................................................................................................... 165

Trade and Investment Dialogue .......................................................................................... 167

Electronic Goods.................................................................................................................. 168

Solar Equipment.................................................................................................................. 168

Intellectual Property Rights................................................................................................. 169

Bibliography....................................................................................................... 171

Appendix A Data Tables..................................................................................... 205

Boxes

3.1 Outline of the WTO Agreement on Trade Facilitation, 2013................................................. 76

3.2 Overview of the WTO dispute settlement procedures.......................................................... 86

Figures

ES.1 U.S. trade balance in goods and services, 1995–2013......................................................... 15

1.1 U.S. real gross domestic product, annual rate of change, 2004–13...................................... 34

1.2 Indices of U.S. dollar exchange rates for selected major foreign currencies, daily, 2013..... 36

1.3 U.S. merchandise trade with the world, 2011–13................................................................. 39

1.4 Leading U.S. merchandise export markets, by share, 2013 .................................................. 41

1.5 Leading U.S. merchandise import sources, by share, 2013................................................... 42

1.6 U.S. private cross-border services trade with the world, 2011–13....................................... 43

1.7 Leading U.S. export markets for private services, by share, 2013 ........................................ 45

1.8 Leading U.S. import sources for private services, by share, 2013......................................... 46

5.1 U.S. merchandise trade with the EU-28, 2009–13 .............................................................. 128

5.2 U.S. private services trade with the EU, 2009-13 ................................................................ 128

5.3 U.S. merchandise trade with Canada, 2009–13................................................................... 133

5.4 U.S. private services trade with Canada, 2009–13 .............................................................. 133

5.5 U.S. merchandise trade with China, 2009–13 ..................................................................... 137

5.6 U.S. private services trade with China, 2009-13.................................................................. 137

5.7 U.S. merchandise trade with Mexico, 2009–13................................................................... 145

5.8 U.S. private services trade with Mexico, 2009-13 ............................................................... 145

5.9 U.S. merchandise trade with Japan, 2009–13 ..................................................................... 151

5.10 U.S. private services trade with Japan, 2009-13................................................................ 151

5.11 U.S. merchandise trade with Korea, 2009–13 ................................................................... 157

5.12 U.S. private services trade with Korea, 2009-13................................................................ 157

5.13 U.S. merchandise trade with Brazil, 2009–13.................................................................... 160

5.14 U.S. private services trade with Brazil, 2009-13 ................................................................ 160

5.15 U.S. merchandise trade with Taiwan, 2009–13................................................................. 163

5.16 U.S. private services trade with Taiwan, 2009-13 ............................................................. 163

6 
5.17 U.S. merchandise trade with India, 2009–13..................................................................... 166

5.18 U.S. private services trade with India, 2009-13................................................................. 166

Tables

ES.1 Summary of 2013 trade agreement activities...................................................................... 26

1.1 U.S. merchandise trade with selected major trading partners and the world, 2013 

(millions of dollars) ....................................................................................................................... 41

1.2 U.S. private services trade with major trading partners and the world, 2013 

(billions of dollars) ........................................................................................................................ 45

2.1 Antidumping duty orders that became effective during 2013.............................................. 54

2.2 Countervailing duty orders that became effective during 2013 ........................................... 55

2.3 U.S. imports for consumption from GSP beneficiaries, 2011–13.......................................... 62

2.4 U.S. imports for consumption from AGOA beneficiaries, 2011–13....................................... 64

2.5 U.S. imports for consumption from ATPA countries, 2011–13 ............................................. 67

2.6 U.S. imports for consumption from CBERA countries, 2011–13 ........................................... 69

2.7 U.S. imports for consumption of apparel from Haiti, 2011–13............................................. 71

3.1 WTO membership in 2013 ..................................................................................................... 82

3.2 WTO observers in 2013.......................................................................................................... 83

3.3 WTO dispute settlement panels established during 2013 .................................................... 87

3.4 WTO dispute settlement panel and Appellate Body (AB) reports circulated or adopted 

in 2013 in which the United States was a party ........................................................................... 92

4.1 U.S. merchandise trade with FTA partners, by FTA partner, applicable periods, 

2011-13 ....................................................................................................................................... 104

4.2 U.S. imports for consumption entered under FTA provisions, by FTA partner, 

2011–13 ...................................................................................................................................... 106

4.3 Status of U.S. FTA negotiations during 2013 ....................................................................... 107

4.4 U.S. merchandise trade with TPP partners, 2011–13.......................................................... 111

4.5 Active files as of yearend 2013 under Articles 14 and 15 of the North American 

Agreement on Environmental Cooperation ............................................................................... 122

4.6 NAFTA Chapter 19 binational panels, active reviews as of yearend 2013 .......................... 124

Appendix Tables

A.1 U.S. merchandise trade with major trading partners (total exports and general imports), 

2013 ............................................................................................................................................ 207

A.2 U.S. merchandise trade with FTA partners (total exports and general imports), 2013...... 208

A.3 U.S. merchandise trade with the world, by USITC digest sectors, 2011–13 ....................... 209

A.4 Leading U.S. domestic exports to the world by Schedule B subheading, 2011–13 ............ 210

A.5 Leading U.S. imports for consumption from the world by HTS subheading, 2011–13....... 211

A.6 U.S. trade with top 15 single-country trading partners, 2013 ............................................ 212

A.7 Top 15 U.S. single-country export markets and import sources, 2013............................... 213

A.8 U.S. private services exports and imports from the world, by category, 2011–13............. 214

A.9 Antidumping cases active in 2013, by USITC investigation number ................................... 215

A.10 Antidumping duty orders and suspension agreements in effect as of 

December 31, 2013..................................................................................................................... 217

7 
A.11 Countervailing duty cases active in 2013, by USITC investigation number ...................... 222

A.12 Countervailing duty orders in effect as of December 31, 2013 ........................................ 223

A.13 Reviews of existing antidumping and countervailing duty orders completed in 2013, 

by date of completion................................................................................................................. 224

A.14 Section 337 investigations and related proceedings completed by the U.S. 

International Trade Commission during 2013 and those pending on December 31, 2013....... 225

A.15 Outstanding Section 337 exclusion orders as of December 31, 2013............................... 231

A.16 U.S. imports for consumption under the GSP, by leading GSP beneficiary, 2011–13 ...... 236

A.17 U.S. imports for consumption under the GSP, by USITC digest sectors, 2011–13............ 237

A.18 Leading U.S. imports for consumption under the GSP, by HTS provision, 2011–13......... 238

A.19 U.S. imports for consumption under AGOA, by source, 2011–13..................................... 239

A.20 Leading U.S. imports for consumption under AGOA, by HTS provision, 2011–13............ 240

A.21 U.S. imports for consumption under ATPA/ATPDEA, by source, 2011–13 ....................... 241

A.22 Leading U.S. imports for consumption under ATPA/ATPDEA, by HTS provision, 

2011–13 ...................................................................................................................................... 242

A.23 U.S. imports for consumption under CBERA/CBTPA, by source, 2011–13 ....................... 243

A.24 Leading U.S. imports for consumption under CBERA/CBTPA, by HTS provision, 

2011–13 ...................................................................................................................................... 244

A.25 WTO dispute settlement cases to which the United States was a party, developments 

in 2013 ........................................................................................................................................ 245

A.26 NAFTA Chapter 19 substantive challenges to original and five-year review 

determinations of USITC and USDOC, developments in 2013 ................................................... 257

A.27 U.S. merchandise trade with the European Union (28 countries), by USITC digest 

sectors, 2011–13......................................................................................................................... 258

A.28 Leading U.S. domestic exports to the European Union (28), by Schedule B 

subheading, 2011–13.................................................................................................................. 259

A.29 Leading U.S. imports for consumption from the European Union (28), by HTS 

provision, 2011–13 ..................................................................................................................... 260

A.30 U.S. merchandise trade with Canada, by USITC digest sectors, 2011–13......................... 261

A.31 Leading U.S. domestic exports to Canada, by Schedule B subheading, 2011–13............. 262

A.32 Leading U.S. imports for consumption from Canada, by HTS provision, 2011–13 ........... 263

A.33 U.S. merchandise trade with China, by USITC digest sectors, 2011–13............................ 264

A.34 Leading U.S. domestic exports to China, by Schedule B subheading, 2011–13................ 265

A.35 Leading U.S. imports for consumption from China, by HTS provision, 2011–13 .............. 266

A.36 U.S. merchandise trade with Mexico, by USITC digest sectors, 2011–13......................... 267

A.37 Leading U.S. domestic exports to Mexico, by Schedule B subheading, 2011–13 ............. 268

A.38 Leading U.S. imports for consumption from Mexico, by HTS provision, 2011–13 ........... 269

A.39 U.S. merchandise trade with Japan, by USITC digest sectors, 2011–13 ........................... 270

A.40 Leading U.S. domestic exports to Japan, by Schedule B subheading, 2011–13................ 271

A.41 Leading U.S. imports for consumption from Japan, by HTS provision, 2011–13.............. 272

A.42 U.S. merchandise trade with Korea, by USITC digest sectors, 2011–13 ........................... 273

A.43 Leading U.S. domestic exports to Korea, by Schedule B subheading, 2011–13 ............... 274

A.44 Leading U.S. imports for consumption from Korea, by HTS provision, 2011–13.............. 275

A.45 U.S. merchandise trade with Brazil, by USITC digest sectors, 2011–13............................ 276

A.46 Leading U.S. domestic exports to Brazil, by Schedule B subheading, 2011–13................ 277

8 
A.47 Leading U.S. imports for consumption from Brazil, by HTS provision, 2011–13 .............. 278

A.48 U.S. merchandise trade with Taiwan, by USITC digest sectors, 2011–13 ......................... 279

A.49 Leading U.S. domestic exports to Taiwan, by Schedule B subheading, 2011–13 ............. 280

A.50 Leading U.S. imports for consumption from Taiwan, by HTS provision, 2011–13............ 281

A.51 U.S. merchandise trade with India, by USITC digest sectors, 2011–13............................. 282

A.52 Leading U.S. domestic exports to India, by Schedule B subheading, 2011–13................. 283

A.53 Leading U.S. imports for consumption from India, by HTS provision, 2011–13 ............... 284

9 
10
Abbreviations and Acronyms 

Acronyms Term

AB Appellate Body (WTO)

ACTA Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement

AD antidumping

AGOA African Growth and Opportunity Act

AI avian influenza

APEC Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation

APHIS Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (USDA)

ARRA American Recovery and Reinvestment Act

ASEAN Association of Southeast Asian Nations

ATPA Andean Trade Preference Act

ATPDEA Andean Trade Promotion and Drug Eradication Act

BEA Bureau of Economic Analysis (USDOC)

BECC Border Environment Cooperation Commission (NAFTA)

BIT Bilateral Investment Treaty

BOP balance of payments

BSE bovine spongiform encephalopathy

CAFTA-DR Dominican Republic-Central America-United States Free Trade Agreement

CARICOM Caribbean Community and Common Market

CBERA Caribbean Basin Economic Recovery Act

CBI Caribbean Basin Initiative

CBTPA Caribbean Basin Trade Partnership Act

CCA Consultative Committee on Agriculture

CEC Commission for Environmental Cooperation (NAFTA)

CITES Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora

CLC Commission for Labor Cooperation (NAFTA)

CNL competitive need limitation

C-Si crystalline silicon

COOL country of origin labeling

CSQ country-specific quota

CTD Committee on Trade and Development (WTO)

CTI Committee on Trade and Investment (APEC)

DDA Doha Development Agenda (WTO)

DSB Dispute Settlement Body (WTO)

DSU Dispute Settlement Understanding (WTO)

DFQF duty-free, quota-free

EAC Environmental Affairs Council

EC European Communities

ECA Environmental Cooperation Agreement

ECOWAS Economic Community of West African States

EDA Economic Development Administration (USDOC)

EIAP Earned Import Allowance Program

ETA Employment and Training Administration (USDOL)

EU European Union

FAO Food and Agriculture Organization (UN)

FAS Foreign Agricultural Service (USDA)

11
FDI foreign direct investment

Fed. Reg. Federal Register

FMCSA Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration

FTA free trade agreement

FTAA Free Trade Area of the Americas

FTAAP Free Trade Area of the Asia-Pacific

FTC Free Trade Commission (CAFTA-DR, NAFTA, Peru TPA)

FY fiscal year

G20 Group of 20 (OECD)

GATT General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade

GDP gross domestic product

GPA Agreement on Government Procurement (WTO)

GPS global positioning system

GSP Generalized System of Preferences

GVC global value chain

HELP Haiti Economic Lift Program

HLC High Level Committee

HLED High Level Economic Dialogue

HLWG High-Level Working Group on Jobs and Growth

HOPE Haitian Hemispheric Opportunity through Partnership Encouragement Act

HS Harmonized Commodity Description and Coding System (international)

HTS Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States

ICSID International Centre for the Settlement of Investment Disputes

ICT information and communications technology

IIS Internet Information Services

ILO International Labor Organization

IMF International Monetary Fund

IPR intellectual property rights

IT information technology

ITA Information Technology Agreement (WTO)

ITA International Trade Administration (USDOC)

JCCT Joint Commission on Commerce and Trade

JCEC Joint Commission for Environmental Cooperation

JECFA Joint FAO/WHO Expert Committee on Food Additives

JNNSM Jawaharlal Nehru National Solar Mission (India)

KORUS FTA U.S.-Korea Free Trade Agreement

LAC Labor Affairs Council

LCIA London Court of International Arbitration

LDBDC least-developed beneficiary developing country

LDC least-developed country

LTFV less than fair value

MEA multilateral environmental agreement

Mercosur Common Market of the South

MFN most-favored nation

MOU memorandum of understanding

MRL maximum residue limit

mt metric tons

NAAEC North American Agreement on Environmental Cooperation (NAFTA)

NAALC North American Agreement on Labor Cooperation (NAFTA)

12
NAC National Advisory Committee (NAFTA)

NADB North American Development Bank (NAFTA)

NAEC New Approach to Economic Challenges

NAFTA North American Free Trade Agreement

NAO National Administrative Office (NAFTA)

n.e.s.o.i. not elsewhere specified or included

NTB nontariff barrier

NTR normal trade relations

OECD Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development

OIE World Organisation for Animal Health (Office International des Epizooties)

OTEXA Office of Textiles and Apparel (USDOC)

OTLA Office of Trade and Labor Affairs (NAFTA)

PHP Preferential Handling Procedure

PSU Policy Support Unit

Pub. L. Public Law

RCC Regulatory Cooperation Council

S&ED Strategic and Economic Dialogue (China)

SCM Subsidies and Countervailing Measures

SEM Submissions on Environmental Measures (NAFTA)

SLA Softwood Lumber Agreement

SME Sindicato Mexicano de Electristas (NAFTA)

SMEs small and medium-sized enterprises

SPS sanitary and phytosanitary (standards)

SSA sub-Saharan Africa

STAN Structural Analysis database (OECD)

STAR Service Trade Access Requirements

TAA Trade Adjustment Assistance

TAAEA Trade Adjustment Assistance Extension Act

TBT technical barriers to trade

TICFA Trade and Investment Cooperation Forum Agreement

TIFA Trade and Investment Framework Agreement

TISA Trade in Services Agreement

TIVA Trade in Value-Added Terms

TPA trade promotion agreement

TPF U.S.-India Trade Policy Forum

TPL tariff preference level

TPP Trans-Pacific Partnership

TPSC Trade Policy Staff Committee

TRIPS Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (WTO)

TRQ tariff-rate quota

TTIP Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (EU)

UN United Nations

U.S.C. United States Code

USAID U.S. Agency for International Development

USCBP United States Customs and Border Protection (USDHS)

USDA United States Department of Agriculture

USDHS United States Department of Homeland Security

USDOC United States Department of Commerce

USDOL United States Department of Labor

13
USDOS United States Department of State

USDOT United States Department of Transportation

USFDA United States Food and Drug Administration

USITC United States International Trade Commission

USTR United States Trade Representative

WCO World Customs Organization

WHO World Health Organization (UN)

WIPO World Intellectual Property Organization

WTO World Trade Organization

WUPP Wood Use Points Program

 

14
Executive Summary

The U.S. trade deficit for goods and services fell from $535.0 billion in 2012 to $475.0 billion in 

2013 on a balance-of-payments basis. The deficit on goods fell from $741.5 billion in 2012 to 

$703.9 billion in 2013, well below the $835.7 billion record set in 2006. At the same time, the 

U.S. surplus on services rose from $206.8 billion in 2012 to a new record of $229.0 billion in 

2013 (figure ES.1). 

U.S. trade in goods and services grew in 2013, but the rate of growth was significantly lower 

than in 2012. Generally slower growth in many foreign countries led to a smaller expansion in 

U.S. exports in 2013. The decline in U.S. imports of petroleum and petroleum-related products 

led to similarly lower growth in total U.S. imports of goods in 2013 compared to 2012. The U.S. 

economic recovery that began in the summer of 2009 continued as real gross domestic product 

(GDP) grew by 1.9 percent in 2013. However, this rate of growth was less than the 2.8 percent 

U.S. growth realized in 2012, due in part to a decline in government spending. The pace of 

global economic growth also slowed, from 3.2 percent in 2012 to 3.0 percent in 2013. 

Figure ES.1 U.S. trade balance in goods and services, 1995–2013

Source: USDOC 

Note: Merchandise trade data are on a balance-of-payments basis.

-1,000

-800

-600

-400

-200

0

200

400

Billion $

U.S. services trade balance

U.S. goods trade balance

15
The U.S. dollar appreciated 3.3 percent during 2013 against a broad trade-weighted index of 

foreign currencies. By yearend, the dollar had fallen against the Chinese yuan, the euro, and the 

pound sterling by 2–4 percent, but had appreciated against the Japanese yen by 20.8 percent. 

Currency movements were uneven during the year. Responding to financial market 

developments, as well as concerns about fiscal stresses in Europe and the global economic 

outlook, the dollar appreciated in the first, second, and fourth quarters and fell in the third 

quarter of 2013. 

A summary of U.S. trade agreement activities in 2013 is presented below, followed by a table 

summarizing key developments on a monthly basis for the year (table ES.1). Trade agreement 

activities during 2013 included the administration of U.S. trade laws and regulations; U.S. 

participation in the World Trade Organization (WTO), the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD), and the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) forum;

U.S. negotiation of and participation in free trade agreements (FTAs); and bilateral 

developments with major trading partners.

Complementing the release of the Year in Trade 2013 report, the USITC has developed a series 

of dashboards in MS Excel available online that present U.S. merchandise trade data in an 

interactive format. Readers will be able to conduct further analysis of U.S. merchandise trade 

with specific trading partners and U.S. trade under specific trade preference programs using 

these dashboards, which can be found on the Commission’s 

website, www.usitc.gov/publications/dashboards. 

Key Trade Developments in 2013

Administration of U.S. Trade Laws and Regulations 

Safeguard actions: The Commission conducted no new safeguard investigations during 2013, 

and no U.S. safeguard measures under these provisions were in effect during any part of 2013.

In addition, by statute, the authority to conduct investigations and apply measures under the 

China safeguards provision in section 421 of the Trade Act of 1974 ceased to be effective on 

December 11, 2013.

Antidumping duty investigations: The Commission instituted 42 new preliminary antidumping 

investigations and completed 10 final investigations during 2013. Antidumping duty orders 

were issued by the U.S. Department of Commerce (USDOC) in 8 of the final investigations on 

five products from five countries.

Countervailing duty investigations: The Commission instituted 14 new preliminary 

countervailing duty investigations and completed 12 final investigations during 2013. 

Countervailing duty orders were issued by the USDOC in 4 of the final investigations on four 

products from three countries.

Sunset reviews: During 2013, the Commission instituted 50 sunset reviews of existing 

antidumping duty and countervailing duty orders and suspension agreements. The Commission 

16
completed 26 reviews, resulting in 22 antidumping duty and countervailing duty orders being 

continued for up to five additional years.

Section 337 investigations: During calendar year 2013, there were 109 active section 337 

investigations and ancillary proceedings, 53 of which were instituted that year. Of these 53 new 

proceedings, 42 were new section 337 investigations and 11 were new ancillary proceedings 

relating to previously concluded investigations. The Commission completed a total of 55 

investigations and ancillary proceedings in 2013 and issued 9 exclusion orders and 25 cease and 

desist orders. Slightly less than 40 percent of the active proceedings in 2013 involved computer 

and telecommunications equipment, while consumer electronics products, small consumer 

items, and pharmaceuticals and medical products each accounted for slightly more than 10

percent of the proceedings. At the close of 2013, 54 section 337 investigations and ancillary 

proceedings were pending at the Commission.

Trade Adjustment Assistance: In fiscal year (FY) 2013, the U.S. Department of Labor (USDOL) 

received 1,480 petitions for Trade Adjustment Assistance (TAA) for workers claiming harm from 

imports, on par with the 1,465 petitions received in FY 2012. USDOL certified 1,025 petitions as 

eligible for TAA covering 104,158 workers, and denied 279 petitions covering 23,628 workers. 

The TAA for Firms program also aided companies seeking technical assistance in expanding 

markets, strengthening their operations, or otherwise increasing their global competitiveness.

Trade Preference Programs 

Generalized System of Preferences (GSP): Imports from developing countries for which GSP 

treatment was claimed totaled $18.5 billion in 2013, accounting for 6.7 percent of total U.S. 

imports from GSP beneficiary countries and 0.8 percent of total imports from all trading 

partners. India was the leading GSP beneficiary in 2013, followed by Thailand and Brazil. On 

April 16, USTR initiated a review for the possible addition of Laos and Burma to the GSP 

program, and on June 27, Bangladesh was suspended from the GSP program because of worker 

rights issues. Authorization for the GSP program lapsed on July 31, 2013, and has not been 

renewed. 

African Growth and Opportunity Act (AGOA): In 2013, 39 sub-Saharan African (SSA) countries 

were designated as eligible for AGOA benefits, and 27 SSA countries were designated eligible 

for AGOA textile and apparel benefits. South Sudan became eligible for AGOA benefits as of 

December 20, 2012, while Guinea-Bissau and Mali lost eligibility for AGOA benefits on January 

1, 2013. In December 2013, the President announced that Mali would be reinstated on January 

1, 2014, due to its inauguration of a democratically elected president in July 2013. Duty-free 

U.S. imports under AGOA, including those covered by GSP, were valued at $26.8 billion in 2013. 

U.S. imports under AGOA, excluding imports also covered by GSP, were valued at $24.8 billion, 

down 24.3 percent from 2012. This decrease was driven mainly by a decline in the value of U.S. 

imports of petroleum-related products, which made up 85.4 percent of imports under AGOA in 

2013. Nigeria and Angola were the largest suppliers under AGOA in 2013.

Andean Trade Preference Act (ATPA): The President’s authority to provide preferential 

treatment under ATPA, including the Andean Trade Promotion and Drug Eradication Act 

17
(ATPDEA), expired on July 31, 2013. Ecuador was the only country still eligible to receive trade 

preferences under ATPA during 2013. Colombia and Peru had previously lost eligibility following 

the entry into force of free trade agreements with the United States, and Bolivia’s eligibility had 

been suspended. However, the government of Ecuador announced on June 27, 2013, that it 

would withdraw from the ATPA program. In light of Ecuador’s withdrawal, and the expiration of 

the President’s authority to provide preferential treatment, U.S. imports under ATPA declined 

77.7 percent in 2013 to $2.5 billion. Crude petroleum and petroleum products accounted for 

the overwhelming share (89.3 percent) of U.S. imports under ATPA in 2013.

Caribbean Basin Economic Recovery Act (CBERA): At yearend 2013, 17 countries and 

dependent territories were eligible for CBERA preferences, and 8 of those countries were 

eligible for additional preferences under the Caribbean Basin Trade Partnership Act (CBTPA). 

Curaçao became eligible for both CBERA and CBTPA preferences on December 31, 2013. U.S. 

imports under CBERA (including CBTPA) fell by 24.4 percent, from $3.1 billion in 2012 to $2.4 

billion in 2013, reflecting a decline in the value of U.S. imports of crude petroleum, knitted 

apparel products, undenatured ethyl alcohol, and melamine, which are major imports from 

CBERA countries. Additionally, Panama left CBERA on October 31, 2012, when the U.S.-Panama 

TPA entered into force, and was thus not eligible for CBERA benefits during any part of 2013. 

Trinidad and Tobago continued to be the leading supplier of U.S. imports under CBERA in 2013, 

accounting for 69.2 percent of the total. Haiti and The Bahamas were also leading suppliers.

Haiti initiatives: Haiti accounted for nearly all U.S. imports of apparel entering under CBTPA. 

U.S. imports of apparel from Haiti were up 4.9 percent from 2012; these imports totaled $765.9 

million, of which $341.7 million entered under CBTPA. U.S. imports of apparel entering under 

the Haitian Hemispheric Opportunity through Partnership Encouragement Acts (HOPE I and II) 

and the Haiti Economic Lift Program (HELP), which added special provisions to CBERA, rose by

almost 40 percent in 2013 to $421.9 million. U.S. imports of apparel from Haiti under the 

Earned Import Allowance Program almost tripled to $90.0 million in 2013. 

WTO, OECD, APEC, and TISA

WTO developments: The World Trade Organization held its Ninth Ministerial Conference in Bali, 

Indonesia, from December 3 to 7, 2013, extending its scheduled conclusion by one day to reach 

agreement on a package of trade measures. Members concluded an Agreement on Trade 

Facilitation to expedite the movement, release, and clearance of goods, and to improve 

cooperation on customs matters among WTO members. They also reached a number of 

decisions in agriculture and in trade and economic development, in particular for the leastdeveloped countries. Discussions during the year concerning WTO plurilateral agreements 

focused on bringing the revised Agreement on Government Procurement into force (which 

occurred on April 6, 2014), as well as negotiations to expand coverage of products under the

Information Technology Agreement (ITA). In WTO-related negotiations, talks among the 27 

participants looking to conclude an expansion of the Information Technology Agreement were 

suspended twice during 2013, first in July and again in November, largely over China’s inability 

to accept terms under discussion to expand coverage to a number of products. Laos and 

Tajikistan acceded to the WTO in 2013; Yemen, whose accession will raise membership to 160, 

18
was invited to accede in December. The WTO also appointed a new Director-General, Roberto 

Azevêdo, to a four-year term that started December 1, 2013.

WTO dispute settlement: During 2013, WTO members filed 20 new requests for WTO dispute 

settlement consultations, compared to 27 in 2012. The United States was the complainant in 3 

of the 20 requests filed during 2013, and the named respondent in 2. Two of the 3 new 

requests filed by the United States during 2013 concerned measures taken by Indonesia, both 

relating to Indonesia’s restrictions on importation of horticultural products, animals, and animal 

products. The third dispute concerned measures by India affecting solar cells and solar 

modules.

The United States was the named respondent in two new disputes filed during 2013, one filed 

by Korea and one by China. There were 12 new dispute settlement panels established during

2013; the United States was the complaining party in 2 of these panel proceedings and the 

responding party in 2. 

OECD developments: The 34 OECD members held their OECD Council at the ministerial level in 

Paris, France, on May 29–30, 2013. Attendees looked at the New Approach to Economic 

Challenges, which focuses on incorporating broader social factors affecting skilled labor––such 

as education, environment, and gender equality––into the assumptions the OECD uses to gauge 

economic growth. In 2013, the OECD Trade Committee considered key projects underway, such 

as the Services Trade Restrictiveness Index as well as the OECD-WTO Trade in Value Added 

(TIVA) database. A joint project launched with the WTO in January, TIVA aims to quantify the 

value added to goods and services by source country as they pass through stages of global 

value chains. 

APEC developments: APEC was chaired by Indonesia throughout 2013. Member economies 

focused on increasing regional economic integration; promoting physical, institutional, and 

people-to-people connectivity; and achieving sustainable, equitable growth in the region. APEC 

continued to work toward the 2015 goal of reducing applied tariffs on a list of environmental 

goods while focusing on the capacity-building needs of member countries. APEC’s annual 

summit in October 2013 served as a forum for discussing progress toward the Free Trade Area 

of the Asia-Pacific, and for leaders of countries negotiating the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) 

to reaffirm their commitment to a 21st-century trade agreement.

Trade in Services Agreement: In 2013, 23 countries, including the United States, began 

negotiating a new agreement aimed at promoting international trade in services. Four rounds 

of negotiations were held in 2013.

U.S. Free Trade Agreements 

U.S. FTAs in force in 2013: The United States was a party to 14 FTAs with 20 countries as of 

December 31, 2013. These include the U.S.-Panama TPA (2012); the U.S.-Colombia TPA (2012); 

the U.S.-Korea FTA (2012); the U.S.-Oman FTA (2009); the U.S.-Peru TPA (2009); a multiparty 

FTA with the countries of Central America and the Dominican Republic (CAFTA-DR) that entered 

into force first with the Dominican Republic, El Salvador, Guatemala, Honduras, and Nicaragua 

19
(2006–07) and then with Costa Rica (2009); the U.S.-Bahrain FTA (2006); the U.S.-Morocco FTA 

(2006); the U.S.-Australia FTA (2005); the U.S.-Chile FTA (2004); the U.S.-Singapore FTA (2004); 

the U.S.-Jordan FTA (2001); the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) with Canada 

and Mexico (1994); and the U.S.-Israel FTA (1985).

FTA developments: During 2013, four rounds of negotiations were held related to the TPP. The 

United States and the other TPP partners reached an agreement to bring Japan into the TPP 

negotiations with the 11 current participants––Australia, Brunei Darussalam, Chile, Malaysia, 

New Zealand, Peru, Singapore, Vietnam, Mexico, Canada, and the United States. In addition, 

TPP partners welcomed Korea’s formal announcement of its interest in joining the TPP.

Three rounds of negotiations for the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP) 

were held with the European Union (EU) in 2013. Discussions in these three rounds concerned 

the possible structure of the agreement, how chapters and specific issues might be handled, 

and pinpointing areas of common ground for text-based discussions. The negotiators also met 

with stakeholders.

FTA merchandise trade flows with FTA partners: Two-way merchandise trade (exports and 

imports) between the United States and its FTA partners amounted to $1.4 trillion, or 39.1 

percent of total U.S. merchandise trade in 2013. The NAFTA countries––Canada and Mexico––

dominated U.S. trade with FTA partners in 2013, accounting for 73.9 percent of total U.S. 

merchandise trade with U.S. FTA partners, or $1.0 trillion. In 2013, U.S. merchandise exports to 

the NAFTA partners expanded by 3.3 percent and imports by 2.4 percent, resulting in a decline 

in the U.S. merchandise trade deficit with the NAFTA partners to $177.2 billion. Leading U.S. 

exports to the NAFTA countries included petroleum products, aircraft, and motor vehicles, 

while the leading U.S. imports were crude petroleum and motor vehicles.

U.S. two-way merchandise trade with FTA partners other than the NAFTA countries amounted 

to $368.7 billion in 2013, representing an increase of 8.7 percent from 2012. U.S. imports from 

these FTA partners rose 10.5 percent to $185.8 billion, while U.S. exports rose 7.0 percent to 

$182.9 billion. Leading U.S. exports to the non-NAFTA FTA partners included petroleum 

products, aircraft, and processors or controllers, while the leading U.S. imports from these 

countries were crude petroleum, diamonds, and motor vehicles. The United States registered a 

merchandise trade deficit with these partners of $3.0 billion in 2013, whereas it had a trade 

surplus of $2.7 billion in 2012. This change was largely due to sharply reduced exports of 

machinery and equipment to Australia in 2013. 

NAFTA developments: All of NAFTA’s provisions were fully implemented as of January 1, 2008, 

with the exception of the NAFTA cross-border trucking provisions; the current pilot program for 

cross-border trucking with Mexico is ongoing, but is scheduled to end in October 2014. 

(Developments in the trucking provisions in 2013 are described in the Mexico section below). 

The NAFTA Free Trade Commission typically meets annually, but did not meet in 2013. At the 

end of 2013, nine files remained active under articles 14 and 15 of the North American 

Agreement on Environmental Cooperation, one of which was submitted in 2013.

20
NAFTA dispute settlement: In 2013, there were five active Chapter 11 (investor-state disputes)

cases filed against the United States, four of them filed by Canadian investors and one filed by 

Mexican investors. Additionally, four cases were filed by U.S. investors against Canada and none 

were filed against Mexico. At the end of 2013, the NAFTA Secretariat listed four active

binational panels under Chapter 19; these are reviews of final determinations made by national 

authorities in antidumping and countervailing duty cases. Two of the four active cases 

challenged the Mexican agency’s determinations on products from the United States. A third 

case challenged U.S. agencies’ determinations on products from Canada, and a fourth

challenged U.S. agencies’ determinations on products from Mexico. No binational panels were 

formed in 2013 under Chapter 19.

Trade Activities with Major Trading Partners 

European Union

The EU as a unit1 continued to be the United States’ largest two-way merchandise trading 

partner in 2013. U.S. merchandise trade with the EU was $613.3 billion in 2013, which 

accounted for 17.0 percent of total U.S. merchandise trade. U.S. merchandise exports to the EU 

totaled $231.7 billion, ranking the EU second to Canada, while the value of U.S. merchandise 

imports from the EU was $381.6 billion, second to China. As a result, the U.S. merchandise 

trade deficit with the EU was $149.9 billion in 2013. Leading U.S. exports to the EU included 

aircraft and parts, petroleum-related products, certain medicaments (medicines), passenger 

motor vehicles, blood fractions (e.g., antiserum), and coal. Leading U.S. imports included 

passenger motor vehicles, petroleum-related products, certain medicaments, and turbojets and 

parts. The EU was also the United States’ largest trading partner in terms of services in 2013, 

accounting for 32.8 percent of total trade in private services.2 The United States registered a 

trade surplus in services with the EU of $60.5 billion in 2013.

The major focus of the U.S.-EU trade relationship in 2013 was the launch of negotiations on a 

comprehensive trade and investment agreement, TTIP. The two sides also addressed issues 

related to beef trade, including extending an expanded EU tariff-rate quota on imports of U.S. 

high-quality beef. 

Canada

In 2013, Canada continued to be the United States’ largest single-country two-way merchandise 

trading partner. Total two-way merchandise trade was valued at $584.6 billion, accounting for 

16.2 percent of U.S. trade with the world. U.S. merchandise exports to Canada amounted to 

$251.7 billion in 2013, and U.S. merchandise imports from Canada were $332.9 billion. The

resulting merchandise trade deficit of $81.2 billion was little changed from deficits in 2012 

($79.3 billion) and 2011 ($82.6 billion). Leading U.S. merchandise exports to Canada included 

1 The 28 members of the EU in 2013 were Austria, Belgium, Bulgaria, Croatia, Cyprus, the Czech Republic, 

Denmark, Estonia, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Ireland, Italy, Latvia, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Malta, 

the Netherlands, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Slovakia, Slovenia, Spain, Sweden, and the United Kingdom.

2 The services trade data reported for the EU and other countries are based on trade in private services, which 

exclude government sales and purchases of services.

21

 
passenger and transport motor vehicles and related parts, and petroleum-related products, 

followed by civilian aircraft and related products. Major U.S. merchandise imports from Canada 

were raw material and energy products, as well as passenger motor vehicles and their parts. 

Canada was also the United States’ second-largest single-country partner for services in 2013 

after the United Kingdom, valued at $93.3 billion, accounting for 8.6 percent of U.S. trade in 

services with the world.

In December 2013, Canada and the United States submitted a joint request for arbitration 

under the 2006 Canada-United States Softwood Lumber Agreement. This request was to 

determine if compensatory amounts awarded in a 2011 dispute case should continue beyond 

the original 2013 expiration of the agreement, in light of the agreement’s two-year extension 

(signed in January 2012). Canada also reintroduced intellectual property rights (IPR) legislation

into Parliament to allow Canadian customs officials to take legal action against counterfeit 

trademark and pirated copyright goods transshipped through Canada to other countries, in 

particular the United States.

China

In 2013, China was the United States’ second-largest single-country two-way merchandise 

trading partner. U.S. merchandise trade with China was $552.5 billion, which accounted for 

15.3 percent of U.S. trade with the world. The United States’ bilateral trade deficit with China, 

which rose by $2.4 billion to $323.8 billion in 2013, remained higher than the U.S. deficit with 

any other single-country trading partner. U.S. merchandise exports to China were $114.3 

billion, and U.S. merchandise imports from China amounted to $438.1 billion in 2013. Leading 

U.S. exports were soybeans, aircraft and parts, motor vehicles, metal waste and scrap, and 

cotton. Leading U.S. imports were computers and computer parts, cellphones, 

telecommunication equipment, toys, video games, and footwear. The United States ran a 

services trade surplus with China in 2013, which amounted to $19.2 billion, compared to $17.0 

billion in 2012. 

China’s compliance with its WTO commitments remained a focus of U.S.-China trade relations 

in 2013. Notable U.S. concerns were China’s IPR enforcement, industrial policies, export 

restraints on raw material inputs, import bans on certain U.S. agricultural products, and barriers 

to entry affecting services sectors. In July 2013, at the fifth U.S.-China Strategic and Economic 

Dialogue, the United States and China announced they intended to negotiate a bilateral 

investment treaty that would provide national treatment at all phases of investment.

Mexico

In 2013, Mexico was the United States’ third-largest single-country two-way merchandise

trading partner. With total two-way merchandise trade valued at $459.4 billion, Mexico 

accounted for 12.7 percent of U.S. trade with the world. U.S. merchandise exports to Mexico 

totaled $181.7 billion in 2013, and U.S. merchandise imports from Mexico amounted to $277.7 

billion, resulting in a merchandise trade deficit of $96.0 billion. In 2013, leading U.S. exports to 

Mexico included transportation equipment, particularly automotive trade; chemicals and 

related products; energy-related products; and electronic products. Leading U.S. imports from 

22
Mexico included transportation equipment, electronic products, energy-related products, 

machinery, computers, televisions, cellphones, and nonmonetary gold. The United States had a 

services trade surplus of $11.7 billion with Mexico in 2013.

On May 2, 2013, the presidents of the United States and Mexico announced the formation of 

the High Level Economic Dialogue (HLED), whose goal is to promote competitiveness and 

connectivity; foster economic growth, productivity, entrepreneurship, and innovation; and 

build a partnership for regional and global leadership. On August 15, 2013, the U.S.-Mexico 

High-Level Regulatory Cooperation Council published its first “Progress Report to Leaders,” 

including an appendix on regulations for nanotechnologies. The report recounts meetings held 

during 2012–13 and details the current status of regulatory cooperation activities and 

discussions related to seven sector issues. 

To address cross-border trucking between the United States and Mexico, the Federal Motor 

Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA) announced the authorization of Mexico-domiciled motor 

carriers to transport cargo throughout the United States (long-haul operations) under a pilot 

program in 2011. As of December 2013, FMCSA had active long-haul operating authority for 14 

Mexican-domiciled motor carriers. These carriers had a total of 56 participating vehicles 

authorized to operate throughout the United States, and the trucks underwent a total of 4,209 

inspections. 

Japan

In 2013, two-way U.S. merchandise trade with Japan—the United States’ fourth-largest singlecountry trading partner—was valued at $197.6 billion, accounting for 5.5 percent of U.S. 

merchandise trade with the world. U.S. merchandise exports to Japan were $59.7 billion in 

2013, and U.S. merchandise imports from Japan were $138.0 billion, resulting in a trade deficit 

of $78.3 billion. Leading U.S. merchandise exports to Japan included aircraft and parts, certain 

medicines, pork, corn, wheat, and soybeans. Leading U.S. imports from Japan included 

passenger vehicles and parts, aircraft parts, parts for printers and copying machines, and heavy 

construction equipment. Japan was the United States’ third-largest single-country trading 

partner in services in 2013, and the United States’ services trade surplus with Japan was $18.6 

billion.

U.S.-Japanese economic dialogue was driven by Japan’s consultations toward joining the TPP 

negotiations in the first half of 2013, and continued during the second half of the year through 

bilateral negotiations that ran parallel to the multilateral TPP negotiations. Japan’s entry into 

TPP negotiations was accompanied by several points of progress in long-standing trade irritants 

between the United States and Japan, including a substantial expansion of market access for 

U.S. beef and several practical measures concerning the Japanese automotive and insurance 

sectors. Dialogue continued on these issues throughout the year as the two countries refocused 

their economic engagement on the negotiation of a free trade agreement.

23
Korea

In 2013, Korea was the United States’ sixth-largest single-country two-way trading partner, with 

two-way merchandise trade valued at $101.0 billion, accounting for 2.8 percent of U.S. trade 

with the world. U.S. merchandise exports to Korea were valued at $39.0 billion and U.S. 

merchandise imports from Korea were valued at $62.0 billion, resulting in a merchandise trade 

deficit of $23.0 billion. Leading U.S. exports to Korea included aircraft and parts, processors, 

machines for the production of electronic integrated circuits and semiconductors, ferrous 

waste and scrap, medicaments, and coal. Leading U.S. imports from Korea included 

automobiles and parts, cellphones, petroleum oils, electronic integrated circuits, and parts for 

automatic data processing machines. The United States reported an overall trade surplus in 

services with Korea of $11.1 billion in 2013. 

In 2013, the second round of tariff cuts occurred under the U.S.-Korea FTA (KORUS FTA), and 12 

of the 19 KORUS FTA committees and working groups held meetings. In November 2013, Korea 

expressed interest in joining the TPP.

Brazil

In 2013, Brazil maintained its position as the United States’ ninth-largest single-country twoway merchandise trading partner. Two-way merchandise trade with Brazil was valued at $64.5 

billion in 2013, accounting for 1.8 percent of total U.S. merchandise trade with the world. U.S 

exports to Brazil in 2013 were valued at $37.6 billion, while U.S imports from Brazil decreased 

by over 15 percent to $26.9 billion. As a result, the United States recorded a $10.8 billion 

surplus in merchandise trade in 2013, an increase of 95 percent from 2012. Leading U.S. 

exports to Brazil included aircraft and parts, petroleum-related oils and refined petroleum 

products, wheat, coal, medicaments, and propane. In 2013, as a result of a poor wheat crop in 

neighboring Argentina, exports of U.S. wheat to Brazil increased over 9,000 percent from 2012, 

reaching a value of $1.2 billion—the highest level in 30 years. Leading U.S. imports from Brazil 

included petroleum-related products, semifinished iron products, ethyl alcohol, unroasted 

coffee, and non-alloy pig iron. In 2013, the U.S. trade surplus in services with Brazil increased to 

$17.4 billion.

In 2013, Brazil and the United States held the second meeting of the Commission on Economic 

and Trade Relations under the Agreement on Trade and Economic Cooperation. Brazil’s 

temporary tariff increase on 100 products, imposed in 2012 on products imported from outside 

Mercosur (the South American common market), ended. The USDA proposed to allow fresh 

beef from certain parts of Brazil to be imported.

Taiwan

In 2013, Taiwan remained the United States’ 11th-largest single-economy two-way 

merchandise trading partner. U.S. two-way merchandise trade with Taiwan was $60.8 billion in 

2013, which accounted for 1.7 percent of U.S. trade with the world. The United States’ bilateral 

trade deficit with Taiwan, which had risen considerably in 2011, dropped to $16.9 billion in 

2012 and $14.3 billion in 2013. U.S. merchandise exports to Taiwan amounted to $23.3 billion 

24
in 2013, a 6.6 percent increase from 2012. U.S. merchandise imports from Taiwan amounted to 

$37.5 billion in 2013, a 3.1 percent decrease from 2012. Leading U.S. exports were 

manufacturing-related semiconductor machines and instruments; ferrous waste and scrap; 

aircraft and parts; light oils; soybeans; and military weapons and munitions. Leading U.S. 

imports were cellphones, memory chips, electronic integrated circuits, processors, and radio 

navigational aid apparatus (GPS devices). The United States ran a services trade surplus with 

Taiwan in 2013, which amounted to $4.0 billion, compared to $3.9 billion the year before.

In 2013, the United States and Taiwan resumed high-level meetings under the U.S.-Taiwan 

Trade and Investment Framework Agreement. The United States also continued work with 

Taiwan to provide full market access for U.S. beef and beef products consistent with World 

Organisation for Animal Health (OIE) guidelines for bovine spongiform encephalopathy (BSE), 

based on a bilateral protocol negotiated in 2009. Additionally, the United States engaged 

Taiwan on issues related to Taiwan’s inconsistent grading practice for imports of U.S. rice under 

a country-specific quota.

India

U.S. two-way merchandise trade with India—the United States’ 12th-largest single-country 

trading partner—was valued at $58.4 billion, accounting for 1.6 percent of U.S. merchandise 

trade with the world. U.S. merchandise exports amounted to $16.9 billion in 2013, and U.S. 

merchandise imports from India were $41.5 billion, resulting in a merchandise trade deficit of 

$24.5 billion. Leading U.S. exports to India included aircraft and parts; nonmonetary gold; 

certain petroleum products used to manufacture tires; coal; and almonds. Leading U.S. imports 

from India included nonindustrial diamonds, certain medicines, light oils and preparations, 

mucilages and thickeners, and jewelry. India was the only major U.S. trading partner with which 

the United States had a deficit in services trade—$6.0 billion—in 2013.

The United States and India addressed several areas of concern using bilateral high-level 

meetings and multilateral forums in 2013. Of particular concern to the United States were 

localization and testing requirements in various electronic goods sectors as well as the solar 

energy sector. The United States continued to monitor India’s IPR protection policies, including 

those covering foreign company patent protection and copyright protection.

25
Table ES.1 Summary of 2013 trade agreement activities

January 

8: The Generalized System of Preferences 

(GSP) subcommittee of the Trade Policy 

Staff Committee (TPSC) requests public 

comments on the effect of withdrawal, 

suspension, or limitation of GSP benefits for 

Bangladesh.

9: The United States and Chile convene the 

sixth meeting of the U.S.-Chile 

Environmental Affairs Council and the 

fourth meeting of the U.S.-Chile Joint 

Commission for Environmental Cooperation 

in Santiago, Chile.

10: The United States requests World Trade 

Organization (WTO) dispute settlement 

consultations with Indonesia concerning 

certain measures Indonesia imposes on the 

importation of horticultural products, 

animals, and animal products (DS455).

11: The United States and Peru reach 

agreement on a five-point action plan to 

support Peru’s forestry sector reform 

efforts and to further Peru’s 

implementation of its obligations under the 

U.S.-Peru Trade Promotion Agreement 

(TPA) Annex on Forest Sector Governance.

15: United States Trade Representative 

(USTR) Kirk notifies Congress of the Obama 

Administration’s intent to enter into 

negotiations for a Trade in Services 

Agreement (TISA) with 20 trading partners.

16: The United States and Thailand 

conclude a two-day meeting under their 

Trade and Investment Framework 

Agreement (TIFA), agreeing to expand 

cooperation on bilateral, regional, and 

multilateral issues in order to increase trade 

and investment and support the creation 

and retention of jobs in both countries.

28: The WTO Dispute Settlement Body 

(DSB) establishes a panel at the request of 

Argentina concerning certain measures the 

United States imposes on the importation 

of animals, meat, and other animal 

products from Argentina (DS447).

28: The WTO DSB establishes a single panel 

at the request of the United States, the 

European Union (EU), and Japan concerning 

certain measures Argentina imposes on the 

importation of goods (DS438, DS444, 

DS445).

28: The United States and Jordan agree to a 

set of joint principles for international 

investment, as well as joint principles for 

information and communication technology 

(ICT) services. 

28: USTR Kirk and U.S. Agricultural 

Secretary Vilsack announce that the United 

States and Japan have agreed on new terms 

and conditions for exports of U.S. beef and 

beef products to Japan, which will pave the 

way for expanded exports to Japan. 

February

6: The United States requests WTO dispute 

settlement consultations with India 

concerning certain measures of India 

relating to domestic content requirements 

for solar cells and solar modules (DS456).

26
February—continued 

11: U.S.-EU High-Level Working Group on 

Jobs and Growth publishes its final report 

recommending the initiation of formal 

domestic procedures to launch negotiations 

on a comprehensive trade and investment 

agreement. 

13: President Obama, European Council 

President Van Rompuy, and European 

Commission President Barroso announce 

the decision to initiate internal procedures 

necessary to launch negotiations on a 

Transatlantic Trade and Investment 

Partnership (TTIP). 

14: The United States and South Korea 

convene the first meeting of the 

Environmental Affairs Council under the 

U.S.-Korea Free Trade Agreement (KORUS 

FTA).

27: The United States and Afghanistan meet 

to continue their dialogue and evaluate 

progress under the United StatesAfghanistan TIFA.

March

1: USTR submits the Administration’s 2013 

Trade Policy Agenda and 2012 Annual 

Report to Congress. 

4–13: The United States and its TPP 

partners––Australia, Brunei Darussalam, 

Canada, Chile, Malaysia, Mexico, New 

Zealand, Peru, Singapore, and Vietnam––

hold the 16th round of TPP negotiations in 

Singapore. 

6: The United States and Iraq announce that 

the bilateral U.S.-Iraq TIFA, first negotiated 

in 2005, is likely to enter into force later this 

year. It will provide a bilateral forum 

fostering more trade and investment

between the two countries. 

10: U.S.-Taiwan TIFA council meetings in 

Taipei result in new joint statements on 

investment principles and ICT services, as 

well as the launch of the new TIFA working 

groups on investment and technical barriers 

to trade.

12: USTR holds a public hearing before the 

TPSC on U.S. negotiating objectives for the 

TISA.

18–19: The United States and South Korea 

convene the first meeting of the Labor 

Affairs Council under the KORUS FTA. 

20: President Obama notifies Congress of its 

intent to enter into TTIP negotiations with 

the EU. 

28: USTR holds a public hearing and 

receives testimony on the GSP review of 

country practices petitions relating to 

Bangladesh, Georgia, Niger, Russia, and 

Uzbekistan. 

29: Acting USTR Marantis announces that 

the United States is exploring the possibility 

of a TIFA with the Economic Community of 

West African States.

April 

1: USTR releases three reports on foreign 

trade measures—2013 Report on Sanitary 

and Phytosanitary Measures, 2013 Report 

on Technical Barriers to Trade, and 2013 

National Trade Estimate Report on Foreign 

Trade Barriers. 

3: USTR releases the annual 2013 Section 

1377 Review on the operation and 

effectiveness of telecommunications trade 

agreements. 

27
April—continued 

10: USTR participates in the Forestry 

Subcommittee meeting of the U.S.-Peru 

TPA and the third meeting of the 

Environmental Cooperation Commission in 

Lima, Peru.

11: The United States and Guatemala agree 

on an Enforcement Plan to resolve concerns 

raised in a labor case brought by the United 

States under the Dominican RepublicCentral America-United States Free Trade 

Agreement (CAFTA-DR).

16: The USTR announces initiation of a 

review of possible designation of Burma 

and Laos as GSP beneficiary developing 

countries.

21: The United States and other TPP 

negotiating partners welcome Japan as a 

new participant in the TPP negotiations.

24: The WTO DSB establishes a panel at the 

request of the United States concerning 

certain measures Indonesia imposes on the 

importation of horticultural products, 

animals, and animal products (DS455).

24: President Obama notifies Congress of its 

intent to include Japan in the TPP 

negotiations. 

May

1: USTR releases the 2013 Special 301 

Report on the adequacy and effectiveness 

of U.S. trading partners’ protection and 

enforcement of intellectual property rights 

(IPR). 

7: Acting USTR Marantis and Acting 

Secretary of Labor Harris announce that the 

United States has requested consultations 

with the government of Bahrain under the 

labor chapter of the U.S.-Bahrain FTA 

regarding labor issues stemming from 

Bahrain’s response to civil unrest in early 

2011. 

10: CAFTA-DR members reaffirm their 

commitment to work together to enhance 

the mutually supportive trade and 

environmental protections outlined in the 

CAFTA-DR Environment Chapter as well as 

the Environmental Cooperation Agreement, 

at an Environmental Affairs Council meeting 

in Santo Domingo, Dominican Republic.

15–24: The 17th round of TPP negotiations 

is held in Lima, Peru.

21: The United States and Burma sign a 

TIFA, creating a platform for ongoing 

dialogue and cooperation on trade and 

investment issues between the two 

governments. 

29: The United States and the Caribbean 

Community (CARICOM) sign a TIFA. 

30: The United States initiates a Section 301 

investigation of the acts, policies, and 

practices of the government of Ukraine that 

resulted in identifying Ukraine as a Priority 

Foreign Country in May’s 2013 Special 301 

Report. 

June 

4: USTR holds a public hearing aimed at 

reviewing U.S. GSP eligibility for Burma and 

Laos. 

5: The United States and Colombia conclude 

the first meeting of the Labor Affairs 

Council under the U.S.-Colombia FTA. 

28
June—continued

6: The United States and Peru meet to 

discuss implementation of the 

environmental provisions of the U.S.-Peru 

TPA and the U.S.-Peru Environmental 

Cooperation Agreement.

7: The United States and Peru hold the third 

meeting of the Free Trade Commission, 

which is responsible for overseeing 

implementation and operation of the U.S.-

Peru FTA. Participants discuss bilateral 

trade, investment, and economic issues, 

pending implementation issues, and 

cooperation in other fora, such as TPP.

13: The United States and Indonesia meet 

to discuss the comprehensive trade agenda 

between the two countries, seeking to 

address issues in ways that would further 

promote job-creating trade and investment 

under the U.S.-Indonesia TIFA. 

19: USTR submits its first annual Report on 

WTO Enforcement Actions: Russia to 

Congress. The report highlights the 

enforcement actions USTR has taken to 

ensure Russia’s full compliance with its 

WTO obligations. 

27: USTR announces results of the 2012 

annual review under the GSP program, 

including a suspension of Bangladesh’s 

eligibility for tariff benefits under the GSP 

program. 

27: Ecuador announces its intention to 

withdraw from the Andean Trade 

Preference Act (ATPA) program.

July 

8–12: The first round of TTIP negotiations is 

held in Washington D.C.

10–11: The fifth round of the U.S.-China 

Strategic and Economic Dialogue is held in 

Washington D.C.

12: USTR Froman announces that the 

United States has fully implemented the 

WTO’s recommendations and rulings in the 

dispute brought by Mexico concerning the 

U.S. dolphin-safe labeling program (DS381).

12: The WTO DSB establishes a panel at the 

request of Vietnam concerning certain 

antidumping measures the United States 

imposes on certain frozen warm-water 

shrimp from Vietnam (DS429).

15–25: The 18th round of TPP negotiations 

is held in Kota Kinabalu, Malaysia, marking 

the first round in which Japan has 

participated as a full negotiating partner. 

17: Negotiations for an expanded 

Information Technology Agreement (ITA) at 

the WTO are suspended due to concerns 

over China’s position on the negotiations. 

24: USTR Froman meets with Japanese 

Minister for Economy, Trade, and Industry 

Motegi in Washington, DC, to discuss 

Japan’s participation in TPP negotiations as 

well as ongoing U.S.-Japan discussions on a 

series of multilateral trade issues. 

29: Argentina requests that the WTO 

Director-General compose a panel 

concerning certain measures the United 

States imposes on the importation of 

animals, meat, and other animal products 

from Argentina (DS447).

29–August 2: USTR Froman joins President 

Obama for the final two of a three-nation 

trip to Senegal, South Africa, and Tanzania. 

The trip highlighted the importance of 

strengthening U.S.-Africa trade and 

investment ties.

29
July—continued

31: Authority to provide preferential 

treatment under GSP, ATPA, and the 

Andean Trade Promotion and Drug 

Eradication Act (ATPDEA) expires.

August

1: USTR Froman and Secretary of 

Agriculture Vilsack announce that the EU 

will continue to offer U.S. producers 

significant access, at zero duty, to the EU 

market for high-quality beef produced from 

non-hormone-treated cattle. 

7–9: The United States and Japan hold 

bilateral negotiations related to autos, 

insurance, and nontariff measures in other 

key areas and sectors in Tokyo parallel to 

the TPP negotiations.

9–13: The 12th annual African Growth and 

Opportunity Act (AGOA) forum is held in 

Addis Ababa, Ethiopia. 

22–30: The 19th round of TPP negotiations 

is held in Bandar Seri Begawan, Brunei 

Darussalam.

30: The United States requests WTO 

consultations with Indonesia concerning 

certain measures it imposes on the 

importation of horticultural products, 

animals, and animal products (DS465).

September

10: USTR conducts a public hearing as part 

of its ongoing section 301 investigation into 

certain IPR policies and practices in Ukraine. 

11: The U.S.-China Joint Commission on 

Commerce and Trade holds its mid-year 

review in Beijing. 

11–12: The United States and Brazil hold 

the second meeting of the Commission on 

Economic and Trade Relations under the 

U.S.-Brazil Agreement on Trade and 

Economic Cooperation. Discussion topics 

include investment, innovation, and small, 

medium-sized, and micro enterprises. 

17: USTR announces country-specific and 

first-come, first-served in-quota allocations 

for the fiscal year 2014 tariff-rate quotas on 

imported raw cane sugar, refined and 

specialty sugar, and sugar-containing 

products.

18–28: The 12 TPP countries meet in 

Washington, DC, to discuss a range of issues 

under negotiation, including investment, 

financial services, and the environment. 

25: The WTO DSB adopts the panel report 

concerning the complaint by the United 

States regarding China’s imposition of 

duties on U.S. broiler products (DS427).

26: The United States and Japan announce 

an agreement to streamline organic trade 

between the two countries. Beginning 

January 1, 2014, organic products certified 

in either country may be sold in both 

countries.

30–October 1: The United States and Japan 

hold a second round of bilateral 

negotiations on motor vehicles, insurance, 

and nontariff measures.

October

1–2: Trade ministers for the TPP negotiating 

countries hold discussions in Bali, Indonesia, 

on the margins of the APEC Leaders’ 

meeting.

30
October—continued

3: Brazil’s Council of Ministers responsible 

for Foreign Trade (CAMEX) meet to discuss 

their next steps in response to the United 

States’ September decision to reduce 

monthly settlement payments to the Brazil 

cotton fund.

3: The Indian Department of Electronics and 

Information Technology delayed, for a 

second time, a controversial testing 

requirement at the request of U.S. 

technology and telecommunications 

companies. The action delayed application 

of the requirement for an additional three 

months.

4–8: The APEC leaders’ and ministerial 

meetings are held in Bali, Indonesia. 

Leaders agree to take steps toward 

increasing connectivity in the region, 

promoting sustainable and equitable 

growth, and improving regional economic 

integration.

21–23: The United States and Japan hold 

the third round of U.S.-Japan bilateral 

negotiations on motor vehicles, insurance, 

and nontariff measures. 

21–25: Negotiations towards expanding the 

ITA resume at the WTO. 

28: The United States expresses concerns 

about the enforcement of Guatemala’s laws 

protecting worker rights, saying that 

significant work remains to ensure that an 

enforcement plan signed by the 

Guatemalan government earlier in the year 

is effectively implemented. 

November

4–9: The fourth round of the TISA 

negotiations takes place in Geneva, 

Switzerland, among participating WTO 

members.

11–14: The eighth council meeting of the 

U.S.-Central Asia TIFA is held in Ashgabat, 

Turkmenistan.

11–15: The second round of TTIP 

negotiations takes place in Brussels, 

Belgium.

15: The United States and CARICOM hold an 

inaugural meeting of the U.S.-CARICOM 

Council on Trade and Investment under the 

recently inaugurated U.S.-CARICOM TIFA.

21: The United States and Morocco sign a 

Trade Facilitation Agreement. Morocco 

becomes the first country in the region to 

conclude a bilateral trade facilitation 

agreement with the United States, as well 

as endorse joint statements on investment 

principles and on ICT services trade with the 

United States.

25: The United States and Bangladesh sign 

the U.S.-Bangladesh Trade and Investment 

Cooperation Forum Agreement (TICFA).

29: USTR Froman welcomes Korea’s 

expression of interest in joining the TPP.

December 

3: China requests WTO dispute settlement 

consultations with the United States 

regarding the use of certain methodologies 

in antidumping investigations involving 

Chinese products (DS471). 

3–7: The ninth annual WTO ministerial 

conference is held in Bali, Indonesia. 

31
December—continued

5: Korea requests establishment of a WTO 

DSB panel concerning certain antidumping 

and countervailing measures the United 

States has placed on large residential 

washers from Korea (DS464).

7–10: A TPP ministerial meeting is held in 

Singapore. 

16–20: The third round of TTIP negotiations 

takes place in Washington, DC.

18: The United States and Libya sign a TIFA, 

which will provide a forum to address trade 

issues and will help build trade and 

investment relations between the two 

countries.

19–20: The 24th session of the U.S.-China 

Joint Commission on Commerce and Trade 

occurs in Beijing, China. 

20: USTR submits its first annual Report on 

Russia’s Implementation of the WTO 

Agreement to Congress.

23: President Obama completes annual 

determinations regarding country eligibility 

for the AGOA in 2014. Eligibility will 

continue for the 39 currently eligible 

countries, and Mali’s eligibility is reinstated 

effective January 1, 2014.

24: USTR submits the 2013 Report to 

Congress on China’s WTO Compliance to 

Congress.

Source: Compiled from official and private sources, including the U.S. Department of Commerce, U.S. Department of State, U.S. 

Trade Representative, White House, World Trade Organization, Inside U.S. Trade, and Washington Trade Daily. 

32
Chapter 1

Overview of U.S. Trade

Scope and Approach of the Report

This report provides factual information on the operation of the U.S. trade agreements program 

and its administration for calendar year 2013.3 Trade agreement activities during 2013 include 

the administration of U.S. trade laws and regulations; U.S. participation in the World Trade 

Organization (WTO), the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD), 

and the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) forum; U.S. negotiation of and participation 

in free trade agreements (FTAs); and bilateral developments with major trading partners.

This report is based on primary source materials about U.S. trade programs and administrative 

actions pertaining to them. These materials chiefly encompass U.S. government reports, 

notices, and news releases, including publications and news releases by the U.S. International 

Trade Commission (USITC or the Commission). Other primary sources of information include 

publications of international institutions, such as the International Monetary Fund (IMF), World 

Bank, OECD, WTO, United Nations (UN), and foreign governments. The report draws on 

professional journals, trade publications, and news reports for supplemental factual 

information when primary source information is unavailable.

Official U.S. merchandise trade data are provided throughout the report. Chapters 1 and 5 also 

offer data on services trade. The services trade data by country are based on figures for trade in 

private services, which exclude government sales and purchases of services. Services data were 

compiled by the Commission primarily from figures provided by the Bureau of Economic 

Analysis (BEA) of the U.S. Department of Commerce (USDOC or Commerce).

To complement the release of the Year in Trade 2013 report, the USITC has developed a series 

of dashboards in MS Excel available online that present U.S. merchandise trade data in an 

interactive format. The dashboards are a companion piece to the traditional report. They will 

offer Year in Trade readers a new way to look at, visualize, and understand the U.S. 

merchandise trade data used in the report. Using the dashboards, readers will be able to 

conduct further analysis of U.S. merchandise trade focusing on specific trading partners, 

specific FTAs, and specific trade preference programs. The dashboards can be found 

at www.usitc.gov/publications/dashboards. All dashboards present data covering at least the 

period presented in this report (2011–13), while some allow the user to review data ranging 

from 1996 through 2013.4

3 This is the 65th in a series of annual reports submitted to the U.S. Congress under section 163(c) of the Trade Act 

of 1974 (19 U.S.C. § 2213(c)) and its predecessor legislation.

4 Data in the dashboards may differ from the data presented in the report. For example, the dashboards may 

present unadjusted data from the U.S. Census Bureau (Census), whereas the corresponding data in a given report 

33

 
Overview of the U.S. Economy in 2013 

In 2013, the U.S. economy continued to rebound from the economic recession of 2008 and 

2009, though at a weaker rate than in 2012. U.S. real gross domestic product (GDP) increased 

1.9 percent in 2013, compared to 2.8 percent the previous year (figure 1.1). The increase in real 

GDP in 2013 mostly reflected positive contributions from personal consumption expenditures 

(1.33 percentage points) and gross private domestic investment (0.84 percentage points), partly 

offset by a negative contribution from government spending (–0.44 percentage points).5 The 

contribution of net exports of goods and services to growth in real GDP was 0.12 percentage 

points.6 To support the continued U.S. economic recovery, the U.S. Federal Reserve continued 

to buy long-term securities and kept the target range for the federal funds rate at 0 to 0.25 

percent in 2013.7 The seasonally adjusted U.S. unemployment rate fell from 7.9 percent in 

January 2013 to 6.7 percent in December 2013.8

Figure 1.1 U.S. real gross domestic product, annual rate of change, 2004–13

Source: USDOC. http://www.bea.gov/national/xls/gdpchg.xls. 

table may reflect an adjustment that is explained in a footnote. Dashboard mechanics are discussed in more detail 

in the dashboard's “Introductory Page” on the USITC website.

5 USDOC, BEA, “Gross Domestic Product: Fourth Quarter and Annual 2013 (Second Estimate),” February 28, 2014, 

table 2.

6 Ibid.

7 Federal Reserve, “Federal Reserve Issues FOMC Statement,” June 19, 2013. The federal funds rate is the interest 

rate at which depository institutions lend their excess deposits to each other overnight. Federal Reserve, “Open 

Market Operations,” n.d. (accessed March 12, 2014). 8 USDOL, BLS, “Labor Force Statistics from the Current Population Survey,” n.d. (accessed January 16, 2014).

-4.0

-3.0

-2.0

-1.0

0.0

1.0

2.0

3.0

4.0

2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013

Percent

34

 
U.S. international trade continued to grow in 2013, although the percentage increase was 

significantly less than in 2012.9 Exports of goods and services increased 2.8 percent in 2013, 

compared to 4.6 percent in 2012, reflecting generally slower growth in most other countries. 

U.S. imports of goods and services increased very slightly (by less than 0.04 percent), reflecting 

lower U.S. demand for imported petroleum and petroleum-related products.10

The global economy also grew at a slightly reduced rate: the growth rate was 3.0 percent in 

2013, compared to 3.2 percent in 2012.11 Economic growth in major advanced economies fell 

slightly, slipping to 1.3 percent in 2013 from 1.4 percent in 2012. While growth has been more 

robust in many emerging and developing economies in recent years, economic growth for these 

economies also decreased on average, from 5.0 percent in 2012 to 4.7 percent in 2013. 

Economic growth rates among major U.S. trading partners showed substantial differences. 

Output in the European Union (EU) euro area fell in 2013 by 0.5 percent, although the decline 

was less than the decline in 2012 (0.7 percent). The economic growth rate rose in the United 

Kingdom (from 0.3 percent in 2012 to 1.8 percent in 2013), in Canada (from 1.7 percent to 2.0

percent), and in Japan (from 1.4 percent to 1.5 percent). Economic growth rates among

developing and emerging market economies were also mixed, with the growth rate falling in 

Mexico (from 3.9 percent in 2012 to 1.1 percent in 2013) and in India (from 4.7 percent to 4.4 

percent). While China’s economic growth rate was highest among major U.S. trading partners, 

its rate stayed constant in 2013 (7.7 percent in both 2012 and 2013).12

Exchange-Rate Trends 

The U.S. dollar appreciated 3.3 percent in 2013 against a broad dollar index.13 By yearend, the 

dollar had appreciated 20.8 percent against the Japanese yen, 7.9 percent against the Canadian 

dollar, and 2.6 percent against the Mexican peso. However, the dollar fell against the Chinese 

yuan, the euro, and the pound sterling by 2 to 4 percent (figure 1.2). Fluctuations in the dollar 

reflected central bank policies as well as concerns about the global economic outlook. In the 

first quarter of the year, the dollar appreciated against most major currencies, reflecting a 

higher growth outlook for the U.S. economy and expectations that foreign central banks would 

continue monetary easing.14 In the second quarter, the dollar appreciated against most major 

currencies, except the euro, due to favorable U.S. economic reports and expectations that the 

9 USDOC, Census Bureau, and BEA, “U.S. International Trade in Goods and Services, January 2014,” March 7, 2014, 

exhibit 1. 10 According to the U.S. Energy Information Administration (USEIA), strong crude oil production growth in the 

United States has led to a “significant decline” in U.S. imports of petroleum. USEIA, “Short-term Energy Outlook,” 

February 11, 2014.

11 IMF, World Economic Outlook, April 2014, table 1.1 Economic growth is measured as the percent change in GDP 

at constant prices.

12 Ibid. 13 The broad dollar index is a weighted average of the foreign exchange values of the U.S. dollar against those of 

the currencies of a large group of major U.S. trading partners. Dollar appreciation is measured as the increase in 

the broad dollar index from January 2, 2013 to December 31, 2013. 14 FRBNY, “Treasury and Federal Reserve Foreign Exchange Operations January–March 2013,” May 9, 2013, 1.

35

 
Figure 1.2 Indices of U.S. dollar exchange rates for selected major foreign currencies, daily, 2013a

Source: U.S. Federal Reserve Board. a

Units of the foreign currency per unit of the U.S. dollar. A decrease in the index represents a depreciation of the U.S. dollar 

relative to the foreign currency, and an increase in the index represents an appreciation of the U.S. dollar relative to the foreign 

currency.

Federal Reserve Board would begin to reduce the pace of its asset purchases.15 In the third 

quarter of the year, the dollar depreciated against most major currencies due to a weaker-thanexpected U.S. economic outlook and the continuation of Federal Reserve asset purchases,

which prompted traders to reduce dollar exposures from the previous quarter.16 In the fourth 

quarter, the U.S. dollar appreciated against the yen and other emerging market currencies.17

The large appreciation of the dollar relative to the yen for the year reflected the expansionary 

monetary and fiscal policies Japan implemented during the course of the year.18

15 FRBNY, “Treasury and Federal Reserve Foreign Exchange Operations April–June 2013,” August 8, 2013, 1. 16 FRBNY, “Treasury and Federal Reserve Foreign Exchange Operations July–September 2013,” November 14, 2013, 

1.

17 FRBNY, “Treasury and Federal Reserve Foreign Exchange Operations October–December 2013,” February 13, 

2014, 5–6. 18 FRBNY, “Treasury and Federal Reserve Foreign Exchange Operations July–September 2013,” November 14, 2013, 

7.

90

95

100

105

110

115

120

Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec

Depreciation $ Appreciation

Euro Pound Canadian dollar Yuan Yen Peso

January 2, 2013 = 100

36

 
Balance of Payments19

The U.S. current-account deficit—the combined balances of trade in goods and services, 

income, and net unilateral current transfers—decreased to $379.3 billion (preliminary) in 2013 

from $440.4 billion in 2012, following an increase in the previous three years.20 The currentaccount deficit also decreased as a share of current-dollar U.S. GDP from 2.7 percent in 2012 to 

2.3 percent in 2013. The decline in the current-account deficit was due to a decrease in the

deficit in goods and services trade and an increase in the surplus in income, which offset an 

increase in net unilateral current transfers to foreigners in 2013.

The U.S. trade deficit for goods and services fell for the second consecutive year to $474.9 

billion in 2013 from $534.7 billion in 2012. The deficit on goods decreased to $703.9 billion in 

2013 from $741.5 billion in 2012, and remained well below the record goods deficit of $835.7 

billion in 2006. U.S. exports of goods rose from $1,561.2 billion in 2012 to $1,589.7 billion in 

2013, reflecting growth in exports of capital goods, consumer goods, and in particular, 

petroleum and petroleum products. Imports of goods dipped to $2,293.6 billion in 2013 from 

$2,302.7 billion in 2012, reflecting a decline in imports of petroleum and petroleum products.

The U.S. trade surplus for services grew from $206.8 billion in 2012 to $229.0 billion in 2013, a 

new annual record.21 Services exports rose from $649.3 billion to $681.7 billion in this period. 

All major categories of services exports grew, with the largest increases in travel and other 

private services.22 At the same time, services imports also increased, rising slightly from $442.5 

billion in 2012 to $452.7 billion in 2013. The largest increases in services imports were in other 

transportation, travel, and other private services.23

19 This section of the report relies on trade data reported by the BEA. The trade balance reported by the BEA is the 

result of subtracting U.S. general imports from U.S. total exports using trade data from the U.S. Census Bureau 

(Census). The BEA adjusts these data to conform with the concepts and definitions used to prepare the 

international and national accounts. For a more detailed discussion of the differences between BOP-basis and 

Census-basis data, see USDOC, BEA, “A Guide to the U.S. International Transactions Accounts,” February 2010. All 

other sections of the report rely solely on Census data. 20 Unless otherwise indicated, information in this section is from USDOC, BEA, “U.S. International Transactions: 

Fourth Quarter and Year 2013,” March 19, 2014, 5–7. Income includes investment income and compensation of 

employees (compensation payments to U.S. residents by nonresidents and payments to nonresidents by U.S. 

residents). Net unilateral transfers include current transfers, such as private remittances, charitable contributions, 

taxes on international transactions, and transfers between U.S. and foreign insurance companies. 21 Services data in this section include trade in private services, as well as transfers under U.S. military agency sales 

contracts and U.S. government purchases of miscellaneous services.

22 Exports of other private services include “mainly film and television tape rentals and expenditures of foreign 

residents temporarily working in the United States.” USDOC, BEA, “U.S. International Transactions Accounts Data: 

Table 3a,” March 19, 2014.

23 “Other transportation” includes freight and port services. Services trade is discussed in more detail later in this 

chapter.

37

 
U.S. Trade in Goods in 201324 

The value of U.S. exports of goods grew 1.4 percent while the value of imports fell 0.5 percent 

in 2013, compared to increases of 4.2 percent and 2.9 percent, respectively, in 2012 (appendix 

table A.3). The reduced growth in U.S. merchandise trade in 2013 reflected slower growth 

among the world economies and the reduction in the value of U.S. imports of petroleum and 

petroleum-related products. According to WTO data, China replaced the United States as the 

largest single-country merchandise trader in 2013.25 U.S. merchandise imports continued to 

exceed merchandise exports. U.S. merchandise exports increased from $1,353.2 billion in 2012 

to $1,372.0 billion in 2013, while U.S. merchandise imports declined from $2,251.0 billion in 

2012 to $2,239.8 billion in 2013 (figure 1.3). The merchandise trade deficit was down slightly in 

2013 at $867.7 billion from $897.8 billion in 2012.

U.S. Merchandise Trade by Product Category

Exports

U.S. exports in 8 of 12 merchandise sector categories increased by a total of $25.8 billion in 

2013, but fell in 4 other sector categories (footwear, minerals and metals, machinery, and 

electronic products) by $7.0 billion (appendix table A.3).26 Transport equipment, which 

consistently ranks as the largest U.S. export sector, accounted for 21.4 percent of merchandise 

exports in 2013. U.S. exports of transport equipment were valued at $293.0 billion in 2013, up 

2.5 percent from $285.8 billion in 2012. Of the 8 merchandise export sectors that grew in 2013, 

68.3 percent of the growth was accounted for by increased exports from 2 sectors: energyrelated products and transport equipment. Energy-related products alone accounted for 40.2 

24 Merchandise trade data in this section do not match the BOP-basis data presented above because of 

adjustments made to the data, as described in footnote 19. Additionally, to maintain continuity with previous 

Commission reports analyzing free trade and preferential trade arrangements, in this section and in the following 

chapters export data consist of U.S. domestic exports and import data consist of U.S. imports for consumption, 

both as reported by Census (for further information on these terms, please select “View data field descriptions” at 

http://dataweb.usitc.gov). The trade balance derived on this basis differs from the merchandise trade balance, 

defined as total exports minus general imports, as generally reported by Census and other federal agencies (see

definitions of general imports and merchandise trade balance at http://www.census.gov/foreigntrade/reference/definitions). Imports for consumption may contain re-exports while domestic exports do not. As a 

result, trade deficits calculated as U.S. domestic exports minus U.S. imports for consumption with certain partners 

may be overstated and trade surpluses with certain partners may be understated in comparison to the 

merchandise trade balance as defined above, depending on the composition of trade with those partners. This 

difference is most notable in bilateral trade with Canada, Mexico, and the EU. Total exports, general imports, and 

the merchandise trade balance as defined above with major trading partners and with FTA partners can be found 

in appendix tables A.1 and A.2. 25 WTO, Statistics Database: Time Series on International Trade (accessed May 12, 2014). According to WTO data, 

the value of China’s merchandise imports and exports amounted to $4.2 trillion, compared to $3.9 trillion for the 

United States in 2013.

26 The 12 sectors in appendix table A.3 include agricultural products, forest products, chemicals and related 

products, energy-related products, textiles and apparel, footwear, minerals and metals, machinery, transportation 

equipment, electronic products, miscellaneous manufactures, and special provisions. Information on the scope of 

each sector can be found in the section on Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs) on the Commission’s website at 

http://www.usitc.gov/research_and_analysis/tradeshifts/2012/index.htm. 

38

 
Figure 1.3 U.S. merchandise trade with the world, 2011–13

Source: Official trade statistics of the USDOC as maintained by the USITC.

Note: Merchandise trade data here include U.S. domestic exports and imports for consumption.

percent of the export growth in these 8 sectors. Top products exported in 2013 included 

aircraft, spacecraft, and parts; petroleum oils; gold; passenger motor vehicles; and soybeans 

(see appendix table A.4 for details at the Schedule B subheading level).

Imports

U.S. imports in 9 of 12 merchandise sector categories rose by $40.2 billion in 2013, while 

imports fell in 3 sector categories (chemicals and related products, energy-related products, 

and minerals and metals) by $51.5 billion (appendix table A.3). Energy-related products 

accounted for most (88.5 percent) of the decline in imports from these 3 sectors. The electronic 

products sector, which has ranked as the largest import sector since 2012, accounted for 18.6 

percent of total merchandise imports in 2013, followed by transportation equipment, at 16.6 

percent. U.S. imports of electronic products were valued at $417.2 billion in 2013, up 0.8 

percent from $413.8 billion in 2012, while imports of transportation equipment were valued at 

$371.5 billion in 2013, up 3.7 percent from $358.4 billion in 2012. Of the 9 industry sectors that 

experienced import growth in 2013, 57.5 percent of this growth was accounted for by increased 

imports of goods from 3 industry sectors: transport equipment, miscellaneous manufactures, 

and imports under special provisions. Top products imported in 2013 included petroleum oils, 

motor vehicles, cellphones, computers, and pharmaceuticals (see appendix table A.5 for details 

at the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States [HTS] subheading level).

-1,500

-1,000

-500

0

500

1,000

1,500

2,000

2,500

2011 2012 2013

Billion $

Exports Imports Trade balance

39
U.S. Imports under Preferential Trade Programs 

and Free Trade Agreements 

The value of U.S. merchandise imports under the United States’ four major preferential trade 

programs with developing countries fell from $66.9 billion in 2012 to $48.1 billion in 2013;27

they accounted for 2.1 percent of total U.S. imports during 2013. Imports totaled $18.5 billion 

under the U.S. Generalized System of Preferences (GSP) program (appendix table A.16); $24.8 

billion (excluding GSP imports) under the African Growth and Opportunity Act (AGOA) 

(appendix table A.19); $2.5 billion under the Andean Trade Preference Act (ATPA), including the 

Andean Trade Promotion and Drug Eradication Act (ATPDEA) (appendix table A.21); and $2.4 

billion under the Caribbean Basin Economic Recovery Act (CBERA), including the Caribbean 

Basin Trade Partnership Act (CBTPA) (appendix table A.23).

28 The value of U.S. imports under all 

four of these programs fell in 2013. A much larger share of U.S. imports enter under free trade 

or trade promotion agreement provisions; the value of these imports increased 4.2 percent in 

2013 and totaled $410.4 billion, or 18.3 percent of total U.S. imports in 2013.29

U.S. Merchandise Trade with Selected Major

Trading Partners30

Table 1.1 shows U.S. trade with selected major trading partners, ranked by total trade (exports 

and imports) in 2013. In 2013, the EU remained the United States’ top trading partner in terms 

of two-way merchandise trade. Canada was the leading global market for U.S. exports. China 

continued as the leading source of U.S. imports through 2013. However, U.S. exports to China 

rose at a faster rate (10.1 percent) than U.S. imports from China (3.1 percent) in 2013. Canada 

also remained the largest single-country two-way trading partner of the United States, followed 

by China and Mexico (see appendix tables A.6 and A.7 for U.S. trade with the top 15 singlecountry trading partners). The leading U.S. export markets and import suppliers by share in 

2013 are shown in figures 1.4 and 1.5.31 

27 U.S. tariff preferences provided to goods entered into the customs territory of the United States from U.S. 

insular possessions (U.S. Virgin Islands, Guam, Johnston Atoll, Midway Islands, and Wake Island) and to products of 

the Freely Associated States (the Marshall Islands, the Federated States of Micronesia, and Palau) are not analyzed 

in this report. See the USITC, Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (HTS) 2014, January 2014, gen. note 

3a (iv) and gen. note 10. U.S. insular possessions are defined in 19 C.F.R. § 7.2 (a).

28 The President’s authority to provide duty-free treatment under the GSP program expired on July 31, 2013. After 

that date, GSP imports did not actually enter duty free, but importers still claimed GSP status to facilitate receiving 

refunds if GSP were to be renewed retroactively, as has been done in the past. The President’s authority to provide 

duty-free treatment under the ATPA/ATPDEA also expired on July 31, 2013. The 2013 data for these programs 

include any imports that claimed GSP or ATPA/ATPDEA status after the expiration date.

29 U.S. imports under preferential trade programs are discussed in chapter 2. U.S. trade with countries under free 

trade or trade promotion agreement provisions is discussed in chapter 4.

30 See chapter 5 for further information on U.S. merchandise trade with major trading partners, including the EU, 

Canada, China, Mexico, and other economies. Annual EU merchandise trade data include 28 countries for 2013 

and the previous years covered in the report. Croatia became the 28th member on July 1, 2013.

31 Leading U.S. exports to and imports from these major trading partners are presented in appendix tables A.27–

A.53.

40

 
Table 1.1 U.S. merchandise trade with selected major trading partners and the world, 2013 (millions of 

dollars)

a

Major trading partner

U.S. domestic

exports

U.S. imports

for consumption Trade balance

Two-way trade 

(exports plus imports)

EU-28 231,676 381,591 -149,915 613,267

Canada 251,685 332,887 -81,202 584,572

China 114,313 438,147 -323,834 552,460

Mexico 181,690 277,664 -95,973 459,354

Japan 59,689 137,954 -78,265 197,643

Koreab 39,008 61,979 -22,971 100,987

Brazil 37,627 26,861 10,767 64,488

Taiwan 23,270 37,539 -14,269 60,808

India 16,911 41,459 -24,548 58,370

All others 416,169 503,671 -87,503 919,840

World 1,372,039 2,239,750 -867,712 3,611,789

Source: Official trade statistics of the USDOC as maintained by the USITC.

Note: Because of rounding, figures may not add to totals shown. a

Trade balance is calculated here as U.S. domestic exports minus U.S. imports for consumption. These balances differ from the 

U.S. merchandise trade balance generally reported by Census, which is defined as total exports minus general imports. 

Appendix table A.1 reports the trade balance on this basis. b

Republic of Korea.

Figure 1.4 Leading U.S. merchandise export markets, by share, 2013

Source: Official trade statistics of the USDOC as maintained by the USITC.

Note: Merchandise trade data here include U.S. domestic exports. Because of rounding, figures may not add to 100 percent.

Canada, 

18%

EU-28, 17%

Mexico, 13%

China, 8%

Japan, 5%

Korea, 3%

Brazil, 3%

Taiwan, 2%

India, 1%

All others, 

30%

Total = $1,372 billion

41
Figure 1.5 Leading U.S. merchandise import sources, by share, 2013

Source: Official trade statistics of the USDOC as maintained by the USITC.

Note: Merchandise trade data here include U.S. imports for consumption. Because of rounding, figures may not add to 100 

percent. 

U.S. Trade in Services in 201332

The U.S. surplus in cross-border private services trade increased 8.9 percent in 2013 to $232.4 

billion (figure 1.6).33 The year 2013 represented the fourth consecutive year of growth in U.S. 

services trade since 2009. U.S. cross-border exports of private services rose 5.1 percent in 2013 

to $659.9 billion, faster than the 3.1 percent increase in U.S. imports, which reached $427.5 

billion. U.S. exports of private services posted gains in 10 of the 11 service categories in 2013, 

the exception being insurance services. By contrast, U.S. imports of private services decreased 

in two service categories: insurance and telecommunications services. Appendix table A.8 

provides data on U.S. trade in private services by product category.

32 This section focuses primarily on cross-border transactions in private services, which exclude government sales 

and purchases of services. Services trade data are drawn from the BEA. In these national accounts data, “crossborder transactions” occur when firms resident in one country provide services to consumers in another, with 

people, information, or money crossing U.S. boundaries in the process. Cross-border transactions appear explicitly 

as imports and exports in the balance of payments. U.S. firms also provide services to foreign consumers through 

affiliates established in host countries, with the income generated through “affiliate transactions” appearing as 

investment income in the balance of payments. The channel of delivery used by service providers depends 

primarily on the nature of the service. For example, many financial services, such as retail banking services, are 

supplied most effectively by affiliates located close to the consumer. Conversely, most trade in education services 

takes the form of cross-border transactions, with students traveling abroad to attend foreign universities. 33 USDOC, BEA, “U.S. International Transactions Accounts Data: Table 3a,” March 19, 2014.

China, 20%

EU-28, 17%

Mexico, 12% Canada, 15%

Japan, 6%

Korea, 3%

Taiwan, 2%

India, 2%

Brazil, 1%

All others, 22%

Total = $2,240 billion

42

 
Figure 1.6 U.S. private cross-border services trade with the world, 2011–13a 

Source: USDOC, BEA, U.S. International Transactions Accounts Data, March 19, 2014, table 3a. a

Data for 2013 are preliminary.

U.S. Services Trade by Product Category 

Exports

Business, professional, and technical services34 led U.S. cross-border services exports in 2013, 

accounting for 23.8 percent of the total, followed by travel services (21.2 percent)35 and 

royalties and license fees (19.6 percent).36 Although exports in most services categories grew in 

2013, growth rates for some sectors were below 2012 levels, while others were virtually 

unchanged or declined. For instance, in 2013, U.S. exports of freight transport services and of 

business, professional, and technical services grew by 0.6 percent and 2.5 percent, respectively, 

compared to growth rates of 2.6 and 8.6 percent in 2012, while U.S. exports of insurance 

services fell by 4.7 percent in 2013. In total, services exports grew more slowly in 2013 than in 

2012, reflecting lower global growth rates.

The post-recessionary growth of U.S. intellectual property exports increased in 2013. In 2013, 

royalties and license fees increased 4.1 percent to $129.3 billion, as compared to 2.9 percent 

34 Business, professional, and technical services are characterized as labor-intensive services employing highly 

skilled and highly educated individuals who fill positions that frequently require specialized licensing or training. 

USITC, Recent Trends in U.S. Services Trade: 2013 Annual Report, July 2013, 2-1. 35 Travel services comprise purchases of goods and services by U.S. residents traveling abroad (U.S. imports of 

travel services) and by foreign travelers in the United States (U.S. exports of travel services). These goods and 

services include food, lodging, recreation, gifts, entertainment, local transportation in the country of travel, and 

other items incidental to a foreign visit.

36 U.S. exports of royalties and license fees comprise payments by foreigners to U.S. owners of intellectual 

property, such as trademarks, computer software, and industrial processes.

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

2011 2012 2013

Billion $

Exports Imports Trade balance

43

 
and $124.2 billion in 2012. Growth in U.S. exports of royalties and license fees occurs when 

there is an increase in the value of U.S. intellectual property purchased by foreign consumers

for use in their domestic markets. Royalties and license fees receipts cover a wide array of 

activities, ranging from the distribution of U.S.-produced movies and television shows to 

industrial processes in the manufacture of pharmaceuticals to general-use software.37

Imports

Business, professional, and technical services (28.0 percent of total imports) and travel services 

(20.2 percent) led U.S. cross-border services imports in 2013. Among all service categories, U.S. 

import growth was mixed. U.S. imports of passenger fares experienced the largest growth at 

7.8 percent (down from 11.5 percent in 2012), followed by freight services at 6.8 percent in 

2013. In 2013, U.S. imports of port and financial services posted increases of 2.7 and 6.3 

percent, respectively, after experiencing a decline in 2012. By contrast, U.S. imports of 

telecommunications and insurance services in 2013 fell by 4.7 percent and 3.8 percent, 

respectively. Elsewhere, U.S. imports of travel services increased by 3.3 percent, down from 6.7 

percent in 2012. Broad growth of U.S. services imports, with increases in 9 of 11 categories, 

likely reflects increasing demand for services by both businesses and consumers as the U.S. 

economy continued its post-recession growth and stabilization. 

U.S. Services Trade with Leading Partners 

The EU was the United States’ largest export market for services in 2013, as well as its largest 

foreign supplier of services (table 1.2), accounting for $208.8 billion (31.6 percent) of total U.S. 

services exports and $148.4 billion (34.7 percent) of total U.S. services imports that year 

(figures 1.7 and 1.8).38 Canada and Japan were the second- and third-largest U.S. services 

trading partners in 2013. The U.S. trade surplus with the EU increased to $60.5 billion in 2013, 

up from $55.9 billion in 2012. The United States also maintained large trade surpluses in 

services with other leading trade partners, including Canada ($34.3 billion), China ($19.2 

billion),39 Japan ($18.6 billion), Brazil ($17.5 billion), Mexico ($11.7 billion), the Republic of 

Korea (Korea) ($11.1 billion), and Australia ($11.1 billion). In addition, U.S. trade surpluses grew 

rapidly in 2013 with several countries, including Korea (27.6 percent), Argentina ($5.3 billion 

surplus, 17.3 percent increase), and South Africa ($1.0 billion surplus, 28.7 percent increase). 

India was the only leading services trade partner with which the United States recorded a trade 

deficit, $6.0 billion, representing a decrease of nearly 9.5 percent from 2012. Although industryspecific data by trading partner are not yet available for 2013, the U.S. services trade deficit 

with India has been driven for the past several years by an increase in U.S. imports of computer 

and information services.40

37 USDOC, BEA, “U.S. International Services,” October 2013, 32. 38 In terms of single countries, Canada was the United States’ largest export market and the United Kingdom (a 

member of the EU) was the largest import supplier of private services in 2013. 39 U.S. services imports from China increased by 7.7 percent while U.S. services exports to China increased by 10.5 

percent, resulting in an increase of 12.6 percent in the U.S. services trade surplus with China. 40 USDOC, BEA, “U.S. International Services,” October 2013, 60–61.

44

 
Table 1.2 U.S. private services trade with major trading partners and the world, 2013a

 (billions of 

dollars) 

Major trading partner U.S. exports U.S. imports Trade balance

Two-way trade 

(exports plus 

imports)

EU-28b 208.8 148.4 60.5 357.2

Canada 63.8 29.5 34.3 93.3

Japan 47.7 29.1 18.6 76.8

Mexico 28.5 16.8 11.7 45.3

China 33.2 14.0 19.2 47.2

India 12.8 18.8 -6.0 31.7

Brazil 24.8 7.3 17.5 32.1

Korea 20.5 9.4 11.1 29.9

Australia 17.6 6.6 11.1 24.2

Taiwan 11.6 7.7 4.0 19.3

Singapore 11.1 4.8 6.2 15.9

All others 179.3 135.1 34.9 305.1

World 659.9 427.5 232.4 1,087.4

Source: USDOC, BEA, U.S. International Transactions Accounts Data, March 19, 2014, table 12.

Note: Because of rounding, figures may not add to totals shown.

a

Data are preliminary.

b

European Union data includes Croatia in the last two quarters of 2013 only.

Figure 1.7 Leading U.S. export markets for private services, by share, 2013a

Source: USDOC, BEA, U.S. International Transactions Accounts Data, March 19, 2014, table 12.

Note: Because of rounding, figures may not add to 100 percent. a

Data for 2013 are preliminary.

EU-28

31%

Canada

10%

Japan

7%

China

5%

Mexico

4%

Brazil

4%

Korea

3%

Australia

3%

India

2%

Taiwan

2%

Singapore

2%

All others

27%

Total = $659.9 billion

45
Figure 1.8 Leading U.S. import sources for private services, by share, 2013a 

Source: USDOC, BEA, U.S. International Transactions Accounts Data, March 19, 2014, table 12.

Note: Because of rounding, figures may not add to 100 percent. a

Data for 2013 are preliminary.

EU-28

35%

Canada

7% Japan

7% India

4%

Mexico

4%

China

Korea 3%

2%

Taiwan

2%

Brazil

2%

Hong Kong

2%

Australia

1%

All others

31%

Total = $427.5 billion

46
Chapter 2

Administration of U.S. Trade Laws and 

Regulations 

This chapter surveys activities related to the administration of U.S. trade laws during 2013, 

covering import relief laws, laws against unfair trade practices, trade adjustment assistance, 

and tariff preference programs. Tariff preference programs encompass the U.S. Generalized 

System of Preferences (GSP), the African Growth and Opportunity Act (AGOA), the Andean 

Trade Preference Act (ATPA), and the Caribbean Basin Economic Recovery Act (CBERA), 

including initiatives aiding Haiti. The online interactive merchandise trade dashboards that 

accompany the Year in Trade 2013 report, as described in chapter 1, can be used for further 

analysis of U.S. trade under the tariff preference programs.

Import Relief Laws

Safeguard Actions 

This section covers safeguard actions under provisions administered by the Commission, 

including the global safeguards provided for in sections 201–204 of the Trade Act of 1974,41 the 

China safeguards provided for in section 421 of the Trade Act of 1974,42 and the safeguards 

provided for in various bilateral free trade agreements (FTAs) involving the United States. 

The Commission conducted no new safeguard investigations during 2013, and no U.S. 

safeguard measures under these provisions were in effect during any part of 2013. In addition, 

by statute, the authority to conduct investigations and apply measures under the China 

safeguards provision in section 421 of the Trade Act of 1974 ceased to be effective on 

December 11, 2013.43

Laws against Unfair Trade Practices

Section 301 Investigations

Section 301 of the Trade Act of 1974 is the principal U.S. statute for addressing unfair foreign 

practices affecting U.S. commerce.

44 Section 301 may be used to enforce U.S. rights under 

bilateral and multilateral trade agreements or to respond to alleged unjustifiable, 

unreasonable, or discriminatory foreign government practices that burden or restrict U.S. 

41 19 U.S.C. §§ 2251–2254. 42 19 U.S.C. § 2451. 43 19 U.S.C. § 2451b(c). Section 423(c) of this law provided that such authority, and regulations issued thereunder, 

were to “cease to be effective 12 years after the date of entry into force of the Protocol of Accession of the 

People’s Republic of China to the WTO.” China’s Protocol of Accession entered into force on December 11, 2001.

44 Section 301 refers to sections 301–310 of the Trade Act of 1974, as amended (19 U.S.C. §§ 2411–2420).

47

 
commerce. Section 301 is administered by the Office of the U.S. Trade Representative (USTR). 

Interested persons may petition USTR to investigate foreign government policies or practices, 

or USTR may initiate an investigation itself.

If the investigation involves a trade agreement and consultations do not lead to a mutually 

acceptable resolution, section 303 of the Trade Act of 1974 requires USTR to use the dispute 

settlement procedures available under the subject agreement. If the matter is not resolved by 

the conclusion of the investigation, section 304 of the Trade Act of 1974 requires USTR to 

determine whether the practices in question fulfill any of three conditions: (1) they deny U.S. 

rights under a trade agreement; (2) they are unjustifiable, and burden or restrict U.S. 

commerce; or (3) they are unreasonable or discriminatory, and burden or restrict U.S. 

commerce. If the practices fulfill either of the first two conditions, USTR must take action.45 If 

the practices fulfill the third condition—that is, if they are unreasonable or discriminatory, and 

they burden or restrict U.S. commerce—USTR must determine whether action is appropriate 

and, if so, what type of action to take.46 The time period for making these determinations varies 

according to the type of practices alleged.

Section 301 Cases

In 2013, there was one ongoing section 301 case, and one new section 301 investigation was 

initiated. The ongoing case concerned various meat hormone directives of the EU, which 

prohibit the use of certain hormones that promote growth in farm animals. The United States 

successfully challenged the EU measures at the WTO, and in 1999, imposed additional ad 

valorem duties of 100 percent on about $117 million in imports from the EU.47

In January 2009, the United States and the EU launched a series of consultations in an effort to 

resolve the meat hormone dispute through negotiation. On May 13, 2009, the United States 

and the EU announced the signing of a memorandum of understanding (MOU).48 Under the 

MOU, the EU agreed to open a tariff-rate quota (TRQ) with an in-quota tariff rate of zero for 

high-quality beef produced without growth-promoting hormones49 in the amount of 20,000 

metric tons,50 and the United States agreed to reduce the scope of the retaliation list.51

The MOU further provided that the parties could enter a second phase under which the EU 

would increase the TRQ to 45,000 metric tons beginning in August 2012, and the United States 

45 Section 301(a) of the Trade Act of 1974, as amended (19 U.S.C. § 2411(a)). 46 Section 301(b) of the Trade Act of 1974, as amended (19 U.S.C. § 2411(b)). 47 64 Fed. Reg. 40638 (July 27, 1999); WTO, European Communities—Measures Concerning Meat and Meat 

Products (DS26, DS48). 48 Memorandum of Understanding between the United States of America and the European Commission Regarding 

the Importation of Beef From Animals Not Treated with Certain Growth-Promoting Hormones and Increased Duties 

Applied by the United States to Certain Products of the European Communities, May 13, 2009 (U.S.-EU Beef MOU). 

For more information on the three-phase MOU, see USITC, The Year in Trade 2009, 2010, 5-5. 49 Article VI of the U.S.-EU Beef MOU defines “high quality beef.” High-quality beef is beef that meets certain 

quality characteristics.

50 U.S.-EU Beef MOU, Art. II(1). 51 U.S.-EU Beef MOU, Art. II(3); 74 Fed. Reg. 40864 (August 13, 2009).

48

 
would lift the remaining additional duties.52 The United States and the EU entered into the 

second phase of the MOU beginning August 1, 2012, and the EU increased the TRQ for highquality beef to 45,000 metric tons.53 The MOU provided that the second phase would continue 

for one year. In August 2013, the United States and the EU agreed to extend the second phase 

of the MOU for two additional years, until August 2, 2015, thereby maintaining the TRQ for 

high-quality beef of 45,000 metric tons per year.

54

The new section 301 case in 2013 concerned intellectual property rights (IPR) protection in 

Ukraine. In May 2013, Ukraine was identified as a priority foreign country55 in USTR’s 2013 

Special 301 Report because of Ukraine’s denial of adequate and effective protection of IPR and 

its denial of fair and equitable market access to persons that rely on IPR protection.56 On May 

30, 2013, the USTR initiated a section 301 investigation of the acts, policies, and practices of the 

government of Ukraine with respect to its IPR regime.57 In particular, the investigation was to 

focus on piracy of copyrights and related rights over the Internet, the Ukrainian government’s 

use of pirated software, and the non-transparent and unfair administration and operation of 

certain Ukrainian copyright collecting societies. The section 301 investigation of intellectual 

property rights in Ukraine was ongoing at the end of 2013.

Special 301

The Special 301 law58 requires that the USTR annually identify and issue a list of foreign 

countries that deny adequate and effective protection of IPR, or deny fair and equitable market 

access to U.S. persons who rely on IPR protection.59 Under the statute, a country denies 

adequate and effective IPR protection if the country does not allow foreign persons “to secure, 

exercise, and enforce rights related to patents, process patents, registered trademarks, 

copyrights and mask works.”60

52 U.S.-EU Beef MOU, Arts. I(2), II(4), and IV(2). The USTR terminated the imposition of the remaining additional 

duties in May 2011. For more background, see USITC, The Year in Trade 2011, 2012, 2-3. 53 Regulation (EU) No. 464/2012 of the European Parliament and of the Council, OJ L 149, June 8, 2012, 1. 54 USTR, “U.S. Trade Representative Froman, Secretary of Agriculture Vilsack,” August 1, 2013. 55 For an explanation of a “priority foreign country,” see the next section on Special 301. 56 USTR, 2013 Special 301 Report, May 2013; USTR, “USTR Releases Annual Special 301 Report,” May 1, 2013. 57 USTR, “Acting U.S. Trade Representative Sapiro Announces Section 301,” May 30, 2013; USTR, “Identification of 

Ukraine as a Priority Foreign Country and Initiation of Section 301 Investigation,” 78 Fed. Reg. 33886 (June 5, 

2013).

58 The Special 301 law is set forth in section 182 of the Trade Act of 1974, as amended (19 U.S.C. § 2242). 59 “Persons who rely on IPR protection” means persons involved in “(A) the creation, production or licensing of 

works of authorship ... that are copyrighted, or (B) the manufacture of products that are patented or for which 

there are process patents.” Section 182(d)(1) of the Trade Act of 1974, as amended (19 U.S.C. § 2242(d)(1)). 60 Section 182(d)(2) of the Trade Act of 1974, as amended (19 U.S.C. § 2242(d)(2)). Section 901(a)(2) of the 

Semiconductor Chip Protection Act (17 U.S.C. § 901(a)(2)) defines “mask work” as a “series of related images, 

however fixed or encoded—(A) having or representing the predetermined, three-dimensional pattern of metallic, 

insulating, or semiconductor material present or removed from the layers of a semiconductor chip product; and (B) 

in which series the relation of the images to one another is that each image has the pattern of the surface of one 

form of the semiconductor chip product.”

49

 
Under the statute, a country denies fair and equitable market access if it denies access to a 

market for a product that is protected by a copyright or related right, patent, trademark, mask 

work, trade secret, or plant breeder’s right through the use of laws and practices that violate 

international agreements or that constitute discriminatory nontariff trade barriers.61 A country 

may be found to deny adequate and effective IPR protection even if it is in compliance with its 

obligations under the WTO Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights 

(TRIPS Agreement).62

In addition, the Special 301 law directs the USTR to identify and list so-called priority foreign 

countries.63 Priority foreign countries are countries that have the most onerous or egregious 

acts, policies, or practices with the greatest adverse impact (actual or potential) on the relevant 

U.S. products.64 Such countries must be designated as priority foreign countries unless they are 

entering into good-faith negotiations, or making significant progress in bilateral or multilateral 

negotiations to provide adequate and effective IPR protection.

65 The identification of a country 

as a priority foreign country triggers a section 301 investigation,66 unless the USTR determines 

that the investigation would be detrimental to U.S. economic interests.67

In addition to identifying priority foreign countries as required by statute, the USTR has 

adopted a practice of naming countries to a “watch list” or a “priority watch list” when the 

countries’ IPR laws and practices fail to provide adequate and effective IPR protection, but the 

deficiencies do not warrant identification of the countries as priority foreign countries.68 The 

priority watch list identifies countries with significant IPR problems that warrant close 

monitoring and bilateral consultation. If a country on the priority watch list makes adequate

progress, it may be moved to the watch list or removed from any listing. On the other hand, a 

country that fails to make progress may be raised from the watch list to the priority watch list, 

or from the priority watch list to the list of priority foreign countries.

In its 2013 Special 301 review, the USTR examined the adequacy and effectiveness of IPR 

protection in 95 countries.69 In conducting the review, the USTR focused on a wide range of 

issues and policy objectives relating to IPR protection and enforcement, including copyright 

piracy over the Internet; trademark counterfeiting and copyright piracy of physical goods, 

including semiconductors, optical discs, automobile parts, and medicines and health care 

products; trademark infringement, particularly with respect to domain names; the protection of 

trade secrets; compulsory technology transfer and licensing; transshipment of pirated and 

counterfeit goods; strengthened criminal and border enforcement; IPR training, resources, and 

prosecutions; criminal prosecutions and deterrent sentencing; ensuring that foreign 

61 Section 182(d)(3) of the Trade Act of 1974, as amended (19 U.S.C. § 2242(d)(3)). 62 Section 182(d)(4) of the Trade Act of 1974, as amended (19 U.S.C. § 2242(d)(4)). 63 Section 182(a)(2) of the Trade Act of 1974, as amended (19 U.S.C. § 2242(a)(2)). 64 Section 182(b)(1) of the Trade Act of 1974, as amended (19 U.S.C. § 2242(b)(1)). 65 Ibid. 66 Section 182(f)(2) of the Trade Act of 1974, as amended (19 U.S.C. § 2242(f)(2)). 67 Section 302(b)(2)(B) of the Trade Act of 1974, as amended (19 U.S.C. § 2412(b)(2)(B)). 68 77 Fed. Reg. 77178 (December 31, 2012). 69 USTR, 2013 Special 301 Report, May 2013; USTR, “USTR Releases Annual Special 301 Report,” May 1, 2013.

50

 
government ministries only use legally authorized and properly licensed business software; 

market access barriers faced by U.S. pharmaceutical and medical device manufacturers; 

adequate implementation of the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) Internet 

treaties;70 and proper implementation of the TRIPS Agreement by developed and developing 

countries.

In the 2013 Special 301 Report, Ukraine was identified as a priority foreign country, principally 

because of its unfair and nontransparent system for collecting and distributing music royalties, 

the widespread use of infringing software by the Ukrainian government, and the failure to 

implement an effective and transparent system to combat online piracy. Ukraine had made a 

series of commitments to make improvements on these particular issues in a 2010 IPR Action 

Plan, following intensive bilateral consultations. Notwithstanding the Ukrainian commitments, 

USTR noted that the situation in Ukraine had deteriorated significantly with respect to each of 

the three issues. 

The 2013 Special 301 Report identified 10 countries on the priority watch list: Algeria, 

Argentina, Chile, China, India, Indonesia, Pakistan, Russia, Thailand, and Venezuela. In listing 

China, the report highlighted the need for greater protection and enforcement of all forms of 

IPR there, including patents, trademarks, copyrights, trade secrets, and the protection of 

pharmaceutical test data. It noted U.S. concerns about cybertheft, compulsory licensing, trade 

secret theft, and “indigenous innovation” policies and related industrial policies in China that 

may disadvantage U.S. rights holders.

India remained on the priority watch list because it made only limited progress in improving its 

weak legal framework for IPR protection and enforcement. The 2013 Special 301 Report noted 

concerns about the patent system, particularly in the pharmaceutical sector; compulsory 

licensing; unauthorized disclosure of test and other data; copyright piracy over the Internet; 

and market access measures that appear to discriminate in favor of the indigenous 

development of IPR.

Although Russia has made some progress in improving IPR protection and enforcement,71 it 

remained on the priority watch list because overall IPR protection and enforcement appears to 

have declined while online piracy is growing. No effective enforcement strategy has been 

developed by Russia to address this issue.

70 The WIPO Internet treaties include the WIPO Copyright Treaty, adopted in Geneva on December 20, 1996, and 

the WIPO Performances and Phonograms Treaty, adopted in Geneva on December 20, 1996. See USTR, 2013 

Special 301 Report, May 2013, Annex 2. 71 On December 21, 2012, the USTR announced that the United States and Russia had agreed to an Intellectual 

Property Rights Action Plan to improve IPR protection and enforcement in Russia. USTR, “United States and 

Russian Federation Agree on Action Plan,” December 21, 2012.

51

 
The 2013 Special 301 Report also identified 30 countries on its watch list.72 It also noted that 

Brunei Darussalam and Norway had made progress and were therefore removed from the 

watch list.

From 2006 through 2010, the USTR also identified so-called notorious markets in the same 

report. In 2010, the USTR announced that the agency would begin issuing a list of these 

markets separately.73 In February 2011, the USTR published the first separate Notorious 

Markets List, which identifies select online and physical marketplaces that reportedly engage in 

and facilitate substantial piracy and counterfeiting.

74 Such markets have been the subject of 

enforcement actions or, according to the USTR, may merit further investigations. In September 

2013, the USTR solicited public comments for the 2013 Special 301 Out-of-Cycle Review of 

Notorious Markets Report.75 The 2013 Notorious Markets List was not issued, and the out-ofcycle review was ongoing during 2013.76 

Antidumping and Countervailing Duty 

Investigations and Reviews 

Antidumping Duty Investigations

The U.S. antidumping law is found in title VII of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended.77 This law 

offers relief to U.S. industries that are injured by imports that are dumped, or sold, at less than 

their “fair value” (LTFV). The U.S. government provides relief by imposing a special additional 

duty on a LTFV import that reflects its “dumping margin”—the amount by which its sale price is 

less than its fair value. 

Antidumping duties are imposed when (1) the U.S. Department of Commerce (USDOC), the 

administering authority, has determined that imports are being, or are likely to be, sold at LTFV 

in the United States, and (2) the Commission has determined that a U.S. industry is materially 

injured or threatened with material injury, or that the establishment of an industry in the 

United States is materially retarded by reason of such imports. (Such a conclusion is called an 

“affirmative determination.”) Most investigations are conducted on the basis of a petition filed

with the USDOC and the Commission by or on behalf of a U.S. industry. The USDOC and the 

Commission each conduct preliminary and final antidumping duty investigations in making their 

separate determinations.

72 The countries on the 2013 watch list are Barbados, Belarus, Bolivia, Brazil, Bulgaria, Canada, Colombia, Costa 

Rica, the Dominican Republic, Ecuador, Egypt, Finland, Greece, Guatemala, Israel, Italy, Jamaica, Kuwait, Lebanon, 

Mexico, Paraguay, Peru, the Philippines, Romania, Tajikistan, Trinidad and Tobago, Turkey, Turkmenistan, 

Uzbekistan, and Vietnam. USTR, 2013 Special 301 Report, May 2013. 73 75 Fed. Reg. 60854 (October 1, 2010). The decision was made in coordination with the Office of the Intellectual 

Property Enforcement Coordinator (IPEC) and in accordance with the 2010 Joint Strategic Plan on Intellectual 

Property Enforcement. Executive Office of the President, IPEC, 2010 Joint Strategic Plan, June 2010, 9. 74 USTR, 2013 Out-of-Cycle Review of Notorious Markets, February, 2014. 75 78 Fed. Reg. 57924 (September 20, 2013). 76 The 2013 Out-of-Cycle Review of Notorious Markets Report was issued by the USTR in February 2014. 77 19 U.S.C. § 1673 et seq.

52

 
In general, imports are considered to be sold at LTFV when a foreign firm sells merchandise in 

the U.S. market at a price that is lower than the “normal value” of the merchandise.78 

Generally, normal value is the price the foreign firm charges for a comparable product sold in 

its home market.79 Under certain circumstances, the foreign firm’s U.S. sales price may also be 

compared with the price the foreign firm charges in other export markets or with the firm’s 

cost of producing the merchandise, taking into account the firm’s selling, general, and 

administrative expenses, as well as its profit. Under the law, this latter basis for comparison is 

known as constructed value.80 Finally, where the producer is located in a non-market-economy 

country, a comparison is made between U.S. prices and a “surrogate” normal value (its factors 

of production, as valued by use of a “surrogate” country).81 In all three instances, the amount 

by which normal value exceeds the U.S. price is the “dumping margin.” The duty specified in an 

antidumping duty order reflects the weighted average dumping margins found by the USDOC 

both for the specific exporters it examined and for all other exporters.82 This rate of duty (in 

addition to any ordinary customs duty owed) will be applied to subsequent imports from the 

specified producers/exporters in the subject country, but it may be adjusted if the USDOC 

receives a request for an annual review.83

The Commission instituted 42 new preliminary antidumping investigations and completed 10 

final investigations in 2013.84 As a result of affirmative Commission determinations, in 2013 

antidumping duties were imposed in 8 of those completed investigations on five products from 

five countries (table 2.1).

The status of all antidumping investigations active at the Commission during 2013 is presented 

in appendix table A.9. A list of all antidumping duty orders, including suspension agreements 

(agreements to suspend investigations),85 in effect as of the end of 2013 appears in appendix 

table A.10.

78 19 U.S.C. § 1677(35)(A); see also 19 U.S.C. § 1677a(a) (defining export price), § 1677a(b) (defining constructed 

export price).

79 19 U.S.C. § 1677b. 80 19 U.S.C. § 1677b(a)(4), § 1677b(e). 81 19 U.S.C. § 1677b(c). 82 19 U.S.C. § 1677(35)(B); 19 U.S.C. § 1673d(c). 83 19 U.S.C. § 1675(a). 84 Data reported here and in the following two sections (“Countervailing Duty Investigations” and “Reviews of 

Outstanding Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Orders/Suspension Agreements”) reflect the total number of 

investigations. In other Commission reports these data are grouped by product because the same investigative 

team and all of the parties participate in a single grouped proceeding, and the Commission generally produces one 

report and issues one opinion containing its separate determinations for each investigation. 85 An antidumping investigation may be suspended if exporters accounting for substantially all of the imports of 

the merchandise under investigation agree either to eliminate the dumping or to cease exports of the merchandise 

to the United States within six months. In extraordinary circumstances, an investigation may be suspended if 

exporters agree to revise prices to completely eliminate the injurious effect of exports of the merchandise in 

question to the United States. A suspended investigation is reinstituted if USDOC determines that the suspension 

agreement has been violated. See 19 U.S.C. § 1673c.

53

 
Table 2.1 Antidumping duty orders that became effective during 2013a

Country Product Range of dumping margins (percent)

China Drawn stainless steel sinks 27.14–76.53

China Utility-scale wind towers 44.99–70.63

China Xanthan gum 15.09–154.07

Korea Large residential washers 9.29–82.41

Mexico Large residential washers 36.52–72.41

Taiwan Steel wire garment hangers 69.98–125.43

Vietnam Steel wire garment hangers 157.00–220.68

Vietnam Utility-scale wind towers 51.50–58.49

Source: Compiled by USITC from Federal Register notices. a

Antidumping duty orders become effective following final affirmative determinations by USDOC and the Commission. The 

rates in the table apply in addition to any ordinary customs duty owed.

Countervailing Duty Investigations

The U.S. countervailing duty law is also set forth in title VII of the Tariff Act of 1930, as 

amended. It provides for the imposition of special additional duties to offset (“countervail”) 

foreign subsidies on products imported into the United States.86 In general, procedures for such 

investigations are similar to those under the antidumping law. Petitions are filed with the 

USDOC (the administering authority) and with the Commission. Before a countervailing duty 

order can be issued, the USDOC must find that a countervailable subsidy exists. In addition, the 

Commission must make an affirmative determination that a U.S. industry is materially injured 

or threatened with material injury, or that the establishment of an industry is materially 

retarded, by reason of the subsidized imports.

The Commission instituted 14 new preliminary countervailing duty investigations and 

completed 12 final investigations during 2013. Countervailing duties were imposed in 2013 as a 

result of affirmative Commission determinations in 4 of the completed investigations on four 

products from three countries (table 2.2). The status of all countervailing duty investigations 

active at the Commission during 2013 is presented in appendix table A.11, and a list of all 

countervailing duty orders (including suspension agreements)87 in effect at the end of the year 

appears in appendix table A.12.

86 A subsidy is defined as when an authority (a government of a country or any public entity within the territory of 

the country):

(i) provides a financial contribution, (ii) provides any form of income or price support 

within the meaning of Article XVI of the GATT 1994, or (iii) makes a payment to a 

funding mechanism to provide a financial contribution, or entrusts or directs a private 

entity to make a financial contribution, if providing the contribution would normally 

be vested in the government and the practice does not differ in substance from 

practices normally followed by governments,

to a person and a benefit is thereby conferred. See 19 U.S.C. § 1677(5)(B). 87 A countervailing duty investigation may be suspended if the government of the subsidizing country or exporters 

accounting for substantially all of the imports of the merchandise under investigation agree to eliminate the 

subsidy, to completely offset the net subsidy, or to cease exports of the merchandise to the United States within 

six months. In extraordinary circumstances, an investigation may be suspended if the government of the 

subsidizing country or exporters agrees to completely eliminate the injurious effect of exports of the merchandise 

54

 
Table 2.2 Countervailing duty orders that became effective during 2013a

Country Product

Range of countervailable subsidy 

rates (percent)

China Drawn stainless steel sinks 4.80–12.26

China Utility-scale wind towers 21.86–34.81

Korea Large residential washers 1.85–72.30

Vietnam Steel wire garment hangers 31.58–90.42

Source: Compiled by USITC from Federal Register notices. a

Countervailing duty orders become effective following final affirmative determinations by USDOC and the Commission. The 

rates in the table apply in addition to any ordinary customs duty owed. 

Reviews of Outstanding Antidumping and Countervailing Duty 

Orders/Suspension Agreements

Section 751(a) of the Tariff Act of 1930 requires the USDOC, if requested, to conduct annual 

reviews of outstanding antidumping duty and countervailing duty orders to ascertain the 

amount of any net subsidy or dumping margin and to determine whether suspension 

agreements are being complied with.88 Section 751(b) also authorizes the USDOC and the 

Commission, as appropriate, to review certain outstanding determinations and agreements 

after receiving information or a petition that shows changed circumstances.89 For a changed 

circumstances review, the party that is asking to have an antidumping duty order, 

countervailing duty order, or suspension agreement revoked or modified has the burden of 

persuading the USDOC and the Commission that circumstances have changed enough to 

warrant review and revocation. On the basis of either the USDOC’s or Commission’s review, the 

USDOC may revoke an antidumping duty or countervailing duty order in whole or in part, or 

may either terminate or resume a suspended investigation. No changed-circumstances 

investigations were conducted at the Commission during 2013.

Section 751(c) of the Tariff Act of 1930 requires both the USDOC and the Commission to 

conduct sunset reviews of existing antidumping duty and countervailing duty orders and 

suspension agreements five years after their publication to determine whether revocation of an 

order or termination of a suspension agreement would be likely to lead to continuation or 

recurrence of dumping or a countervailable subsidy and material injury.90 During 2013, the 

USDOC and the Commission instituted 50 sunset reviews, and the Commission completed 26 

reviews. As a result, 22 antidumping duty and countervailing duty orders were continued for 

five more years. Appendix table A.13 shows completed reviews of antidumping duty and 

countervailing duty orders and suspension agreements in 2013.91

in question to the United States. A suspended investigation is reinstituted if USDOC determines that the 

suspension agreement has been violated. See 19 U.S.C. § 1671c.

88 19 U.S.C. § 1675(a). 89 19 U.S.C. § 1675(b). 90 19 U.S.C. § 1675(c). 91 For detailed information on reviews instituted, as well as Commission action in all reviews, see the Commission’s 

website section “Five-Year (Sunset) Reviews” at http://info.usitc.gov/oinv/sunset.NSF. 

55

 
Section 337 Investigations

Section 337 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended,92 prohibits certain unfair acts in the 

importation of goods into the United States. Most section 337 investigations involve allegations 

of patent infringement—specifically, whether products that infringe a valid and enforceable 

U.S. patent or that are produced by means of an infringed patented process are being imported 

into the United States, sold for importation, or sold after importation. To find a violation of 

section 337 based on patent infringement, the Commission must also determine that an 

industry in the United States related to articles protected by the patent either exists or is in the 

process of being established. Similar standards govern investigations involving infringement of 

registered trademarks, registered copyrights, registered mask works, and registered vessel hull 

designs. In addition, the Commission has broad authority to investigate other unfair methods of 

competition and unfair acts in the importation and sale of products in the United States (such 

as products manufactured abroad using stolen U.S. trade secrets), the threat or effect of which 

is to destroy or injure a U.S. industry, to prevent the establishment of a U.S. industry, or to 

restrain or monopolize trade and commerce in the United States.93 The Commission may 

institute an investigation on the basis of a complaint or on its own initiative.94

If the Commission determines that a violation exists, it can issue an exclusion order directing 

U.S. Customs and Border Protection to block the subject imports from entry into the United 

States, in addition to cease and desist orders directing the violating parties to stop engaging in 

the unlawful practices. The orders enter into force unless disapproved for policy reasons by the 

USTR95 within 60 days of issuance.96

During calendar year 2013, there were 109 active section 337 investigations and ancillary 

proceedings, 53 of which were instituted that year. Of these 53 new proceedings, 42 were new 

section 337 investigations and 11 were new ancillary proceedings relating to previously 

concluded investigations. In 37 of the new section 337 investigations instituted in 2013, patent 

infringement was the only type of unfair act alleged (although allegations of trade secret 

misappropriation were later added to 1 investigation). Of the remaining 5 investigations, 1 

involved allegations of patent infringement and trade secret misappropriation; 2 involved 

allegations of only trade secret misappropriation; 1 involved allegations of copyright 

92 19 U.S.C. § 1337. 93 Other unfair methods of competition and unfair acts have included common-law trademark infringement, trade 

dress infringement, trademark dilution, false advertising, and false designation of origin. (“Trade dress,” in general 

terms, is a product’s total appearance and image, including features such as size, texture, shape, color or color 

combinations, and graphics.) Unfair practices that involve the importation of dumped or subsidized merchandise 

must be pursued under antidumping or countervailing duty provisions, not under section 337.

94 19 U.S.C. § 1337(b)(1). 95 19 U.S.C. § 1337(j). Although the statute reserves the review for the President, since 2005 this function has been 

officially delegated to the USTR. 70 Fed. Reg. 43251 (July 26, 2005). 96 Section 337 investigations at the Commission are conducted before an administrative law judge in accordance 

with the Administrative Procedure Act, 5 U.S.C. §§ 551 et seq. The judge conducts an evidentiary hearing and 

makes an initial determination, which is transmitted to the Commission for review. If the Commission finds a 

violation, it must determine the appropriate remedy, the amount of any bond to be collected while its 

determination is under review by the USTR, and whether public-interest considerations preclude issuing a remedy.

56

 
infringement, unfair methods of competition, and unfair acts; and 1 involved allegations of 

trademark infringement, unfair methods of competition, trademark dilution, and unfair acts.

The Commission completed a total of 55 investigations and ancillary proceedings under section 

337 in 2013, including 1 modification proceeding, 2 bond-related proceedings, and 4 

enforcement proceedings. In addition, 9 exclusion orders, including 3 general exclusion orders, 

and 25 cease and desist orders were issued during 2013. The Commission also issued one 

limited exclusion order and one cease and desist order that were disapproved by the USTR. The 

Commission terminated 28 investigations without determining whether there had been a 

violation. Twenty-three of these investigations were terminated on the basis of settlement 

agreements and/or consent orders.

As in prior years, the section 337 investigations active in 2013 involved a broad spectrum of 

products. Slightly less than 40 percent of the proceedings involved computer and 

telecommunications equipment. Consumer electronics products (such as video game systems, 

Blu-ray disc players, and set-top boxes), small consumer items (such as digital photo frames, 

cellphone cases, and robotic toys), and pharmaceuticals and medical products (such as reduced 

folate nutraceuticals, omega-3 supplements, and breathing systems for treating sleep apnea) 

each represented slightly more than 10 percent of the proceedings. The remaining 

proceedings—about 30 percent of the total—involved a wide variety of other types of goods, 

including integrated circuits, liquid-crystal displays, toner cartridges, rubber resins, lighting 

products, automobile tires, outdoor grills, household cleaning products, and crawler cranes.

At the close of 2013, 54 section 337 investigations and related proceedings were pending at the 

Commission. Commission activities involving section 337 proceedings in 2013 are presented in 

appendix table A.14. As of December 31, 2013, there were 96 exclusion orders based on 

violations of section 337 in effect. Appendix table A.15 lists the investigations in which these 

exclusion orders were issued.

Trade Adjustment Assistance

The United States provides trade adjustment assistance (TAA) to aid U.S. workers and firms 

adversely affected by import competition or by U.S. production moving to foreign countries.97

The main TAA programs in effect in 2013 were TAA for Workers, administered by the U.S. 

97 TAA was first established by the Trade Expansion Act of 1962 (Pub. L. 87-793) and subsequently expanded and 

reauthorized numerous times. The most recent extension and modification of TAA was made by the Trade 

Adjustment Assistance Extension Act (TAAEA) of 2011 (Pub. L. 112-40), which was signed into law on October 21, 

2011. The TAAEA generally extended most TAA provisions through December 31, 2013. CRS, Trade Adjustment 

Assistance ((TAA) and Its Role in U.S. Trade Policy, August 5, 2013, 14–16. On January 1, 2014, the 2011 

Amendments to the Trade Act expired and the TAA program began operating under the sunset provisions, referred 

to as “Reversion 2014.” Reversion 2014 is a modified version of the 2002 Program that retains certain elements of 

the 2011 Program. For example, TAA for Workers under Reversion 2014 provides a wage subsidy to workers 

involved in a full-time training course lasting for 130 weeks (as in the 2011 Program) but limits worker eligibility to 

only those in the manufacturing sector (as in the 2002 Program). More examples of Reversion 2014 are provided 

below. USDOL, “Trade Adjustment Assistance for Workers: Comparison by Petition Number,” n.d. (accessed March 

19, 2014).

57

 
Department of Labor (USDOL), and TAA for Firms, administered by the USDOC.98 A third 

program, TAA for Farmers, was authorized by the Trade Adjustment Assistance Extension Act

(TAAEA) of October 2011, but has not received appropriations since 2011.99 Selected 

developments in the TAA programs for workers and firms during fiscal year (FY) 2013 are 

summarized below.100 The most current information on each of the TAA programs, including 

the status of authorizing legislation and program funding, is available from the respective 

administering agencies cited in this report.

Assistance for Workers 

The TAA for Workers program gives federal assistance to eligible workers who have been 

adversely affected by foreign trade. Assistance includes training and reemployment services, as 

well as income support, and included a tax credit for health care through 2013.101 Current 

information on provisions of the TAA for Workers program, as well as detailed information on 

program eligibility requirements, benefits, and available services, is available at the USDOL’s 

Employment and Training Administration (ETA) website for 

TAA, http://www.doleta.gov/tradeact/. 

To be certified by USDOL as being eligible for TAA, unemployed workers must establish that 

they were separated from their employment either because their jobs moved outside the 

United States or because of an increase in directly competitive imports. (Workers often apply in 

groups based on their former firms.) Workers at firms that are or were suppliers to or 

downstream users of the output of TAA-certified firms may also be eligible for TAA benefits. In 

2013, both manufacturing and service workers (except those in the public sector) were eligible 

for TAA.102

98 A TAA program for communities adversely impacted by trade was mostly discontinued by legislation in 2011 

because it was considered duplicative of other federal programs. One component of that program, the trade 

adjustment assistance community college and career training grants, was retained and is administered by the 

USDOL in partnership with the U.S. Department of Education. CRS, Trade Adjustment Assistance (TAA) and Its Role, 

August 5, 2013, 14. Further information on the college and career training grants program is available from USDOL, 

ETA, “Trade Adjustment Assistance Community College and Career Training,” September 18, 2013. 99 The TAA for Farmers program, which was administered by USDA’s Foreign Agricultural Service, provided 

technical training and cash benefits to eligible U.S. producers of raw agricultural commodities and eligible 

fishermen whose crops or catch were adversely affected by imports. The program for farmers was first instituted 

in 2002 by Congress as part of the Trade Act of 2002 (Pub. L. 107-210), and was expanded as part of the American 

Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA) of 2009 (Pub. L. 111-5) to increase producer eligibility for program 

benefits. Appropriations from ARRA lasted only through December 2010, and funding lapsed as of January 2011. 

CRS, TAA for Farmers, September 5, 2012, 2, 5; CRS, Trade Adjustment Assistance (TAA) and Its Role, August 5, 

2013, 10–11. The program was re-authorized most recently as part of the TAAEA in October 2011 through the end 

of 2013, but USDA has not requested or received appropriations for this program between FY 2012 and FY 2014. 

CRS, TAA for Farmers, September 5, 2012, 5, 11; USDA, Budget Summary and Annual Performance Plans (FYs 

2012–15) (accessed March 19, 2014). 100 FY 2013 ran from October 1, 2012, to September 30, 2013. 101 The Health Care Tax Credit expired on January 1, 2014. USDOL, “Trade Adjustment Assistance for Workers: 

Comparison by Petition Number,” n.d. (accessed March 19, 2014).

102 Since January 1, 2014, under Reversion 2014, services workers whose prior work was not related to 

manufacturing production are no longer eligible for TAA. In addition, workers who lost their jobs due to 

58

 
Groups of workers submitted 1,480 petitions for TAA in FY 2013, roughly equivalent to the 

1,465 petitions filed in FY 2012.103 The ETA certified 1,025 petitions covering 104,158 workers 

as eligible for TAA, and denied 279 petitions covering 23,628 workers.104 The largest number of 

petitions certified in FY 2013 were in the South census region (313 petitions covering 37,506 

workers), followed by the Midwest (267 petitions covering 26,457 workers), the Northeast (249 

petitions covering 20,806 workers), and the West (159 petitions covering 14,465 workers). By 

state, Texas had the most workers certified (10,853 workers), followed by California (7,609 

workers), Pennsylvania (6,571 workers), New York (5,557 workers), and North Carolina (5,313 

workers).

The majority (58.1 percent) of TAA petitions certified during FY 2013 were in goods-producing 

industries, covering 74,052 workers, primarily in the manufacturing sector. The remaining 41.9 

percent of TAA petitions certified during FY 2013 were in services sectors, covering 30,106 

workers. Among the services sector petitions certified, 17.0 percent were in professional, 

scientific, and technical services (5,110 workers); 11.4 percent were in information services 

(3,437 workers); and 8.0 percent were in finance and insurance (2,402 workers). The largest 

share of petitions that were certified attributed job losses to workers’ firms moving production 

or services to foreign countries.

Assistance for Firms

The TAA for Firms program provided technical and financial assistance to U.S. manufacturers 

and service sector firms adversely affected by imports in 2013.105 The TAA for Firms program 

helps eligible firms that have been certified for benefits to develop a business recovery plan 

(“adjustment proposal”). TAA also provides matching funds to help certified firms expand 

markets, strengthen their operations, or otherwise increase their global competitiveness.106

Current information on provisions of the TAA for Firms program, as well as detailed information 

on program eligibility requirements, benefits, and available services, is available at the USDOC’s 

Economic Development Administration (EDA) website for TAA, http://www.taacenters.org/. 

To be eligible for TAA, firms must show that directly competitive imports have contributed to 

declines in employment and sales or production.107 Assistance is in the form of matching funds 

outsourcing are eligible only if their firm’s production shifted to a country with which the United States has an FTA 

or certain preferential trade agreements. CRS, Trade Adjustment Assistance for Workers, December 17, 2012, 2; 

USDOL, “Trade Adjustment Assistance for Workers: Comparison,” n.d. (accessed March 19, 2014).

103 ETA’s petition database is found at http://www.doleta.gov/tradeact/taa_reports/petitionsresults.cfm. Data 

represent actual figures as collected and reported for FY 2013 in TAA’s Trade Act Participant Report (TAPR) data 

management system.

104 Petitions are accepted and investigated on a rolling basis throughout the year, and petitions may be withdrawn 

and investigations terminated at any point. For these reasons, the number of petitions certified and denied for TAA 

in any fiscal year may not equal the total number of petitions filed in that year. USDOL, ETA, “Petition Filing 

Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ),” n.d. (accessed March 14, 2014).

105 As of January 1, 2014, TAA for Firms no longer offered eligibility to services firms. USDOC, EDA, Fiscal Year 2013 

Annual Report to Congress: Trade Adjustment Assistance, 3 (accessed March 29, 2014). 106 Ibid., 3. 107 Ibid., 10–11.

59

 
that can be applied toward the cost of hiring consultants, engineers, designers, or industry 

experts for improvement projects in areas such as manufacturing, engineering, marketing, 

information technology, and quality improvement and sales.108 Under the program, the firm’s 

management receives help in assessing the firm’s strengths and weaknesses and developing an 

adjustment proposal to stimulate recovery and growth. Firms generally have up to five years to 

carry out an approved adjustment proposal.109

EDA reported that in FY 2013 it accepted 105 petitions for TAA, with 105 petitions certified as 

eligible for assistance and one denied or withdrawn during the year. In comparison, EDA 

accepted 83 petitions in FY 2012, with 79 certified and 3 denied or withdrawn.110 Firms located 

in Illinois received the most certifications in FY 2013 (16 certifications, or 15 percent of the 

total), followed by firms in Pennsylvania (12 certifications, or 11 percent).111 Manufacturing 

firms accounted for 89 percent of the firms certified for TAA during FY 2013, with firms in 

manufacturing and technical services, commercial machinery, wholesale trade, and agriculture 

accounting for the remainder.112 EDA approved 114 adjustment proposals in FY 2013 with total 

government funding valued at $6.2 million, up from 102 adjustment proposals with 

government funding valued at $5.4 million approved in FY 2012.113

Tariff Preference Programs

Generalized System of Preferences 

The U.S. Generalized System of Preferences (GSP) program authorizes the President to grant 

duty-free access to the U.S. market for certain products that are imported from developing 

countries and territories designated as beneficiaries.114 Certain additional products are allowed 

duty-free treatment when imported from countries designated as least-developed beneficiary 

developing countries (LDBDCs). The President’s authority to provide duty-free treatment under 

the GSP program expired on December 31, 2010,115 and was renewed retroactively on October 

21, 2011, effective through July 31, 2013.116 USTR completed an annual review of 2012 imports 

and announced the results on July 1, 2013. However, on July 31, 2013, the President’s authority 

to provide duty-free treatment again lapsed and was not renewed during 2013. As detailed 

below, petitions have continued to be accepted for review so that the program can be 

reinstituted smoothly if the President’s authority is renewed.

108 Ibid., 9–10. 109 Ibid., 11–12. 110 Petitions are certified on a rolling basis throughout the year. Petitions certified in one fiscal year may be the 

result of those received or accepted in the previous fiscal year, while petitions received or accepted in a fiscal year 

may not result in certification in that year. USDOC, EDA, Fiscal Year 2013 Annual Report to Congress: Trade 

Adjustment Assistance, 13 (accessed March 29, 2014). 111 USDOC, EDA, Fiscal Year 2013 Annual Report to Congress: Trade Adjustment Assistance, n.d, 15–16 (accessed 

March 29, 2014). 112 Ibid., 17. 113 Ibid., 25. 114 The program is authorized by title V of the Trade Act of 1974, as amended, 19 U.S.C. § 2461 et seq. 115 Pub. L. 111-124. 116 Pub. L. 112-40.

60

 
The GSP program aims to accelerate economic growth in developing countries by offering 

unilateral tariff preferences. An underlying principle of the program is that creating trade 

opportunities for developing countries encourages broad-based economic development and 

sustains momentum for economic reform and liberalization. The GSP program also allows U.S. 

companies to have access to intermediate products from beneficiary countries on generally the 

same terms as those available to competitors in other developed countries that grant similar 

trade preferences.117

Countries are designated as “beneficiary developing countries” under the GSP program by the 

President, although they can lose this designation based on petitions alleging improper country 

practices, including inadequate protection of IPR or of internationally recognized worker 

rights.118 The President also designates the articles that are eligible for duty-free treatment, but 

may not designate articles that are designated as “import sensitive” by statute or that he 

determines to be “import sensitive” in the context of the GSP. Certain articles (for example, 

footwear, textiles, and apparel) are designated by statute as “import sensitive” and thus not 

eligible for duty-free treatment under the GSP program. The statute also provides for 

graduating countries from the program when they become “high income” and for ending the 

eligibility of articles, or of articles from certain countries, under certain conditions.

Competitive need limitations (CNLs) are another important part of the GSP program’s structure. 

CNLs are quantitative ceilings on GSP benefits for each product and beneficiary developing 

country, and are applied during program reviews. The GSP statute provides that a beneficiary 

developing country will lose its GSP eligibility with respect to a product if the CNLs are 

exceeded, though waivers may be granted under certain conditions. Under the CNLs, U.S. 

imports of a particular product from a beneficiary developing country cannot account for 50 

percent or more of the value of total U.S. imports of that product during a calendar year, 

and/or U.S. imports of a particular product cannot exceed a certain dollar value ($160 million in 

2013 and increasing by $5 million each year).119 The extension of the GSP program in 2006 

provided that a CNL waiver in effect on a product for five or more years should be revoked if 

U.S. imports from a specific supplier meet certain “super-competitive” value thresholds.120 The 

following developments affecting the U.S. GSP program occurred in 2013:

• On April 16, 2013, USTR announced initiation of a review of the possible designation of 

Burma and Laos as GSP beneficiary developing countries.121 A public hearing was held on 

June 4, 2013.

• Following a public hearing on March 28, and a comment period, the President proclaimed

on June 27, 2013, that Bangladesh would be suspended from the GSP program in response 

to worker rights problems.122

117 USTR, 2012 Trade Policy Agenda, March 2012, 188. 118 The list of current GSP beneficiaries can be found on the USITC’s website at 

http://www.usitc.gov/publications/docs/tata/hts/bychapter/1400gn.pdf#page=11. 119 USTR, U.S. Generalized System of Preferences (GSP) Guidebook, December 2012, 11. 120 19 U.S.C. § 2463(d)(4)(B)(ii). 121 78 Fed. Reg. 22593 (April 16, 2013). 122 Proclamation 8997, 78 Fed. Reg. 39949 (July 2, 2013).

61

 
• In the same June 27, 2013, proclamation, one product (corn, other than seed and yellow 

dent corn from Brazil) was excluded from GSP for exceeding the CNL; a second product 

(calcium silicon ferroalloys from Brazil) was granted a waiver of its CNL; and certain other 

technical corrections were made. In addition, country practice reviews continued for a 

number of GSP beneficiaries. These reviews focused on worker rights, IPR, and arbitral 

issues.123

• The President’s authority to provide duty-free treatment under the program expired on July 

31, 2013. As stated in a Federal Register notice on July 29, 2013, petitions have continued to 

be accepted for review so that the program can be reinstituted smoothly if the President’s 

authority is renewed.124

Imports for which GSP preference was claimed totaled $18.5 billion in 2013, accounting for 6.7 

percent of total U.S. imports from GSP beneficiary countries and 0.8 percent of total U.S. 

imports (table 2.3).125 India was the leading GSP beneficiary in 2013, followed by Thailand and 

Brazil (appendix table A.16). Appendix table A.17 shows the overall sectoral distribution of GSP 

benefits, and appendix table A.18 shows the top 25 products imported under the GSP in 2013.

Table 2.3 U.S. imports for consumption from GSP beneficiaries, 2011–13

Item 2011 2012 2013

Total imports from GSP beneficiaries(million $) 365,902 338,138 276,950

Total imports under GSP (million $) a 18,539 19,857 18,516

Imports under LDBDC provisions (million $)b 503 540 622

Imports under non-LDBDC provisions (million $)c 18,036 19,317 17,894

Share of total imports under GSP (percent of total) 5.1 5.9 6.7

Source: Official trade statistics of the USDOC as maintained by the USITC.

Note: LDBDCs = least-developed beneficiary developing countries. The President’s authority to provide duty-free treatment 

under the GSP program expired on December 31, 2010, and was restarted on October 21, 2011; trade data for this period 

include retroactive entries. The President’s authority expired again on July 31, 2013, and has yet to be renewed. Data for 2013 

since the expiration include imports that have GSP petitions on file in anticipation of renewal of the program. a

There were 127 GSP beneficiary countries for which U.S. importers could claim GSP duty preferences in 2013. However, U.S. 

importers claimed such preferences for imports from only 95 beneficiaries. b

LDBDC-eligible products are those for which a rate of duty of “free” appears in the special rate column of the HTS, followed by 

the symbol “A+” in parentheses. The symbol “A+” indicates that all LDBDCs (and only LDBDCs) are eligible for duty-free 

treatment with respect to all articles listed in the designated provisions.

c

Non-LDBDC-eligible products are those for which a rate of duty of “free” appears in the special rate column of the Harmonized 

Tariff Schedule of the United States (HTS) followed by the symbols “A” or “A*” in parentheses. The symbol “A” indicates that all 

beneficiary countries are eligible for duty-free treatment with respect to all articles listed in the designated provisions. The 

symbol “A*” indicates that certain beneficiary countries (specified in general note 4(d) of the HTS) are not eligible for duty-free 

treatment with respect to any article provided for in the designated provision.

123 Ibid. 124 78 Fed. Reg. 45596 (July 29, 2013). 125 Imports entering the United States free of duty under preference programs are given duty-free preference only 

upon an importer’s claim for each shipment, supported with documentation. Note that imports after July 31, 2013, 

did not actually enter duty-free, but importers still claimed GSP status to facilitate receiving refunds in case GSP is 

renewed retroactively, as has been done in the past.

62

 
African Growth and Opportunity Act 

The African Growth and Opportunity Act (AGOA or Act) was enacted in 2000 to promote stable 

and sustainable economic growth and development in sub-Saharan Africa. In a statement of 

policy in the Act, Congress expressed support for, among other things, “encouraging increased 

trade and investment between the United States and Sub-Saharan Africa” and “reducing tariff 

and nontariff barriers and other obstacles to sub-Saharan African and United States trade.”126

By granting unilateral trade benefits to eligible beneficiary sub-Saharan African (SSA) countries, 

AGOA aims to promote political and economic reform in SSA, encourage regional economic 

integration, strengthen private sectors, and facilitate the development of civil societies and 

political freedom.127 Authority to provide the principal trade preferences under AGOA is 

currently in effect through September 30, 2015.

AGOA builds on the U.S. GSP program, providing duty-free access to the U.S. market for all GSPeligible products128 and for an additional 1,800 qualifying tariff line-item products from 

designated SSA countries. In addition, AGOA authorizes duty-free treatment to certain textile 

and apparel articles made in qualifying beneficiary SSA countries.129 In 2013, approximately 

6,800 tariff lines were eligible for duty-free treatment under AGOA.130

AGOA authorizes the President to designate an SSA country as an AGOA beneficiary country if 

the President determines the country meets the eligibility requirements set forth in section 

104(a) of the Act.131 The Act also requires the President to review annually whether SSA 

countries are, or remain, eligible for AGOA benefits based on the eligibility criteria.132 In 2013, a 

total of 39 SSA countries were designated as eligible for AGOA benefits,133 and 27 of these also 

qualified for AGOA textile and apparel benefits.134 Of the countries in the latter group, all but 

126 Trade and Development Act of 2000, 19 U.S.C. 3701, Title I, sec. 103 (Pub. L.106-200), 19 U.S.C. § 3702. 127 Ibid. 128 The eligibility criteria for GSP and AGOA substantially overlap, and countries must be GSP-eligible in order to 

receive trade benefits under AGOA. USDOC, ITA, “AGOA: General Country Eligibility Provisions,” n.d. (accessed 

March 5, 2014).

129 19 U.S.C. § 3721. AGOA provisions that provide preferential treatment for certain textiles and apparel also 

expire on September 30, 2015. 19 U.S.C. § 3721(f).

130 These tariff lines do not include imports under the AGOA apparel and textile provisions. 131 19 U.S.C. § 3703(a). 19 U.S.C. § 3706 lists a total of 49 SSA countries, or their successor political entities, as 

potential AGOA beneficiaries.

132 19 U.S.C. § 2466a(a)(2). 133 The following 39 countries were listed in general note 16 of the HTS as designated AGOA beneficiaries during 

2013: Angola, Benin, Botswana, Burkina Faso, Burundi, Cameroon, Cabo Verde, Chad, Comoros, Republic of the 

Congo, Côte d’Ivoire, Djibouti, Ethiopia, Gabon, The Gambia, Ghana, Guinea, Kenya, Lesotho, Liberia, Malawi, 

Mauritania, Mauritius, Mozambique, Namibia, Niger, Nigeria, Rwanda, São Tomé and Príncipe, Senegal, Seychelles, 

Sierra Leone, South Africa, South Sudan, Swaziland, Tanzania, Togo, Uganda, and Zambia. USITC, Harmonized Tariff 

Schedule of the United States (HTS) 2013, January 2013, 188. 134 Twenty-eight countries are listed in U.S. Note 7(a) of the HTS as eligible to receive AGOA apparel benefits as of 

January 1, 2014. These countries include 27 countries eligible in 2013 plus Mali, which was restored to AGOA 

benefits on January 1, 2014. The eligible countries in 2013 included Benin, Botswana, Burkina Faso, Cameroon, 

Cabo Verde, Chad, Côte d’Ivoire, Ethiopia, The Gambia, Ghana, Kenya, Lesotho, Liberia, Malawi, Mauritius, 

Mozambique, Namibia, Niger, Nigeria, Rwanda, Senegal, Sierra Leone, South Africa, Swaziland, Tanzania, Uganda, 

and Zambia. USITC, Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (HTS) 2014, January 2014, section XXII, chapter 

63

 
one (South Africa) were also eligible for additional textile and apparel benefits for lesser 

developed beneficiary countries. Notable among these extra benefits is the third-country fabric 

provision, which allows beneficiary countries to use non-U.S., non-AGOA fabrics in apparel 

exports under AGOA. 

South Sudan became eligible for AGOA benefits in December 2012, while Guinea-Bissau and 

Mali lost their eligibility as of January 1, 2013.135 However, in December 2013 the President 

announced that Mali would be reinstated as of January 1, 2014, due to Mali’s inauguration of a 

democratically elected president in July 2013.136

In 2013, U.S. imports that entered duty-free from AGOA beneficiary countries under either 

AGOA or GSP were valued at $26.8 billion. They accounted for 70.2 percent of total imports 

from AGOA countries and represented a 23.1 percent decrease in value from 2012. Articles 

entering the United States free of duty exclusively under AGOA (excluding GSP) were valued at 

$24.8 billion, accounting for 64.9 percent of total imports from AGOA countries and 

representing a 24.3 percent decrease from 2012 (table 2.4). The drop in the value of 

petroleum-related product imports, particularly from Nigeria, Angola, and Gabon, was an 

important factor in the decrease of total imports under AGOA.137

The leading suppliers of duty-free U.S. imports under AGOA in 2013 were Nigeria (43.6 percent 

of total AGOA imports), Angola (24.2 percent), South Africa (10.4 percent), Chad (9.7 percent), 

the Republic of the Congo (4.2 percent), and Gabon (3.7 percent).138 These six countries 

accounted for 95.8 percent of total imports by value under AGOA, a decrease of 0.8 percentage 

points from 2012 (appendix table A.19). Petroleum-related products remained the leading 

Table 2.4 U.S. imports for consumption from AGOA beneficiaries, 2011–13

Item 2011 2012 2013

Total imports from AGOA countries(million $) 72,198 47,638 38,209

Total imports under AGOA, including GSP (million $)a 53,840 34,892 26,816

Total Imports under AGOA, excluding GSP (million $) 51,883 32,748 24,798

Share of total imports under AGOA (percent of total) 74.6 73.2 70.2

Source: Official trade statistics of the USDOC as maintained by the USITC. a

AGOA-eligible products are those for which a rate of duty of “free” appears in the special rate column of the HTS followed by 

the symbol “D” in parentheses. The symbol “D” indicates that all AGOA beneficiaries are eligible for duty-free treatment with 

respect to all articles listed in the designated provisions. In addition, provisions of subchapters II and XIX of chapter 98 of the 

HTS set forth specific categories of AGOA-eligible products, under the terms of separate country designations enumerated in 

subchapter notes. Includes imports for which preferential tariff treatment was claimed by U.S. importers under GSP, for HTS 

rate lines with special duty symbols “A” or “A+.”

98, 98-II-3, U.S. Note 7(a). Also, see USDOC, OTEXA, “Trade Preference Programs: AGOA,” n.d. (accessed December 

6, 2013). Côte d’Ivoire qualified for AGOA apparel benefits in March 2013. 78 Fed. Reg. 16908 (March 19, 2013).

135 Proclamation 8921 of December 20, 2012, “To Take Certain Actions under the African Growth and Opportunity 

Act and for Other Purposes,” 77 Fed. Reg. 76799 (December 28, 2012). 136 USTR, “Mali Now Eligible for Trade Benefits,” December 24, 2013; 78 Fed. Reg. 80417 (December 31, 2013). 137 The decline in AGOA petroleum imports reflects the decline in total U.S. imports of these products. As noted in 

chapter 1, strong crude oil production growth in the United States has resulted in a “significant decline” in U.S. 

petroleum imports. USEIA, “Short-term Energy Outlook,” February 11, 2014. 138 The share is based on exclusive AGOA imports and does not include imports under GSP.

64

 
imports under AGOA, accounting for 85.6 percent of total AGOA imports in 2013, though they 

were down by 4.4 percentage points from 90.0 percent in 2012. The total value of petroleumrelated imports dropped from $29.5 billion in 2012 to $21.2 billion in 2013, a 28.0 percent 

decrease (appendix table A.20). Imports of apparel increased 11.2 percent, from $0.8 billion in 

2012 to $0.9 billion in 2013. As a percentage of total AGOA imports by value, apparel rose from 

2.5 percent in 2012 to 3.6 percent in 2013.139

Section 105 of AGOA required the President to establish the U.S.-SSA Trade and Economic 

Cooperation Forum (also known as the AGOA Forum) through which USTR and the Secretaries 

of State, Commerce, and the Treasury meet with senior officials from AGOA-eligible countries 

to discuss trade, investment, and development relationships.140 The 12th AGOA Forum was 

held in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia, on August 9–13, 2013. The event brought together senior 

officials from the United States and AGOA-eligible African countries to discuss a range of trade 

and investment issues.141 The theme of the 2013 AGOA Forum was “Sustainable 

Transformation through Trade and Technology.”

Because AGOA is scheduled to expire in September 2015, U.S. Trade Representative Froman 

announced at the 2013 AGOA Forum that he would be launching a comprehensive review of 

the AGOA program to assess how well AGOA has met its stated goals. The review is to include 

inputs from AGOA’s many stakeholders, a hearing, and roundtables on a range of AGOA issues. 

Additionally, the USTR asked the Commission to provide four reports related to AGOA.142 The 

USTR said that the results of all these activities will help inform the Administration’s 

consultations with Congress on the future of the AGOA program.143

Andean Trade Preference Act 

The Andean Trade Preference Act (ATPA) was enacted in 1991 to promote broad-based 

economic development and viable economic alternatives to coca cultivation and cocaine 

production by offering Andean countries (Bolivia, Colombia, Ecuador, and Peru) broader access 

to the U.S. market.144 The President’s authority to provide preferential treatment under ATPA 

expired on December 4, 2001, but was renewed and expanded by the Andean Trade Promotion 

and Drug Eradication Act (ATPDEA), part of the Trade Act of 2002.145 The President’s authority 

139 USITC DataWeb/DOC (accessed March 5, 2014). 140 19 U.S.C. § 3704. 141 USDOS, “AGOA Forum 2013” (accessed January 3, 2014). 142 The Commission’s reports and the investigations under which they were prepared are investigation no. 332-

542, AGOA: Trade and Investment Performance Overview; investigation no. 332-544, AGOA: Economic Effects of 

Providing Duty-Free Treatment for Imports; investigation no. 332-545, U.S. AGOA Rules of Origin: Possible Changes 

to Promote Regional Integration and Increase Exports to the United States; and investigation no. 332-546, EUSouth Africa FTA: Impact on U.S. Exports to South Africa. See also USITC, “Sub-Saharan African Trade and 

Investment under AGOA,” November 13, 2013.

143 USTR, “USTR Froman Looks to Next Steps,” August 13, 2013. 144 For a more detailed description of ATPA, including country and product eligibility, see USITC, Andean Trade 

Preference Act, September 2012. 145 Pub. L. 107-210, title XXXI. ATPA beneficiaries are not automatically eligible for ATPDEA preferences. ATPDEA 

authorizes the President to designate any ATPA beneficiary as eligible for ATPDEA benefits, provided the President 

determines the country has satisfied certain requirements, including protection of IPR and internationally 

65

 
to provide preferential treatment under ATPA, as amended by ATPDEA, has expired and been 

renewed a number of times since then, including in 2011. (The authority expired on February 

12, 2011, and was renewed retroactively on October 21, 2011, through July 31, 2013.)146 The 

President’s authority to provide preferential treatment under both ATPA and ATPDEA expired 

on July 31, 2013, and as of the end of 2013 had not been renewed.147

At the time the President’s authority expired on July 31, 2013, three out of the four original 

beneficiary countries—Bolivia, Peru, and Colombia—had been removed from ATPA. Bolivia lost 

its eligibility on December 15, 2008, for failing to meet ATPA’s counternarcotics cooperation 

criteria.148 Peru lost its eligibility by statute effective January 1, 2011, following entry into force 

of the U.S.-Peru Trade Promotion Agreement (TPA). Most recently, Colombia also lost its 

eligibility by statute when the U.S.-Colombia TPA entered into force on May 15, 2012.149 After 

May 2012, Ecuador was the only remaining ATPA beneficiary country. However, on June 27, 

2013, the Ecuadorian government announced that it would withdraw from the ATPA 

program.150

A wide range of products are eligible for duty-free entry under ATPA as originally enacted. 

ATPDEA amended ATPA to provide duty-free treatment for certain products previously 

excluded from ATPA, including certain textiles and apparel, certain footwear, tuna in foil or 

other flexible airtight packages (not cans), crude petroleum and petroleum products, and 

watches and watch parts assembled from components originating in countries not eligible for 

U.S. normal trade relations (NTR) rates of duty.151 Products that continue to be excluded from 

ATPA preferential treatment include textile and apparel articles not otherwise eligible for 

preferential treatment under ATPDEA (primarily textile articles), certain footwear, canned tuna, 

rum and tafia, and above-quota imports of certain agricultural products subject to TRQs 

(primarily sugar, beef, and dairy products).

Total (dutiable and duty-free) U.S. imports from ATPA-eligible countries were valued at $11.5 

billion in 2013, down 43.4 percent from $20.2 billion in 2012. There were two principal reasons 

for the decline: Ecuador was the only eligible country in 2013 following Colombia’s departure in 

May 2012, and the President’s authority to provide preferential treatment under ATPA expired 

recognized workers’ rights. The President designated all four ATPA beneficiaries as ATPDEA beneficiaries on 

October 31, 2002. Proclamation No. 7616, “To Implement the Andean Trade Promotion and Drug Eradication Act,” 

67 Fed. Reg. 67283 (October 31, 2002).

146 Pub. L. 112-42, § 501. Importers had 180 days to claim retroactive refunds. USDHS, USCBP, “Memorandum on 

the Renewal of ATPA,” October 24, 2011.

147 USDHS, USCBP, “Expiration of GSP, ATPA, and ATPDEA,” July 12, 2013. 148 Proclamation No. 8323 of November 25, 2008, 73 Fed. Reg. 72667 (November 28, 2008). 149 Proclamation No. 8818 of May 14, 2012, 77 Fed. Reg. 29519 (May 18, 2012). 150 Embassy of Ecuador, “Statement on the Renunciation of ATPDEA,” June 27, 2013. According to USTR, Ecuador 

stopped receiving benefits when the program expired on July 31, 2013. USTR, 2014 Trade Policy Agenda and 2013 

Annual Report, March 2014, V.195; Valencia and Ellsworth, “Ecuador Offers U.S. Rights Aid, Waives Trade 

Benefits,” June 27, 2013 (quoting the USTR’s comment that Ecuador remained eligible for trade benefits despite 

Ecuador’s renunciation).

151 Also known as Most Favored Nation (MFN) rates of duty.

66

 
at the end of July (table 2.5 and appendix table A.21).152 Similarly, U.S. imports specifically 

under ATPA declined by 77.7 percent in 2013 to $2.5 billion, down from $11.4 billion in 2012. 

U.S. imports under ATPDEA accounted for 91.6 percent of imports under ATPA in 2013 ($2.3 

billion) and U.S. imports under the original ATPA (ATPA excluding ATPDEA) accounted for the 

remaining 8.4 percent, valued at $212 million. 

Crude petroleum and petroleum products accounted for 89.1 percent of U.S. imports under 

ATPA in 2013 and represented 3 of the top 25 U.S. imports under the program (appendix table 

A.22). Fresh cut flowers (ornamental or for bouquets) was the next-largest category of imports 

under ATPA, accounting for 4.9 percent of such imports and for three of the leading imports 

under ATPA. The share of U.S. imports under ATPA accounted for by all other imports was 5.9 

percent in 2013.

Table 2.5 U.S. imports for consumption from ATPA countries, 2011–13

Item 2011 2012 2013

Total imports from ATPA countries(million $)a 31,891 20,228 11,454

Total imports under ATPA/ATPDEA(million $)b 4,385 11,406 2,538

Imports under ATPDEA (million $)c 3,965 10,605 2,326

Imports under ATPA excluding ATPDEA (million $)d 420 801 212

Total imports under ATPA (as a share of all imports from ATPA countries) 13.7 56.4 22.2

Source: Official trade statistics of the USDOC as maintained by the USITC. 

Note: The President’s authority to provide duty-free treatment lapsed between February 12, 2011, and October 21, 2011; 

retroactive entries under ATPA are included for this time period. ATPA expired again on July 31, 2013. a

Total imports from Colombia are included through May 2012 and for Ecuador, the last remaining beneficiary, through 2013.

b

Includes imports recorded as entering under ATPA/ATPDEA after loss of eligibility or expiration of the agreement from Peru in 

2011, from Colombia in 2012, and from Ecuador in 2013. Imports from Ecuador under ATPA/ATPDEA ceased after October 

2013. 

c

ATPDEA-eligible products are those for which a rate of duty of “free” appears in the special rate column of the HTS followed by 

the symbol “J+” in parentheses. The symbol “J+” indicates that all ATPDEA beneficiary countries are eligible for duty-free 

treatment with respect to all articles listed in the designated provisions.

d

ATPA-eligible products (excluding ATPDEA-eligible products) are those for which a special duty rate appears in the special rate 

column of the HTS, followed by the symbols “J” or “J*” in parentheses. The symbol “J” indicates that all beneficiary countries 

are eligible for special duty rate treatment with respect to all articles listed in the designated provisions. The symbol “J*” 

indicates that certain articles, specified in general note 11(d) of the HTS, are not eligible for special duty rate treatment with 

respect to any article listed in the designated provision. In addition, subchapter XXI of chapter 98 sets forth provisions covering 

specific products given duty-free eligibility under the ATPDEA, under the terms of separate country designations enumerated in 

that subchapter.

152 Total U.S. imports from Colombia in 2012 are included only for those months when Colombia was an ATPA 

beneficiary country.

67

 
Caribbean Basin Economic Recovery Act 

The Caribbean Basin Economic Recovery Act (CBERA) was enacted in 1983 as part of the 

Caribbean Basin Initiative to encourage economic growth and development in the Caribbean 

Basin countries by using duty preferences to promote increased production and exports of 

nontraditional products.153 The Caribbean Basin Trade Partnership Act (CBTPA) amended 

CBERA in 2000 and expanded the list of qualified articles, for eligible countries, to include 

certain apparel.154 The CBTPA also extended “NAFTA-equivalent treatment”—that is, rates of 

duty equivalent to those accorded to goods using the rules of origin applicable under the North 

American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA)—to a number of other products previously excluded 

from CBERA. These products included certain tuna; crude petroleum and petroleum products; 

certain footwear; watches and watch parts assembled from parts originating in countries not 

eligible for NTR rates of duty; and certain handbags, luggage, flat goods, work gloves, and 

leather wearing apparel. Products that are still excluded from CBERA preferential treatment 

include textile and apparel products not otherwise eligible for preferential treatment under 

CBTPA (mostly textile products) and above-quota imports of certain agricultural products 

subject to TRQs (primarily sugar, beef, and dairy products). CBTPA preferential treatment 

provisions were extended in 2010 through September 30, 2020, while other parts of CBERA 

have no expiration date.155 In the section that follows, the term CBERA refers to CBERA as 

amended by the CBTPA.

At the end of 2013, 17 countries and dependent territories were eligible for CBERA 

preferences156 and 8 were eligible for CBTPA preferences.157 Panama lost its eligibility for both 

CBERA and CBTPA preferences when the U.S.-Panama TPA entered into force on October 31, 

2012.158 Also in 2012, several countries asked to be designated as eligible for benefits under 

CBERA, CBTPA, or both, but only one had achieved eligibility by yearend 2013. The Turks and 

Caicos Islands requested eligibility under CBERA; Aruba, The Bahamas, Dominica, Grenada, 

Montserrat, St. Kitts and Nevis, and St. Vincent and the Grenadines, under CBTPA;159 and 

Curaçao and Sint Maarten, under CBERA and CBTPA.160 (Until 2010, Curaçao and Sint Maarten 

153 For a more detailed description of CBERA, including country and product eligibility, see USITC, Caribbean Basin 

Economic Recovery Act, 21st Report 2011–12, September 2013. 154 Textiles and apparel not subject to textile agreements in 1983 (which includes only textiles and apparel of silk or 

non-cotton vegetable fibers, mainly linen and ramie) are eligible for duty-free entry under the original CBERA 

provisions, which do not have an expiration date.

155 Certain preferential treatment provisions relating to import-sensitive textile and apparel articles from CBERA 

countries and relating to textile and apparel articles imported under special rules for Haiti (see section on Haiti 

below) have been extended to September 30, 2020. This occurred on May 24, 2010, when the President signed the 

Haiti Economic Lift Program Act of 2010, Pub. L. 111-171, § 3. 156 Antigua and Barbuda, Aruba, The Bahamas, Barbados, Belize, Curaçao, Dominica, Grenada, Guyana, Haiti, 

Jamaica, Montserrat, St. Kitts and Nevis, St. Lucia, St. Vincent and the Grenadines, Trinidad and Tobago, and the 

British Virgin Islands.

157 Barbados, Belize, Curaçao, Guyana, Haiti, Jamaica, St. Lucia, and Trinidad and Tobago. 158 Proclamation No. 8894, 77 Fed. Reg. 66507 (November 5, 2012). 159 USTR, “Joint Statement from U.S.-CARICOM,” March 31, 2012; 77 Fed. Reg. 61816 (October 11, 2012). 160 77 Fed. Reg. 61816 (October 11, 2012). USTR, Tenth CBERA Report, December 31, 2013. In addition, Suriname 

requested beneficiary status under CBERA and CBTPA in December 2009, and in April 2010, USTR asked for public 

comments regarding this request. 75 Fed. Reg. 17198 (April 5, 2010).

68

 
were members of the now-dissolved Netherlands Antilles.) On December 31, the President 

designated Curaçao as a beneficiary country for purposes of CBERA and CBTPA.161

U.S. imports under CBERA fell by 24.4 percent, from $3.1 billion in 2012 to $2.4 billion in 2013 

(table 2.6). This decrease reflected a decline in the value of 2013 U.S. imports of crude 

petroleum, knitted apparel products, undenatured ethyl alcohol, and melamine, which are 

major imports from CBERA countries. The decrease also reflected the fact that, as just noted, 

Panama lost eligibility for CBERA benefits at the end of October 2012 when the U.S.-Panama 

TPA entered into force. U.S. imports under CBERA accounted for 26.5 percent of all U.S. 

imports from CBERA countries in 2013. Trinidad and Tobago continued as the leading supplier 

of U.S. imports under CBERA in 2013, accounting for 69.2 percent of the total. Haiti and The 

Bahamas were also leading suppliers (appendix table A.23). 

Mineral fuels, methanol, and apparel products dominated the list of imports under CBERA in 

2013 (appendix table A.24). Of the 25 leading products under CBERA in 2013, 12 were 

agricultural and food products, which entered under CBERA preferences (accounting for 3.6 

percent of total U.S. imports under CBERA in 2013); 3 were knitted apparel entered under 

CBTPA (14.2 percent); 2 were petroleum and fuel products entered under CBTPA (21.2 

percent); 2 were organic chemicals entered under CBERA (50.4 percent); and the remaining 6 

were miscellaneous products that qualify for benefits under CBERA provisions. Together, these 

25 leading imports accounted for 97.2 percent of total U.S. imports under CBERA in 2013.

Table 2.6 U.S. imports for consumption from CBERA countries, 2011–13

Item 2011 2012 2013

Total imports from CBERA countries (million $)a 14,515 11,849 8,954

Total imports under CBERA/CBTPA(million $)b 3,619 3,137 2,371

Imports under CBTPA (million $)c 1,879 1,633 852

Imports under CBERA, excluding CBTPA (million $)d 1,740 1,504 1,520

Total imports under CBERA (as a share of all imports from CBERA countries) 24.9 26.5 26.5

Source: Official trade statistics of the USDOC as maintained by the USITC.

a

Data for 2012 include U.S. imports from Panama only for the period during which Panama was eligible for CBERA benefits 

before the U.S.-Panama FTA entered into force on October 31, 2012. b

Includes a small amount of imports reported as originating from the Netherland Antilles in 2011.

c

CBTPA-eligible products are those for which a special duty rate appears in the special rate column of the HTS, followed by the 

symbol “R” in parentheses. The symbol “R” indicates that all CBTPA beneficiary countries are eligible for special duty rate 

treatment with respect to all articles listed in the designated provisions. In addition, subchapters II and XX of chapter 98 set 

forth provisions covering specific products eligible for duty-free entry, under separate country designations enumerated in 

those subchapters (and including the former CBTPA beneficiaries).

d

CBERA (excluding CBTPA)-eligible products are those for which a special duty rate appears in the special rate column of the 

HTS, followed by the symbols “E” or “E*” in parentheses. The symbol “E” indicates that all beneficiary countries are eligible for 

special duty rate treatment with respect to all articles listed in the designated provisions. The symbol “E*” indicates that certain 

articles, specified in general note 7(d) of the HTS, are not eligible for special duty rate treatment with respect to any article 

listed in the designated provision.

161 78 Fed. Reg. 80417 (December 31, 2013).

69

 
Haiti Initiatives

Since 2006, CBERA has been amended three times to expand and enhance trade benefits for 

Haiti and to give Haitian apparel producers more flexibility in sourcing yarns and fabrics.162 In 

2006, the Haitian Hemispheric Opportunity through Partnership Encouragement Act of 2006 

(HOPE Act)163 amended CBERA to expand the rules of origin for inputs to apparel and wire 

harness automotive components assembled in Haiti and imported into the United States.164 In 

2008, the Haitian Hemispheric Opportunity through Partnership Encouragement Act of 2008 

(HOPE II Act)165 amended the HOPE Act to enhance the existing provisions and provide 

additional trade preferences to attract new investment and jobs in Haiti while also offering 

incentives to encourage the use of U.S. inputs.166 Finally, in 2010, the President signed into law 

the Haiti Economic Lift Program of 2010 (HELP Act).167 The HELP Act expanded existing U.S. 

trade preferences168 (especially duty-free treatment for certain qualifying apparel) for Haiti that 

were established under the CBTPA and the HOPE Act and HOPE II (collectively referred to as 

HOPE or the HOPE Acts).

U.S. imports of apparel from Haiti totaled $765.9 million in 2013, up 4.9 percent from $730.0 

million in 2012 (table 2.7).169 Virtually all (99.7 percent) U.S. imports of apparel from Haiti 

entered duty-free under trade preference programs in 2013.170 The continued growth in U.S. 

imports of apparel from Haiti in 2013 since the devastating earthquake in January 2010 has 

162 Haiti’s textiles and apparel industry is the largest sector of the country’s economy and is considered a key

growth area. Barrie, “Haiti: Sae-A Trading on Track to Begin Production,” September 18, 2012; USDOS, U.S. 

Embassy, Port-au-Prince, “Haiti: FY2012 Second Quarter Report on the NEI Initiative,” April 27, 2012. 163 Pub. L. 109-432, sect. 5001 et seq., the Haitian Hemispheric Opportunity through Partnership Encouragement 

Act of 2006.

164 There were no U.S. imports of wire harness automotive components from Haiti during 2007–2013. 165 Pub. L. 110-234, sect. 15401 et seq., the Haitian Hemispheric Opportunity through Partnership Encouragement 

Act of 2008.

166 GAO, “Letter to the Honorable Max Baucus and the Honorable Dave Camp,” December 14, 2012. For more 

details on the programs under the HOPE Acts, see USITC, The Year in Trade 2010, July 2011, 2-21 to 2-22; USITC, 

Textiles and Apparel: Effects of Special Rules, June 2008, i, ES-1, 1-3 to 1-5. 167 Pub. L. 111-171, sect. 2, Haiti Economic Lift Program Act of 2010. 168 Key provisions under the HELP Act include (1) extension of the CBTPA and HOPE Acts through September 30, 

2020 (from the earlier expiration of September 30, 2018); (2) provision of duty-free treatment for additional textile 

and apparel products that are wholly assembled or knit to shape in Haiti regardless of the origin of the inputs; (3) 

increase in the respective tariff preference levels under which certain Haitian knit and woven apparel products 

may receive duty-free treatment, regardless of the origin of inputs, from 70 million to 200 million square meter 

equivalents; and (4) liberalization of the earned import allowance rule by allowing the duty-free importation of one 

square meter equivalent of apparel wholly assembled or knit to shape in Haiti, regardless of the origin of the 

inputs, for every two square meter equivalents (previously it was for every three square meter equivalents) of 

qualifying fabric from the United States. The HELP Act also inserted two new headings into the HTS: 9820.61.45 

(certain knit apparel) and 9820.63.05 (home goods). For additional details on the HELP Act, see USITC, The Year in 

Trade 2010, July 2011, 2-21 to 2-22. 169 Haitian apparel production remains concentrated in high-volume commodity garments that have reasonably 

predictable consumer demand and few styling changes. Cotton knit shirts and blouses, cotton underwear, and 

cotton trousers and pants dominated U.S. imports from Haiti, accounting for 49 percent, 15 percent, and 11 

percent, respectively, of total U.S. imports of apparel from Haiti in 2013.

170 Based on data from USDOC, OTEXA, “U.S. Imports under Trade Preference Programs” (accessed various dates).

70

 
Table 2.7 U.S. imports for consumption of apparel from Haiti, 2011–13

Item 2011 2012 2013

Total apparel imports from Haiti (million $) 701.5 730.0 765.9

Apparel imports under a trade preference program (million $) 689.1 727.0 763.6

CBERA/CBTPA (million $) 461.4 423.6 341.7

HOPE and HELP Acts (million $) 227.7 303.4 421.9

Share of total apparel imports from Haiti: (percent)

Apparel imports under a trade preference program 98.2 99.6 99.7

CBERA/CBTPA 65.8 58.0 44.6

HOPE and HELP Acts 32.5 41.6 55.1

Source: Official trade statistics of the USDOC as maintained by the USITC.

Note: Because of rounding, figures may not add up to totals shown.

been attributed to these preference programs, which offer unlimited duty-free treatment for 

certain apparel products and limited duty-free treatment for other apparel products up to 

certain quotas known as tariff preference levels (TPLs).171 Nevertheless, industry sources in 

Haiti report that the Haitian apparel industry’s capacity to take full advantage of these 

preferences remains hobbled by internal problems. They state that although improvements are 

slowly being made in Haiti’s infrastructure—ports, airports, and roads—shortages of building 

space and adequate facilities still hamper the industry’s ability to substantially increase 

production.172 In addition, they report that Haitian apparel producers have lower productivity 

than other producers in the Western Hemisphere, such as Nicaragua and Guatemala.173

In 2013, Haiti accounted for nearly all (99.7 percent) of U.S. imports of apparel entering under 

the CBTPA. Just under half (44.6 percent) of total U.S. imports of apparel from Haiti entered 

under CBTPA provisions in 2013. The value of U.S. imports of apparel entering under the HOPE 

Acts rose by 39.1 percent, from $303.4 million in 2012 to $421.9 million in 2013,174 and 

represented over half (55.1 percent) of total U.S. apparel imports that entered free of duty 

from Haiti. Over three-fourths ($331.9 million) of the apparel imported into the United States 

from Haiti under the HOPE Acts entered under tariff preference levels that allow duty-free 

treatment for certain apparel up to established annual quotas (“restraint limits”).175 About onethird ($135.0 million) of these U.S. imports of apparel from Haiti entered under the woven 

171 USDOS, U.S. Embassy, Port-au-Prince, “Haiti Response to USITC Biennial Caribbean Basin Investment Survey,” 

July 5, 2013.

172 U.S. apparel industry representative, telephone interview by USITC staff, January 31, 2014; Haitian apparel 

industry representatives, telephone interviews by USITC staff, February 4, 2014.

173 U.S. government representative, email message to USITC staff, February 11, 2014. 174 Data on trade under the HOPE Acts are from USDOC, OTEXA,“U.S. Imports under Trade Preference Programs” 

(accessed various dates).

175 The tariff preference limits allow certain knit and woven apparel (both of which must be wholly assembled in 

Haiti), as well as certain apparel for which at least 50–60 percent of the export value added must consist of inputs 

from Haiti, the United States, or a country with which the United States has an FTA, to enter the United States free 

of duty, regardless of the source of the fabric. The tariff preference limits allow certain knit and woven apparel 

(both of which must be wholly assembled in Haiti) as well as certain apparel for which the export value added must 

have a minimum of inputs from Haiti, the United States, or country with which the United States has an FTA, of 50 

to 60 percent, to enter the United States free of duty regardless of the source of the fabric.

71

 
apparel restraint limit in 2013. Over half ($230.3 million) of the imports of apparel from Haiti 

entered under the knit apparel and value-added restraint limits the same year.176

Virtually all of the remaining U.S. imports ($90.0 million) under the HOPE Acts in 2013 entered 

under the Earned Import Allowance Program (EIAP), a special trade program created under 

HOPE II in 2008 that allowed the duty-free entry into the United States of certain apparel 

manufactured in Haiti. The EIAP originally provided that for every 3 square meter equivalents of 

qualifying fabric (defined as formed in the United States from U.S.-formed yarns) purchased or 

manufactured by the producer for apparel production in Haiti, a 1-unit credit was received that 

could be used toward the duty-free importation of apparel in the United States that was 

produced using non-qualifying fabric. In 2010, the HELP Act reduced the EIAP exchange ratio 

from 3-for-1 to 2-for-1 in an effort to encourage the program’s use, since no apparel from Haiti 

was exported to the United States under the original 3-for-1 program. The near tripling of U.S. 

imports of apparel from Haiti under the EIAP from $34.7 million in 2012 to $90.0 in 2013 can 

likely be attributed to apparel producers’ growing familiarity with the program and their taking 

advantage of credits earned on goods that otherwise would not qualify for duty-free 

treatment.177 No U.S. imports entered in 2013 under two other HELP provisions added in 2010; 

i.e., HTS 9820.61.45 (certain knit apparel—unlimited) and HTS 9820.63.05 (home goods).

176 The fill rates for the woven apparel restraint limit (HTS subheading 9820.62.05), knit apparel restraint limit (HTS 

subheading 9820.61.35), and value-added restraint limits (HTS subheadings 9820.61.25 and 9820.61.30) were 47.3 

percent, 58.3 percent, and 5.5 percent respectively, for the preferential treatment period October 1, 2012, to 

September 30, 2013.

177 U.S. government representative, email message to USITC staff, February 11, 2014.

72

 
Chapter 3

The WTO, OECD, APEC, and TISA

This chapter covers developments in 2013 in the World Trade Organization (WTO), including 

multilateral trade negotiations under the Doha Development Agenda; the work programs, 

decisions, and reviews of the WTO General Council; meetings held under WTO auspices by 

parties to plurilateral agreements; and major dispute settlement developments during the year. 

The chapter also covers activities in other key multilateral organizations, including the 

Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) and the Asia-Pacific 

Economic Cooperation (APEC) forum. Finally, the chapter covers negotiations for a Trade in 

Services Agreement (TISA), which began in 2013. While separate from the WTO, the 

negotiations were initiated as a result of slow progress on services negotiations under the WTO 

General Agreement on Trade in Services.

World Trade Organization

Ministerial Conference178

The WTO held its Ninth Ministerial Conference from December 3 to 7, 2013, in Bali, Indonesia. 

The ministers reviewed the operation of the multilateral trade system, acting under the 

leadership of the new WTO Director-General Roberto Azevêdo, whose four-year appointment 

began December 1, 2013. The WTO Director-General also holds the post of chairman of the 

Trade Negotiating Committee overseeing the multilateral trade negotiations conducted under 

the Doha Development Agenda (“Doha Round”). The conference ended on December 7, one 

day later than scheduled, following round-the-clock consultations when ministers could not 

reach agreement on a complete package by the scheduled conclusion.179

The primary focus of the ministerial conference was a package of issues covering trade 

facilitation, agriculture, and trade and economic development. The discussion of trade 

facilitation covered the reduction of administrative barriers to the movement of goods across 

borders, e.g., the simplification of customs procedures or obstacles involving port 

administration. The conference also addressed several agricultural issues under negotiation in 

the Doha Development Agenda, including export subsidies, agricultural import quotas, and food 

stockpiles intended to improve food security for developing-country members. In considering 

development, a key topic was the establishment of a monitoring mechanism to review and 

recommend improvements in the special treatment provisions afforded to developing-country 

members and, in particular, to least-developed country (LDC) members under various trade 

agreements. Another key development topic was the cotton negotiations involving the four 

178 WTO, “Bali Ministerial Declaration––Adopted on 7 December 2013,” December 11, 2013. 179 WTO, “Ninth WTO Ministerial Conference: Days 3, 4, and 5,” December 7, 2013.

73

 
sub-Saharan cotton producers—Benin, Burkina Faso, Chad, and Mali (the “Cotton Four” or “C4”).180 

Other issues discussed at the conference included issues of “nonviolation” provisions 

addressing intellectual property rights (IPR);

181 electronic commerce (“e-commerce”); small and 

vulnerable economies; aid for trade; and trade and the transfer of technology. Plurilateral 

agreement issues included the Information Technology Agreement (ITA)182 and negotiations on 

ITA product expansion, as well as progress on bringing the revised Agreement on Government 

Procurement into force.183

Agreement on Trade Facilitation

At the Ninth Ministerial Conference, WTO members reached consensus on a Trade Facilitation 

Agreement as part of a wider “Bali Package.” The agreement creates binding commitments 

among WTO members to expedite the movement, release, and clearance of goods; to improve 

cooperation on customs matters among WTO members; and to help developing-country 

members implement the agreement’s obligations.184 The agreement aims to increase customs 

efficiency, the effective collection of revenue, and transparency in customs practices, as well as 

to reduce document processing and other requirements before traded goods arrive at the 

border.185 

The United States Trade Representative (USTR) Michael Froman announced at the conference 

that potential cost reductions from the Trade Facilitation Agreement were estimated at 10 

percent for high-income countries and almost 14.5 percent for low-income countries.186 He 

cited OECD estimates that worldwide income could rise by more than $40 billion for every 1 

percent in cost reduction, with nearly two-thirds (65 percent) of the income increase going to 

developing countries. Potential gains in world GDP, according to Froman, were estimated at 

nearly $1 trillion.187

The agreement establishes a Preparatory Committee on Trade tasked with developing a 

protocol to adopt the agreement, to be reported to the WTO General Council no later than July 

31, 2014. WTO members will then have one year––until July 31, 2015––to accept or not accept 

the agreement as a protocol annexed to the 1995 Marrakesh Agreement Establishing the World 

Trade Organization (the “WTO Agreement”).188 The WTO Agreement on Trade Facilitation has 

180 WTO, “Ninth WTO Ministerial Conference: Day 1,” December 3, 2013. 181 WTO summarizes a “nonviolation” complaint as a situation where a government alleges that it has been 

deprived of an expected benefit because of another government’s action or other similar situation, even where no 

agreement, commitment, or obligation has been violated.

182 Formally, the Ministerial Declaration on Trade in Information Technology Products. For further detail, see the 

“Plurilateral Agreements” section in this chapter. 183 WTO, “Ministerial Conferences: Briefing Notes” (accessed December 9, 2013). 184 WTO, “Agreement on Trade Facilitation––Ministerial Decision of 7 December 2013,” December 11, 2013. 185 USDOS, “Ninth WTO Ministerial Conference Makes History,” December 18, 2013, par. 4. 186 USTR, “Statement of U.S. Trade Representative Michael Froman,” December 6, 2013. 187 USTR, “Saving Money, Growing Trade, Raising Incomes Worldwide,” December 7, 2013. 188 WTO, “Agreement on Trade Facilitation––Ministerial Decision of 7 December 2013,” December 11, 2013, par. 

1–3.

74

 
13 articles in section I, which sets out members’ substantive obligations on facilitating customs 

and other border procedures. Section II addresses rules providing special and differential 

treatment for developing and least-developed country members. Annex 1 to the agreement 

sets out the format for notifications to be used for the import and export of goods, as well as 

for goods in transit (box 3.1).189

Agriculture

The ministers at the conference reached agreement on a number of agricultural issues, 

addressing (1) agricultural service programs, (2) food security stockholding, (3) underfilled 

agricultural tariff-rate quotas (TRQs), and (4) export competition provisions concerning state 

trading enterprises.190 Ministers also addressed several issues concerning cotton and 

developing-country members, including LDCs.

Government service programs.

191 Members added several land-use and rural development 

programs to the list of general services exempt from reduction commitments under Annex 2 of 

the WTO Agreement on Agriculture. Such government agricultural service programs are exempt 

from reduction commitments because they provide benefits to the agricultural sector or rural 

community that offset whatever minimal production or trade distortion these programs might 

cause. Adding to the non-exhaustive list of general services already in Annex 2, members 

included six more programs, addressing (1) land rehabilitation, (2) soil conservation and 

resource management, (3) drought management and flood control, (4) rural employment 

programs, (5) issuance of property titles, and (6) farmer settlement programs.

Food security stockholding.

192 A major issue considered at the conference was the use of 

domestic government support to build public stocks for food security. The problem is that such 

support may breach a country’s commitments limiting trade-distorting support under the 

Agreement on Agriculture, in particular Article 6 (Domestic Support Commitments) and Article 

7 (General Disciplines on Domestic Support). Members were able to come to an interim 

solution to address this concern. Under the interim plan, members agreed to refrain from WTO 

dispute settlement challenges when a developing-country member falls out of compliance with 

its commitments under the Agreement on Agriculture due to government support for such 

programs, when targeted on traditional staple food crops. In addition to the interim solution, 

members agreed to establish a work program under the WTO Committee on Agriculture to 

develop a permanent solution to the issue no later than the 11th WTO Ministerial Conference 

(i.e., no later than 2017).

189 WTO, “Agreement on Trade Facilitation––Ministerial Decision of 7 December 2013,” December 11, 2013. 190 WTO summarizes a TRQ as a quota where an import quantity within a quota is charged a lower duty rate than 

the quantities above the quota; typically, import duty rates for amounts above the quota are significantly higher. 191 WTO, “General Services––Ministerial Decision of 7 December 2013,” December 11, 2013; WTO, “Agreement on 

Agriculture: Annex 2,” April 15, 1994; WTO, “Ninth WTO Ministerial Conference: Days 3, 4 and 5,” December 7, 

2013.

192 WTO, “Public Stockholding for Food Security Purposes––Ministerial Decision of 7 December 2013,” December 

11, 2013; USTR, “Promoting Food Security, Facilitating Competition, Enhancing Exports,” December 7, 2013; WTO, 

“Ninth WTO Ministerial Conference: Days 3, 4 and 5,” December 7, 2013.

75

 
Box 3.1 Outline of the WTO Agreement on Trade Facilitation, 2013

Annex––Agreement on Trade Facilitation

 Preamble

Section I 

Article 1: Publication and availability of information

1. Publication

2. Information available through Internet

3. Enquiry points

4. Notification

Article 2: Opportunity to comment, information before entry into force, and consultation

1. Opportunity to comment and information before entry into force

2. Consultations

Article 3: Advance rulings

Article 4: Appeal or review procedures

1. Right to appeal or review

Article 5: Other measures to enhance impartiality, nondiscrimination and transparency

1. Notifications for enhanced controls or inspections

2. Detention

3. Test procedures

Article 6: Disciplines on fees and charges imposed on or in connection with importation and exportation

1. General disciplines on fees and charges imposed on or in connection with importation and 

exportation

2. Specific disciplines on fees and charges imposed on or in connection with importation and 

exportation

3. Penalty disciplines

Article 7: Release and clearance of goods

1. Pre-arrival processing

2. Electronic payment

3. Separation of release from final determination of customs duties, taxes, fees, and charges

4. Risk management

5. Post-clearance audit

6. Establishment and publication of average release times

7. Trade facilitation measures for authorized operators

8. Expedited shipments

9. Perishable goods

Article 8: Border agency cooperation

Article 9: Movement of goods under customs control intended for import

Article 10: Formalities connected with importation and exportation and transit

1. Formalities and documentation requirements

2. Acceptance of copies

3. Use of international standards

76
4. Single window

5. Pre-shipment inspection

6. Use of customs brokers

7. Common border procedures and uniform documentation requirements

8. Rejected goods

9. Temporary admission of goods/inward and outward processing

Article 11: Freedom of transit

Article 12: Customs cooperation

1. Measures promoting compliance and cooperation

2. Exchange of information

3. Verification

4. Request

5. Protection and confidentiality

6. Provision of information

7. Postponement or refusal of a request

8. Reciprocity

9. Administrative burden

10. Limitations

11. Unauthorized use or disclosure

12. Bilateral and regional agreements

Article 13: Institutional arrangements

1. Committee on trade facilitation

2. National committee on trade facilitation

Section II

Special and differential treatment provisions for developing-country members and least-developed 

country members

1. General principles

2. Categories of provisions

3. Notification and implementation of Category A 

4. Notification of definitive dates for implementation of Category B and Category C

5. Early warning mechanism: Extension of implementation dates for provisions in Categories B and C

6. Implementation of Category B and Category C

7. Shifting between Categories B and C

8. Grace period for the application of the understanding on rules and procedures governing the 

settlement of disputes

9. Provision of assistance for capacity building

10. Information on assistance to be submitted to the committee

Final Provisions

Annex 1: Format for Notification Under Article 10.1

Source: WTO, “Agreement on Trade Facilitation––Ministerial Decision of 7 December 2013,” December 11, 2013.

77
Tariff-rate quota administration. WTO members reached an understanding193 on the 

administration of TRQs for agricultural products, in particular those chronically under-filled194

for no evident commercial reason. In the understanding, members set out specific import 

licensing procedures and obligations to provide greater transparency and opportunity for 

consultations between an importing member and other interested members and potential 

users. Members agreed to establish an “underfill” or “re-allocation” mechanism195 for 

underfilled quotas within the purview of the Committee on Agriculture, with a review to begin 

no later than four years (i.e., by 2017) from adoption of the understanding.196 

Under the mechanism, the Committee on Agriculture is to track TRQs for key indicators—e.g., 

whether a quota fill rate has (1) remained below 65 percent for three consecutive years, (2) not 

increased by certain percentages in each of the previous three years, or (3) not been shown to 

be underfilled as a result of market circumstances. The underfill mechanism, once fully 

operational, will require an importing member to act on the basis of such indicators to provide 

unencumbered access to other interested members. The importing member may use one of 

two quota administration methods: (1) a first-come, first-served system applied at the border; 

or (2) an automatic, unconditional, within-quota license issued on demand, either choice to be 

maintained in place for a minimum of two years. Developing-country members are to be 

permitted to maintain their current TRQ administration or choose an alternative TRQ method 

for a similar two-year period. 

Export competition.197 Participants at the Bali ministerial agreed to hold dedicated annual 

discussions in the Committee on Agriculture to examine developments in the field of export 

competition. In addition to standard notifications under the Agreement on Agriculture, these 

discussions are to be augmented with information from a questionnaire designed to enhance 

transparency in the area of agricultural export competition. Key subjects in the questionnaire 

cover export subsidies; export credits, guarantees, and financing programs; provision of food 

aid and related policies; state trading enterprises that export agricultural products; and exportcompetition policies eliminated by policy reforms. Members agreed to review the situation 

regarding export competition at the 10th WTO Ministerial Conference (i.e., no later than 2015). 

193 WTO, “Understanding on Tariff Rate Quota Administration Provisions of Agricultural Products,” December 11, 

2013; WTO, “Ninth WTO Ministerial Conference: Days 3, 4 and 5,” December 7, 2013.

194 USTR cited in particular the EU, Japan, Norway, and Switzerland as import markets where U.S. farmers, 

ranchers, workers, and food processors might benefit from an understanding that could reallocate underfilled 

agricultural quotas. USTR, “Promoting Food Security, Facilitating Competition, Enhancing Exports,” December 7, 

2013.

195 Annex A of the understanding. 196 WTO, “Understanding on Tariff Rate Quota Administration Provisions of Agricultural Products,” December 11, 

2013; WTO, “Ninth WTO Ministerial Conference: Days 3, 4 and 5,” December 7, 2013. The understanding did not, 

however, fully resolve the future of the mechanism, indicating that the provisions for the underfill mechanism will 

“no longer apply” without a recommendation from the WTO General Council at the 12th WTO Ministerial 

Conference (i.e., by 2019), but also that “Members shall continue to apply the provisions . . . in the absence of a 

decision to extend [it].” WTO, “Understanding on Tariff Rate Quota Administration Provisions of Agricultural 

Products,” December 11, 2013, par. 14–15. Moreover, five countries reserved the right to discontinue the underfill 

mechanism regardless of any decision to continue it or not––Barbados, the Dominican Republic, El Salvador, 

Guatemala, and the United States.

197 WTO, “Export Competition––Ministerial Decision of 7 December 2013,” December 11, 2013.

78

 
More broadly, the decision was also seen as impetus for members to resume WTO agriculture 

negotiations in all three of the major areas—i.e., market access and domestic support as well as 

export competition.198

Cotton.

199 Participants agreed to hold dedicated discussions twice a year in the Committee on 

Agriculture in Special Session to examine trade-related developments affecting cotton. The 

framework for these discussions will center on the three “pillars” of the Agreement on 

Agriculture––market access, domestic support, and export competition––in relation to cotton 

so as to enhance the monitoring and transparency of cotton-specific developments. Ministers 

also agreed to improve market access for cotton products from the LDCs, as well as to improve 

development assistance for cotton production for these countries.200

Development Issues

In addition to action taken on cotton, members reached agreement on four other subjects 

related to the development needs of developing members and the LDCs.

Preferential rules of origin for least-developed countries.

201 Participants agreed at the 

conference on guidelines to simplify individual members’ rules of origin arrangements that 

provide preferential market access to products from the LDCs. The decision called for 

simplifying documentary requirements and enhancing transparency of the origin rules notified 

through established channels, notably the Transparency Mechanism for Preferential Trade 

Arrangements under the WTO Committee on Trade and Development. The decision provided 

that members might confer preferential access through origin rules based not only on final 

products, but also through rules of origin containing criteria based on the principle of 

substantial transformation.202

Preferential treatment for services and service suppliers from least-developed countries.

203 WTO 

members agreed to make permanent the waiver adopted at the Eighth Ministerial Conference 

in 2011, which originally granted preferential treatment to the services and service suppliers of 

LDCs for the next 15 years (i.e., the preferential treatment was previously set to expire in 2026).

Duty-free and quota-free market access for least-developed countries.

204 Developed-country 

WTO members reached agreement “to seek to improve” their duty-free and quota-free (DFQF) 

198 WTO, “Ninth WTO Ministerial Conference: Days 3, 4 and 5,” December 7, 2013. 199 WTO, “Cotton––Ministerial Decision of 7 December 2013,” December 11, 2013. 200 WTO, “Ninth WTO Ministerial Conference: Days 3, 4 and 5,” December 7, 2013. 201 WTO, “Preferential Rules of Origin for Least-developed Countries––Ministerial Decision of 7 December 2013,” 

December 11, 2013.

202 The World Customs Organization (WCO) summarizes substantial transformation as “a production requirement 

guaranteeing that a meaningful manufacturing process has taken place in the free trade zone in order to confer 

originating status of a good.” WCO, “Substantial Transformation: Concept of ‘Originating Goods’” (accessed March 

13, 2014).

203 WTO, “Operationalization of the Waiver Concerning Preferential Treatment to Services and Service Suppliers,” 

December 11, 2013.

204 WTO, “Duty-free and Quota-free (DFQF) Market Access,” December 11, 2013.

79

 
market access for LDCs to at least 97 percent205 for LDC products before the 10th Ministerial 

Conference (i.e., no later than 2015). The ministerial decision further agreed that developingcountry members in a position to do so would also seek to provide or improve such access to 

LDCs. Members are to notify measures taken to increase market access for LDCs through the 

Transparency Mechanism for Preferential Trade Arrangements.

Monitoring mechanism on special and differential treatment.206 Members established a Special 

and Differential Treatment Monitoring Mechanism to analyze and review the implementation 

of special and differential treatment provisions. This monitoring mechanism is a new forum 

aimed at complementing other WTO channels that help developing and least-developed 

country members to integrate into the multilateral trading system. The forum is to meet twice a 

year in dedicated sessions of the WTO Committee on Trade and Development. WTO members 

are to review the experience of the monitoring mechanism three years after its first formal 

meeting, and subsequently as needed as circumstances evolve.

General Council 

Work Programs, Decisions, and Reviews 

Intellectual property rights complaints.

207 Ministers at the conference directed the WTO Council 

for Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS Council) to continue to examine 

“nonviolation complaints” under WTO dispute settlement provisions. Ministers first authorized 

the examination of this category of complaints in December 2011 to consider the effect of any 

measure or situation that does not necessarily conflict with WTO obligations or commitments, 

but may impair a member’s IPR benefits under the TRIPS Agreement. The ministers called for 

the TRIPS Council to make recommendations to them at the 10th Ministerial Conference in 

2015, and members agreed not to bring nonviolation cases to dispute settlement pending such 

recommendations.

Work program on electronic commerce.208 At the conference, ministers agreed to continue the 

Work Program on Electronic Commerce, in particular as it relates to commercial issues, 

economic development, and evolving technology. Ministers cited a number of trade-related 

aspects of the program to address, including (1) enhanced Internet connectivity and access to 

information, telecommunications technologies, and public Internet sites; (2) the growth of 

mobile telephony; (3) electronically delivered software; (4) cloud computing; and (5) privacy, 

consumer protection, and the protection of confidential data. Ministers directed that the 

program continue to examine the opportunities and challenges for access to electronic 

commerce by micro, small, and medium-sized enterprises, with special consideration for 

developing and least-developed country members. The ministers instructed the General Council 

to hold several periodic reviews of the work program––in July 2014, December 2014, and July 

205 Defined at the tariff level. 206 WTO, “Monitoring Mechanism on Special and Differential Treatment,” December 11, 2013. 207 WTO, “TRIPS Non-violation and Situation Complaints,” December 11, 2013. 208 WTO, “Work Programme on Electronic Commerce,” December 11, 2013.

80

 
2015. WTO members agreed to continue their current practice of not imposing customs duties 

on electronic transmissions in the interim to the 10th Ministerial Conference in 2015.

Work program on small economies.209 Ministers continued the Work Program on Small 

Economies, noting in particular the work on the effects of nontariff measures on small 

economies that has been conducted since 2011 in dedicated sessions of the Committee on 

Trade and Development. The ministers instructed the committee to continue its work in order 

to recommend ways for the General Council to help improve the economic situation of small 

economies. In particular, the committee was to focus on the challenges and opportunities for 

small economies in linking to global value chains involved in goods and services trade.

Aid for trade.210 The conference noted the deliberations and outcomes of the Fourth Global 

Review of Aid for Trade, held July 8–10, 2013, and welcomed the progress made to date in the 

effort to help developing and least-developed country members. Ministers considered that the 

new Aid-for-Trade Work Program should be developed in the context of debate over the post2015 development agenda.

Trade and transfer of technology.211 The conference directed the Working Group on Trade and 

Transfer of Technology to continue to examine the nexus between trade and the transfer of 

technology, aimed at enhancing the flow of technology to developing countries.

Accessions

At the end of 2013, the WTO had 159 members (table 3.1), with two countries acceding during 

the year and a third country invited to accede during the Ninth Ministerial Conference. Laos 

became the 158th WTO member on February 2, 2013,212 and Tajikistan became the 159th on 

March 2, 2013.213 Yemen was invited to join the WTO in December 2013 at the Bali 

conference.214 At the end of 2013, there were 25 observer countries in WTO accession working 

parties (table 3.2).

209 WTO, “Work Programme on Small Economies,” December 11, 2013. 210 WTO, “Aid for Trade,” December 11, 2013. 211 WTO, “Trade and Transfer of Technology,” December 11, 2013. 212 WTO, “Member Information: Lao People’s Democratic Republic and the WTO” (accessed March 13, 2014). 213 WTO, “Accessions: Tajikistan” (accessed March 13, 2014). 214 Yemen became the 160th WTO member on June 26, 2014. WTO, “Yemen brings WTO membership to 160,” 

June 26, 2014. 

81

 
Table 3.1 WTO membership in 2013

Albania Germany Nigeria

Angola Ghana Norway

Antigua and Barbuda Greece Oman

Argentina Grenada Pakistan

Armenia Guatemala Panama

Australia Guinea Papua New Guinea

Austria Guinea-Bissau Paraguay

Bahrain Guyana Peru

Bangladesh Haiti Philippines

Barbados Honduras Poland

Belgium Hong Kong, China Portugal

Belize Hungary Qatar

Benin Iceland Romania

Bolivia India Russia

Botswana Indonesia Rwanda

Brazil Ireland Saint Kitts and Nevis

Brunei Darussalam Israel Saint Lucia

Bulgaria Italy Saint Vincent and the Grenadines

Burkina Faso Jamaica Samoa

Burmaa Japan Saudi Arabia

Burundi Jordan Senegal

Cabo Verde Kenya Sierra Leone

Cambodia Korea, Republic of Singapore

Cameroon Kuwait Slovakia 

Canada Kyrgyzstan Slovenia

Central Africa Republic Laos Solomon Islands

Chad Latvia South Africa

Chile Lesotho Spain

China Liechtenstein Sri Lanka

Colombia Lithuania Suriname

Congo, Democratic Republic of the Luxembourg Swaziland

Congo, Republic of the Macao, China Sweden

Costa Rica Macedoniab Switzerland

Côte d’Ivoire Madagascar Taiwanc

Croatia Malawi Tajikistan

Cuba Malaysia Tanzania

Cyprus Maldives Thailand

Czech Republic Mali Togo

Denmark Malta Tonga

Djibouti Mauritania Trinidad and Tobago

Dominica Mauritius Tunisia

Dominican Republic Mexico Turkey

Ecuador Moldova Uganda

Egypt Mongolia Ukraine

El Salvador Montenegro United Arab Emirates

Estonia Morocco United Kingdom

European Union Mozambique United States

Fiji Namibia Uruguay

Finland Nepal Vanuatu

France Netherlands Venezuela

Gabon New Zealand Vietnam

Gambia Nicaragua Zambia

Georgia Niger Zimbabwe

Source: WTO, “Understanding the WTO: The Organization: Members and Observers,” n.d. (accessed March 13, 2014). a

In the WTO, Burma is known as Myanmar.

b

In the WTO, Macedonia is known as the Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia.

c

In the WTO, Taiwan is known as the Separate Customs Territory of Taiwan, Penghu, Kinmen, and Matsu, or less formally as 

“Chinese Taipei.” 

82
Table 3.2 WTO observers in 2013

Afghanistan Equatorial Guinea Serbia

Algeria Ethiopia Seychelles

Andorra Iran Sudan

Azerbaijan Iraq Syria

Bahamas Kazakhstan Uzbekistan

Belarus Lebanon Vatican (Holy See)

Bhutan Liberia Yemen

Bosnia and Herzegovina Libya

Comoros São Tomé and Príncipe

Source: WTO, “Understanding the WTO: The Organization: Members and Observers,” n.d. (accessed March 13, 2014).

Selected Plurilateral Agreements 

Agreement on Government Procurement215

Parties to the revised WTO Agreement on Government Procurement, adopted in March 2012, 

noted progress toward bringing the revised agreement into force by March 31, 2014.216 The 

parties encouraged all WTO members to consider the possibility of acceding to the revised 

agreement, noting it expands access to government procurement markets by an estimated 

$80–$100 billion annually, deters corruption, and promotes good governance and effective 

management of public resources. The parties acknowledged the efforts of several countries––

China, Montenegro, and New Zealand—that are in the process of acceding to the agreement.

Agreement on Trade in Civil Aircraft217

The Committee on Trade in Civil Aircraft held its annual meeting November 7, 2013, to discuss 

progress made toward a final consensus on modifications to the Product Coverage Annex to the 

Agreement on Trade in Civil Aircraft. The modifications are intended to bring the annex into 

conformity with the Harmonized System (HS)218 nomenclature, 2007 edition (HS 2007). Based 

on information exchanges since their 2012 meeting, delegations considered that consensus was 

near on a revised annex. The chairman proposed at the November 2013 meeting that the 

committee meet in the first half of 2014 to finalize the revisions to the annex, after which the 

WTO Secretariat could prepare a final copy of the revised annex for action by the committee.

215 WTO, Committee on Government Procurement, “Ministerial-level Meeting of the Committee on Government 

Procurement,” December 3, 2013.

216 The revised agreement entered into force on April 6, 2014, upon acceptance by two-thirds of its 15 signatories. 

It thus entered into force for the following 10 signatories: Canada; the EU; Hong Kong, China; Iceland; Israel; 

Liechtenstein; Norway; Singapore; Taiwan (Chinese Taipei); and the United States. 79 Fed. Reg. 14776 (March 17, 

2014).

217 WTO, Committee on Trade in Civil Aircraft, “Minutes of the Meeting Held on 7 November 2013,” November 12, 

2013; USTR, 2014 Trade Policy Agenda and 2013 Annual Report, March 3, 2014, II.112. 218 Formally, the Harmonized Commodity Description and Coding System. WCO, “International Convention on the 

Harmonized Commodity Description and Coding System,” June 14, 1983. The HS underwent further modifications 

in 2012; work on 2017 changes is ongoing.

83

 
Information Technology Agreement

As of October 3, 2013, there were 50 participants in the Ministerial Declaration on Trade in 

Information Technology Products, commonly known as the Information Technology Agreement 

(ITA). These participants covered 78 WTO members, states, or separate customs territories, and 

represented approximately 96 percent of world trade in information technology products.219

New members that joined during 2013 were Tajikistan (March 2), Qatar (July 4), and Russia 

(September 13).220 During the year, the ITA Committee221 continued with its Work Program on 

Nontariff Measures to identify impediments to trade in ITA products, as well as its 

Electromagnetic Interference/Electromagnetic Compatibility Pilot Project. In the latter effort, 

participants exchange information on national procedures used to assess conformity with 

standards used for ITA products in order to increase transparency and trade in the sector. In 

2013, the ITA Committee also continued to work on consolidating differences in the HS 

classification that affect ITA products. In July 2013, ITA participants adopted a decision that 

narrowed classification divergences for a list of 18 products largely involving semiconductor 

technologies into single common classifications defined under the HS 1996.222

Negotiations to expand the ITA to new categories of information technology products ran into 

considerable difficulties in 2013, being twice suspended during that year.223 These negotiations 

had begun in the previous year. A core group of ITA participants––Costa Rica, the EU, Japan, 

Korea, Taiwan, and the United States––reached broad agreement at the May 15, 2012, meeting 

of the ITA Committee to proceed with negotiations to expand ITA product coverage. These 

participants made the decision recognizing that new categories of information technology 

products had been developed since conclusion of the original 1996 ITA.224 The proposed list for 

product expansion initially covered 130 product codes under the HS, comprising 439 product 

descriptions.225 The group’s discussions led to establishment of a technical working group 

outside of the formal WTO ITA Committee framework.226 At the working group’s meeting on 

September 26–27, 2012, China participated in the ITA expansion discussions for the first time, 

219 WTO, Committee of Participants on the Expansion of Trade in Information Technology Products, “Status of 

Implementation––Note by the Secretariat––Revision,” October 4, 2013. As of October 3, 2013, participants in the 

ITA were Albania; Australia; Bahrain; Canada; China; Colombia; Costa Rica; the Dominican Republic; Egypt; El 

Salvador; the EU; Georgia; Guatemala; Honduras; Hong Kong, China; Iceland; India; Indonesia; Israel; Japan; 

Jordan; Korea; Kuwait; Kyrgyzstan; Macao, China; Malaysia; Mauritius; Moldova; Montenegro; Morocco; New 

Zealand; Nicaragua; Norway; Oman; Panama; Peru; the Philippines; Qatar; Russia; Saudi Arabia; Singapore; 

Switzerland (on behalf of the customs union of Switzerland and Liechtenstein); Taiwan (Chinese Taipei); Tajikistan; 

Thailand; Turkey; Ukraine; the United Arab Emirates; the United States; and Vietnam. 220 WTO, Committee of Participants on the Expansion of Trade in Information Technology Products, “Report (2013) 

of the Committee of Participants,” October 15, 2013.

221 Formally, the Committee of Participants on the Expansion of Trade in Information Technology Products. 222 WTO, Committee of Participants on the Expansion of Trade in Information Technology Products, “Classification 

Divergences—Note by the Secretariat,” March 11, 2009. 223 USTR, “USTR Froman Expresses U.S. Disappointment,” July 17, 2013. 224 WTO, “9th WTO Ministerial Conference, Bali, 2013: Briefing Note” (accessed March 14, 2014); USTR, “Letter 

from the United States Trade Representative/Williamson,” July 31, 2012. 225 USITC, The Information Technology Agreement: Advice and Information on the Proposed Expansion; Part 1, 

October 2012.

226 WTO, “9th WTO Ministerial Conference, Bali, 2013: Briefing Note” (accessed March 14, 2014).

84

 
reportedly favoring a more narrow expansion of product coverage as a result of domestic 

sensitivities.227 By the November 1, 2012, meeting of the ITA Committee, parties in the 

technical working group discussions had increased to 17.228 The group indicated that it aimed to 

reissue its draft list of ITA products by mid-December 2012. The reissued list would in turn 

become the basis for further discussion and subsequent negotiations.229

Discussions during the first half of 2013 aimed at consolidating and reducing the list of products 

proposed for ITA expansion. The group’s criteria restricted proposed products to goods that 

were traded among members in significant quantities (covering 50 percent or more of world 

trade in a given product) or whose inclusion was supported by at least 8 of the 25 negotiating 

parties.230 In meetings in June 2013, China reported to the group that it was unable to agree to 

tariff cuts for over one-third of the 256 products under discussion.231 Despite subsequent 

clarification of China’s offers, the remaining parties in the group suspended negotiations on July 

18, 2013.232 

ITA expansion talks resumed October 21–24, 2013, with a central focus on China’s offer to 

phase out tariffs for sensitive items.233 In subsequent meetings scheduled for November 11–20, 

China stated that it was unable to agree to tariff elimination for approximately one-quarter of 

the 256 products under discussion for tariff elimination, and furthermore could only agree to 

duty phaseouts for an additional 80 products.234 The parties reached an impasse in discussions 

on November 18, 2013, and suspended negotiations for a second time on November 21, 

2013.235 By the end of 2013, parties to the technical working group discussions comprised 27 

ITA participants: Albania; Australia; Canada; China; Colombia; Costa Rica; the Dominican 

Republic; El Salvador; the EU; Guatemala; Hong Kong, China; Iceland; Israel; Japan; Korea; 

Malaysia; Mauritius; Montenegro; New Zealand; Norway; the Philippines; Singapore; 

Switzerland; Taiwan; Thailand; Turkey; and the United States.236 

Dispute Settlement Body 

This section focuses on complaints filed before the WTO Dispute Settlement Body (DSB) and on 

panel and Appellate Body findings and recommendations adopted under the WTO Dispute 

227 Inside U.S. Trade, “China Joins ITA Talks; Pushes Back,” October 4, 2012. 228 The 17 parties were Australia; Canada; China; Costa Rica; the EU; Hong Kong, China; Japan; Korea; Malaysia; 

New Zealand; Norway; the Philippines; Singapore; Switzerland; Taiwan (Chinese Taipei); Thailand; and the United 

States.

229 WTO, Committee of Participants on the Expansion of Trade in Information Technology Products, “Minutes of 

the Meeting of 1 November 2012,” March 14, 2013, par. 2.7.

230 Inside U.S. Trade, “ITA Expansion Negotiators Make Push To Finalize,” June 6, 2013. 231 Inside U.S. Trade, “China Poses New Roadblock,” June 27, 2013. 232 USTR, “USTR Froman Expresses U.S. Disappointment,” July 17, 2013; Inside U.S. Trade, “U.S., Others Suspend 

ITA Talks,” July 18, 2013.

233 Inside U.S. Trade, “Slow Restart To ITA Expansion Talks,” October 24, 2013. 234 Inside U.S. Trade, “ITA Expansion Talks Suspended Again,” November 21, 2013. 235 WTO, “9th WTO Ministerial Conference, Bali, 2013: Briefing Note” (accessed March 14, 2014); Inside U.S. Trade, 

“ITA Expansion Talks Suspended Again,” November 21, 2013. 236 WTO, “9th WTO Ministerial Conference, Bali, 2013: Briefing Note” (accessed March 14, 2014).

85

 
Settlement Understanding during calendar year 2013 that involve the United States.237 Box 3.2 

provides an overview of the WTO dispute settlement process.

Table 3.3 lists the disputes (involving all WTO members) that moved from the consultation 

stage to the more formal panel litigation stage during 2013. The titles of the disputes listed in 

table 3.3 also serve as an indication of the types of subject matter that reached the more 

formal litigation stage during 2013.

The rest of this section consists of short summaries of the procedural and substantive issues in 

disputes involving the United States that moved to the panel stage during 2013 and summaries 

of panel and Appellate Body reports involving the United States that were issued or adopted 

during 2013. The summaries are based entirely on information in publicly available documents,

including summaries published online by the WTO and press releases issued by U.S.

government agencies. They should not be regarded as comprehensive or as reflecting a U.S.

Box 3.2 Overview of the WTO dispute settlement procedures

The WTO Dispute Settlement Understanding (DSU) establishes a framework for the resolution of 

disputes that arise between members under the WTO agreements.a Under the DSU, a member may file 

a complaint with the WTO DSB. After filing, the member must first seek to resolve the dispute through 

consultations with the named respondent party.b If the consultations fail, the complaining party may ask 

the DSB to establish a panel to review the matters raised by the complaint and make findings and 

recommendations.c Either party may appeal issues of law covered in the panel report and legal 

interpretations developed by the panel to the WTO’s Appellate Body.d

The findings and recommendations of the Appellate Body and of the panel (as modified by the Appellate 

Body) are then adopted by the DSB unless there is a consensus by the members to reject the ruling. 

While the guidelines suggest that panels should complete their proceedings in six months, and the 

Appellate Body should complete its review in 60 days, these periods are often extended.

Once the panel report or the Appellate Body report is adopted, the party concerned must notify the DSB 

of its intentions with respect to implementing the adopted recommendations.e If it is impracticable to 

comply immediately, the party concerned is given a reasonable period of time to comply, with the time 

to be decided either through agreement of the parties and approval by the DSB, or through arbitration. 

Further provisions set out rules for compensation or the suspension of concessions in the event the 

respondent fails to implement the recommendations.fWithin a specified timeframe, parties can enter 

into negotiations to agree on mutually acceptable compensation. Should the parties fail to reach 

agreement, a party to the dispute may request the DSB’s authorization to suspend concessions or other 

obligations to the other party concerned. Disagreements over the proposed level of suspension may be 

referred to arbitration.

a

WTO, “Understanding on Rules and Procedures Governing the Settlement of Disputes,” 1995. b

WTO DSU, Article 4.

c

WTO DSU, Article 6.

d

WTO DSU, Article 17.6.

e

WTO DSU, Article 21.3.

f

WTO DSU, Article 22.

237 For additional information on the WTO dispute settlement process, the DSU, and individual dispute cases, see 

the WTO, “Dispute Settlement” at http://www.wto.org/english/tratop_e/dispu_e/dispu_e.htm. 

86

 
Table 3.3 WTO dispute settlement panels established during 2013

Case no. Complainant Respondent Case name Panel established

DS429 Vietnam United States United States—Anti-Dumping Measures on 

Certain Frozen Warmwater Shrimp from Viet 

Nam

February 27, 2013

DS435 Honduras Australia Australia—Certain Measures Concerning 

Trademarks, Geographical Indications and 

Other Plain Packaging Requirements 

Applicable to Tobacco Products and Packaging

September 25, 2013

DS438 European Union Argentina Argentina––Measures Affecting the 

Importation of Goods

January 28, 2013 (with 

DS444 and DS445)

DS442 Indonesia European Union European Union—Anti-Dumping Measures on 

Imports of Certain Fatty Alcohols from 

Indonesia

June 25, 2013

DS444 United States Argentina Argentina—Measures Affecting the 

Importation of Goods

January 28, 2013 (with 

DS438 and DS445)

DS445 Japan Argentina Argentina—Measures Affecting the 

Importation of Goods

January 28, 2013 (with 

DS438 and DS444)

DS447 Argentina United States United States—Measures Affecting the 

Importation of Animals, Meat and Other 

Products from Argentina

January 28, 2013

DS453 Panama Argentina Argentina—Measures Relating to Trade in 

Goods and Services

June 25, 2013

DS454 Japan China China—Measures Imposing Anti-Dumping 

Duties on High-Performance Stainless Steel 

Seamless Tubes (“HP-SSST”) from Japan

May 24, 2013

DS455 United States Indonesia Indonesia—Importation of horticultural 

products, animals and animal products

April 24, 2013

DS457 Guatemala Peru Peru—Additional Duty on Imports of Certain 

Agricultural Products

July 23, 2013

DS460 European Union China China—Measures Imposing Anti-Dumping 

Duties on High-Performance Stainless Steel 

Seamless Tubes (“HP-SSST”) from the 

European Union

August 30, 2013

DS461 Panama Colombia Colombia—Measures Relating to the 

Importation of Textiles, Apparel and Footwear

September 25, 2013

DS462 European Union Russia Russian Federation—Recycling Fee on Motor 

Vehicles

November 25, 2013

Source: Derived from WTO, “Dispute Settlement: The Disputes—Chronological List of Disputes” (accessed March 19, 2014).

87
government interpretation of the issues raised or addressed in the disputes or in panel or 

Appellate Body reports. A table showing procedural developments during 2013 in disputes in 

which the United States was the complainant or respondent appears in appendix table A.25.

This section focuses on developments through the panel and Appellate Body stage and 

generally does not include matters that arise after the DSB adopts panel or Appellate Body 

reports in the original dispute. As indicated in box 3.2, dispute litigation often continues beyond 

the adoption of the panel or Appellate Body report, particularly when the defending party is the 

“losing” party. Issues may arise about the reasonableness of the time sought by the losing party 

to implement findings and recommendations, the adequacy of actions taken by the losing party 

to comply with the findings and recommendations, and about possible compensation and 

retaliation. Matters may be referred to the original or a new panel for further findings and 

recommendations regarding compliance and other matters, and in appropriate cases the 

parties may seek the assistance of an arbitrator to resolve matters. There were a number of 

disputes still active during 2013, well after the panel or Appellate Body report had been 

adopted, including two high-profile disputes brought by the United States and the European 

Communities (EC),238 respectively, against each other’s large civilian aircraft measures.239 Other

proceedings of note that were underway during 2013 after adoption of panel and Appellate 

Body reports involved two disputes relating to U.S. country of origin labeling requirements240

and a dispute relating to U.S. measures relating to the importation, marketing, and sale of tuna 

and tuna products.241

238 In this report’s WTO dispute settlement section, the term “European Communities” (EC) is used rather than 

“EU” if the source document WTO online summary uses “EC.” 239 Compliance proceedings begun in 2012 in both disputes remained underway throughout 2013, with panel 

reports expected in DS316 (brought by the United States against the EU) by the end of 2014, and in DS353 

(brought by the EU against the United States) during the first half of 2014. See WTO, “Dispute Settlement: DS316; 

European Communities—Measures Affecting Trade in Large Civil Aircraft” (accessed April 10, 2014); WTO, “Dispute 

Settlement: DS353; United States—Measures Affecting Trade in Large Civil Aircraft—Second Complaint” (accessed 

April 10, 2014).

240 WTO, “Dispute Settlement: DS384; United States—Certain Country of Origin Labelling (COOL) Requirements” 

(accessed April 10, 2014); WTO, “Dispute Settlement: DS386; United States—Certain Country of Origin Labelling 

Requirements” (accessed April 10, 2014). The disputes involved challenges by Canada and Mexico, respectively, of 

mandatory U.S. country of origin labelling (COOL) requirements; the respective panels and the Appellate Body 

found that aspects of U.S. requirements violated U.S. obligations under the Technical Barriers to Trade Agreement 

(TBT) and GATT 1994. In September 2012, both Canada and Mexico sought arbitration concerning the “reasonable 

period of time” the United States should have to implement the recommendations and rulings of the DSB, and in 

December 2012 the arbitrator determined that this period should expire on May 23, 2013. In August 2013, Canada 

and Mexico also requested the establishment of a compliance panel and a compliance panel was composed on 

September 27, 2013. As of the end of 2013, the panel had not issued its report.

241 WTO, “Dispute Settlement: DS381; United States—Measures Concerning the Importation, Marketing and Sale of 

Tuna and Tuna Products” (accessed April 10, 2014). The dispute concerned U.S. dolphin-safe labeling provisions 

and whether they were consistent with U.S. obligations under the GATT 1994 and the Agreement on Technical 

Barriers to Trade. The Appellate Body found aspects of the U.S. provisions inconsistent with the TBT Agreement. 

On July 23, 2013, the United States informed the DSB of a change in its dolphin-safe labeling requirements and 

that it had brought its requirements into conformity with the DSB recommendations and rulings. On November 14, 

2013, Mexico requested the establishment of a compliance panel; the DSB established a panel on January 22, 

2014; the panel was composed on January 27, 2014. See also USTR, “U.S. Announces Compliance,” July 12, 2013.

88

 
New Requests for Consultations and New Panels Established

During 2013, WTO members filed 20 new requests for WTO dispute settlement consultations, 

compared with 27 in 2012, 8 in 2011, and 17 in 2010. The United States was involved in 5 (3 as 

complainant and 2 as respondent) of the 20 requests filed during 2013 (as compared with 11 of 

the 27 requests filed during 2012). During 2013, the EU was involved in the largest number of 

new requests for consultations, at 7 (as the complainant in 3, and the respondent in 4). Other 

WTO members involved in multiple new disputes included Indonesia, 5 (as complainant in 2 

and respondent in 3), and Russia, 3 (as the complainant in 1 and the respondent in 2). New 

disputes involving China fell sharply in 2013, with China involved in only 2 new disputes (as the 

complaining party in 1 and the responding party in 1). This compares with 10 new disputes in 

2012, when China was the complaining party in 3 and the responding party in 7.

Twelve new dispute settlement panels were established during 2013 (table 3.3), including one 

panel that consolidated three complaints. The United States was the complaining party in two 

of these panel proceedings, and the responding party in two. The 12 new panels established in 

2013 represents an increase from the 11 established in 2012, and the 7 panels established in 

each of 2011 and 2010.

Requests for consultations filed during 2013 in which the United 

States was the complaining party or named respondent

Two of the three new requests for dispute settlement consultations filed by the United States 

during 2013 concerned measures taken by Indonesia, with both relating to Indonesia’s 

restrictions on importation of horticultural products, animals, and animal products.242 The third 

dispute concerned measures by India relating to solar cells and solar modules.243 A panel was 

established during 2013 in only one of the three disputes, the first of the two disputes filed 

against Indonesia. The issues raised in that dispute are described in greater detail in the next 

section.

The United States was the named respondent in two new disputes filed during 2013, one filed 

by Korea and one filed by China. The dispute filed by Korea concerned U.S. countervailing duty 

and antidumping measures on large residential washers from Korea,244 and the dispute filed by 

China concerned U.S. methodologies and their application to antidumping proceedings 

involving China.245 No panel was established in either of these disputes during 2013.246

242 WTO, “Dispute Settlement: DS455; Indonesia—Importation of Horticultural Products, Animals and Animal 

Products” (accessed March 21, 2014); WTO, “Dispute Settlement: DS465; Indonesia—Importation of Horticultural 

Products, Animals and Animal Products” (accessed March 28, 2014). 243 WTO, “Dispute Settlement: DS456; India—Certain Measures Relating to Solar Cells and Solar Modules” 

(accessed March 28, 2014).

244 WTO, “Dispute Settlement: DS464; United States—Anti-dumping and Countervailing Measures on Large 

Residential Washers from Korea” (accessed March 31, 2014). 245 WTO, “Dispute Settlement: DS471; United States—Certain Methodologies and Their Application to AntiDumping Proceedings Involving China” (accessed March 31, 2014).

89

 
Panels established during 2013 at the request of the United States

As indicated in table 3.3, the DSB established two panels at the request of the United States 

during 2013: one concerning measures taken by Argentina, and the second concerning 

measures taken by Indonesia. As of the end of 2013, the panel had been composed only in the 

Argentina dispute, with a final panel report expected in late spring 2014. The issues raised and 

the procedural histories of the two disputes are summarized below.

Argentina—Measures Affecting the Importation of Goods (DS444). In this dispute, filed on 

August 21, 2012, the United States challenged certain measures imposed by Argentina on the 

importation of goods, including certain licensing requirements, certain requirements imposed 

on importers to undertake trade-restrictive commitments, and systematic delays in granting or 

denying import approval. The United States alleged that these actions violated Articles III, X, 

and XI of the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT) 1994; Article 2 of the TradeRelated Investment Measures (TRIMs) Agreement; Articles 1, 3, and 5 of the Agreement on 

Import Licensing Procedures; and Article 11 of the Safeguards Agreement. At its meeting on 

January 28, 2013, the DSB established a single panel to examine this dispute and two other 

disputes, DS438 (a complaint filed by the EU) and DS445 (a complaint filed by Japan). The 

Director-General composed the panel on May 27, 2013. On November 15, 2013, the chair of 

the panel informed the DSB that the panel expected to issue its final report to the parties by 

the end of May 2014.247

Indonesia—Importation of Horticultural Products, Animals and Animal Products (DS455). In 

this dispute, filed on January 10, 2013, the United States claimed that certain measures 

imposed by Indonesia on the importation of horticultural products, animals, and animal 

products are inconsistent with Articles X:3(a) and XI:1 of the GATT 1994; Article 4.2 of the 

Agreement on Agriculture; and Articles 1.2, 3.2 and 3.3 of the Import Licensing Agreement. 

After consultations failed to resolve the dispute, the United States asked for the establishment 

of a panel. The DSB established a panel at its meeting on April 24, 2013,248 but the panel had 

not been composed as of the end of 2013.

Panels established during 2013 in which the United States was 

the named respondent

The DSB established two panels during 2013 in which the United States was the named 

respondent, one at the request of Vietnam and the second at the request of Argentina. As of 

the end of 2013, both panel proceedings were still pending, with an anticipated final report 

246 A panel in one of the two disputes, DS464: United States—Anti-dumping and Countervailing Measures on Large 

Residential Washers from Korea, was established on January 22, 2014 (see WTO, “Dispute Settlement: DS464” 

(accessed March 31, 2014).

247 WTO, “Dispute Settlement: DS444; Argentina—Measures Affecting the Importation of Goods” (accessed March 

21, 2014). See also USTR, “United States Requests WTO Panel,” December 6, 2012. On May 5, the chair informed 

the DSB that the panel expected to issue its final report by the end of June 2014.

248 WTO, “Dispute Settlement: DS455; Indonesia—Importation of Horticultural Products, Animals and Animal 

Products” (accessed March 21, 2014). See also USTR, “U.S. Trade Representative Kirk Seeks World Trade 

Organization Dispute Settlement,” March 14, 2013.

90

 
date announced for only one of the two panels. The issues raised and the procedural histories 

of the two disputes are summarized below.

United States—Anti-Dumping Measures on Certain Frozen Warmwater Shrimp from Viet Nam 

(DS429). In this dispute, filed on February 20, 2012, Vietnam claimed that various U.S. laws, 

regulations, administrative proceedings, and practices relating to zeroing249 are inconsistent 

with U.S. obligations under Articles 1:1, VI:1, VI:2, and X:3(a) of the GATT 1994; Articles 1, 2.1, 

2.4, 2.4.2, 6, 9, 11, 17.6(i), and Annex II of the Antidumping Agreement; Article XVI:4 of the 

WTO Agreement; Articles 3.7, 19.1, 21.1, 21.3, and 21.5 of the Dispute Settlement 

Understanding; and Vietnam’s Protocol of Accession. The DSB established a panel on February 

27, 2013, and the panel was composed on July 12, 2013. On January 30, 2014, the chair of the 

panel informed the DSB that the panel expects to issue its final report to the parties by 

September 30, 2014.

United States—Measures Affecting the Importation of Animals, Meat and Other Animal 

Products from Argentina (DS447). In this dispute, filed on August 30, 2012, Argentina alleged 

that several actions or omissions by the United States appeared to be inconsistent with U.S. 

WTO obligations. This included (1) a U.S. prohibition on imports of fresh (chilled or frozen) beef 

from Argentina embodied in an interim and final rule of the U.S. Animal and Plant Health 

Inspection Service (APHIS); (2) the failure by the United States to recognize certain areas of 

Argentina’s territory as free of foot-and-mouth disease embodied in the APHIS Policy Regarding 

Importation of Animals and Animal Products; and (3) undue delays in recognizing the animal 

health status of a region or in granting approval to export animals or animal products from that 

region under U.S. regulations and additional U.S. statutory conditions. Specifically, Argentina 

alleged violations of provisions in Articles I:1, III:4, and XI:1 of the GATT 1994; Articles 1.1, 2.2, 

2.3, 3.1, 3.3, 5.1, 5.2, 5.4, 5.6, 6.1, 6.2, 8 and Annex C.1, and Article 10.1 of the Sanitary and 

Phytosanitary (SPS) Agreement; and Article XVI:4 of the WTO Agreement. The DSB established a 

panel on January 28, 2013, and the Director-General composed the panel on August 8, 

2013.250 In early March 2014, the panel chair informed the DSB that the panel expects to issue 

its final report in early 2015.

Panel and Appellate Body Reports Issued and/or Adopted during 

2013 that Involve the United States

During 2013, the DSB adopted panel and/or Appellate Body reports in original disputes251 in 

only one case in which the United States was the complainant or a respondent (table 3.4). The 

report in that dispute is summarized below. 

249 Before 2006, USDOC engaged in a practice called “zeroing,” in which it treated non-dumped transactions as 

having a zero margin for purposes of computing a weighted average dumping margin for a class or kind of subject 

merchandise. USDOC has changed this practice in response to adverse rulings from the WTO. Under the revised 

practice, USDOC uses the non-dumped transactions as an offset to dumped transactions. 250 WTO, “Dispute Settlement: DS447; United States—Measures Affecting the Importation of Animals, Meat and 

Other Animal Products from Argentina” (accessed June 1, 2014). 251 As opposed to panel and Appellate Body reports issued in subsequent compliance and other proceedings.

91

 
Table 3.4 WTO dispute settlement panel and Appellate Body (AB) reports circulated or adopted in 2013 

in which the United States was a party

Case no. Complainant Respondent Case name

Date of report circulation 

or adoption

DS427 United States China China—Anti-Dumping and Countervailing Duty 

Measures on Broiler Products from the United 

States

Panel report adopted 

(September 25, 2013)

Source: Derived from WTO, “Dispute Settlement: The Disputes—Chronological List of Disputes” (accessed March 19, 2014).

Reports in which the United States was the complainant

China—Anti-Dumping and Countervailing Duty Measures on Broiler Products from the United 

States (DS427). In this dispute, filed on September 20, 2011, the United States challenged 

China’s measures imposing antidumping and countervailing duties on broiler products from the 

United States. More specifically, the United States alleged that China’s measures appeared to 

be inconsistent with various provisions of the WTO Antidumping and Subsidies and 

Countervailing Measures (SCM) Agreements related to the process of the investigation as well 

as to the determinations at issue (improper reliance on facts available, failure to provide access 

to relevant information, insufficient explanation of the basis for the determination, absence of 

proper analysis of the effects of imports under investigation, absence of objective 

determination of causality, and imposition of countervailing duties in excess of the subsidy 

found to exist). The United States alleged violations of provisions in Articles 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, and 

12 of the Antidumping Agreement and Articles 10, 11, 12, 15, 16, 19, and 22 of the SCM 

Agreement. The United States also alleged that China’s measures are inconsistent with Article 

VI of the GATT 1994 as a result of the alleged violations of the Antidumping and SCM 

Agreements.

After consultations failed to resolve the dispute, the United States requested establishment of a 

panel. The DSB established a panel on January 20, 2012, and the Director-General composed 

the panel on May 24, 2012. The panel report was circulated to members on August 2, 2013.

The panel found in favor of the United States on nearly all U.S. claims regarding the conduct of 

China’s investigation, the insufficiency of China’s public notices, China’s allocation

methodology, and the claim that China failed to explain adequately its subsidy calculation. The 

panel also agreed with U.S. claims that the antidumping rates applied by China were in 

contravention of the Antidumping Agreement. The panel also upheld U.S. claims regarding 

China’s price comparisons and finding of price suppression. The panel rejected the U.S. claim 

concerning China’s definition of the domestic industry, and found it unnecessary to rule on 

certain other U.S. claims concerning China’s analysis, having found China’s price analysis 

deficient.

The DSB adopted the panel report on September 25, 2013. On October 22, 2013, China 

informed the DSB that it intended to implement the DSB recommendations and rulings, and on 

92
December 19, 2013, China and the United States informed the DSB that they had agreed that a 

reasonable time to do so would expire on July 9, 2014. 252

Reports in which the United States was the respondent

No reports were issued during 2013.

Organisation for Economic Co-operation and 

Development

The Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) provides a forum for 

member governments to review and discuss economic, social, and other policy-related 

developments affecting their market economies, as well as to engage with other nonmember 

economies to address issues of common interest involving the global economy. There were 34 

OECD members at the end of 2013.253

Ministerial Council Meeting

The meeting of the OECD Council at the ministerial level was held in Paris, France, on May 29–

30, 2013. The chair summarized the highlights of the meeting, starting with a call by ministers 

to continue their focus on structural reforms and policies that improve the functioning of the 

labor market through the broader inclusion of different social segments in the workforce. 

Recent OECD efforts in this area have focused on improving education, vocational training, and 

work skills for several types of people, including youth; the most vulnerable in society, such as 

low-income families; and those facing other social barriers, such as gender inequality. Work 

cited in these areas included the OECD recommendations from the Giving Youth a Better Start 

Action Plan as well as the Recommendation of the Council on Gender Equality in Education, 

Employment and Entrepreneurship. 254

The chair’s summary of the ministerial meeting pointed out a need to rebuild a level of trust of 

citizens in government and other institutions. According to the summary, citizens need to 

regain confidence not only in government’s ability to restore long-term growth that addresses 

the social impact of the global economic crisis, but also in fairness in governmental areas such 

as tax systems. Ministers highlighted two examples of recent OECD work in this area, one 

addressing the erosion of the government tax basis as a result of changing corporate profit 

sharing, and a second addressing plans to revise international tax rules to prevent commercial 

252 WTO, “Dispute Settlement: DS427; China—Anti-Dumping and Countervailing Duty Measures on Broiler Products 

from the United States” (accessed March 19, 2014). See also USTR, “World Trade Organization Adopts Report 

Ruling,” September 25, 2013.

253 Australia, Austria, Belgium, Canada, Chile, the Czech Republic, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, France, Germany, 

Greece, Hungary, Iceland, Ireland, Israel, Italy, Japan, Korea, Luxembourg, Mexico, the Netherlands, New Zealand, 

Norway, Poland, Portugal, Slovakia, Slovenia, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, Turkey, the United Kingdom, and the 

United States.

254 OECD, “Chair’s Summary––OECD Ministerial Council Meeting (MCM), 29–30 May 2013,” n.d. (accessed March 

18, 2014).

93

 
firms from shifting funds to locations offering more favorable tax treatment. The chair summary 

also mentioned the need to build confidence and trust in the private sector in areas such as 

corporate governance, long-term investment, finance for small and medium-sized firms, 

consumer policy, and efforts to combat corruption. 255

At the ministerial meeting, the OECD Secretary-General offered ministers the organization’s 

Interim Report on the New Approach to Economic Challenges (NAEC) initiative. Ministers 

welcomed the report as a means to draw lessons from the global economic crisis and promote 

a more comprehensive concept of growth. According to the summary, such a concept 

encompasses not only basic economic growth but also broader factors, such as social equality 

in labor markets, access to high-quality education, environmentally sustainable growth, and 

other elements that contribute to skilled labor in an increasingly connected and complex global 

economy.256 Similarly, the ministers welcomed reports about OECD work on global value chains 

(GVCs) and on the joint OECD-WTO Trade in Value-Added Terms (TIVA) database.

257 Finally, 

ministers reiterated the importance of OECD dialogue with nonmember partners. As part of this 

dialogue, the organization has launched a new regional program for Southeast Asia to exchange 

perspectives and common understandings on policy matters in order to address joint 

challenges.258

Trade Committee 

The OECD Trade Committee held two sessions in 2013—its 161st session259 on May 15–16, 

2013, and its 162nd session260 on November 5–6, 2013. At the committee’s plenary session on 

May 15, the OECD Secretariat updated the Trade Committee on three key projects that are 

underway: (1) the Services Trade Restrictiveness Index, (2) Multilateralizing Regionalism, and 

(3) Emerging Trade Policy Issues and Trade Modeling Capacity. The committee also heard 

progress reports from the chairs of three subsidiary groups: the Working Party of the Trade 

Committee, the Joint Working Party on Trade and Environment, and the Arrangement on 

Export Credits.261

The committee discussed progress on the NAEC initiative, as well as the TIVA database. The 

OECD introduced the NAEC initiative at the 2012 Ministerial Council Meeting to reassess 

255 Ibid. 256 USDOS, U.S. Mission, Paris, “Evolving the OECD,” September 17, 2013, par. 3, 6. 257 USDOS, U.S. Mission, Paris, “Inclusive Growth: OECD Working it Out,” February 12, 2014, par. 2. 258 OECD, “Chair’s Summary––OECD Ministerial Council Meeting (MCM), 29–30 May 2013,” n.d. (accessed March 

18, 2014).

259 OECD, Trade and Agriculture Directorate (TAD), Trade Committee, “Summary Record: 161st Session of the Trade 

Committee––Plenary Session,” September 5, 2013; OECD, TAD, Trade Committee, “Summary Record: 161st 

Session of the Trade Committee––Confidential Session,” September 5, 2013. 260 OECD, TAD, Trade Committee, “Summary Record: 162nd Session of the Trade Committee––Plenary Session,”

January 31, 2014; OECD, TAD, Trade Committee, “Summary Record: 162nd Session of the Trade Committee––

Confidential Session,” January 31, 2014. 261 OECD, TAD, Trade Committee, “Chair’s Highlights: Working Party of the Trade Committee,” May 10, 2013; 

OECD, TAD, Trade Committee, “Chair’s Highlights: the Recent Activities of the Joint Working Party on Trade and 

Environment,” May 10, 2013; OECD, TAD, Trade Committee, “Report to the 161st Session of the Trade Committee: 

Export Credits,” May 2, 2013.

94

 
fundamental assumptions in OECD analytical frameworks. The reassessment’s aim is to make 

OECD policy advice not only promote strong economic growth, but also support a broader 

improvement in people’s well-being, a fairer distribution of the benefits of growth, and 

economic production that uses natural resources more sustainably.262

The OECD-WTO TIVA database seeks to measure the value added by each country in the 

production of goods and services that are consumed worldwide when passing through stages of 

GVCs.263 Launched in January 2013, the TIVA initiative is developing a database of indicators 

that can be integrated with information that covers bilateral trade in goods, broken down by 

industry and by end use; data on trade in services; and the structural analysis (STAN) industry 

databases. The resulting database should better illuminate the underlying relations of trade and 

commercial relations between countries. TIVA indicators include (1) the breakdown of gross 

exports by industry into their domestic and foreign content; (2) the services content of gross 

exports by exporting industry, broken down by foreign/domestic origin; (3) bilateral trade 

balances, based on flows of value added embodied in domestic final demand; and (4) imports 

embodied in exports. 

In addition, the committee discussed administrative items concerning preparations for the 2013 

OECD Ministerial Council meeting with G20 country delegates.264 It also discussed programs 

such as the OECD Global Forum, held under the auspices of the Trade Committee.

At the Trade Committee’s session on May 16 with participating G20 Members, Russia––as 

president of the G20––presented a progress report on the G20 trade policy agenda, with the 

OECD Secretariat highlighting participant contributions.265 The Trade Committee and G20 

participants discussed the expansion of the TIVA database and its implications for policymaking 

on trade, investment, competitiveness, and skills and labor market issues. The committee and 

G20 participants held two sub-sessions focused on different facets of trade facilitation and 

trade in value added through GVCs. 

The first sub-session of the May meeting explored the interaction of GVCs and trade issues, in 

particular considering how GVCs can compound the effects of protectionism on growth and 

employment. It also looked at the question whether different protectionist measures—tariffs, 

nontariff measures, regulations, and standards—affect GVCs for agriculture, manufactures, and 

services in different ways. In addition, the sub-session discussed the role of trade facilitation, in 

particular Aid for Trade measures, in advancing the integration of developing countries into 

GVCs. 

262 OECD, “Ministerial Meeting 2013: NAEC and Prioritising Inclusive Growth,” n.d. (accessed March 18, 2014). 263 OECD, Interconnected Economies: Benefiting from Global Value Chains, 2013. 264 The Group of Twenty major advanced and emerging economies are Argentina, Australia, Brazil, Canada, China, 

the EU, France, Germany, India, Indonesia, Italy, Japan, Korea, Mexico, Russia, Saudi Arabia, South Africa, Turkey, 

United Kingdom, and the United States, https://www.g20.org (accessed March 19, 2014). 265 OECD, TAD, Trade Committee, “Summary Record; 161st Session of the Trade Committee––Session with the 

Participation of G20 Members,” September 5, 2013.

95

 
The second sub-session examined various implications for policy formulation that arise from 

results of the TIVA database, such as how convergence of standards and mutual recognition 

measures can reinforce the positive effects of market opening. It also considered the policy 

implications of TIVA analyses showing how services may be embodied in goods trade. Finally, it 

discussed whether government policies need to be reevaluated to ensure that business and 

labor market environments maximize the benefits of integration into GVCs.

At the committee’s closed session in May, members explored differences in the way 

government policy-makers and private sector officials view trade barriers to open markets (e.g., 

forced localization). Members also debated whether regulatory and other “behind the border” 

measures are increasing, and discussed what are the most egregious trade barriers and 

measures.266 The committee also reviewed its relations with Argentina and Argentina’s 

participation in its work; requests for participant status in the committee from Egypt, Latvia, 

Lithuania, and Romania; the status of the committee’s strategy on export credits; and the OECD 

program on Southeast Asia. The Secretariat updated the committee on the reporting process 

following OECD accession by Chile and Israel. In addition, the committee discussed its Market 

Openness Review of the Russian economy with the Russian delegation, focusing in particular on 

IPR and compliance with regulatory reform measures in the context of Russia’s accession to the 

OECD.

At the Trade Committee’s 162nd meeting in November, delegations heard updates from the 

chairs of the Working Party of the Trade Committee and of the Joint Working Party on 

Agriculture and Trade, as well as of the Trade Committee itself, concerning their respective 

work programs.267 The committee also explored issues concerning regulatory cooperation 

mechanisms to help reduce international transaction costs and facilitate trade, particularly 

looking at developments in regional trade agreements and negotiations. In addition, the 

committee considered progress being made in multilateral trade negotiations and related 

preparations for the February 2014 OECD Global Forum on Trade, hosted annually by the OECD 

Trade Committee.

At its closed meeting in November, the committee followed up on its May discussions 

concerning Russia’s accession to the OECD.268 The committee held a Market Openness Review 

of Colombia, and subsequently held discussions concerning the Trade Committee’s global 

relations strategy. Discussions related to this strategy touched on further review of Argentina’s 

participation in the committee’s work; consideration of participation status for Latvia, 

Lithuania, and Romania; and a request from Costa Rica for a Market Openness Review of its 

economy. Lastly, the Trade Committee considered adjustments made to the 2013 renewal of 

the mandate for the Export Credit Group, extending the group’s mandate to July 31, 2015.

266 OECD, TAD, Trade Committee, “161st Session of the Trade Committee: Confidential Session––Draft Agenda,” 

April 9, 2013.

267 OECD, TAD, Trade Committee, “162nd Session of the Trade Committee: Plenary Session––Draft Agenda,” 

October 29, 2013. 268 OECD, TAD, Trade Committee, “162nd Session of the Trade Committee: Confidential Session––Draft Agenda,” 

October 29, 2013. 

96

 
Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation

Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) is an international organization composed of 21 

Pacific Basin economies seeking to enhance intraregional economic growth and cooperation.269

The organization operates as a cooperative, multilateral economic and trade group, where 

decisions are made by consensus and commitments are undertaken voluntarily. Since its 

inception, APEC has aimed to facilitate economic growth, trade, investment, and cooperation in 

the Asia-Pacific region.270 APEC pursues progress toward greater regional economic integration 

through annual meetings of heads of state and trade ministers, and coordinates capacitybuilding and liberalization efforts with member economies throughout the year. In 1994, 

member economies committed to meeting the Bogor Goals––named for the summit meeting in 

Bogor, Indonesia––which aimed to create a free and open trade and investment area in the 

Asia-Pacific region by 2010 for industrialized members’ economies and by 2020 for developing 

members’ economies.271

Under the chairmanship of Indonesia throughout 2013, APEC focused on increasing regional 

economic integration in the context of a continued economic recovery; promoting physical, 

institutional, and people-to-people connectivity; and achieving sustainable growth and 

development. In addition, the APEC annual summit, held in Bali, Indonesia, in October 2013, 

served as a forum for discussing possible pathways and progress toward a Free Trade Area of 

the Asia-Pacific (FTAAP), as well as other multilateral commitments. APEC’s working-level 

committees and groups worked throughout the year to improve the prospects of meeting the 

Bogor Goals and to develop a coordinated and equitable approach to the FTAAP.272

The Bogor Goals, FTAAP, and Related APEC 

Commitments 

In 2013, APEC ministers and leaders remained committed to fully achieving the Bogor Goals by 

2020, stating that working toward the attainment of free trade and investment had produced 

an extraordinary period of prosperity in the region. At the October 2013 APEC leaders’ meeting, 

participants highlighted the importance of assisting developing countries to achieve the goals 

by 2020. At the same time, participants encouraged developed countries to take more concrete 

actions toward reaching the Bogor Goals. These actions were to be based on a 2010 assessment 

calling for greater trade and investment liberalization and 2011 guidelines setting forth 

standardized self-reporting and peer review of new trade policies and improvements in the 

269APEC was founded in 1989 when ministers from 12 Asia-Pacific governments met in Canberra, Australia, to 

discuss world and regional economic developments, global trade liberalization, and opportunities for regional 

cooperation. Current APEC membership includes Australia; Brunei Darussalam; Canada; Chile; China; Hong Kong, 

China; Indonesia; Japan; Korea; Malaysia; Mexico; New Zealand; Papua New Guinea; Peru; the Philippines; Russia; 

Singapore; Taiwan (Chinese Taipei); Thailand; the United States; and Vietnam. For further details, see APEC, APEC 

at a Glance, 2014, October 2013, and the APEC website, http://www.apec.org/. 270APEC, APEC at a Glance, October 2013. 271 Ibid. 272APEC, 21st APEC Economic Leaders’ Meeting: The Bali Declaration, October 8, 2013; APEC, 25th APEC Ministerial 

Meeting: Joint Statement, October 5, 2013.

97

 
business environment.273 As a continuation of this self-review effort in 2013, economies agreed 

to the public release of an updated Bogor Goals Dashboard of Indicators laying out basic 

indicators used to measure regional integration. Member economies also agreed to a 2014 

timeline for preparing and submitting Individual Action Plans toward meeting the Bogor 

goals.274

In addition to working toward the general objectives of the Bogor Goals, member economies 

affirmed their commitment to achieving a Free Trade Area of the Asia-Pacific (FTAAP). 

Recognizing the different tracks that such an agreement could take, leaders and ministers 

affirmed that APEC would serve as an information sharing and communication platform in 

order to improve transparency.275 In support of the FTAAP, APEC’s Committee on Trade and 

Investment (CTI) continued to implement the Capacity Building Needs Initiative, a program of 

workshops and training courses designed to build member capacity in negotiating areas such as 

e-commerce, labor, government procurement, safeguards, dispute settlement, and scheduling 

of services and investment commitments in free trade agreements.276

The trade ministers of the 12 countries negotiating the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) again 

used the APEC Leaders’ Meeting in October as a forum to announce progress toward reaching 

an agreement. Leaders from these 12 countries announced that they were on track to complete 

the negotiations, and reaffirmed support for a “next-generation model” agreement that would 

benefit all member countries despite their different levels of economic development. Within 

the context of APEC, leaders stated that they viewed it as a promising pathway toward the 

finalization of a FTAAP and were encouraged by other APEC countries that had expressed an 

interest in future participation in negotiations.277

In addition, APEC leaders reiterated their confidence in the underlying institutional strength of 

the WTO, and extended a commitment to refrain from protectionist measures until the end of 

2016. Stating that Doha negotiations were “at an impasse,” leaders expressed urgency about 

achieving successful outcomes at the Ninth Ministerial Conference of the WTO in Bali, including 

outcomes related to trade facilitation, some elements of agriculture, and economic 

273APEC, 21st APEC Economic Leaders’ Meeting: The Bali Declaration, October 8, 2013; APEC, 25th APEC Ministerial 

Meeting: Joint Statement, October 5, 2013. In 2010, APEC members assessed the progress made by 13 member 

countries toward the Bogor Goals and concluded that while broad liberalization had led to increased trade and 

investment linkages in the region, trade barriers between the economies remained. They based this assessment on 

a mutually endorsed and collaboratively written report which stated that, in the 13 countries, progress eliminating 

tariffs had not been uniform across sectors. Barriers to services trade were still in place, human mobility and FDI 

were still restricted, and work remained to be done with respect to nontariff measures and “behind-the-border” 

issues. APEC, The Report on APEC’s 2010 Economies’ Progress, 2010. These assessments were updated by the APEC 

Policy Support Unit (PSU) in a report that showed some progress in these areas. APEC, PSU, APEC’s Bogor Goals 

Progress Report, August 2012, August 2012. For more information on the self-reporting mechanisms agreed to in 

2011, see APEC, CTI, 2011 Annual Report to Ministers, November 2011, appendix 1. 274 APEC, CTI, CTI Annual Report to Ministers: 2013, October 2013, 5; APEC, 25th APEC Ministerial Meeting: Joint 

Statement, October 5, 2013. 275 APEC, 21st APEC Economic Leaders’ Meeting: The Bali Declaration, October 8, 2013; APEC, 25th APEC Ministerial 

Meeting: Joint Statement, October 5, 2013. 276 APEC, CTI, CTI Annual Report to Ministers: 2013, October 2013, 6. 277 White House, Trans-Pacific Partnership Leaders Statement, October 8, 2013.

98

 
development.278 In addition, leaders encouraged swift progress in the negotiations to expand 

product coverage and membership in the WTO Information Technology Agreement (ITA). They 

noted that expansion would bolster the multilateral trading system and global economic 

growth, as well as contributing to APEC’s mission to facilitate regional economic integration.279

Regional Economic Integration, Connectivity, and 

Sustainable Growth

In addition to providing a forum for leaders to discuss possible pathways toward multilateral 

liberalization, APEC pursues an agenda of regional economic integration that relies on 

developing nonbinding common principles, action plans, workshops, and research on best 

practices. In addition, APEC pursues economic objectives of shared importance driven by the 

needs and interests of member countries. This work ranges from technical policy prescriptions, 

studies, and workshops to more open-ended forums for discussion, and is therefore designed 

to deal practically with known issues as well as explore new areas of economic integration. 

These efforts continue year-round under the oversight of the APEC Secretariat and workinglevel committees and are guided by the outcomes of ministerial and leadership meetings.280

Building on an initiative begun in 2011, member economies continued to work toward the goal 

of reducing applied tariffs on the APEC List of Environmental Goods to 5 percent or less on a 

most-favored-nation basis by the end of 2015. Work in 2013 focused on capacity building to 

help reach that goal, including the development of a survey to identify economies’ specific 

capacity-building needs related to reducing the tariffs. Countries also agreed to a proposal on 

public-private partnership designed to offer industry representatives and government officials a 

platform for a dialogue on issues related to trade in environmental goods and services. Other 

green growth initiatives include continuing a capacity-building and research project on green 

public procurement policies, discussions on liberalizing certain products to address both 

sustainable growth and rural development goals, and a workshop on public facilitation of 

sustainable automotive technologies.281

Besides continuing work on environmental goods and services, APEC pursued a variety of other 

initiatives involving sustainable growth in areas such as small and medium-sized enterprises 

(SMEs), women’s economic empowerment, health, oceans, food security, renewable energy, 

financial inclusion, and innovation. For example, APEC held the First Joint Ministerial Meeting 

on Small and Medium Enterprise and Women; it also strengthened disaster-related business 

continuity planning for SMEs through several initiatives during the year.282

The APEC Group on Services made progress on several initiatives. The group continued 

implementing the Action Plan on Statistics on Trade in Services, an effort developed in 2012 to 

278APEC, 21st APEC Economic Leaders’ Meeting: Supporting the Multilateral Trading System and the 9th Ministerial 

Conference of the World Trade Organization, October 8, 2013. 279 Ibid. 280 APEC, APEC at a Glance, October 2013. 281 APEC, CTI, CTI Annual Report to Ministers: 2013, October 2013, 7–10. 282 APEC, Outcomes and Outlook 2013–14, March 2014.

99

 
improve collection methods and the quality of services statistics in the region by networking 

regional experts and holding workshop training.283 Member countries continued to participate 

in expanding the Services Trade Access Requirements (STAR) Database, which is a tool 

businesses can use to facilitate trade in services and which is particularly useful for SMEs.284 In 

addition, the APEC Market Access Group continued work on technical initiatives designed to 

facilitate and encourage trade in remanufactured goods through workshops, capacity building, 

and information sharing.285

Promoting connectivity was a major focal point in APEC’s policy agenda in 2013. Toward this 

goal, APEC worked on improving infrastructure through investment, making supply chains more 

efficient, advancing regulatory cooperation, and enhancing the mobility of people. Members 

endorsed a multiyear plan for infrastructure development and investment. This plan would 

improve members’ investment environments, promote public-private partnerships, and 

enhance government capacity and coordination in preparing and executing infrastructure 

projects.286 

In addition, CTI and the APEC Policy Support Unit completed an interim assessment of the 

Supply-Chain Connectivity Framework Action Plan. Focused on time, costs, and uncertainty of 

supply chain performance, this program is designed to improve supply chain connectivity in the 

region by 10 percent between 2010 and 2015. The interim assessment indicated that midterm 

progress toward achieving these goals was below pro rata benchmarks. Working to reach the 

2015 objectives, CTI made progress in building inventories of policy recommendations that 

members could use to address eight key “chokepoints” in their supply chains.287 APEC also set a 

goal of having one million university students participate in intraregional exchange programs in 

order to encourage people-to-people connectivity in the Asia-Pacific region.288

Negotiations on a Trade in Services 

Agreement

On January 15, 2013, the USTR notified Congress of the administration’s intent to enter into 

negotiations for a new trade agreement aimed at promoting international trade in services.289

The USTR cited 20 trading partners, representing nearly two-thirds of global trade in services, as 

the initial negotiating group of countries.290

283 APEC, CTI, CTI Annual Report to Ministers: 2013, October 2013, 11; APEC, 25th APEC Ministerial Meeting: Joint 

Statement, October 5, 2013. 284 APEC, CTI, CTI Annual Report to Ministers: 2013, October 2013, 30; APEC, 25th APEC Ministerial Meeting: Joint 

Statement, October 5, 2013. 285 APEC, CTI, CTI Annual Report to Ministers: 2013, October 2013, 10. 286 APEC, 25th APEC Ministerial Meeting: Joint Statement, October 5, 2013. 287 APEC, CTI, CTI Annual Report to Ministers: 2013, October 2013, 17. 288 APEC, Outcomes and Outlook, March 2014. 289 USTR, “Letter from the United States Trade Representative/Boehner,” January 15, 2013. 290 The USTR cited these 20 trade partners as Australia; Canada; Chile; Colombia; Costa Rica; the EU; Hong Kong, 

China; Iceland; Israel; Japan; Korea; Mexico; New Zealand; Norway; Pakistan; Panama; Peru; Switzerland; Taiwan 

100

 
The first round of negotiations for a Trade in Services Agreement (TISA) was held April 27 to 

May 3, 2013, chaired by the United States. Initial discussions focused on rules governing the 

temporary entry of foreign businesspersons into a country, as well as trade in financial services, 

and produced a draft core negotiating text.291 Switzerland presented an initial proposal 

regarding a TISA dispute settlement mechanism.292 The second round was held June 24–28, 

2013, and was chaired by the EU. Discussions centered on the inclusion of provisions from the 

WTO General Agreement on Trade in Services in the core text, with proposals circulated 

regarding professional services, financial services and domestic regulation, electronic 

commerce, and maritime transport services.

The third round was held September 16–20, 2013, chaired by Australia. Progress was made on 

the core text, with early offers by the United States and Japan, which opened market-access 

negotiations. Discussions were also held on new and enhanced disciplines (trade rules) 

governing global trade in services. The fourth round was held November 4–8, 2013, chaired by 

the United States. Negotiations focused on new and enhanced disciplines for trade in services 

in information and communications technology, financial services, professional services, the 

temporary entry of businesspersons, maritime transport services, and domestic regulation. 

Parties presented new proposals on air transport services, competitive delivery services, energy 

services, and subsidies. The EU presented its initial market-access offer. Further progress was 

made on the core text of the agreement:293 participants agreed to use a “negative list” 

approach for commitments on national treatment294 and largely finalized the text provisions on 

scheduling of commitments. 

At yearend, the draft agreement was reported to include six sectoral annexes, focused on 

telecommunications and electronic commerce; financial services; professional services, 

including computer services; the movement of natural persons; maritime transport; and 

domestic regulation and transparency.295

(Chinese Taipei); and Turkey, in addition to the United States. Since January 2013, the number of trading partners 

participating in TISA negotiations has grown to 23. 291 Government of Australia, DFAT, “Trade in Services Agreement (TiSA)” (accessed March 10, 2014). 292 Inside U.S. Trade, “TISA Negotiators Begin Mode 4 Talks,” May 9, 2013. 293 The fifth round was held February 17 to 24, 2014, chaired by the EU. Three days of discussions were held, 

concentrated on starting market-access negotiations. Of an expanded group of 23 negotiating parties, 21 parties 

presented their initial market-access offers. Discussions also continued on the subjects of trade rules for ICT 

services, financial services, professional services, the temporary entry of business persons, maritime transport, and 

domestic regulation and transparency. The sixth round of discussions and negotiations is set for April 28 to May 2, 

2014, in Geneva, Switzerland, chaired by Australia. Government of Australia, DFAT, “Trade in Services Agreement 

(TiSA)” (accessed March 10, 2014). Another source reports that 19 of the 23 TISA parties have tabled offers, citing 

the four parties yet to table offers as Chile, Pakistan, Paraguay, and Peru. Inside U.S. Trade, “Focus on TPP, TTIP 

and TISA,” February 18, 2014.

294 USTR, “Readout of Trade in Services Agreement (TISA) Negotiations,” November 8, 2013. A negative list 

approach in an international agreement is one that lists those items, entities, products, etc. to which the 

agreement will not apply, the commitment being to apply the agreement to everything else. Contrasts with 

positive list. http://www-personal.umich.edu/~alandear/glossary/n.html. 295 Inside U.S. Trade, “U.S. Tables Financial Services TISA Proposal,” February 20, 2014.

101

 
102
Chapter 4

U.S. Free Trade Agreements

This chapter summarizes developments related to U.S. free trade agreements (FTAs) during 

2013. It describes trends in U.S. merchandise trade with FTA partners, the status of U.S. FTA 

negotiations during the year, and major North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) 

activities, including NAFTA dispute settlement developments.296 The online interactive 

merchandise trade dashboards that accompany the Year in Trade 2013 report can be used for 

further analysis of U.S trade under various FTAs.

U.S. Trade with FTA Partners in 2013 

The United States was party to 14 FTAs as of December 31, 2013.297 FTAs in force during 2013 

were the U.S.-Panama Trade Promotion Agreement (TPA) (2012); the U.S.-Colombia TPA 

(2012); the U.S.-Korea FTA (2012); the U.S.-Oman FTA (2009); the U.S.-Peru TPA (2009); a 

multiparty FTA with the countries of Central America and the Dominican Republic (CAFTA-DR) 

that includes the Dominican Republic, El Salvador, Guatemala, Honduras, and Nicaragua 

(entered into force 2006–07), and Costa Rica (2009); the U.S.-Bahrain FTA (2006); the U.S.-

Morocco FTA (2006); the U.S.-Australia FTA (2005); the U.S.-Chile FTA (2004); the U.S.-

Singapore FTA (2004); the U.S.-Jordan FTA (2001); NAFTA, with Canada and Mexico (1994); and 

the U.S.-Israel FTA (1985).

Two-way merchandise trade between the United States and its 20 FTA partners amounted to 

$1.4 trillion or 39.1 percent of total U.S. merchandise trade in 2013. U.S. trade with FTA 

partners is dominated by trade with the NAFTA countries. In 2013, Canada and Mexico 

accounted for 73.9 percent of total U.S. trade with its FTA partners, or $1.0 trillion. Two-way 

trade with Canada and Mexico increased by 2.4 percent in 2013 from 2012, with exports 

expanding by 3.3 percent and imports by 1.7 percent (table 4.1). Leading U.S. exports to the 

NAFTA countries included petroleum products, aircraft, and motor vehicles, while leading U.S. 

imports were crude petroleum and motor vehicles. The U.S. merchandise trade deficit with the 

NAFTA partners declined for the second year in a row, by 2.1 percent, to $177.2 billion in 2013. 

Outside of NAFTA, U.S. two-way trade with FTA partners amounted to $368.7 billion in 2013, 

representing an increase of 8.7 percent from 2012.298 U.S. imports from these FTA partners 

increased 10.5 percent to $185.8 billion, while U.S. exports increased 7.0 percent to $182.9 

billion. Leading U.S. exports to the non-NAFTA FTA partners included petroleum products, 

296 The chapter also includes updates on Trade and Investment Framework Agreement (TIFA) activity. 297 Since the U.S.-Singapore FTA in 2004, the modifications to the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States 

(HTS) required to implement each FTA can be found at USITC, Tariff Information Center website, 

http://www.usitc.gov/tariff_affairs/hts_index.htm. 298 Outside of NAFTA, there were 18 FTA partners with 13 FTAs in place during 2013, including FTAs with Australia, 

Bahrain, Chile, Colombia, Israel, Jordon, Korea, Morocco, Oman, Panama, Peru, and Singapore, as well as CAFTADR (with six FTA partners).

103

 
Table 4.1 U.S. merchandise trade with FTA partners, by FTA partner, applicable periods, 2011-13a

FTA Partner 2011 2012 2013

Million $

Domestic Exports:

Israel 8,084 9,729 7,827

NAFTA 393,684 419,358 433,375

Canada 233,774 244,199 251,685

Mexico 159,910 175,159 181,690

Jordan 1,410 1,645 1,967

Chile 14,498 17,309 16,139

Singapore 28,224 27,013 26,690

Australia 25,491 28,907 23,976

Morocco 2,842 2,237 2,278

Bahrain 1,166 1,146 968

CAFTA-DR 28,403 28,204 27,080

Oman 1,369 1,661 1,423

Peru 7,412 8,196 8,857

Koreab 0 33,122 39,008

Colombiac 0 10,038 16,482

Panamad 0 1,687 10,176

FTA partner total 512,584 590,252 616,247

World total 1,299,176 1,353,211 1,372,039

FTA partner share of world (percent) 39.5 43.6 44.9

Imports for consumption:

Israel 23,022 22,122 22,661

NAFTA 579,067 600,333 610,551

Canada 316,397 323,925 332,887

Mexico 262,671 276,408 277,664

Jordan 1,060 1,155 1,196

Chile 9,170 9,385 10,387

Singapore 18,982 20,080 17,671

Australia 10,173 9,575 9,519

Morocco 991 937 999

Bahrain 518 701 635

CAFTA-DR 27,947 30,848 29,829

Oman 2,184 1,354 1,022

Peru 6,153 6,586 8,143

Koreab 0 48,926 61,979

Colombiac 0 16,411 21,364

Panamad 0 109 430

FTA partner total 679,267 768,523 796,386

World total 2,186,951 2,251,035 2,239,750

FTA partner share of world (percent) 31.1 34.1 35.6

104
FTA Partner 2011 2012 2013

Million $

Trade Balance

Israel -14,938 -12,393 -14,834

NAFTA -185,384 -180,975 -177,175

Canada -82,623 -79,726 -81,202

Mexico -102,761 -101,249 -95,973

Jordan 350 490 771

Chile 5,328 7,923 5,752

Singapore 9,243 6,933 9,019

Australia 15,318 19,332 14,457

Morocco 1,851 1,300 1,279

Bahrain 648 446 333

CAFTA-DR 456 -2,644 -2,749

Oman -815 307 401

Peru 1,259 1,610 714

Koreab 0 -15,804 -22,971

Colombiac 0 -6,374 -4,882

Panamad 0 1,578 9,746

FTA partner total -166,683 -178,271 -180,139

World total -887,775 -897,824 -867,712

Source: Official trade statistics of the USDOC as maintained by the USITC.

a

Trade balance is calculated here as U.S. domestic exports minus U.S. imports for consumption. These balances differ from the 

U.S. merchandise trade balance generally reported by Census, which is defined as total exports minus general imports. See 

footnote 24. Appendix table A.2 reports the trade balance on this basis. b

U.S-Korea FTA entered into force on March 15, 2012 (data reported for March 2012 forward). c

U.S.-Colombia TPA entered into force on May 15, 2012 (data reported for May 2012 forward). d

U.S.-Panama TPA entered into force on October 31, 2012 (data reported for November 2012 forward).

aircraft, and processors or controllers, while leading U.S. imports from these countries were 

crude petroleum, diamonds, and motor vehicles. The United States registered a merchandise 

trade deficit of $3.0 billion in 2013 with these partners, compared to a trade surplus of $2.7 

billion in 2012, largely due to a decline in U.S. exports of machinery and equipment to Australia 

in 2013.299 

The value of imports that entered the United States under FTA provisions increased 4.2 

percent, from $393.7 billion in 2012 to $410.4 billion in 2013 (table 4.2). These imports 

accounted for 51.5 percent of total imports from FTA partners in 2013. Approximately 40.4 

percent of total imports from CAFTA-DR partners entered under FTA provisions in 2013. 

Particularly high shares (more than 60 percent) of total imports from Jordan, Bahrain, 

Colombia, and Mexico (listed in descending order of magnitude) also entered under FTA 

provisions. By contrast, particularly low shares (20 percent or less) of total imports from 

Morocco, Israel, Singapore, and Panama entered under FTA provisions. 

Imports that entered under FTA provisions accounted for 18.3 percent of total U.S. imports in 

2013, an increase from 17.5 percent in 2012. The share of U.S. imports that entered under FTA 

provisions continued to be small in 2013 because a large share (over 60 percent) of the imports 

from U.S. FTA partners enters the United States free of duty under normal trade relations or 

column 1-general duty rates.

299 For more information about the decline in U.S. exports to Australia, see Associated Equipment Distributors, 

“Exports of U.S.-Made Construction Equipment,” February 27, 2014.

105

 
Table 4.2 U.S. imports for consumption entered under FTA provisions, by FTA partner, 2011–13 

% change,

FTA partner 2011 2012 2013 2012–13

Million $

Israel 2,661 2,952 2,974 0.7

NAFTA 326,551 343,832 349,102 1.5

Canada 162,734 175,241 177,681 1.4

Mexico 163,817 168,591 171,421 1.7

Jordan 870 1,012 1,075 6.2

Chile 5,706 5,668 6,145 8.4

Singapore 1,138 1,068 1,733 62.3

Australia 3,034 3,419 3,628 6.1

Morocco 201 166 188 13.4

Bahrain 326 425 418 -1.7

CAFTA-DR 11,912 12,610 12,040 -4.5

Oman 1,526 655 582 -11.0

Peru 3,079 2,658 2,869 7.9

Korea 0 11,635 16,415 41.1

Colombia 0 7,638 13,175 72.5

Panama 0 4 31 690.2

Total imports under FTA provisions 357,005 393,742 410,376 4.2

World 2,186,951 2,251,035 2,239,750 -0.5

Share of total imports from FTA partner: Share of total imports from FTA partner

Israel 11.6 13.3 13.1

NAFTA 56.4 57.3 57.2

Canada 51.4 54.1 53.4

Mexico 62.4 61.0 61.7

Jordan 82.1 87.7 89.9

Chile 62.2 60.4 59.2

Singapore 6.0 5.3 9.8

Australia 29.8 35.7 38.1

Morocco 20.3 17.7 18.8

Bahrain 62.9 60.6 65.8

CAFTA-DR 42.6 40.9 40.4

Oman 69.8 48.3 56.9

Peru 50.0 40.4 35.2

Korea (

a

) 23.8 26.5

Colombia (

a

) 46.5 61.7

Panama (

a

) 3.6 7.2

FTA partner total 52.6 51.2 51.5

Source: Official trade statistics of the USDOC as maintained by the USITC.

Note: The U.S.-Korea FTA entered into force on March 15, 2012; the U.S.-Colombia TPA entered into force on May 15, 2012; 

and the U.S.-Panama TPA entered into force on October 31, 2012. a

Undefined.

106
Developments in FTA Negotiations during 

2013

On April 21, 2013, the United States and other Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) negotiating 

partners welcomed Japan as a new participant in the TPP negotiations, pending the successful 

completion of domestic procedures by each TPP country.300 During 2013, the United States and 

the EU also conducted three formal rounds of the Transatlantic Trade and Investment 

Partnership (TTIP).301 The status of U.S. FTA negotiations during 2013 is shown in table 4.3. 

Negotiations and Consultations toward the TransPacific Partnership (TPP) Agreement 

The United States and its TPP partners—Australia, Brunei Darussalam (Brunei), Canada, Chile, 

Japan, Malaysia, Mexico, New Zealand, Peru, Singapore, and Vietnam—concluded four formal 

rounds of negotiations in 2013. The 16th round of the TPP was held in March (Singapore), the 

17th round in May (Lima, Peru), the 18th round in July (Kota Kinabalu, Malaysia), and the 19th 

round in August (Bandar Seri Begawan, Brunei). TPP ministers also met at the margins of the 

Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) leaders’ meetings in April (Surabaya, Indonesia), in 

October (Bali, Indonesia), and in December (Singapore). TPP negotiators also held six 

intersessional meetings to exchange proposals, identify creative and pragmatic solutions to

outstanding issues, and close gaps. Meeting focuses included rules of origin (October 28–

November 1, Mexico City, and November 12–18, Salt Lake City), government procurement 

(October 30–November 2, Washington, DC), state-owned enterprises (November 4–7, Santiago, 

Chile), investment (November 6–8, Washington, DC), and legal and institutional issues 

(November 12–14, Washington, DC). 

In the 16th round of TPP negotiations, delegations intensified their drive to find mutually 

acceptable paths forward on the remaining issues in the legal text of the agreement. Chief

negotiators and 20 working groups reported making progress in bridging the gaps in a number

of areas, such as customs, investment, telecommunications, services, technical barriers to

Table 4.3 Status of U.S. FTA negotiations during 2013

FTA partner(s)

Negotiations

Launched

Negotiations

concluded

Agreement signed 

by parties

Date of entry 

into force

Trans-Pacific Partnership (Australia, Brunei, 

Canada, Chile, Malaysia, Mexico, New Zealand, 

Peru, Japan, Singapore, and Vietnam)

Dec. 14, 2009 ___ ___ ___

Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership 

(EU) March 20, 2013 ___ ___ ___

Source: USTR, various press releases, 2006–12. http://www.ustr.gov. 

Note: No negotiations have taken place concerning the Free Trade Area of the Americas since 2005, and none have taken place

concerning the Southern African Customs Union (Botswana, Lesotho, Namibia, South Africa, and Swaziland), Ecuador, Thailand, 

and the United Arab Emirates since 2006.

300 USTR, “Obama Administration Notifies Congress of Intent,” April 24, 2013. 301 The United States and the EU announced their intentions to launch negotiations on TTIP on February 13, 2013. 

107

 
trade, sanitary and phytosanitary measures, intellectual property, regulatory coherence, legal 

and institutional issues, and development of supply chains. TPP partners also made progress in 

continuing to develop the comprehensive packages that will provide market access for eligible 

goods, services, investment, and government procurement. Productive exchanges were also 

held on rules of origin and on how best to promote development of regional supply chains to 

benefit companies based in TPP partner countries. Negotiators also discussed proposals to 

open services and investment for government procurement markets and agreed on additional 

intersessional work to build on market access advances made in the 15th round.302 

On March 15, 2013, USTR welcomed Japan’s announcement formally expressing its interest in 

joining TPP negotiations.303 On April 12, 2013, the United States and Japan completed bilateral 

TPP consultations, and on April 24, 2013, USTR notified Congress of its intent to include Japan in 

the TPP negotiations, stating that Japan would join the negotiations on July 23, 2013, during the 

18th round.304 The notification triggered a 90-day consultation period with Congress. USTR 

announced its plans to conduct bilateral, parallel negotiations with Japan to address concerns 

about nontariff measures and the automotive and insurance sectors.305 

In April, TPP Ministers met at the margins of the APEC Ministers meeting in Surabaya, 

Indonesia. TPP Ministers announced that an agreement had been reached to bring Japan into 

the regional trade talks, pending successful conclusion of each member’s respective domestic 

procedures.306 USTR held TPP discussions with Vietnamese officials beginning April 24 in Hanoi, 

focusing on meaningful market access in Vietnam for goods and services, as well as on the 

importance of fully enforcing labor and environmental provisions.307 

In the 17th TPP round, negotiating groups reported making significant progress in services, 

government procurement, sanitary and phytosanitary issues, trade remedies, labor, and 

dispute settlement. Work also progressed on other legal texts, including those on technical 

barriers to trade, e-commerce, rules of origin, investment, financial services, intellectual 

property, transparency, competition, and environment. Negotiators also made progress on 

tariff packages and rules of origin that reflected stakeholders’ input on how to promote trade 

and regional integration. They also discussed plans for integrating Japan into the TPP 

negotiations.308

In the 18th TPP round, negotiators resolved many of the technical issues in the texts of all 

chapters across the agreement.309 They announced plans to discuss all other outstanding issues 

302 USTR, “TPP Negotiations Shift into High Gear,” March 13, 2013. 303 USTR, “Statement by Acting U.S. Trade Representative Demetrios Marantis on Japan’s Announcement,” March 

15, 2013. 

304 USTR, “Obama Administration Notifies Congress of Intent to Include Japan,” April 24, 2013; CRS, Japan Joins the 

Trans-Pacific Partnership: What Are the Implications? August 13, 2013. 305 USTR, “Acting Deputy U.S. Trade Representative Wendy Cutler to Visit Japan,” July 31, 2013. 306 USTR, “Acting U.S. Trade Representative Marantis Lauds Progress,” April 21, 2013. 307 USTR, “United States Advances Trans-Pacific Partnership Goals,” April 24, 2013. 308 USTR, “Trans-Pacific Partnership Negotiations Maintain Strong Momentum,” May 24, 2013. 309 USTR, “Statement on the 18th Round of Trans-Pacific Partners Negotiations,” July 25, 2013.

108

 
through intersessional work before the next round of negotiations.310 Thirteen negotiating 

groups met to discuss investment, nonconforming measures, competition, market access, rules 

of origin, technical barriers to trade, financial services, e-commerce, temporary entry, 

intellectual property, environment, government procurement, and legal and institutional 

issues. The negotiators made progress on constructing a market access package for their 

respective markets for industrial, agricultural, and textile and apparel products; services and 

investment; and government procurement. On July 23, TPP members welcomed Japan as the 

12th member of the negotiations.311

On August 22, USTR announced plans to present a new proposal on tobacco at the TPP 

negotiations in Brunei.312 Noting that the TPP Agreement would contain a general exception for 

matters necessary to protect human life and health, the proposal would state that this general 

exception should also apply to tobacco health measures. Another provision would require that 

before a party to TPP challenges another party’s tobacco regulatory measures using the TPP 

dispute settlement mechanism, the health authorities of the concerned parties should meet to 

discuss the measure. Lastly, USTR indicated that the U.S. position on market access would 

remain unchanged; consistent with long-standing policy, the United States will continue to 

press for an end to tariffs on agricultural goods.313

In the 19th round, ministers noted that work on the majority of issues had reached an 

advanced stage and that TPP partners had explored ways to develop a mutually acceptable 

package. The package would include possible “landing zones” on remaining sensitive and 

challenging questions and on sequencing issues in the final talks.314 Negotiators advanced their 

technical work on texts covering market access for goods, rules of origin, financial services, 

investment, temporary entry, and government procurement, as well as those on intellectual 

property, competition, and environmental issues. Ministers offered guidance on how to drive 

the negotiations toward a conclusion within a 2013 time frame.315

During September 18–21, chief negotiators concluded meetings in Washington, DC, having 

worked toward solutions and next steps on a range of issues under negotiation in the trade 

agreement talks.316 In some TPP chapters (customs, telecommunications, sanitary and 

phytosanitary issues, technical barriers to trade, cross-border services, and labor), progress was 

made on many issues, and discussions were held on how best to resolve the others. Chief 

negotiators also discussed approaches to resolving challenges on e-commerce and legal and 

institutional issues, and met with negotiating groups covering market access for goods and 

government procurement. They discussed plans for the TPP ministers’ and leaders’ meetings at 

310 Government of Australia, DFAT, “Eighteenth Round of Trans-Pacific Partnership Agreement (TPP) Negotiations” 

(accessed April 9, 2014). 

311 USTR, “Statement on the 18th Round of the Trans-Pacific Negotiations,” July 25, 2013. 312 USTR, “New U.S. Proposal on Tobacco Regulation,” August 22, 2013. 313 Ibid. 314 USTR, “Joint Press Statement TPP Ministers Meeting,” August 23, 2013. 315 Ibid. 316 USTR, “Readout of This Week’s Trans-Pacific Partnership Discussions,” September 23, 2013.

109

 
the margins of APEC in Bali as well. In addition, the United States also held bilateral meetings 

with a number of TPP members on the issue of state-owned enterprises.317 

Following a three-day meeting of trade ministers in Bali, TPP leaders met on October 3 at the 

margins of the APEC Leaders’ Summit to review progress in the negotiations.318 Leaders 

announced that they were on track to complete the TPP negotiations, reporting progress on all 

the legal texts and annexes on access to each partner’s goods, services, investment, financial 

services, government procurement, and temporary entry markets.319 Leaders agreed that 

negotiators should proceed to resolve all outstanding issues with the objective of completing a 

comprehensive and balanced regional agreement.320

On November 29, 2013, USTR issued a statement welcoming Korea’s interest in joining the 

TPP.

321 

During December 7–10, ministers and heads of delegations completed four days of ministerial 

meetings in Singapore, following the WTO ministerial meeting in Bali. Ministers indicated that 

they had made substantial progress toward completing the TPP322 and that they were able to 

identify potential “landing zones” for the majority of key outstanding issues in the text, as well 

as for market access issues. However, ministers reported that they were unable to reach an 

agreement on all points by the end of 2013 and that talks would extend into 2014.323 

U.S. Trade with TPP Partners 

In 2013, the United States had a trade deficit of $261.3 billion with its partners in the TPP 

negotiations (table 4.4). U.S. trade with the TPP partners is dominated by Canada and Mexico, 

which received $433.4 billion of the $588.1 billion in U.S. exports (73.7 percent) to TPP partners 

and supplied $610.6 billion of the $849.4 billion in U.S. imports (71.9 percent) from TPP 

partners in 2013. In addition to the NAFTA partners, four other TPP partners also have FTAs

with the United States: Australia, Chile, Peru, and Singapore. The United States ran a trade 

surplus of $29.9 billion with these four FTA TPP partners in 2013. 

The addition of Japan as a TPP partner in 2013 substantially increased the value of U.S. trade 

with non-FTA TPP partners. With Japan, U.S. exports to non-FTA TPP partners were higher by

$59.7 billion in 2013; U.S. imports, by $138.0 billion. In total, U.S. exports and imports from 

non-FTA TPP partners accounted for 13.4 percent of U.S. TPP exports and 22.7 percent of U.S. 

TPP imports in 2013.

317 Ibid. 318 USTR, “Readout of Ambassador Michael Froman’s Oct. 3 Meeting,” October 17, 2013. 319 White House, “Trans-Pacific Partnership Leaders Statement,” October 8, 2013. 320 USTR, “Trans-Pacific Partnership Leaders Statement,” October 17, 2013. 321 USTR, “Statement by U.S. Trade Representative Michael Froman on Korea’s Announcement,” November 29, 

2013. 

322 USTR, “Substantial Progress in Singapore,” December 10, 2013. 323 USTR, “Statement of the Ministers and Heads of Delegation,” December 10, 2013. 

110

 
Table 4.4 U.S. merchandise trade with TPP partners,a 2011–13b

% change,

2011 2012 2013 2012-13

Million $

Total trade with TPP partners:

Total exports to TPP partners 550,729 583,772 588,072 0.7

Total imports from TPP partners 797,660 839,838 849,396 1.1

Trade balance -246,931 -256,066 -261,324

Domestic exports:

TPP partners with FTAs 469,309 500,783 509,038 1.6

Of which NAFTA 393,684 419,358 433,375 3.3

TPP partners without FTAs 81,420 82,989 79,034 -4.8

Of which Japan 61,409 64,599 59,689 -7.6

Share with FTAs (percent) 85.2 85.8 86.6

Imports for consumption:

TPP partners with FTAs 623,544 645,960 656,271 1.6

Of which NAFTA 579,067 600,333 610,551 1.7

TPP partners without FTAs 174,115 193,878 193,125 -0.4

Of which Japan 127,901 144,538 137,954 -4.6

Share with FTAs (percent) 78.2 76.9 77.3

Trade balance:

TPP partners with FTAs -154,236 -145,176 -147,233

Of which NAFTA -185,384 -180,975 -177,175

TPP partners without FTAs -92,696 -110,889 -114,091

Of which Japan -66,492 -79,939 -78,265

Source: Official trade statistics of the USDOC as maintained by the USITC. a

TPP negotiating partners at yearend 2013 included Australia, Brunei, Canada, Chile, Japan, Malaysia, Mexico, New Zealand, 

Peru, Singapore, and Vietnam. Of these, the United States has FTAs with Australia, Canada, Chile, Mexico, Peru, and Singapore.

b

Trade balance is calculated here as U.S. domestic exports minus U.S. imports for consumption. These balances differ from the 

U.S. merchandise trade balance generally reported by Census, which is defined as total exports minus general imports. See 

footnote 24. Appendix table A.2 reports the trade balance on this basis.

The United States runs a deficit, which has been increasing since 2010, with the five non-FTA 

TPP partners, Brunei, Japan, Malaysia, New Zealand, and Vietnam. U.S. exports to the non-FTA 

TPP countries are dominated by aircraft, medicaments, and agricultural products, including 

corn (maize), pork, wheat, and soybeans. The largest categories of U.S. imports from the nonFTA TPP countries include automobiles and parts, aircraft parts, parts and accessories of 

printing machines, earthmoving equipment, semiconductor manufacturing equipment, and 

television cameras. In total, TPP in its current form covers 42.9 percent of total 2013 U.S. 

exports and 37.9 percent of U.S. imports. If concluded, TPP would be the world’s largest FTA in 

terms of total trade covered.

111
Negotiations and Consultations toward the 

Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership 

(TTIP) Agreement 

On March 20, 2013, the Obama Administration notified Congress of its intent to enter into 

negotiations on a comprehensive trade and investment agreement with the EU.324 This 

followed a February 13 joint announcement by President Obama and EU leaders indicating their 

intent to pursue talks toward the TTIP based on recommendations from the U.S.-EU High Level 

Working Group on Jobs and Growth.325 The Administration’s notification of intent triggered a 

90-day consultation period for Congress to comment on the proposed negotiations.326 On 

March 12, the European Commission agreed to a draft mandate for the TTIP negotiations, 

which was transmitted to the Council of the European Union for the approval of member 

states. On June 14, the Council of Ministers approved the mandate for the European 

Commission to negotiate TTIP.327

In 2013, the United States and the EU concluded three formal rounds of TTIP negotiations. The 

first round was held in July (Washington, DC), the second, in November (Brussels), and the 

third, in December (Washington, DC). During the first round, July 8–12, 2013, discussions 

focused on the possible structure of the negotiations and on how possible chapters and specific 

issues might be addressed.328 The first round of negotiations also identified the approaches and 

ambitions of the negotiating parties for 20 trade areas expected to be addressed by TTIP, 

including market access for agricultural and industrial goods, government procurement, 

investment, energy and raw materials, regulatory issues, sanitary and phytosanitary measures, 

services, intellectual property rights, sustainable development, small and medium-sized 

enterprises, dispute settlement, competition, customs/trade facilitation, and state-owned 

enterprises.329 Negotiators identified certain areas of convergence across various components 

of the negotiations and, in areas of divergence, explored possible ways to bridge the gaps.330

Negotiators also met with 350 stakeholders from the private sector, academia, trade unions, 

and nongovernmental organizations to answer questions and obtain their input for the 

proposed trade pact. 

The second round of TTIP negotiations was initially scheduled for October 7–11, but was 

postponed due to the U.S. government shutdown. This round was eventually hosted by the EU 

in Brussels during November 11–15.331 Negotiators made progress in identifying areas of 

324 USTR, “Obama Administration Notifies Congress of Intent to Negotiate,” March 20, 2013. 325 USTR, “U.S., EU Announce Decision to Launch Negotiations,” February 13, 2013. For more information on the 

U.S.-EU High Level Working Group on Jobs and Growth, see the EU section in chapter 5. 326 USTR, “Obama Administration Notifies Congress of Intent to Negotiate,” March 20, 2013. 327 EU Council of Ministers, “Council Approves Launch of Trade and Investment Negotiations,” June 14, 2013. 328 USTR, “Statement by U.S. Trade Representative Froman on the First Round,” July 12, 2013; White House, “Fact 

Sheet: Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership,” June 17, 2013. 329 European Commission, “EU and US Conclude First Round of TTIP Negotiations,” July 12, 2013. 330 Ibid. 331 USTR, “Statement by U.S. Trade Representative Froman on the Conclusion of Round Two,” November 15, 2013.

112

 
common ground in order to start preparing for text-based discussions in future rounds.

332 Areas 

of discussion included services, investment, energy and raw materials, and a range of 

regulatory issues, including regulatory coherence, technical barriers to trade, and sector 

approaches.333

In the third round, hosted by the United States in Washington, DC, December 16–20, a number 

of TTIP negotiating groups continued their work on services, market access, competition, trade 

facilitation, sector issues, investment, textiles, labor and environment, intellectual property 

rights, and technical barriers to trade.334 The round also offered stakeholders an opportunity to 

give negotiators feedback on negotiating objectives for the TTIP. Chief negotiators and their 

teams participated in a three-hour session with stakeholders that included more than 50 policy 

presentations covering a range of issues, including consumer and food safety, innovation, and 

agriculture.335

Developments in FTAs Already in Force during 

2013

In 2013, U.S. officials held consultations with the United States’ FTA partners to discuss a 

variety of matters, including labor issues, the environment, implementation and functioning of 

the agreements, and dispute settlement. Highlights of these developments are presented 

below.

Thirteen of the 14 U.S. FTAs have provisions on labor rights. In 2013, the U.S. Department of 

Labor (USDOL) and other agencies acted on five labor complaints made by interested parties 

from Bahrain, the Dominican Republic, Guatemala, Honduras, and Mexico that had been 

submitted under the labor chapters of various FTAs.336 The USDOL’s Office of Trade and Labor 

Affairs (OTLA) evaluated submissions regarding denial of workers’ rights in Honduras (under 

CAFTA-DR) and Mexico (under NAFTA). The USTR and the Secretary of Labor requested 

consultations with the government of Bahrain (responding to a 2011 U.S.-Bahrain FTA 

submission) and agreed to an enforcement plan with Guatemala regarding worker rights (2008 

332 European Commission, “EU and US Conclude Second Round,” November 15, 2013. 333 European Commission, “EU and US Conclude Second Round,” November 15, 2013; USTR, “Announcement of 

Next Round,” November 4, 2013. 

334 USTR, “Update on the Third Round,” December 19, 2013; USTR, “Statement by U.S. Trade Representative 

Froman on the Conclusion,” December 20, 2013. 335 USTR, “Update on the Third Round,” December 19, 2013. 336 Labor provisions in FTAs have set up processes through which interested organizations that believe a trading 

partner is not fulfilling commitments made under the FTAs can submit complaints (“submissions”) to the USDOL. 

The USDOL’s Office of Trade and Labor Affairs (OTLA) receives and reviews submissions made under the labor 

chapters of the FTAs. Depending on the outcome of the review, OTLA may recommend further actions, including 

consultations with the other country. The United States requested consultations for the first time under an FTA 

labor chapter in 2010 with Guatemala. USDOL, OTLA, “Submissions under the Labor Provisions of Free Trade 

Agreements” (accessed March 12, 2014). 

113

 
CAFTA-DR submission). Additionally, OTLA issued a report in September 2013 raising concerns 

about certain labor laws in the Dominican Republic (2011 CAFTA-DR submission).337 

Ten FTAs contain provisions designed to protect foreign investors and their investments and to 

facilitate the settlement of investment disputes. According to the U.S. Department of State, 

among the U.S. FTAs that provide for investor-state dispute settlement, there are ongoing 

investor disputes under NAFTA,338 the U.S.-Chile FTA, CAFTA-DR, and the U.S.-Peru TPA.339 

U.S.-Bahrain FTA: Consultation with Bahrain to 

Protect Worker Rights 

On May 7, 2013, USTR announced that it had requested consultations with the government of 

Bahrain under the Labor Chapter of the U.S.-Bahrain FTA.340 The request followed a December 

2012 report by the USDOL that highlighted labor issues stemming from the government of 

Bahrain’s response to civil unrest in early 2011. The United States sought consultations to 

discuss actions taken by Bahrain that appeared to be inconsistent with the Labor Chapter of the 

FTA. According to the USDOL’s report, trade unionists and leaders were apparently targeted for 

firing after a general strike in March 2011, and Bahrain’s labor laws do not provide adequate 

protection from employment discrimination based on religious (sectarian) identity or political 

opinion. The USDOL report recognized that members of the government of Bahrain, in 

particular the Minister of Labor, had taken important steps to address labor concerns following 

the unrest in 2011 by seeking to reinstate the fired workers. It found, however, that problems 

remained with Bahrain’s labor laws as well as with the treatment of certain reinstated 

workers.341

CAFTA-DR

Enforcement Plan Relating to Labor Rights in Guatemala

On April 26, 2013, representatives from the United States and Guatemala met and signed an 

18-point Enforcement Plan outlining concrete actions to strengthen labor law enforcement in 

Guatemala. Under the Enforcement Plan, Guatemala committed to strengthen labor 

inspections, expedite and streamline the process of sanctioning employers and ordering 

remediation of labor violations, increase labor law compliance by exporting companies, 

improve the monitoring and enforcement of labor court orders, publish labor law enforcement 

information, and set up mechanisms to ensure that workers are paid what they are owed when 

factories close. 342 Guatemala’s representatives committed to implement the enforcement plan 

337 USDOL, OTLA, “Submissions under the Labor Provisions of Free Trade Agreements” (accessed March 12, 2014). 338 For more information on dispute settlement under NAFTA, see the section on NAFTA later in this chapter. 339 For more information, see U.S. Department of State, International Claims and Investment Disputes, 

http://www.state.gov/s/l/c3433.htm. 340 USTR, “United States Seeks to Protect Worker Rights,” May 7, 2013. 341 Ibid. 342 USTR, “Acting U.S. Trade Representative Marantis and Acting Labor Secretary Harris,” April 11, 2013.

114

 
within six months. This labor case is the first that the United States has brought to dispute 

settlement under an FTA.

On October 28, USTR expressed serious concerns, saying that significant work remained to be 

done to ensure that the Enforcement Plan is effectively implemented.343 USTR acknowledged 

the important steps already taken under the plan, but indicated to Guatemalan officials that 

the United States expects solid progress in fully implementing the commitments. According to 

USTR, if Guatemala fails to comply with the provisions of the Enforcement Plan, the United 

States retains the right to reactivate an arbitration panel established in a 2011 labor 

enforcement case brought against Guatemala under the CAFTA-DR. 

Meeting to Discuss Environmental Issues

On May 9, 2013, officials from the United States and parties to CAFTA-DR held the seventh 

meeting of the Environmental Affairs Council (EAC) under CAFTA-DR.344 Members of the council 

reaffirmed their commitment to work together to enhance the mutually supportive nature of 

trade and environmental protection through the CAFTA-DR Environment Chapter and 

Environment Cooperation Agreement. They reviewed progress on implementation of the 

Environment Chapter and shared important achievements, including those involving 

environmental cooperation and capacity building. 

U.S.-Chile FTA: Environmental Affairs Council 

Meeting 

During the week of January 10, 2013, the United States and Chile convened the sixth meeting of 

the Environmental Affairs Council (EAC) under the U.S.-Chile FTA and the fourth meeting of the 

Joint Commission for Environmental Cooperation (JCEC) under the U.S.-Chile Environmental 

Cooperation Agreement.345 The EAC reviewed implementation of, and compliance with, the 

obligations listed in the Environment Chapter of the FTA. Chile highlighted its new law that 

created the Ministry of Environment and other environmental institutions, such as the 

Environmental Evaluation Service and the Superintendency of Environment. Chile and the 

United States also signed the 2012–14 Work Program for Environmental Cooperation and 

reaffirmed their commitment to continue working together to preserve and protect the 

environment through the FTA Environment Chapter and Environmental Cooperation 

Agreement. 

343 USTR, “United States Continues to Press Guatemala,” October 28, 2013. 344 USTR, “United States and Central America-Dominican Republic,” May 10, 2013. Officials from Costa Rica, the 

Dominican Republic, El Salvador, Guatemala, Honduras, Nicaragua, and the United States attended. 345 USTR, “United States and Chile Hold Sixth Meeting,” January 10, 2013. 

115

 
U.S.-Colombia TPA: Labor Issues Discussion with 

Colombia

U.S. and Colombian officials convened the inaugural meeting of the Labor Affairs Council in 

Washington, DC on June 4–5, 2013, under the U.S.-Colombia TPA.346 The council reaffirmed the 

parties’ commitments under the Labor Chapter, including the commitment to adopt and 

maintain in law and practice the rights as stated in the International Labor Organization (ILO) 

Declaration on Fundamental Principles of Rights to Work. The council held in-depth discussions 

on several topics, including (1) the vision of the new Colombian Ministry of Labor and activities 

to strengthen institutional capacity and labor law enforcement and compliance, (2) multilateral 

cooperation and technical assistance and capacity building, and (3) the implementation of the 

Labor Chapter of the U.S-Colombia TPA. The council discussed the labor obligations of the 

agreement as well as progress under the Colombian Action Plan Related to Labor Rights. It also 

discussed areas of technical cooperation and capacity building, including on the topics of 

enhanced social dialogue, promotion of high-quality jobs, and improving labor inspections. 

U.S.-Jordan FTA: U.S.-Jordan Agreement to Boost 

Investment and ICT Services, and Enhance Labor 

Cooperation

On January 28, 2013, the United States and Jordan agreed on the Joint Principles for 

International Investment as well as the Joint Principles for Information and Communication 

Technology (ICT) Services.347 The two countries also agreed to a new initiative on promoting 

labor rights and improving working conditions in Jordan. In recognition of the economic 

benefits that international investment can offer, the United States and Jordan committed to 

adopt and maintain an open and nondiscriminatory investment regime, strong protection for 

foreign investment, transparency and public participation in the development of laws and 

regulations, and a level competitive playing field for international investment. Under the Joint 

Principles for ICT Services, the United States and Jordan agreed to support the global 

development of ICT services, such as the Internet and other network-based applications. The 

ICT principles address issues such as the free flow of information across borders, facilitating the 

cross-border supply of services, and foreign investment in ICT sectors.348 

346 USTR, “United States and Colombia Hold Inaugural Meeting,” June 5, 2013. 347 USTR, “U.S. Trade Representative Ron Kirk Announces Agreements,” January 28, 2013. 348 Ibid. 

116

 
U.S.-Korea Free Trade Agreement (KORUS FTA): 

Environment and Labor Councils and Joint 

Committee Meetings 

On February 14, 2013, the United States and Korea convened the first meeting of the 

Environmental Affairs Council (EAC) under the KORUS FTA.349 At the meeting, officials reviewed 

implementation of the Environmental Chapter of the KORUS FTA. Korean officials highlighted 

developments in a wide range of areas, including initiatives to protect air and water resources, 

and public health. 

The United States and Korea convened the first meeting of the Labor Affairs Council under the 

KORUS FTA on March 19, 2013. At this meeting, officials reviewed the implementation of the 

Labor Chapter and the labor obligations of the FTA.350 The two parties confirmed that 

implementation of the Labor Chapter during the first year, including the establishment of the 

council and contact points for labor issues, has been positive and constructive. The council also 

held in-depth discussions on areas for future cooperation on specific priority areas, including 

the collection and analysis of employment and labor statistics, and collaboration on supporting 

corporate compliance with international labor standards in global supply chains.

On October 5, the United States and Korea convened the second meeting of the KORUS FTA 

Joint Committee, which was held on the margins of the APEC ministerial, to review 

implementation of the FTA to date. The ministers noted that the overall implementation of the 

KORUS FTA had gone smoothly to date.351 The United States raised a number of issues requiring 

further attention, in particular financial services, autos, and customs-related matters. 

U.S.-Morocco FTA: New Trade Facilitation 

Agreement 

On November 21, 2013, the United States and Morocco signed the U.S.-Morocco Trade 

Facilitation Agreement. The agreement, which builds on the U.S.-Morocco FTA, includes 

provisions for Internet publication of customs laws, regulations, and administrative and transit 

procedures for imports and exports of goods; simplified customs procedures; and penalties for 

violations of customs laws. 352 Morocco became the first country in the Middle East/North 

Africa region to conclude a bilateral trade facilitation agreement, as well as to endorse joint 

principles on investment and ICT services trade with the United States.353

349 USTR, “United States and Korea Hold First Meeting,” February 14, 2013. 350 USTR, “United States and Korea Hold First Meeting,” March 19, 2013. 351 USTR, “Readout of the Second Meeting,” October 5, 2013. 352 USTR, “United States, Morocco Sign Bilateral Trade Facilitation Agreement,” November 21, 2013. 353 Ibid. 

117

 
U.S.-Peru TPA 

Progress on Environmental Matters 

On January 11, 2013, the United States and Peru announced agreement on a five-point action 

plan to support Peru’s forestry sector reforms and to further Peru’s implementation of its 

obligations under the U.S.-Peru TPA Annex on Forest Sector Governance.

354 The two 

governments identified a targeted set of actions for Peru to undertake to address specific 

environmental challenges. These actions include strengthening physical inspection of big-leaf 

mahogany and Spanish cedar trees; strengthening accurate development and implementation 

of the annual operating plans; ensuring timely criminal and administrative proceedings to 

sanction anyone who violates Peru’s forestry and wildlife laws; improving systems to track and 

verify the chain of custody of timber exports of big-leaf mahogany and Spanish cedar; and 

strengthening the implementation of Peru’s National Anti-Corruption Forest and Wildlife Sector 

Plan.355 

On April 10, 2013, the United States and Peru held the sixth meeting of the Sub-Committee on 

Forest Sector Governance to review progress made to implement the U.S.-Peru TPA Annex on 

Forest Sector Governance. Positive steps included the development of a prototype for an 

information system that will track and verify the chain of custody for wood harvested in Peru’s 

forests; the adoption of laws and administrative procedures for management, supervision, and 

issuance of permits for timber species exports covered by the Convention on International 

Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES); and Peru’s efforts to develop 

regulations to implement its new Forestry and Wildlife Law.356 The third meeting of the 

Environmental Cooperation Commission also took place on the same date, and members 

reviewed ongoing and future environmental cooperation activities that support the 

implementation of the Annex on Forest Sector Governance. Members also discussed activities 

to support the January 2013 Joint Action Plan that focuses on deepening ongoing cooperation 

with respect to the management of big-leaf mahogany and Spanish cedar.357

During June 4–5, 2013, the United States-Peru Environmental Affairs Council and the 

Environmental Cooperation Commission convened their fourth meeting in Washington, DC.358

The meeting focused on progress to implement the environmental provisions of the U.S.-Peru 

TPA and environmental cooperation activities under the U.S.-Peru Environmental Cooperation 

Agreement. A key focus of the meeting was the discussion regarding the creation of an 

independent secretariat to receive and consider submissions on enforcement matters, as called 

for by the U.S.-Peru TPA.359 

354 USTR, “The United States and Peru Reach Agreement,” January 11, 2013. 355 Ibid. 356 USTR, “USTR Participates in Forestry Sub-Committee,” April 10, 2013. 357 Ibid. 358 USTR, “Assistant U.S. Trade Representative for Environment and Natural Resources,” June 6, 2013. 359 Ibid. 

118

 
Free Trade Commission Meeting 

On June 7, 2013, USTR and Peru held the third meeting of the Free Trade Commission in 

Washington, DC. The commission was established under the U.S.-Peru TPA to oversee the 

implementation and operation of the TPA and to address formally matters that arise under the 

agreement.360 A variety of issues were discussed, including the work of environmental, 

intellectual property, and other committees; implementation issues; and cooperation in other 

forums, including the TPP. Officials agreed to work to ensure the effective implementation of 

and compliance with the trade in goods and services, labor, and environment obligations under 

the TPA.361 

North American Free Trade Agreement362

The North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) between the United States, Canada, and 

Mexico entered into force on January 1, 1994. All of the agreement’s provisions were 

implemented by January 1, 2008, with the exception of the NAFTA cross-border trucking 

provisions.363 In 2013, total two-way (exports plus imports) U.S. merchandise trade with its 

NAFTA partners increased by 2.4 percent over 2012, with U.S.-Canada merchandise trade 

amounting to $584.6 billion and U.S.-Mexico merchandise trade totaling $459.4 billion (table 

4.1). The following sections describe the major activities of NAFTA’s Free Trade Commission 

(FTC), Commission for Labor Cooperation (CLC), and Commission for Environmental 

Cooperation (CEC), as well as the dispute settlement activities under NAFTA chapters 11 and 19 

during 2013.

Free Trade Commission 

The FTC is NAFTA’s central oversight body, established under article 2001 of the agreement. It 

is chaired jointly by trade representatives or their designees from the three member 

countries.364 The FTC is responsible for overseeing NAFTA’s “implementation and further 

elaboration,” as well as activities under its dispute settlement provisions.

365

The FTC typically meets annually, but did not meet in 2013. At its most recent meeting in April 

2012 in Washington, DC, the FTC agreed to continue the ongoing regulatory cooperation 

initiatives aimed at facilitating trade and reducing unnecessary administrative costs.366 These 

initiatives operate though the U.S.-Canada Regulatory Cooperation Council and the U.S.-Mexico

360 USTR, “Assistant U.S. Trade Representative for the Western Hemisphere,” June 7, 2013. 361 Ibid. 362 U.S. bilateral trade relations with Canada and Mexico are described in chapter 5 of this report. 363 The section on Mexico in chapter 5 discusses NAFTA’s cross-border trucking provisions. Information on the last 

remaining restrictions on U.S.-Mexico trade, which were removed on January 1, 2008, is given in USITC, The Year in 

Trade 2008, 2009, 5-16. All product categories offer duty-free entry to originating goods from Mexico, and all 

except over-TRQ shipments of goods from Canada are likewise eligible. 364 The representatives are the USTR, the Canadian Minister for International Trade, and the Mexican Secretary of 

the Economy.

365 USTR, 2014 Trade Policy Agenda and 2013 Annual Report, March 2014, 130. 366 USTR, “Joint Statement from 2012 NAFTA,” April 3, 2012. 

119

 
High-Level Regulatory Cooperation Council.367 The FTC also agreed to enhance trade in 

chemicals starting with exploratory work on rules of origin, customs procedures, and 

classification.368 

Commission for Labor Cooperation 

The CLC, composed of a ministerial council and an administrative secretariat, was established 

under the North American Agreement on Labor Cooperation (NAALC). The NAALC is a 

supplemental agreement to NAFTA that aims to promote effective enforcement of domestic 

labor laws and foster transparency in administering them. The CLC is responsible for 

implementing the NAALC. Each NAFTA partner has established a national administrative office 

(NAO) within its labor ministry to serve as the contact point with the other parties, the 

secretariat, other government agencies, and the public. The United States NAO is the USDOL’s 

Office of Trade and Labor Affairs (OTLA).369 Another NAO function is to receive and respond to 

public communications on labor law matters arising in another NAALC country. Each NAO 

establishes its own domestic procedures for reviewing and responding to public 

communications. The NAOs and the secretariat also carry out the cooperative activities of the 

CLC, including seminars, conferences, joint research projects, and technical assistance.370

In 2013, representatives of each country’s NAO met to discuss ways to strengthen coordination 

and communications among the NAOs. Also, the National Advisory Committee for Labor 

Provisions in U.S. Free Trade Agreements (NAC) provided recommendations to the U.S. NAO on 

how to improve the functioning of the NAALC.371 In January 2012, OTLA announced that it 

accepted for review a submission by the Sindicato Mexicano de Electricistas, a Mexican union, 

on behalf of 93 other organizations, concerning the Mexican government’s obligations under 

the NAALC.372 In March 2013, officials from OTLA met with the NAC and provided an update on 

the review of its submission. OTLA indicated that the Mexican union had requested the 

opportunity to provide additional information for the review, and that OTLA then extended the 

review period to consider this new information.373

Commission for Environmental Cooperation 

The CEC was established under article 8 of the North American Agreement on Environmental 

Cooperation (NAAEC). This supplemental agreement to NAFTA is designed to ensure that trade 

liberalization and efforts to protect the environment are mutually supportive. The CEC oversees 

367 USTR, 2014 Trade Policy Agenda and 2013 Annual Report, March 2014, 131. For more information on regulatory 

cooperation, see sections on Canada and Mexico in chapter 5. 368 For additional information see USITC, The Year in Trade 2012, 2013, 4-15; USTR, “Joint Statement from 2012 

NAFTA,” April 3, 2012. 369 USDOL, OTLA, “Submissions under the North American Agreement on Labor Cooperation (NAALC)” (accessed 

March 18, 2014).

370 CLC, “The National Administrative Offices” (accessed March 18, 2014). 371 USTR, 2014 Trade Policy Agenda and 2013 Annual Report, March 2014, 131. 372 77 Fed. Reg. 4366 (January 27, 2012). Also, USDOL, OTLA, “Submissions under the Labor Provisions of Free 

Trade Agreements: Mexico” (accessed March 18, 2014). 373 USTR, 2014 Trade Policy Agenda and 2013 Annual Report, March 2014, 131. 

120

 
the mandate of the NAAEC and is composed of (1) the Council—the governing body of the 

CEC—made up of the environmental ministers from the United States, Canada, and Mexico;374

(2) the Joint Public Advisory Committee, made up of five private citizens from each of the 

NAFTA parties; and (3) the Secretariat, located in Montreal. The Secretariat provides technical, 

administrative, and operational support to the Council; prepares independent reports on 

environmental matters, along with information on the state of the environment throughout 

North America; and processes citizen submissions on enforcement matters.375

Articles 14 and 15 of the NAAEC provide citizens and nongovernmental organizations with a 

mechanism to help enforce environmental laws in the NAFTA countries. 376 Article 14 governs 

alleged violations submitted for review by the CEC. It sets forth guidelines regarding criteria for 

submissions and parties that can file complaints. Article 15 outlines the Secretariat’s obligations 

in considering the submissions and publishing findings in the factual record.377 At the end of 

2013, nine complaint files remained active under Articles 14 and 15, one of which was

submitted in 2013. In 2013, one active file involved the United States, three involved Canada, 

and five involved Mexico (see details in table 4.5).

At the 20th regular session of the CEC Council, held on July 11, 2013, in Los Cabos, Mexico, the 

Council agreed to a new operational plan for 2013–14 that focuses on collaborative actions in 

three strategic areas: greening transportation, tackling climate change while improving air 

quality, and addressing waste in trade.378 The Council also stated that it continues to support 

CEC efforts aimed at improving the alignment of environmental standards across North 

America, including the transportation sector, in accordance with legal frameworks and national 

circumstances.379

At the 2013 CEC Council meeting, the Council announced two new tools designed to make the 

Submissions on Enforcement Matters (SEM) process more accessible to the North American 

public: (1) a new online portal, designed to provide members of the public with a user-friendly 

resource for filing submissions; and (2) an online SEM “tracker” that will allow interested 

parties to monitor compliance with the mandatory SEM process deadlines.380 In 2012, the CEC 

Council adopted significant revisions of the SEM process. 

374 The CEC Council consists of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Administrator, Canadian Environment 

Minister, and Mexican Secretary for Environment and Natural Resources.

375 CEC, Secretariat, “Three Countries Working Together” (accessed March 19, 2014). 376 CEC, “Submissions on Enforcement Matters” (accessed March 19, 2014). 377 CEC, “Part Three, Article 14 and Article 15” (accessed March 19, 2014). 378 In 2012, the FTC approved a work plan to strengthen cooperation between the FTC and the CEC. Trade officials 

from the three member countries participated in the CEC’s 2013–14 Operational Plan. USTR, 2014 Trade Policy 

Agenda and 2013 Annual Report, March 2014, 131. 379 CEC, “CEC Ministerial Statement: Twentieth Regular Session” (accessed March 19, 2014). 380Ibid. 

121

 
Table 4.5 Active files as of yearend 2013 under Articles 14 and 15 of the North American Agreement on 

Environmental Cooperation

Name Case First filed Countrya Status

Coal-fired 

Power Plants

SEM-04-005 Sept. 20, 2004 United States The Secretariat submitted a draft factual record 

to Council, for a 45-day comment period on the 

accuracy of the draft on October 25, 2013.

Ex Hacienda

El Hospital II

SEM-06-003 July 17, 2006 Mexico The Secretariat received comments from 

Mexico on November 27, 2013, and from 

Canada on December 24, 2013.

Ex Hacienda

El Hospital III

SEM-06-004 Sept. 22, 2006 Mexico The Secretariat received comments from 

Mexico on November 27, 2013, and from 

Canada on December 24, 2013.

Wetlands in 

Manzanillo

SEM-09-002 Feb. 4, 2009 Mexico The Council decided to defer voting on whether 

to instruct the Secretariat to prepare a factual 

record on November 15, 2013.

Alberta 

Tailings 

Ponds

SEM-10-002 Apr. 13, 2010 Canada The Secretariat determined that the submission 

met the criteria of Article 14(1) and requested 

a response from the concerned government 

party on December 11, 2013.

Sumidero

Canyon II

SEM-11-002 Nov. 29, 2011 Mexico The Secretariat informed Council that the 

Secretariat considers that the submission 

warrants development of a factual record on 

November 11, 2013.

Protection of 

Polar Bears

SEM-11-003 Dec. 5, 2011 Canada The Secretariat informed Council that the 

Secretariat considers that the submission 

warrants development of a factual record on 

November 7, 2013.

BC Salmon 

Farms

SEM-12-001 Feb. 10, 2012 Canada The Secretariat received the requested 

information from the concerned government 

party on December 17, 2013.

Tourism 

Development in the 

Gulf of California

SEM-13-001 Apr. 11, 2013 Mexico The Secretariat determined that the submission 

met the criteria of Article 14(1) and requested 

a response from the concerned government on 

November 12, 2013.

Source: CEC, “Submission on Enforcement Matters: Active Submissions” (accessed March 12, 2014). a

Refers to the country against which an allegation was filed.

In November 1993, the United States and Mexico agreed on arrangements to support border 

communities with environmental infrastructure projects to advance the goals of NAFTA and the 

NAAEC. The Border Environment Cooperation Commission (BECC) and the North American 

Development Bank (NADB) are working with communities throughout the U.S.-Mexico border 

region to address their environmental infrastructure needs.381 As of December 31, 2013, the 

NADB has contracted a cumulative total of approximately $2.3 billion in loans and grants, of 

which a total of $2.0 billion has already been disbursed. These funds helped finance 192

projects certified by the BECC with an estimated total cost of $5.7 billion.

382

381 USTR, 2014 Trade Policy Agenda and 2013 Annual Report, March 2014, 131. 382 BECC and NADB, Quarterly Status Report, December 31, 2013; NADB, “Summary of Project Implementation 

Activities: Active Projects,” December 31, 2013. 

122

 
Dispute Settlement 

The dispute settlement provisions of NAFTA Chapters 11 and 19 cover a variety of areas.383 The 

sections below describe developments during 2013 in NAFTA Chapter 11 investor-state 

disputes and Chapter 19 binational reviews of final determinations of antidumping and 

countervailing cases. Appendix table A.26 presents an overview of developments in NAFTA 

Chapter 19 dispute settlement cases to which the United States was a party in 2013.

Chapter 11 Dispute Settlement Developments

Chapter 11 of NAFTA includes provisions designed to protect cross-border investors and ease 

the settlement of investment disputes. Under subpart B of Chapter 11, an individual investor 

who alleges that a NAFTA country has breached its investment obligations under Chapter 11 

may pursue arbitration through internationally recognized channels or remedies available in

the host country’s domestic courts.384 A key feature of the Chapter 11 arbitral provisions is the 

enforceability in domestic courts of final awards made by arbitration tribunals.385

In 2013, there were five active Chapter 11 cases filed against the United States, four of them 

filed by Canadian investors and one filed by Mexican investors;386 four filed by U.S. investors 

against Canada;387 and none filed against Mexico.388

Chapter 19 Dispute Panel Reviews 

Chapter 19 of NAFTA contains a mechanism that provides for a binational panel to review final 

determinations made by national investigating authorities in antidumping and countervailing 

duty cases. Such a panel serves as an alternative to judicial review by domestic courts and may 

be established at the request of any involved NAFTA country.389 At the end of 2013, the NAFTA 

Secretariat listed four binational panels active under Chapter 19 (table 4.6). Two of the four

active cases challenged the Mexican agency’s determinations on products from the United 

States. One of the four active cases in 2013 challenged U.S. agencies’ determinations on 

products from Canada, and one challenged U.S. agencies’ determinations on products from 

Mexico.390 There were no binational panels formed in 2013 under Chapter 19.

383 NAFTA Secretariat, “Overview of the Dispute Settlement Provisions” (accessed March 19, 2014). 384 Internationally recognized arbitral mechanisms include the International Centre for the Settlement of 

Investment Disputes (ICSID) at the World Bank, ICSID’s Additional Facility Rules, and the rules of the United Nations 

Commission on International Trade Law (UNCITRAL Rules). NAFTA Secretariat, “Overview of the Dispute 

Settlement Provisions” (accessed March 19, 2014). 385 Ibid. 386 USDOS, “NAFTA Investor-State Arbitrations: Cases Filed against the United States” (accessed March 19, 2014). 387 USDOS, “NAFTA Investor-State Arbitrations: Cases Filed against the Government of Canada” (accessed March 

19, 2014). 388 USDOS, “NAFTA Investor-State Arbitrations: Cases Filed against the United Mexican States” (accessed March 19, 

2014). 389 NAFTA Secretariat, “Overview of the Dispute Settlement Provisions” (accessed March 19, 2014). Such reviews 

involve the parties and designated agencies, rather than individuals or firms. 390 NAFTA Secretariat, “NAFTA—Chapter 19 Active Cases” (accessed March 12, 2014).

123

 
Table 4.6 NAFTA Chapter 19 binational panels, active reviews as of yearend 2013 

Countrya Case number

National agencies’ final 

determinationb Case title

Mexico MEX-USA-2012-1904-01 SE Antidumping 

Administrative Review

Chicken Thighs and Legs

MEX-USA-2012-1904-02 SE Antidumping 

Administrative Review

Ethylene Glycol Monobutyl Ether

United States USA-CDA-2009-1904-01 USDOC Antidumping 

Administrative Review

Carbon and Alloy Steel Wire Rod

USA-MEX-2012-1904-02 USDOC Antidumping 

Administrative Review

Bottom Mount Combination 

Refrigerator-Freezers

Source: NAFTA Secretariat, “Status Report of Dispute Settlement Proceeding.” (accessed March 12, 2014). a

The United States filed the first two cases contesting Mexico’s determinations, Canada filed the next case contesting a U.S. 

determination, and Mexico filed the remaining case contesting a U.S. determination. b

In Canada, final dumping and subsidy determinations are made by the Canada Border Services Agency, and injury 

determinations are made by the Canadian International Trade Tribunal. In Mexico, all determinations are made by the 

Secretariat of Economy (SE). In the United States, dumping and subsidy determinations are made by the U.S. Department of 

Commerce (USDOC), and injury determinations are made by the USITC. NAFTA Secretariat, “Overview of the Dispute 

Settlement Provisions” (accessed March 12, 2014). 

Trade and Investment Framework 

Agreements and Other Agreements 

The United States has entered into Trade and Investment Framework Agreements (TIFAs) with 

a number of countries and regional economic groups. These agreements create a forum 

through which the United States meets with partner governments on a regular basis (generally 

annually), through formal TIFA Councils, to discuss issues that affect trade and investment and 

to increase cooperation.391 

Developments in New TIFAs during 2013 

In 2013, the United States entered into TIFAs with the Caribbean Community (CARICOM),392

Burma,393 and Libya.394 In March 2013, it was announced that the United States was also 

considering entering into a TIFA with the Economic Community of West African States.395 Also 

in March 2013, the United States and Iraq announced progress on the entry into force of the 

bilateral TIFA that was signed in 2005, with the intention of holding the first meeting of the 

U.S.-Iraq TIFA Council in 2014.396 The inaugural meeting of the U.S.-CARICOM TIFA Council was 

held in November 2013 and the council discussed intellectual property protection, the 

development of e-commerce infrastructure, and the removal of barriers to trade.397

391 USTR, “Trade and Investment Framework Agreements.” 392 USTR, “Acting U.S. Trade Representative Miriam Sapiro Hails Signature,” May 29, 2013. 393 USTR, “United States and Burma Sign,” May 21, 2013. 394 USTR, “United States, Libya Sign,” December 18, 2013. 395 USTR, “The United States Explores New Opportunity,” March 29, 2013. 396 USTR, “United States of America and the Republic of Iraq Announce Progress,” March 6, 2013. 397 USTR, “United States and Caribbean Community,” November 15, 2013.

124

 
Developments in Existing TIFAs during 2013 

In January 2013, the U.S.-Thailand TIFA Council met to discuss expanding trade in goods, 

services, and agriculture; protection of intellectual property rights; Thai import restrictions on 

pork products; and Thai regulations that might restrict access to the telecommunications sector 

and those that might require domestic processing of credit card transactions. 398 In February, at 

the seventh meeting of the U.S.-Afghanistan TIFA Council in Washington, DC, the Council 

discussed market access issues, Afghanistan’s work towards acceding to the WTO by the end of 

2014, both countries’ efforts to improve transit of Afghan goods to export markets, agriculture, 

women’s entrepreneurship, and Afghanistan’s mining sector. 399 In March 2013, the U.S.-

Taiwan TIFA Council met and released new joint statements on investment principles and ICT 

services, and also launched new TIFA working groups on investment and technical barriers to 

trade.400 The U.S.-Indonesia TIFA Council meeting in June 2013 included discussions on 

Indonesia’s restrictions to its agriculture, manufacturing, energy, and telecommunications 

markets and investment restrictions; trade issues including those within APEC and the WTO; 

and intellectual property rights. 401 The U.S. Central Asia TIFA Council held its eighth meeting in 

Turkmenistan in November 2013 to discuss energy trade, investment, WTO membership, 

customs, procurement, trade and investment between Central Asia and Afghanistan, and the 

promotion of women’s entrepreneurship.402

Other Agreements 

In November 2013, the United States and Bangladesh signed a Trade and Investment 

Cooperation Forum Agreement in order to improve the two countries’ bilateral trade and 

investment relationship, as well as to track and discuss Bangladesh’s work toward improving 

worker safety and worker rights.403

398 USTR, “United States and Thailand Deepen Commitments,” January 17, 2013. 399 USTR, “Readout from the Seventh Meeting,” February 28, 2013. 400 USTR, “Deputy U.S. Trade Representative Demetrios Marantis Welcomes,” March 10, 2013. 401 USTR, “United States and Indonesia Meet,” June 13, 2013. 402 USTR, “Joint Statement from the United States-Central Asia Trade and Investment,” November 14, 2013. 403 USTR, “United States, Bangladesh Sign Trade and Investment Cooperation,” November 25, 2013.

125

 
126
Chapter 5

U.S. Relations with Selected Major 

Trading Partners

This chapter reviews U.S. bilateral trade relations with nine selected trading partners during 

2013: the EU, Canada, China, Mexico, Japan, Korea, Brazil, Taiwan, and India (ordered by value 

of two-way merchandise trade). Appendix tables A.6 and A.7 show U.S. trade with its top 15 

single-country trading partners in 2013.404 The online interactive merchandise trade 

dashboards that accompany the Year in Trade 2013 report can be used for further analysis of 

U.S. trade with all of its trading partners.

European Union 

The EU as a unit405 is the largest two-way (exports and imports) U.S. trading partner in terms of 

both goods and services. The value of U.S. merchandise trade with the 28 member states of the 

EU rose 0.5 percent in 2013 to $613.3 billion, accounting for 17.0 percent of total U.S. trade. 

However, U.S.-EU trade that year still had not recovered to the level recorded in 2008 ($614.9 

billion), just before the global economic downturn. Although U.S. imports from the EU grew 

slightly in 2013, U.S. exports to the EU declined as slow growth in the EU continued. As a result, 

the U.S. merchandise trade deficit with the EU grew $11.3 billion or 8.1 percent, to $149.9 

billion in 2013 (figure 5.1). On the other hand, the U.S. trade surplus in private services with the 

EU was $60.5 billion in 2013, up $4.5 billion from 2012 (figure 5.2). The EU accounted for 32.8 

percent of U.S. two-way trade in services in 2013, with the United Kingdom as the largest 

services trader within the EU, followed by Germany and France.406

The EU continued to be the second-largest market (after Canada) for U.S. exports in 2013. U.S. 

merchandise exports to the EU fell 1.8 percent in 2013 to $231.7 billion. Leading U.S. exports 

included aircraft and parts, petroleum-related products, certain medicaments (medicines), 

passenger motor vehicles, blood fractions (e.g., antiserum), and coal. The most notable gains 

404 In chapter 5, the country trade balance is calculated as U.S. domestic exports minus U.S. imports for 

consumption. These balances differ from the U.S. merchandise trade balance generally reported by Census, which 

is defined as total exports minus general imports. Appendix table A.1 reports the country trade balance on this 

basis. For more information, please see footnote 24 in chapter 1.

405 In 2013, Croatia joined the European Union as the 28th member state. The 28 members of the EU in 2013 were 

Austria, Belgium, Bulgaria, Croatia, Cyprus, the Czech Republic, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, France, Germany, 

Greece, Hungary, Ireland, Italy, Latvia, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Malta, the Netherlands, Poland, Portugal, Romania, 

Slovakia, Slovenia, Spain, Sweden, and the United Kingdom. 406 The services trade data by country reported in this chapter are based on trade in private services, which exclude 

government sales and purchases of services.

127

 
Figure 5.1 U.S. merchandise trade with the EU-28, 2009–13

Source: Official trade statistics of the USDOC as maintained by USITC. 

Figure 5.2 U.S. private services trade with the EU, 2009-13a

Source: Official trade statistics of the USDOC as maintained by USITC. a

Data for 2013 are preliminary. 

-200

-100

0

100

200

300

400

500

2009 2010 2011 2012 2013

Billion $

Exports Imports Trade balance

0

50

100

150

200

250

2009 2010 2011 2012 2013

Bilion $

Exports Imports Trade balance

128
among top exports were certain heterocyclic compounds,407 which increased 66.7 percent from 

2012, and shelled almonds, which rose 42.8 percent. Exports of petroleum-related products 

also rose significantly by value. The decline in the value of U.S. exports was led by nonmonetary 

gold, coal, and certain medicaments. Of the top 25 U.S. exports to the EU, 13 declined by value 

between 2012 and 2013.

The EU was also the second-largest source of U.S. imports, following China. U.S. merchandise 

imports from the EU rose 1.9 percent in 2013 to $381.6 billion. Leading U.S. imports included 

passenger motor vehicles, petroleum-related products, certain medicaments, and turbojets and 

parts. Among the top imports, the most notable increases by value were in motor vehicles, 

which grew by $3.3 billion, and airplanes and other aircraft, which grew by $1.8 billion. U.S.-EU 

merchandise trade data are shown in appendix tables A.27 through A.29. 

The major focus of U.S.-EU trade relations in 2013 was the launch of negotiations to conclude a 

bilateral trade and investment agreement, which is described below and was discussed in 

greater detail in chapter 4. The two sides also addressed issues related to beef trade, including 

extending an EU tariff-rate quota (TRQ) on imports of U.S. high-quality beef, and amending U.S. 

import regulations on bovine spongiform encephalopathy (BSE) to end long-standing 

restrictions on U.S. imports of EU beef. There were also developments in WTO dispute 

settlement cases involving the United States and EU in 2013. Following a WTO dispute brought 

by the United States regarding EU tariff treatment of certain information technology products, 

in September 2013 the EU adopted a European Council regulation408 providing duty-free 

treatment for flat panel displays.409 The two WTO dispute settlement cases involving the longrunning U.S. and EU complaints about each other’s measures affecting trade in large civil 

aircraft remained in the compliance panel phase in 2013 (see chapter 3 and appendix table 

A.25).

Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership 

On February 13, 2013, U.S. and EU leaders announced their intention to launch negotiations on 

a comprehensive trade and investment agreement.410 On June 17, these leaders formally 

launched negotiations to conclude a Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP).411

TTIP negotiations are based on the findings and recommendations of the U.S.-EU High-Level 

Working Group on Jobs and Growth (HLWG). The HLWG was set up at the November 2011 U.S.-

EU Summit to identify and assess policies and measures that could increase bilateral trade and 

investment to support job creation, economic growth, and international competitiveness.412

407 These heterocyclic compounds are organic chemicals containing a pyrimidine ring or a piperazine ring. They are 

used either as intermediates in the production of chemicals or as end products (e.g., the active ingredients in

pharmaceuticals and pesticides).

408 Council Regulation 953/2013, Official Journal of the European Union, No. L 263/4. The regulation entered into 

effect on October 25, 2013.

409 USTR, “USTR Froman Welcomes EU Action,” October 25, 2013. 410 White House, “Statement from United States President Barack Obama,” February 13, 2013. 411 White House, “Remarks by President Obama, U.K. Prime Minister Cameron,” June 17, 2013. 412 HLWG, “Interim Report to Leaders from the Co-Chairs,” June 19, 2012.

129

 
The working group provided an interim report on their findings in June 2012413 and a final 

report on February 11, 2013.414 After engaging with key stakeholders and assessing various 

options, in the final report the HLWG recommended negotiating “a comprehensive agreement 

that addresses a broad range of bilateral trade and investment issues, including regulatory 

issues, and contributes to the development of global rules.” The HLWG noted that because the 

U.S. and EU economies are substantially open already, the new agreement will “need to break 

ground to create additional bilateral market openings and establish new trade rules that are 

globally relevant.”415

The final report identifies three broad areas for negotiations: market access, regulatory issues 

and nontariff barriers, and rules to address shared global trade challenges and opportunities. 

With respect to market access, the HLWG recommended that the agreement go “beyond what 

the United States and the EU have achieved in previous trade agreements.” In particular, the 

agreement should (1) eliminate all tariffs on bilateral trade; (2) bind services commitments to 

the “highest level of liberalization that each side has achieved in trade agreements to date” and 

“seek to achieve new market access” by addressing remaining long-standing barriers to trade in 

services; (3) include investment provisions that are “based on the highest levels of liberalization 

and highest standards of protection that both sides have negotiated to date”; and (4) improve 

“access to government procurement opportunities at all levels of government on the basis of 

national treatment.”416

In the area of regulatory issues and nontariff barriers, the HLWG recommended that the two 

sides find ways to address “behind-the-border” nontariff barriers and reduce the costs 

associated with regulatory differences. In particular, the agreement should include (1) an “SPSplus” chapter and a “TBT-plus” chapter, which would include establishing bilateral forums to 

address sanitary and phytosanitary (SPS) and technical barriers to trade (TBT) issues, 

respectively, as they arise;417 (2) rules on regulatory coherence and transparency for goods and 

services, including early consultations on significant regulations, use of impact assessments, 

periodic review of existing regulatory measures, and application of good regulatory practices; 

(3) commitments to promote regulatory compatibility in mutually agreed goods and services 

sectors, including considering a variety of approaches, such as regulatory harmonization, 

equivalence, or mutual recognition, where appropriate; and (4) a framework for identifying 

opportunities for and guiding future regulatory cooperation, including provisions that provide 

an institutional basis for future progress. To help develop concrete action plans, the United 

States and the EU requested stakeholder comments on how to promote regulatory 

compatibility in September 2012. These proposals were initially reviewed at a meeting of the 

413 Ibid. For more information on the interim report, see USITC, The Year in Trade 2012, 2013, 5-2 to 5-3. 414 HLWG, “Final Report,” February 11, 2013. 415 Ibid. 416 Ibid. 417 SPS-plus and TBT-plus refer to strengthening and reinforcing the rules and disciplines of the WTO’s agreements 

on SPS measures and TBTs, respectively.

130

 
High-Level Regulatory Cooperation Forum in April 2013, but more proposals are expected as 

negotiations on regulatory issues progress.418

Finally, the HLWG recommended developing rules that go beyond bilateral trade and contribute 

to strengthening the multilateral trading system by addressing IPR, the environment, and labor. 

According to the HLWG, the agreement should also include globally relevant rules, principles, or 

modes of cooperation in the following areas: customs and trade facilitation, competition policy, 

state-owned enterprises, localization barriers to trade,419 raw materials and energy, small and 

medium-sized enterprises, and transparency.

Following the launch of negotiations in June 2013, U.S. and EU officials held three rounds of 

negotiations in 2013. These rounds are described in chapter 4.

Beef Trade 

To resolve a dispute over the EU’s ban on imports of hormone-treated beef, the United States 

and the EU signed a memorandum of understanding (MOU) in May 2009 that increased access 

to the EU market for U.S. exports of “high quality” beef. Such beef must be from cattle not 

treated with growth-promoting hormones.420 The MOU established a TRQ of 20,000 metric tons 

with an in-quota tariff rate of zero percent.421 In August 2012, as part of the second phase of 

the MOU, the EU raised the TRQ to 45,000 metric tons for one year. In return, the United States 

suspended retaliatory duties it had imposed in 1999 in response to the findings of a WTO 

dispute settlement panel on the matter. In August 2013, both sides announced an agreement 

to extend phase 2 of the MOU, including the quota, for two years—until August 2, 2015.422 The 

MOU also provides for a third phase, which would require the EU to maintain the higher quota 

in exchange for a permanent cessation of U.S. retaliatory duties.423

In November 2013, the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) Animal and Plant Health 

Inspection Service (APHIS) announced its intention to amend U.S. import regulations on BSE, 

which will end restrictions on U.S. imports of EU beef that have been in place since the 1990s. 

APHIS posted the final rule in the Federal Register on December 4, 2013, and it became 

effective March 4, 2014.424 The new regulations will permit imports from a particular country 

based on the same criteria and risk categories that the World Organization for Animal Health 

418 HLWG, “Final Report,” February 11, 2013. 419 Localization barriers to trade are measures designed to protect, favor, or stimulate domestic industries, service 

providers, and/or intellectual property (IP) at the expense of goods, services, or IP from other countries. For more 

information, see USTR, Trade Topics, http://www.ustr.gov/trade-topics/localization-barriers. 420 Memorandum of Understanding between the United States of America and the European Commission Regarding 

the Importation of Beef From Animals Not Treated with Certain Growth-Promoting Hormones and Increased Duties 

Applied by the United States to Certain Products of the European Communities, May 13, 2009, 

http://www.ustr.gov/sites/default/files/asset_upload_file254_15654.pdf. For more information on the MOU, see 

USITC, The Year in Trade 2009, 2010, 5-5. 421 The EU’s high-quality beef quota is open to all countries on a most-favored-nation basis. 422 USTR, “U.S. Trade Representative Froman, Secretary of Agriculture Vilsack Announce,” August 1, 2013. 423 U.S.-EU Beef MOU, Art. II(5). 424 78 F.R. 72980–73008 (December 4, 2013).

131

 
(OIE)425 uses to rate a country’s BSE risk status.426 However, before EU producers can export to 

the United States, national meat inspection systems in EU member states must be approved by 

the USDA as providing protection for human health equivalent to U.S. procedures.427

Canada 

Canada is the United States’ largest single-country trading partner in terms of two-way trade in 

goods (exports plus imports), and its second-largest single-country partner for trade in services, 

after the United Kingdom. Total U.S. two-way merchandise trade with Canada was valued at 

$584.6 billion in 2013, representing about 16.2 percent of U.S. merchandise trade with the 

world. U.S. merchandise exports to Canada amounted to $251.7 billion in 2013, and U.S. 

merchandise imports from Canada amounted to $332.9 billion, resulting in a merchandise trade 

deficit of $81.2 billion, little changed from deficits in 2012 ($79.3 billion) and 2011 ($82.6 

billion) (figure 5.3). Canada’s economic recovery from the 2008–09 global recession slowed in 

early 2012 and remained subdued in 2013. Canada’s exports were weaker than expected in 

2013, partly due to slow economic recovery in the United States––Canada’s main export 

market––and partly influenced by other factors, such as low productivity growth and increased 

competition from emerging markets.428

Canada’s total two-way trade in private services with the United States was valued at $93.3 

billion in 2013, accounting for 8.6 percent of U.S. trade in services with the world. U.S. services 

exports to Canada were valued at $63.8 billion, while U.S. services imports from Canada were 

valued at $29.5 billion, resulting in a U.S. surplus on trade in services with Canada of $34.3 

billion (figure 5.4). The 2013 U.S. services surplus with Canada represented an increase of 9.2

percent from 2012, continuing the upward trend of the past five years (2009–13).

Canada was the foremost single-country export market for U.S. goods in 2013, with a value 

roughly 60 percent higher than the second-largest U.S. goods export market (Mexico). The 

leading 25 U.S. goods exports to Canada accounted for roughly 30 percent of U.S. good exports 

to Canada ($251.7 billion). Motor vehicles, tractors, trailers, and related parts (under HS 

chapter 87) were the leading products, representing half of the top 25 U.S. goods exports to 

Canada. U.S. exports of energy products (under HS chapter 27) came second, accounting for 

over a quarter of the top 25 U.S. goods exports to the Canadian market. These included 

products such as crude petroleum, light oils, and natural gas.

Canada was the second-largest single-country source of U.S. goods imports in 2013, after China. 

U.S. imports for consumption from Canada were valued at $332.9 billion, up slightly from 2012 

($323.9 billion) and 2011 ($316.4 billion). Leading U.S. merchandise imports from Canada were 

energy products (under HS chapter 27), which accounted for nearly one-third of U.S. imports 

425 The OIE is an international body that sets standards related to animal health. 426 USDA, APHIS, “APHIS Finalizes Bovine Import Regulations,” November 1, 2013. 427 Glotz, “Beef Industry Hails Lifting of US Export Ban,” November 4, 2013; Inside U.S. Trade, “U.S. Lifts ‘Mad Cow’ 

Restrictions,” November 7, 2013.

428 OECD, “Canada,” Economic Outlook, November 2013, 123; IMF, “Canada––2013 Article IV Consultation,” 

February 2014, 4.

132

 
Figure 5.3 U.S. merchandise trade with Canada, 2009–13

Source: Official trade statistics of the USDOC as maintained by USITC. 

Figure 5.4 U.S. private services trade with Canada, 2009–13a

Source: Official trade statistics of the USDOC as maintained by USITC. a

Data for 2013 are preliminary. 

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

2009 2010 2011 2012 2013

Billion $

Exports Imports Trade balance

-200

-100

0

100

200

300

400

2009 2010 2011 2012 2013

Billion $

Exports Imports Trade balance

133
from Canada, followed by passenger vehicles and related parts (under HS chapter 87) and raw 

materials, such as coniferous wood, nonmonetary gold, and aluminum. (See appendix tables 

A.30 to A.32 for details of U.S.-Canada merchandise trade.)

The United States and Canada share the world’s largest and most comprehensive bilateral 

trading relationship, with Canada being the single largest foreign supplier of energy––

petroleum, natural gas, and electricity––to the United States.429 Canada was the fourth largest 

source of foreign direct investment in the United States, totaling $261 billion in 2012 (latest 

data available).430 Since 1994, trade between the two countries has operated within the 

framework of the NAFTA agreement between the United States, Canada, and Mexico. NAFTA 

has reduced trade barriers and liberalized rules in a wide variety of areas––agriculture, services, 

energy, financial services, investment, and government procurement––as well as provided an 

institutional structure through which to settle a variety of disputes among the three partners.

In 2013, the United States and Canada continued to work to integrate the two economies more 

closely. They consulted on agricultural and industrial goods matters through forums such as the 

Canada-United States Consultative Committee on Agriculture and the Canada-United States 

Regulatory Cooperation Council to facilitate trade, targeting in particular trade distortions 

caused by behind-the-border measures. In September 2013, Canada and the United States 

agreed to a joint request for arbitration under the 2006 Softwood Lumber Agreement to 

resolve a dispute regarding interpretation of the award made in a 2011 case decided under the 

agreement (see following discussion). 

Softwood Lumber 

On September 30, 2013, Canada and the United States agreed to submit a joint request for 

arbitration under the 2006 U.S.-Canada Softwood Lumber Agreement (SLA) to resolve a dispute 

concerning the interpretation of the compensatory amounts awarded in a case decided under 

the SLA in January 2011.431 On January 20, 2011, the tribunal in LCIA432 case no. 81010 made an 

award concerning provincial subsidies that requires Canada to apply additional export charges 

on shipments of softwood lumber from Quebec and Ontario to the United States in order to 

remedy breaches of the SLA concerning certain forestry programs in those provinces.433 The 

charges were designed to collect $58.85 million over the term of the original SLA, which was to 

expire on October 12, 2013. Canada started to apply the additional export charges on March 1, 

2011, but did not collect the full $58.85 million by the expiration date of the original SLA 

(October 12, 2013). On January 23, 2012, the parties agreed to extend the SLA for an additional 

two years, setting a new expiration date of October 12, 2015. As a consequence, the parties 

429 USDOS, Bureau of Western Hemisphere Affairs, “U.S. Relations with Canada,” August 23, 2013. 430 USDOS, American Embassy, Canada, “U.S.-Canada Economic Relations” (accessed March 25, 2014). 431 LCIA (London Court of International Arbitration), “Joint Request for Arbitration––Submitted on Behalf of Canada 

and the United States of America,” September 30, 2013. See text of the 2006 U.S.-Canada Softwood Lumber 

Agreement at http://www.ustr.gov/webfm_send/3254, and the Extension to the 2006 U.S.-Canada Softwood 

Lumber Agreement at http://www.ustr.gov/webfm_send/3255. 432 London Court of International Arbitration, the dispute settlement body recognized under the SLA. 433 USTR, 2014 Trade Policy Agenda and 2013 Annual Report, March 2014, III.137; USDOS, American Embassy, 

Canada, “Canada: 2014 National Trade Estimate Report,” December 12, 2013, par. 20–22.

134

 
agreed in 2013 to reconvene the original tribunal to determine whether or not the award 

requires Canada to continue to apply the additional export charges while the extended SLA 

remains in effect.434

Regulatory Cooperation Council 

Canada and the United States announced the creation of the Canada-United States Regulatory 

Cooperation Council (RCC) on February 4, 2011.435 The aim of the RCC is to eliminate 

unnecessary regulatory differences and duplication that hinder cross-border trade and 

investment. After consultations with the private sector and bilateral negotiations between 

Canada and the United States, the RCC released a Joint Action Plan on Regulatory Cooperation 

on December 7, 2011, describing 29 ways in which Canada and the United States will seek 

greater regulatory alignment.436 All 29 work plans were finalized by July 2012, and include 

sector initiatives in areas such as automotive, agricultural, and consumer products, as well as

future technologies, including nanotechnology. Activities under these work plans include 

collaboration on common approaches to regulations, mutual recognition of standards and 

development of joint standards, harmonized testing procedures, technical and scientific 

cooperation, information sharing, and pilot programs to increase regulatory transparency. 

U.S. regulatory agencies and their Canadian counterparts met in Washington, DC, on June 19, 

2013, to discuss work under the 2011 Joint Action Plan, the next steps in regulatory alignment, 

and the future role of the RCC.

437 The RCC held its first stakeholder meeting with interested 

private sector participants in January 2012, and a second stakeholder meeting on June 20, 

2013, in Washington, DC. At the June 2013 meeting, industry representatives from the 

automobile, consumer products, food, and major appliance sectors shared views on how to 

better align the regulatory system in both countries in key areas such as product approval 

procedures, reduction of duplicative requirements, and setting and implementing standards.438

Intellectual Property 

Canada was placed on the USTR Special 301 Priority Watch List in 2009, but was moved in 2012 

to the Watch List in light of Canada’s moves to legislate improved copyright protection. Canada 

passed the Copyright Modernization Act on June 29, 2012, implementing into national law the 

World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) Copyright Treaty and the Performances and 

Phonograms Treaty––commonly known as the WIPO Internet Treaties––that Canada had signed 

434 For further information, see USITC, The Year in Trade 2011, July 2012, 5-6. On March 21, 2014, the tribunal 

determined that Canada has no obligation to continue to apply the compensatory adjustments beyond October 12, 

2013. LCIA No. 810108, “The United States of America and Canada––DETERMINATION,” March 21, 2014. 435 USDOS, American Embassy, Canada, “2013 Investment Climate Statement” (accessed March 25, 2014). 436 USDOC, ITA,“U.S.-Canada Regulatory Cooperation Council” (accessed March 25, 2014); USTR, 2014 Trade Policy 

Agenda and 2013 Annual Report, March 2014, III.137. 437 USDOC, ITA, “June 19, 2013: Meeting of Canada-United States Regulatory Cooperation Council” (accessed 

March 26, 2014).

438 USDOC, ITA, “June 20, 2013: RCC Stakeholder Dialogue Session” (accessed March 26, 2014); RCC, “U.S.-Canada 

Regulatory Cooperation––Charting the Path Forward,” June 20, 2013.

135

 
in 1997.439 Most of these provisions to improve copyright protection became effective on 

November 7, 2012.440

In October 2011, Canada signed the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement, which obligates 

Canada to grant Canadian border officials ex officio authority to take legal action against 

infringing products, including the seizure of counterfeit trademark and pirated copyright goods 

transshipped through Canada for the United States. Canada has indicated its intention to 

introduce domestic legislation to meet its commitments under this agreement, but has not yet 

done so. The United States has urged Canada to enact such legislation as soon as possible.441 In 

October 2013, Canada reintroduced the Combating Counterfeit Products Act in Parliament after 

a previous version lapsed in September at the end of the first session.442

In addition, a new patent utility standard adopted by Canadian courts for pharmaceuticals has 

raised concerns among U.S. firms over the adequacy of Canada’s patent protection regime.443

The U.S. pharmaceutical industry has expressed the view that Canada’s administrative process 

for regulatory approval and review of pharmaceutical products may limit patent protection in 

Canada. For example, one U.S. firm had its patent invalidated and another pharmaceutical 

patent was voided in November 2012 by Canadian Supreme Court decision.444

China

In 2013, China remained the United States’ second-largest single-country trading partner based 

on two-way goods trade, accounting for 15.3 percent of U.S. trade with the world. U.S. two-way 

merchandise trade with China amounted to $552.5 billion in 2013, an increase of 4.6 percent 

over $528.4 billion in 2012. The U.S. merchandise trade deficit with China, which rose by 0.8 

percent, or $2.4 billion, to $323.8 billion in 2013, remained higher than the U.S. deficit with any 

other trading partner. The increase in the trade deficit was mostly attributable to an increase in 

U.S. merchandise imports from China, which more than offset an accompanying increase in U.S. 

exports to China (figure 5.5). However, the U.S. trade surplus in services with China increased 

by 12.6 percent from $17.0 billion in 2012 to $19.2 billion in 2013 (figure 5.6).

China overtook Japan to become the third-largest single-country destination for U.S. 

merchandise exports in 2007, and remained in that position, behind Canada and Mexico, 

through 2013. U.S. merchandise exports to China amounted to $114.3 billion in 2013, a 10.4 

percent increase over 2012. Of U.S. merchandise exports to China in 2013, about 11.7 percent 

consisted of soybeans, and 10.6 percent consisted of aircraft and parts. Other leading U.S. 

439 USITC, The Year in Trade 2012, July 2013, 7. 440 Ibid. See text of the act at http://laws.justice.gc.ca/PDF/C-42.pdf, and most recent amendments to the 

consolidated act at http://laws.justice.gc.ca/eng/acts/C-42/page-1.html. 441 USDOS, American Embassy, Canada, “2013 Investment Climate Statement” (accessed March 25, 2014). 442 Ibid.; Parliament of Canada, “C-8: An Act to Amend the Copyright Act and the Trade-marks Act and To Make 

Consequential Amendments to Other Acts: Short Title: Combating Counterfeit Products Act,” October 16, 2013–

present.

443 USDOS, American Embassy, Canada, “2013 Investment Climate Statement” (accessed March 25, 2014); USTR, 

2014 Trade Policy Agenda and 2013 Annual Report, March 2014, III.137. 444 USTR, 2013 National Trade Estimate Report, April 2013, 58. 

136

 
Figure 5.5 U.S. merchandise trade with China, 2009–13

Source: Official trade statistics of the USDOC as maintained by USITC. 

Figure 5.6 U.S. private services trade with China, 2009-13a

Source: Official trade statistics of the USDOC as maintained by USITC. a

Data for 2013 are preliminary. 

-400

-300

-200

-100

0

100

200

300

400

500

2009 2010 2011 2012 2013

Billion $

Exports Imports Trade balance

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

2009 2010 2011 2012 2013

Billion $

Exports Imports Trade balance

137
exports to China included motor vehicles, metal waste and scrap, and cotton. The increase in 

the value of U.S. exports to China in 2013 was led by a $4.2 billion increase in exports of aircraft 

and parts and a $3.1 billion increase in passenger motor vehicles, followed by increases in 

exports of wheat, brewing or distilling dregs and waste, gold, and telecommunication 

instruments and apparatus.

In 2013, China remained the largest source of U.S. imports. U.S. merchandise imports from 

China amounted to $438.1 billion, an increase of 3.1 percent over 2012. Leading U.S. imports 

from China in 2013 were computers and computer parts, cellphones, telecommunications 

equipment, toys, video games, and footwear. The increase in the value of U.S. imports in 2013 

was led by growth in imports of cellphones, computers and computer parts, telecommunication 

equipment, and electrical static converters. U.S.-China merchandise trade data are shown in 

appendix tables A.33 through A.35. 

In 2013, U.S.-China trade relations focused on the following Chinese policies and practices: 

China’s IPR protection and enforcement; industrial policies; export restraints on raw material 

inputs; import bans on U.S. agricultural products; and entry barriers in services sectors. These 

issues were among the principal themes of the 2013 U.S.-China Strategic and Economic 

Dialogue (S&ED) and the 2013 Joint Commission on Commerce and Trade (JCCT).445 The S&ED, 

established in 2009, is a high-level forum in which the United States and China can discuss a 

wide range of bilateral, regional, and global political, strategic, security, and economic issues.

The JCCT, established in 1983, is a forum for high-level dialogue on bilateral trade issues and a 

vehicle for promoting commercial relations. Both the S&ED and the JCCT meet annually.

Since China’s accession to the WTO, the United States has brought 15 WTO dispute settlement

cases against China, and China has brought 9 WTO dispute settlement cases against the United 

States.446 In December 2013, China filed a new WTO dispute settlement case against the United 

States regarding its use of certain methodologies in antidumping investigations involving 

Chinese products (DS471).447 There were also developments in a number of existing WTO 

dispute settlement cases between the United States and China in 2013. The WTO panel report 

was adopted in a case brought by the United States regarding China’s antidumping and 

countervailing duty measures on broiler products from the United States (DS427).448 China 

reported it had fully implemented the Dispute Settlement Body (DSB) recommendations and 

rulings in two cases brought by the United States: (1) certain measures affecting electronic 

payment services (DS413);449 and (2) measures related to the exportation of various raw 

445 U.S. Department of Treasury, “Joint U.S.-China Economic Track Fact Sheet,” July 12, 2013; USDOC, “24th U.S.-

China Joint Commission on Commerce and Trade,” December 20, 2013. 446 WTO, “Chronological List of Dispute Cases” (accessed March 12, 2014). 447 WTO, “Dispute Settlement: DS471; United States—Certain Methodologies and Their Application to AntiDumping Proceedings Involving China” (accessed January 3, 2014).

448 WTO, “Dispute Settlement: DS427; China—Anti-dumping and Countervailing Duty Measures on Broiler Products 

from the United States” (accessed January 3, 2014).

449 WTO, “Dispute Settlement: DS413; China—Certain Measures Affecting Electronic Payment Services” (accessed 

January 3, 2014).

138

 
materials (DS394).450 The United States reported it had fully implemented the DSB 

recommendations and rulings in a case brought by China regarding antidumping measures on 

shrimp and diamond sawblades from China (DS422); however, China disagreed, arguing that 

the United States had failed to revoke the antidumping duty on sawblades.451 Developments in

several of these cases during 2013 are described in more detail in chapter 3 and appendix table 

A.25. 

Intellectual Property Rights Enforcement452

The United States and China have had lengthy and long-standing consultations on IPR issues, 

particularly since China’s accession to the WTO and acceptance of the Trade-Related Aspects of 

Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS) Agreement. As a result, China has undertaken wide-ranging 

revisions to its laws and numerous special campaigns to improve public awareness of IPR and 

enforcement. These efforts have yielded positive results, although much work reportedly 

remains to be done. According to USTR, the ongoing and sustained involvement of China’s 

governmental leaders will be critical if China is to deliver on its substantial IPR commitments.

USTR’s 2013 Special 301 report again placed China on the Priority Watch List for countries with 

particular problems with respect to IPR protection, enforcement, or market access for persons 

relying on intellectual property.453 USTR noted substantial concerns with the theft of U.S. firms’ 

trade secrets and forced technology transfer, the difficulty of obtaining legal redress, and 

problems with non-deterrent IPR enforcement in general. More positively, USTR cited 

improvements in China’s IPR landscape through increased judicial resources devoted to IPR 

cases and through notable efforts to update major intellectual property laws. For example, a 

judicial interpretation by China’s Supreme People’s Court, which took effect on January 1, 2013, 

clarified that those who facilitate online infringement would be held jointly liable with the 

actual infringers.454

USTR’s 2013 Out-of-Cycle Review of Notorious Markets, which identified Internet and physical 

markets that reportedly engage in substantial copyright and trademark infringement, also 

highlighted developments in China, including some encouraging trends. In 2013, the Chinese 

website Xunlei shut down the previously listed multiplatform site GouGou; another Chinese 

website, Warez-bb, cooperated with authorities to address unauthorized conduct on its site; 

and a third, PaiPai, took measures to address complaints about its role in facilitating the 

distribution of pirated and counterfeit goods, and expanded its work with rights holders to 

include business and entertainment software and other content industries. As a result of their 

450 WTO, “Dispute Settlement: DS394; China—Measures related to the Exportation of Various Raw Materials” 

(accessed January 3, 2014).

451 WTO, “Dispute Settlement: DS422; United States—Anti-dumping Measures on Shrimp and Diamond Sawblades 

from China” (accessed January 3, 2014).

452 For more information on the effect of China’s IPR infringement, see USITC, China: Intellectual Property 

Infringement, November 2010; USITC, China: Effects of Intellectual Property Infringement, May 2011. 453 USTR, 2013 Special 301 Report, May 2013. 454 Ibid., 10.

139

 
efforts, GouGou, Warez-bb, and PaiPai were removed from the Notorious Markets list.455

However, USTR listed a number of Chinese websites that still sell counterfeit goods and 

facilitate the unauthorized downloading and distribution of music, movies, and software, as 

well as physical markets in China where large quantities of copyright- and trademark-infringing 

products are being sold.456

Industrial Policies 

According to USTR, China continues to use industrial policies that “seek to limit market access 

for imported goods, foreign manufacturers and foreign-based service suppliers, while offering 

substantial government guidance, resources and regulatory support to Chinese industries.”457

Such policies remained a major U.S. concern in 2013; they included China’s indigenous 

innovation policy, export restraints, subsidies to domestic industries, value-added tax rebates, 

and restrictive investment regime.458

According to USTR, some progress was made on these issues in 2013. At the December 2013 

JCCT meeting, China made a commitment that it would not implement two measures that 

would have excluded vehicles manufactured by foreign enterprises or foreign-invested 

enterprises from procurement by the Chinese government and the Chinese Communist Party. 

Additionally, as a result of the 2012 bilateral dialogue, in 2013 the Chinese government 

reversed a proposed measure relating to approval of new medical devices that sought to limit 

eligibility for priority treatment to medical device manufacturers holding indigenous intellectual 

property.459

Export Restraints on Raw Material Inputs 

USTR reported that China continued to impose “numerous export restraints” in 2013, including 

export quotas, export licensing and bidding requirements, minimum export prices, and export 

duties on exports of raw materials. USTR also reported that such practices distort trade in raw 

materials as well as intermediate and final products.460 The United States filed two WTO 

dispute settlement complaints (DS394 in 2009 and DS431 in 2012) addressing China’s export 

restraints on raw materials.461 The United States prevailed in the first dispute settlement case 

455 USTR, 2013 Out-of-Cycle Review of Notorious Markets, February 2014, 3. 456 The list of Chinese online websites and physical marketplaces can be found in USTR, 2013 Out-of-Cycle Review 

of Notorious Markets, February 2014. 457 USTR, 2013 Report to Congress on China’s WTO Compliance, December 2013, 8. 458 USTR, 2012 Report to Congress on China’s WTO Compliance, December 2012, 7–10. 459 USTR, 2013 Report to Congress on China’s WTO Compliance, December 2013, 8–9. 460 Ibid., 42-43. 461 WTO, “Dispute Settlement: DS394; China—Measures Related to the Exportation of Various Raw Materials”; 

WTO, “Dispute Settlement: DS431; China—Measures Related to the Exportation of Rare Earths, Tungsten and 

Molybdenum” (accessed January 3, 2014).

140

 
(DS394) in 2012462 and, in response, during 2013 China took steps to remove export duties and 

export quotas on certain raw material inputs covered in the dispute.463

Agriculture 

In 2013, U.S. agricultural exports worth about $25.9 billion, or 18.0 percent of all U.S. 

agricultural exports, went to China, making it the largest U.S. agricultural export destination.464

Although U.S. agricultural exports to China continued to grow in 2013, a variety of nontariff 

barriers remained to impede market access, including SPS measures and inspection-related 

requirements.465

In 2013, China continued to block the importation of U.S. beef and beef products in response to 

a case of BSE detected in the United States in 2003.

466 At the December 2013 JCCT meeting, 

both sides agreed to aim to resume Chinese market access for U.S. beef by July 2014 on the 

basis of mutually agreed-upon conditions.467

In 2013, China also continued to ban imports of U.S. pork containing trace amounts of 

ractopamine, even at concentrations below the U.S. maximum residue level (MRL) and the 

proposed Codex Alimentarius MRL.

468 The ban reflected China’s zero-tolerance policy for 

ractopamine, a veterinary drug used in animal feed to promote muscle growth in pigs, cattle, 

and, to a limited extent, heavy turkeys.469 

In 2007, China placed avian influenza (AI)-related import bans on U.S. poultry and poultry 

products from several U.S. states. The United States asked China to take prompt action in 

accordance with science-based international standards on the state-level bans.470 During 2010–

12, China lifted bans on U.S. poultry products from Idaho, Kentucky, Minnesota, Pennsylvania, 

and Texas. In June 2013, China lifted the Arkansas ban, but reimposed it several weeks later 

when a detection of low-pathogenic AI was reported. China also imposed a ban on poultry 

products from Wisconsin in June 2013 due to a detection of low-pathogenic AI. As of December 

2013, China maintained import bans on poultry and poultry products from Arkansas, New York, 

462 In March 2014, the WTO Panel ruled in favor of the United States in DS431. China has notified the WTO of its 

decision to appeal.

463 USTR, 2013 Report to Congress on China’s WTO Compliance, December 2013, 9. 464 USDA, “Top 15 U.S. Agricultural Export Destinations,” April 21, 2014. 465 USTR, 2013 Report to Congress on China’s WTO Compliance, December, 2013, 86–89. For more information on 

the conditions of competition in China’s agricultural market and trade, see USITC, China’s Agricultural Trade: 

Competitive Conditions, March 2011. 466 USTR, 2013 Report to Congress on China’s WTO Compliance, December, 2013, 92. 467 USTR, “24th U.S.-China Joint Commission on Commerce and Trade,” December 20, 2013. 468 USTR, 2012 Report on Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures, April 2, 2012, 31. The Codex Alimentarius 

Commission is a UN food standards-setting body. 469 FAO, “Discussion on Ractopamine in Codex,” April 26, 2012. 470 USTR, 2012 Report on Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures, April 2, 2012, 34.

141

 
Virginia, and Wisconsin.471 Additionally, poultry from eligible states may not transit the four

restricted states, even if the truck, container, or railcar is sealed.

Services 

In 2013, about 5.0 percent, or $33.2 billion, of U.S. services exports went to China, making it the 

fifth-largest single-country market for U.S. services. However, USTR noted that in 2013 China 

continued to “maintain or erect restrictive or cumbersome terms of entry or internal expansion 

in some sectors (e.g., financial services, legal services, express delivery services, and 

construction and related engineering services) that prevent or discourage foreign suppliers 

from gaining market access.”472 Additionally, USTR noted that barriers such as “discriminatory 

regulatory processes, informal bans on entry, overly burdensome licensing and operating 

requirements” have prevented or discouraged U.S. services suppliers from achieving their full 

market potential in China.473

China’s telecommunication services market—the world’s second-largest—is one area that has 

been noted as problematic.

474 Telecommunications services in China are classified into two 

categories: basic and value-added. As of November 2013, the Chinese regulator had licensed 

more than 29,000 domestic suppliers of value-added telecommunications services, but only 41 

foreign suppliers.475 In 2013, China released a draft revision of its Catalogue of 

Telecommunications Services that seeks to expand the scope of value-added 

telecommunications services to include a range of Internet-based services, such as cloud 

computing services, e-commerce services, and content distribution network services. This 

change could potentially further limit the market access of foreign suppliers by subjecting them 

to additional telecommunications licensing requirements.476

Life insurance is another area of concern, though there have been recent promising 

developments. At present, in this sector, China permits foreign companies to participate only in 

Chinese-foreign joint ventures, with foreign equity capped at 50 percent. China also prevents 

foreign insurance brokers from providing a full scope of services. Such market access 

restrictions have limited foreign insurers to low market share in the Chinese insurance 

market—less than 4 percent of the life insurance sector and only 1 percent of the non-life (i.e., 

property and casualty) insurance sector.477 At the May 2012 S&ED meeting, China noted that its 

regulations had been amended to allow U.S. and other foreign insurance companies to sell 

mandatory auto liability insurance in China. At the July 2013 S&ED meeting, China stated that in 

its pilot projects for tax-deferred insurance pension products, it will treat domestic enterprises 

471 USTR, 2013 Report on China’s WTO Compliance, December 2013, 95. In May 2014, China lifted the import ban 

on poultry and poultry products from Virginia, allowing Virginia products slaughtered or processed on or after April 

30, 2014, to enter the country. USDA, FSIS, “Export Requirements for the People’s Republic of China,” May 8, 2014. 472 USTR, 2013 Report to Congress on China’s WTO Compliance, December 2013, 114–115. 473 Ibid., 11. 474 USITC, Recent Trends in U.S. Services Trade: 2012 Annual Report, July 2012, 8-2. 475 USTR, 2013 Report to Congress on China’s WTO Compliance, December 2013, 127. 476 Morrison & Foerster, “China’s MIIT Releases Long-Awaited Draft,” June 13, 2013. 477 USTR, 2013 Report to Congress on China’s WTO Compliance, December 2013, 122.

142

 
and foreign-invested enterprises equally with regard to participation and any further 

expansion.478

A third problem area has involved China’s restrictions on foreign suppliers of electronic 

payment services, including major U.S. credit card companies. In 2010, the United States 

brought a WTO dispute settlement case against China regarding its measures affecting 

electronic payment services (DS413), and won the case in 2012.479 China announced in July 

2013 that it had complied with the WTO recommendations; however, USTR disagreed.480 USTR 

acknowledged that, as of December 2013, China had taken some steps toward complying with 

the WTO’s rulings, but stated that China continued to deny market access to foreign services 

providers in at least one important respect. Specifically, China has not set up a process for 

foreign suppliers to obtain licenses to provide electronic payment services for payment card 

transactions denominated in local currency through commercial presence in China.481 The 

United States has indicated its concerns about the situation at the WTO and is considering 

further options there while continuing to press China to comply with the rulings.482

U.S.-China Bilateral Investment Treaty 

In July 2013, at the fifth U.S.-China S&ED meeting, the two countries announced that they 

intended to negotiate a bilateral investment treaty (BIT) that would provide national treatment 

at all phases of investment, including market access (i.e., the “pre-establishment” phase of 

investment), and in all sectors of the Chinese economy (with negotiated exceptions).483 

According to the U.S. Department of Treasury, this was the first time that China agreed to 

negotiate a BIT on this scale, which will help eliminate the market barriers and level the playing 

field for U.S. businesses in China.484 The United States and China had previously agreed to 

launch negotiations for a BIT on June 18, 2008, during the fourth meeting of the U.S.-China 

Strategic Economic Dialogue. However, negotiations were delayed during a review of the 

United States’ 2004 model BIT, which concluded in April 2012 with a new model BIT.485 U.S.-

China negotiations will be based on the new model BIT, which provides investors with 

“improved market access; protection from discriminatory, expropriatory, or otherwise harmful 

478 USTR, 2013 Report to Congress on China’s WTO Compliance, December, 2013, 123. 479 WTO, “Dispute Settlement: DS413; China—Certain Measures Affecting Electronic Payment Services” (accessed 

January 3, 2014).

480 USTR, “2013 Year in Review: A Look Back,” January 3, 2014. 481 USTR, 2013 Report to Congress on China’s WTO Compliance, December, 2013, 125. 482 Ibid., 125. 483 U.S. Department of Treasury, “U.S. Fact Sheet—Economic Track Fifth Meeting” July 12, 2013; USTR, 2013 

Report to Congress on China’s WTO Compliance, December, 2013, 77. At the July 2014 S&ED meeting, the two 

sides agreed to intensify BIT negotiations with an aim to reach agreement on core issues and major articles of the 

treaty text by the end of 2014, and initiate the “negative list” negotiation to identify exceptions early in 2015 

based on each other’s “negative list” offers. A “negative list” lists those sectors where investments would be 

explicitly excluded from the terms of the BIT. U.S. Department of Treasury, “U.S. and China Joint Fact Sheet Sixth 

Meeting,” July 11, 2014.

484 U.S. Department of Treasury, “U.S. and China Breakthrough Announcement,” July 15, 2013. 485 USTR, “United States Concludes Review of Model Bilateral Investment Treaty,” April 2012. The Obama 

Administration initiated a review of the 2004 model BIT to ensure that it was consistent with the Administration’s 

economic agenda. 

143

 
government treatment; and a mechanism to pursue binding international arbitration for 

breaches of the treaty.”486 The 2012 model BIT made several changes from the earlier model 

BIT, including enhanced transparency and public participation; strengthened disciplines that 

address preferential treatment to state-owned enterprises, including the distortions created by 

certain indigenous innovation policies; and improved protections relating to labor and the 

environment.487

Mexico

In 2013, Mexico was the United States’ third-largest single-country merchandise trading 

partner, following Canada and China. Merchandise trade between the two countries increased 

1.7 percent to $459.4 billion in 2013, accounting for 12.7 percent of U.S. trade with the world. 

While the U.S. merchandise trade deficit with Mexico fell by $5.2 billion in 2013, to $96.0

billion, it was still the United States’ second-largest merchandise trade deficit with any single 

country (figure 5.7). The deficit was outweighed only by that with China, which was almost 

three and a half times the U.S. trade deficit with Mexico. 

At the same time, the U.S. trade surplus in services with Mexico decreased by 4.5 percent to 

$11.7 billion in 2013 (figure 5.8). U.S. services exports to Mexico were valued at $28.5 billion, 

while U.S. services imports from Mexico totaled $16.8 billion. Mexico was the United States’

sixth-largest single-country trading partner for services in 2013, after the United Kingdom, 

Canada, Japan, Germany, and China. 

U.S. merchandise exports to Mexico totaled $181.7 billion in 2013, an increase of 3.7 percent 

from 2012. In 2013, leading U.S. exports to Mexico included transportation equipment, 

particularly automotive trade; chemicals and related products; energy-related products; and 

electronic products. These exports together accounted for 60 percent of total U.S. merchandise 

exports to Mexico. Other leading exports to Mexico included parts and accessories for 

automatic data processing machines; articles of plastic; corn; copper ores; and soybeans.

In 2013, U.S. merchandise imports from Mexico increased by 0.5 percent to $277.7 billion. 

Leading U.S. imports from Mexico included transportation equipment, electronic products, 

energy-related products, and machinery, which together accounted for 75 percent of total U.S. 

merchandise imports from Mexico. Other leading imports from Mexico were computers, 

televisions, cellphones, and nonmonetary gold. Particularly important in the increase of U.S. 

imports from Mexico was the rise in the value of imports of vehicles and vehicle parts and 

accessories. U.S.-Mexico merchandise trade data are shown in appendix tables A.36 through 

A.38.

U.S.-Mexican trade relations are governed in large part by NAFTA, which provides duty-free

treatment to a sizable portion of the goods traded between the two parties (table 4.2).488 In 

486 USTR, “United States Concludes Review of Model Bilateral Investment Treaty,” April 2012. 487 Ibid. 488 For more information on NAFTA, see chapter 4.

144

 
Figure 5.7 U.S. merchandise trade with Mexico, 2009–13

Source: Official trade statistics of the USDOC as maintained by USITC. 

Figure 5.8 U.S. private services trade with Mexico, 2009-13a

Source: Official trade statistics of the USDOC as maintained by USITC. a

Data for 2013 are preliminary. 

-150

-100

-50

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

2009 2010 2011 2012 2013

Billion $

Exports Imports Trade balance

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

2009 2010 2011 2012 2013

Billion $

Exports Imports Trade balance

145
October 2012, Mexico officially joined the ongoing negotiations under the Trans-Pacific 

Partnership (TPP), a prospective regional trade agreement between the United States and 11 

other countries (including Mexico).489 

Various trade disputes between the United States and Mexico were the subject of WTO and 

NAFTA dispute settlement proceedings in 2013. These include long-standing WTO disputes 

brought by Mexico on U.S. requirements for country of origin labeling and U.S. measures 

relating to the importation, marketing, and sale of tuna and tuna products, both of which 

remained in the compliance stage in 2013. The procedural developments in each of these cases 

are listed in appendix tables A.25 and A.26, respectively. 

To strengthen the U.S.-Mexico commercial and economic relationship, a new High Level 

Economic Dialogue (HLED) was established in 2013; it is described below. Also summarized 

below are developments in bilateral regulatory cooperation and developments related to 

NAFTA’s cross-border trucking provisions. 

High Level Economic Dialogue

On May 2, 2013, the presidents of the United States and Mexico met in Mexico City and 

announced the formation of the HLED, whose goal is to promote competitiveness and 

connectivity; foster economic growth, productivity, entrepreneurship, and innovation; and 

build a partnership for regional and global leadership.490 The HLED intends to advance strategic 

economic and commercial priorities central to promoting mutual economic growth, job

creation, and competitiveness. The HLED, which will be led at the cabinet level and meet 

annually, aims to build on a variety of existing successful bilateral dialogues and working 

groups.

491 

On September 20, 2013, Vice President Biden, together with Mexican government officials, 

launched the HLED in Mexico City, co-chaired by the U.S. Department of State, U.S. Department 

of Commerce, Office of the U.S. Trade Representative, and their Mexican counterparts.

492 To 

accomplish the goals laid out in the HLED work plan, 

the United States and Mexico plan to: continue the work of the MexicoU.S. Entrepreneurship and Innovation Council (MUSEIC) and expand 

entrepreneurship delegation exchanges; collaborate on organizing an 

information and communications technology road show, regulatory 

workshop series, and broadband innovation information exchanges; 

announce negotiations to modernize and expand our bilateral air 

transport relationship; develop an agenda of ongoing cooperation on 

489 TPP is discussed in chapter 4. 490 White House, “Fact Sheet: U.S.-Mexico Partnership,” March 12, 2013; White House, “Fact Sheet: U.S.-Mexico 

High Level Economic Dialogue,” September 20, 2013. 491 White House, “Fact Sheet: U.S.-Mexico Partnership,” March 12, 2013. 492 White House, “Fact Sheet: U.S.-Mexico High Level Economic Dialogue,” September 20, 2013; USDOC, “Secretary 

Pritzker Co-Chairs U.S.-Mexico High Level Economic Dialogue,” September 20, 2013; USDOC, ITA, Fact Sheet “High 

Level Economic Dialogue” (accessed March 13, 2014). 

146

 
intelligent transportation and freight systems; make efficient use of the 

North American Development Bank by supporting new and ongoing 

cross-border initiatives and directing its Board to begin an assessment 

of the Bank’s long-term capital needs as well as how it can more 

effectively leverage private sector capital to support border 

infrastructure; and pursue joint investment initiatives.493 

High-Level Regulatory Cooperation Council 

On May 19, 2010, Mexico and the United States established the U.S.-Mexico High-Level 

Regulatory Cooperation Council (HLRCC) to enhance regulatory cooperation between the 

United States and Mexico through bilateral working groups composed of senior regulatory, 

trade, and foreign affairs officials from both countries.494 In March 2011 the HLRCC published 

terms of reference495 that set a goal of developing a work plan within two years. The work plan 

was to identify sectors in which both governments considered that harmonized regulations 

would be likely to reduce transaction costs and have a high positive impact on economic 

growth. Released in February 2012, the HLRCC’s work plan stipulated that the effort should 

include a focus on standards and technical regulations that mitigate risk––such as safety, 

health, and environmental risk––and that regulations should be consistent within the NAFTA 

region. Important economic aims are to facilitate intra-North American commerce and enhance 

the competitiveness of North American producers in key export markets, with a focus on small 

and medium-sized enterprises.

Work Plan 

After extensive consultations with private sector stakeholders, public comment, and bilateral 

discussion within the HLRCC, the council released the initial United States-Mexico HLRCC Work 

Plan on February 28, 2012, covering the period 2012–13.496 The work plan addressed regulatory 

issues in the areas of food and agriculture, energy, transportation, health, technology, and 

standards accreditation. Specific sectoral subjects focused on seven areas: food safety 

modernization, electronic certification (“e-certification”) for plants and plant products, 

commercial motor vehicle safety standards and procedures, electronic health record systems 

(“e-health”), offshore oil and gas development standards, nanotechnology, and the crosssectoral issue of accreditation of conformity assessment bodies.

493 White House, “Fact Sheet: U.S.-Mexico High Level Economic Dialogue,” September 20, 2013. On February 19, 

2014, the presidents of Canada, Mexico, and the United States held the North American Leader’s Summit in 

Toluca, Mexico. At the summit, the presidents stated, “We are determined to promote inclusive broad-based 

economic growth for the wellbeing of our citizens, so that 21st century North America sets new global standards 

for trade, education, sustainable growth, and innovation.” White House, “Joint Statement by North American 

Leaders,” February 19, 2014; USDOC, “U.S. Secretary of Commerce Penny Pritzker Attends,” February 19, 2014. 494 White House, “Joint Statement from President Barack Obama and President Felipe Calderón,” May 19, 2010; 

USDOC, ITA, “U.S.-Mexico High Level Regulatory Cooperation Council” (accessed May 1, 2014). 495 White House, “Terms of Reference for the High-Level Regulatory Cooperation Council,” March 3, 2011. 496 White House, Executive Office of the President, United States-Mexico High Level Regulatory Cooperation 

Council, February 28, 2012.

147

 
2013 Progress Report 

On August 15, 2013, the HLRCC published its first “Progress Report to Leaders,” including an

appendix discussing regulations for nanotechnologies.497 The report lists the agencies involved, 

recounts meetings held during 2012–13, and details the current status of discussions in the 

seven sectoral topics set out in the work plan.

On food safety, a key topic has been the U.S. Food Safety Modernization Act. The report noted 

that Mexico was developing an e-certification system as part of the Mexican Single Window for 

Foreign Trade (VUCEM)498 following the release on June 27, 2013, of an electronic module for 

the Phytosanitary Certificate Issuance and Tracking system in the United States. In the area of 

transportation, the report cited progress toward alignment of truck safety standards to 

eliminate duplication of verification costs for vehicles entering either country, as well as 

progress toward developing a plan to recognize Mexico’s certifications of commercial vehicle 

inspection as the legal equivalent to inspections under U.S. law. Discussion of e-health record 

systems centered around sharing best regulatory practices for e-health certification programs, 

information exchange on interoperability standards for electronic health records, and the 

creation of a framework to establish core vocabularies for electronic health records. Regarding 

offshore oil and gas standards, discussions focused on developing a framework to identify 

critical oil and gas exploration and production activities in the Gulf of Mexico. The discussions 

centered on sharing best practices employed worldwide, as well as participation in offshore 

platform inspection and workshops to review lessons learned concerning oil spill responses. 

Appendix A of the 2013 Progress Report contains guidelines for nanotechnology regulation

drafted by Mexico in accordance with Mexican legal provisions.499 According to the appendix, 

the guidelines were developed in particular to help protect the environment, human health, 

and the consumer. Presented in Mexico City on November 12, 2012, the guidelines note that 

nanotechnology in Mexico is found in materials such as cosmetic products, coatings, 

bactericides, textiles, and other products. Among other principles, the guidelines state that

regulations on nanotechnology, when needed, (1) should be based on sound technical and 

scientific evidence, (2) should protect worker health and the environment, and (3) should 

involve open communication with trade partners.500 

The report also addressed a cross-sectoral issue: the accreditation of conformity assessment 

bodies. The progress report detailed activities undertaken by U.S. and Mexican regulatory 

agencies to increase recognition of U.S. and Mexican laboratories in the two countries. The 

activities focused on improving Mexican laboratories’ understanding of technical requirements 

and application processes in the United States and on making Mexican regulations more 

transparent to U.S. laboratories seeking certification.

497 United States-Mexico Regulatory Cooperation Council, “Progress Report to Leaders,” August 15, 2013. 498 In Mexico, Ventanilla Digital Mexicana de Comercio Exterior. 499 United States-Mexico Regulatory Cooperation Council, “Progress Report to Leaders,” August 15, 2013, appendix 

A. 

500 Ibid. 

148

 
Cross-Border Trucking between the United States 

and Mexico 

Before 2000, all Mexican trucks were limited to trucking goods in the United States within the 

“commercial zones” (which extend up to 25 miles into the United States along the U.S.-Mexico 

border). Under the cross-border trucking commitments found in Chapter 12 of NAFTA, Mexican 

trucks were allowed to provide cross-border truck services throughout the United States 

beginning in 2000. The implementation of these provisions was delayed because of U.S. safety 

concerns.501 To address these concerns, in 2011 the U.S. Department of Transportation 

established a Pilot Program on the NAFTA Long-Haul Trucking Provisions,502 following the 

suspension of an earlier program.503 The pilot program was not to exceed three years.504

Under the pilot program, on July 8, 2011, the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration 

(FMCSA) authorized Mexico-domiciled motor carriers to transport cargo throughout the United 

States (long-haul operations).505 To enter the pilot program, Mexican trucks must meet criteria 

that U.S. and Mexican government officials agreed upon.506 The agreement also stipulated that 

before a carrier has completed 18 months of operation under the pilot program, a final 

compliance review is to be conducted. Carriers that pass the review are granted a permanent 

operating authority to operate throughout both countries.507

In 2012, FMCSA conducted an audit of the program, concluding that there might not be enough 

authorized carriers to statistically assess the safety of the pilot program. The audit, covering the 

period from October 2011 through May 2012, noted that “The low participation in the pilot 

program puts FMCSA at risk of not meeting its goals for providing an adequate and 

representative sample of Mexico-domiciled carriers and inspections necessary to assess the 

impact on motor carrier safety.”508 FMCSA estimated that at least 46 carriers would be needed 

to conduct a target of 4,100 inspections over a period of three years.

As of December 2013, FMCSA had active long-haul operating authority for 14 Mexicandomiciled motor carriers. These carriers had a total of 56 participating vehicles authorized to 

501 Developments in cross-border truck services between the United States and Mexico from 1981 to 2012 are 

reported in USITC, The Year in Trade 2008, 2009, 5-16; USITC, The Year in Trade 2009, 2010, 5-16; USITC, The Year 

in Trade 2010, 2011, 5-12; USITC, The Year in Trade 2011, 2012, 5-14; USITC, The Year in Trade 2012, 2013, 5-13. 502 76 Fed. Reg. 20807 (April 13, 2011). 503 The earlier program was suspended in 2009. In response, Mexico retaliated by suspending NAFTA preferential 

tariffs on certain U.S. products. In 2011, Mexico eliminated the retaliatory duties after the first Mexican carrier was 

authorized to enter the 2011 pilot program. For more details, see USITC, The Year in Trade 2011, 2012, 5-14; 

USITC, The Year in Trade 2012, 2013, 5-13. 504 Details of the program are reported in USITC, The Year in Trade 2011, 2012, 5-14. 505 76 Fed. Reg. 40420 (July 8, 2011). 506 USDOT, FMCSA, “Memorandum of Understanding on International Freight,” July 6, 2011. 507 Ibid. 508 USDOT, FMCSA, “Increased Participation and Improved Oversight Mechanisms,” August 16, 2012, 2.

149

 
operate throughout the United States, and the trucks underwent a total of 4,209 inspections.

509

The program is scheduled to end in October 2014.

Japan 

In 2013, Japan remained the fourth-largest single-country U.S. trading partner in terms of twoway merchandise trade. Japan accounted for 5.5 percent of total U.S. merchandise trade, down 

from 5.8 percent in 2012. U.S.-Japan two-way trade has not changed significantly since the late 

1990s, a trend driven in part by slow growth in Japan that was further exacerbated by the Great 

East Japan Earthquake disaster of 2011. In addition, Japanese producers increasingly rely on 

operations in third-country Asian markets to meet global demand as well as regional supply 

chains to further process Japanese intermediate goods; the result is a relative decline in 

Japanese exports to the United States and other markets not directly within its downstream 

supply chains.510 

U.S. merchandise trade with Japan was $197.6 billion in 2013, a decrease of 5.5 percent from 

2012 that resulted from lower exports and imports and was characteristic of a decline in the 

value of Japanese global trade.

511 The United States recorded a merchandise trade deficit with 

Japan of $78.3 billion in 2013, roughly equivalent to the $79.9 billion deficit in 2012 (figure 5.9). 

The stability of the bilateral trade deficit was due to nearly identical declines in the value of U.S. 

exports to and imports from Japan.

Japan was the United States’ third-largest single-country trading partner in services, behind the 

United Kingdom and Canada, in 2013. U.S. services exports to Japan rose 2.6 percent to $47.7 

billion, while imports of services from Japan rose 8.2 percent to $29.1 billion. The result was a 

$971 million decrease in the U.S. services surplus with Japan, to $18.6 billion, in 2013 (figure 

5.10).

Japan remained the fourth-largest destination for U.S. merchandise exports, accounting for 4.4 

percent of global U.S. exports. Between 2012 and 2013, however, U.S. merchandise exports to 

Japan fell by 7.6 percent, from $64.6 billion in 2012 to $59.7 billion in 2013. Leading U.S. 

exports to Japan were aircraft and parts, certain medicaments (medicines), corn, pork, wheat, 

and soybeans. The decline in U.S. exports to Japan was broadly based across most major 

sectors, such as corn (which fell by $1.2 billion) and aircraft and parts (which fell by $1.0 billion). 

Nonetheless, certain leading products experienced significant export growth, including liquefied 

propane, which increased by $427 million, and machines used to manufacture semiconductor 

devices or electronic integrated circuits, which increased by $441 million.

509 USDOT, FMCSA, Mexico Cross-Border Trucking Pilot Program, “Operational Update Reports,” 12/23/2013–

12/29/2013 (revised 01/27/2014); USDOT, FMCSA, “Mexico-Domiciled Motor Carriers with Active Operating 

Authority,” December 29, 2013.

510 CRS, U.S.-Japan Economic Relations: Significance, Prospects, February 18, 2014, 4–5; JETRO, FY2013 Survey on 

the International Operations of Japanese Firms, February 27, 2014. 511 GTIS, Global Trade Atlas database (accessed April 4, 2014). The EIU reports that the annual average exchange 

rate between the U.S. dollar and the Japanese yen increased from 79.8 ¥/$ in 2012 to 97.6 ¥/$ in 2013. Therefore, 

the apparent decline in the U.S.-dollar value of Japanese trade may in part reflect the substantial depreciation of 

the Japanese yen relative to the U.S. dollar that occurred between 2012 and 2013. 

150

 
Figure 5.9 U.S. merchandise trade with Japan, 2009–13

Source: Official trade statistics of the USDOC as maintained by USITC. 

Figure 5.10 U.S. private services trade with Japan, 2009-13a

Source: Official trade statistics of the USDOC as maintained by USITC. a

Data for 2013 are preliminary. 

-100

-50

0

50

100

150

200

2009 2010 2011 2012 2013

Billion $

Exports Imports Trade balance

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

2009 2010 2011 2012 2013

Billion $

Exports Imports Trade balance

151
Japan remained the fourth-largest source of U.S. merchandise imports, accounting for 6.2 

percent of global U.S. imports. U.S. merchandise imports from Japan fell by 4.6 percent to 

$138.0 billion in 2013, down from $144.5 billion in 2012. Leading U.S. imports from Japan were 

passenger vehicles and parts, aircraft parts, parts for printers and copying machines, and heavy 

construction equipment. The decline in U.S. imports from Japan was led by a variety of 

products, including certain automotive parts, electronics, and heavy machinery. However, 

imports of passenger vehicles remained stable, while imports of certain aircraft parts generally 

increased. U.S.-Japan merchandise trade data are shown in appendix tables A.39 through A.41. 

Economic dialogue between the United States and Japan in 2013 centered on Japan’s official 

entry into TPP negotiations in July 2013, including bilateral consultations beforehand and 

formal negotiations afterward. As part of these discussions, Japan agreed to work with the 

United States to address several long-standing trade concerns. These involved automotive 

market access, insurance and express delivery competition policy, and cross-cutting nontariff 

barriers to trade, such as standards and lack of transparency. In addition, Japan coordinated 

closely with the United States on a variety of WTO dispute settlement matters involving thirdcountry markets, including a dispute concerning Chinese export restraints on rare earths, 

tungsten, and molybdenum.512 Japan and the United States also worked together in 

negotiations to expand the products covered by the WTO Information Technology Agreement, 

as well as the membership of the agreement.513

TPP Negotiations and Dialogue 

Between February 2012 and April 2013, bilateral economic dialogue between the United States 

and Japan was largely driven by consultations regarding Japan’s interest in joining the TPP.514 In 

exchange for U.S. support for Japan’s entrance into TPP negotiations, the United States looked 

for Japan to address three “confidence-building measures” related to Japanese restrictions on 

U.S. beef, market access for U.S. automotive exports, and insurance competition policy.515 As 

indicated further below, Japan took steps to address all three of these concerns before formally 

joining the negotiations. Japan also indicated its willingness to join the 11 other TPP partners in 

negotiating a high-standard trade agreement, including market access for industrial and 

agricultural goods, open markets for services and investment, protection of the environment, 

workers’ rights, and IPR. Japan further agreed to subject all goods to negotiation.516

Before Japan entered into TPP negotiations, Japanese and U.S. policy makers also agreed to 

conduct bilateral negotiations parallel to the multilateral negotiations. These talks were 

designed to produce outcomes that would be incorporated into the final TPP agreement once 

512 USTR, 2014 Trade Policy Agenda and 2013 Annual Report, March 2014, 9. 513 Ibid., 4, 142. 514 USTR, “Toward the Trans-Pacific Partnership,” April 12, 2013. For additional information on the TPP, see chapter 

4.

515 CRS, U.S.-Japan Economic Relations: Significance, Prospects, and Policy Options, February 18, 2014, 12. 516 USTR, “Toward the Trans-Pacific Partnership,” April 12, 2013; USTR, 2014 Trade Policy Agenda and 2013 Annual 

Report, March 2014, 2–3.

152

 
concluded.517 These bilateral negotiations will continue to focus on the insurance sector of the 

Japanese market and automotive market access issues. In addition, the United States and Japan 

agreed to use this bilateral negotiating framework to address a variety of cross-cutting nontariff 

measures in Japan that affect U.S. exporters and investors. The United States stated that it 

would seek more transparency in Japanese public decision making, including by increasing 

access to ministry-appointed advisory councils and through public comment procedures; 

facilitation of opportunities for mergers and acquisitions; stronger copyright, trademark rights, 

and enforcement of IPR; flexibility and transparency in standards setting and greater adoption 

of international standards; improved government procurement bidding processes; fairer 

competition policy, including competition policy governing express delivery services; and less 

restrictive SPS measures.518

Following the conclusion of preliminary consultations with the United States as well as with

other TPP countries, the President notified Congress of his intent to include Japan in the TPP 

negotiations in April 2013.519 After a 90-day consultation period with Congress and the public 

on U.S. negotiating objectives with respect to Japan, Japan entered formal TPP negotiations 

during the 18th round in July 2013.520 As multilateral TPP negotiations continued throughout 

2013, the United States and Japan had four rounds of bilateral parallel negotiations.521

Passenger Vehicle Market Access

Despite the presence of a large domestic passenger vehicle market in Japan and a globally 

competitive passenger vehicle industry in the United States, U.S. manufacturers have been 

unable to make significant sales to this market. In order to address these concerns over market 

access, the United States used bilateral discussions both before and after Japan’s entry into TPP 

negotiations to address long-standing concerns over barriers to trade in such goods. The 

passenger vehicle consultations and negotiations focused on transparency in regulations, 

standards and conformity assessment, and on facilitating the adoption and distribution of 

“green” and new-technology vehicles, as well as other issues.522 Japan and the United States 

further agreed to negotiate a special motor vehicle safeguard provision as part of the TPP, as 

well as a “mechanism to ‘snap back’ tariffs” as a remedy in dispute settlement cases.”523

In addition, Japan announced in April 2013 that it would more than double the number of 

motor vehicles that could enter under its Preferential Handling Procedure (PHP), an easier, 

faster certification program used to quickly establish safety and environmental compliance of 

imported vehicles. U.S. producers would be able to export up to 5,000 vehicles annually, per 

517 USTR, “Transcript: Briefing by USTR Ambassador Froman,” December 10, 2013. 518 USTR, “Toward the Trans-Pacific Partnership,” April 12, 2013; USTR, “Fact Sheet: Non-Tariff Measures: U.S. 

Consultations with Japan,” April 12, 2013.

519 USTR, “Obama Administration Notifies Congress of Intent,” April 24, 2013. 520 USTR, “Statement on the 18th Round of Trans-Pacific Partnership Negotiations,” July 25, 2013. 521 USTR, 2014 Trade Policy Agenda and 2013 Annual Report, March 2014, 142. These parallel bilateral negotiations 

continued into 2014.

522 USTR, Motor Vehicle Trade: Terms of Reference, April 12, 2013. 523 USTR, “Toward the Trans-Pacific Partnership,” April 12, 2013.

153

 
model, under the PHP program, up from 2,000 vehicles.524 Japan also agreed that, in a finalized 

agreement, U.S. tariffs on imports of Japanese motor vehicles would be phased out in 

accordance with the longest staging period established during the TPP negotiations, and that 

these phase-outs would be “back loaded” to take place at the end of the staging period.525

Japan Post 

In 2013, the United States continued to press Japan on the competitive position held by Japan 

Post Holdings Co. (Japan Post), a publicly held company, in the banking, insurance, and express 

delivery sectors of the Japanese economy.526 As in previous years, a major concern for U.S. 

policy makers and business leaders has been that Japan Post uses its size and the variety of its 

domestic holdings to cross-subsidize and promote its services across sectors, allowing it to 

monopolize services markets. In addition, Japan Post is subject to fewer reporting and customs 

clearance requirements than private companies, which may give it a competitive advantage 

over both smaller domestic firms and foreign competitors. While the United States remains 

neutral as to whether Japan Post should be privatized, it is concerned that these advantages do

not allow smaller domestic businesses or international providers to compete on a level playing 

field within the banking, insurance, and express delivery services sectors.527

In 2007, former Prime Minister Koizumi’s government introduced reforms designed to privatize 

and separate the holdings of Japan Post, thereby making them subject to the same regulations 

as private firms. However, successor governments moved to reverse or mitigate these reforms 

before they were fully implemented, and the Japanese Diet passed legislation in April 2012 to 

loosen regulatory requirements on Japan Post as part of a compromise among various Japanese 

political parties.528 This legislation extended Japan Post companies’ exemptions from the 

Insurance Business Law and Banking Law, gave companies within Japan Post more latitude to 

expand their business scope, and increased interconnectedness between the Japan Post’s mail 

delivery and network operations subsidiaries.529

As part of the consultative process leading to Japan’s entrance into TPP negotiations, the 

United States and Japan agreed to address “level playing field” issues relating to Japan Post 

insurance and express delivery operations. Japan unilaterally announced in April 2013 that it 

would not approve new or modified cancer insurance and/or stand-alone medical products sold 

524 Ibid. 525 Ibid. 526 USTR, “Toward the Trans-Pacific Partnership,” April 12, 2013; USTR, “Non-Tariff Measures: U.S. Consultations 

with Japan,” April 12, 2013. Japan Post is a Japanese conglomerate owned by the government of Japan; it supplies 

integrated postal, banking, and insurance services, among other services. Japan Post Group, Annual Report 2013, 

July 2013.

527 USTR, 2014 National Trade Estimate Report on Foreign Trade Barriers, March 2014, 180–182. 528 CRS, U.S.-Japan Economic Relations: Significance, Prospects, and Policy Options, February 18, 2014, 10–11. 529 USTR, 2014 National Trade Estimate Report on Foreign Trade Barriers, March 2014, 180–182; USTR, 2013 

National Trade Estimate Report on Foreign Trade Barriers, April 2013, 180; WTO, Trade Policy Review: Japan, 

February 21, 2013, 87–88.

154

 
by Japan Post Insurance until it determined that equivalent conditions of competition exist 

between Japan Post and private insurance companies.530

Agriculture Products 

Japan banned imports of U.S. beef in December 2003 due to concerns about BSE, following 

years in which Japan was the largest export market for U.S. beef.531 The ban was adjusted in 

July 2006 to exclude cuts from cattle older than 20 months of age; nevertheless, the restrictions 

effectively banned most of the high-quality beef that U.S. exporters had traditionally shipped to 

Japan.532 Discussions between officials in Japan and the United States continued after this time, 

culminating in a bilateral meeting between President Obama and then-Prime Minister 

Yoshihiko Noda on the sidelines of the 2011 APEC Leaders’ Meeting, after which the Japanese 

Prime Minister announced that Japan would review current restrictions on U.S. beef imports.533

Between December 2011 and October 2012, Japan’s independent Food Safety Commission 

conducted a risk assessment on raising the age limit of cattle that can be used to supply U.S. 

beef products for export to Japan.534 The United States and Japan agreed to expand U.S. beef 

exports to Japan in January 2013, with Japan permitting beef from cattle less than 30 months of 

age and revising other restrictive standards for U.S. beef exports. In addition, the two 

governments agreed to hold both regular and ad hoc consultations to review progress under 

the agreement to address any issues that may arise. Japan further confirmed that an ongoing 

Food Safety Commission risk assessment is considering raising the age limit above 30 months 

for beef from the United States.535 The United States continued to press Japan for full market 

access for beef from animals of all ages.536

The U.S. and Japanese governments also engaged in other productive discussions covering

agricultural market access issues. In September 2013, the United States and Japan announced 

the United States-Japan Organic Equivalency Arrangement. This bilateral agreement allows 

products certified as organic in Japan or in the United States to be sold as organic in either 

country without the need to obtain separate certifications in each country.537 Also during 2013, 

the U.S. government expressed concerns over Japan’s Wood Use Points Program (WUPP), an 

incentive program designed to encourage Japanese homeowners and builders to use local 

wood species. As a result of a petitioning effort by the U.S. Embassy, the Softwood Export 

Council, and American academic institutions, Japan’s National Land Afforestation Promotion 

530 USTR, “Toward the Trans-Pacific Partnership,” April 12, 2013. 531 USITC, Year in Trade 2010, 2011, 5-16. 532 USTR, “U.S. Trade Representative Ron Kirk and Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack,” January 2013; USITC, Year in 

Trade 2011, 2012, 5-18 to 5-19. 533 White House, “Readout by the Press Secretary on the President’s Meeting,” November 12, 2011. 534 USTR, “U.S. Trade Representative Ron Kirk and Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack,” January 2013. 535 Ibid. 536 USTR, 2014 Report on Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures, March 2014. 537 USTR, 2014 Trade Policy Agenda and 2013 Annual Report, March 2014, Annex III; USTR, “United States and 

Japan Streamline Organic Trade,” September 26, 2013.

155

 
Organization approved inclusion of U.S. Douglas fir as an eligible species under the WUPP 

program in December 2013.538

U.S. officials continued to work with their Japanese counterparts to resolve SPS restrictions in 

the Japanese market involving food additives, gelatin and collagen, poultry, and potatoes. In a 

development affecting a variety of U.S. agricultural exports, Japan changed its risk assessments 

of fungicides into a single, streamlined process and allowed U.S. agrochemical companies 

submitting registration applications with the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency to 

simultaneously apply for import tolerances in Japan.539

Republic of Korea 

The Republic of Korea (Korea) was the United States’ sixth-largest single-country trading 

partner in 2013. Two-way merchandise trade was valued at $101.0 billion in 2013, accounting 

for 2.8 percent of U.S. trade with the world. The United States recorded a $23.0 billion 

merchandise trade deficit with Korea in 2013, or 28.5 percent higher than in 2012 (figure 5.11). 

The U.S. trade surplus in services with Korea increased by over $2 billion, or by nearly 28 

percent, to $11.1 billion in 2013 (figure 5.12).

U.S. merchandise exports to Korea were valued at $39.0 billion in 2013, a decrease of 2.5 

percent from 2012. Leading U.S. exports to Korea during the year included aircraft, spacecraft, 

and parts, valued at $2.6 billion; processors or controllers, valued at $2.4 billion; and machines 

for the production of semiconductor devices or electronic integrated circuits, valued at $1.2 

billion. Other leading U.S. exports in 2013 were ferrous waste and scrap, medicaments, and 

coal. Of the top five exports to Korea, growth in value occurred in processors or controllers 

(21.4 percent) and medicaments (25.7 percent). Significant decreases occurred in machines for 

the manufacture of semiconductor devices or electronic integrated circuits and ferrous waste 

and scrap (32.4 percent and 20.3 percent, respectively). The value of the top U.S. export—

aircraft, spacecraft, and parts—after jumping nearly 40 percent from 2011 to 2012, fell by 0.6 

percent from 2012 to 2013.

U.S. merchandise imports from Korea totaled $62.0 billion in 2013, an increase of 7.1 percent 

from 2012. Some of the top products imported from Korea saw significant gains, including 

motor vehicles, cellphones, and parts for automatic data processing machines. Though imports 

of cellphones have not recovered to 2011 levels and declined 40.9 percent from 2011 to 2012, 

they increased more than 30 percent from 2012 to nearly $6 billion in 2013. Imports of 

passenger vehicles with cylinder capacity between 1,000 cc and 1,500 cc increased in value by 

517 percent from 2012. Few of the top imports experienced significant decreases in value from 

2012, with the exception of car tires, mechanical shovels, and seamed pipe. U.S.-Korea 

merchandise trade data are shown in appendix tables A.42 through A.44.

538 USTR, 2014 Trade Policy Agenda and 2013 Annual Report, March 2014, 20; SEFS, “CINTRAFOR Scores Major 

Victory for Pacific Northwest,” January 15, 2014.

539 USTR, 2014 Report on Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures, March 2014, 60–64. 

156

 
Figure 5.11 U.S. merchandise trade with Korea, 2009–13

Source: Official trade statistics of the USDOC as maintained by USITC. 

Figure 5.12 U.S. private services trade with Korea, 2009-13a

Source: Official trade statistics of the USDOC as maintained by USITC. a

Data for 2013 are preliminary.

-30

-20

-10

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

2009 2010 2011 2012 2013

Billion $

Exports Imports Trade balance

0

5

10

15

20

25

2009 2010 2011 2012 2013

Billion $

Exports Imports Trade balance

157
Korea was the United States’ 10th-largest single-country trading partner in services in 2013. 

U.S. services exports to Korea increased 13.5 percent from 2012 to reach $20.5 billion in 2013, 

while U.S. services imports from Korea remained relatively unchanged from 2012 levels at just 

over $9 billion.

The U.S.-Korea FTA (KORUS) entered its second year of implementation in 2013. Korea 

expressed interest in joining the TPP in November 2013, and its inclusion, at the appropriate 

time, was welcomed by USTR.540 After requesting consultations through the WTO in August, 

Korea and the United States held consultations on antidumping and countervailing duty 

measures imposed on large residential washers from Korea in October. In December, Korea 

requested the establishment of a WTO dispute resolution body panel to address this matter.541

U.S.-Korea FTA 

The KORUS FTA entered into force on March 15, 2012. The agreement ends tariffs on over 95 

percent of U.S. exports of industrial and consumer goods by 2016.542 The second round of tariff 

cuts under the KORUS FTA occurred on January 1, 2013. Through a combination of tariff 

elimination and expansion of tariff-rate quotas, nearly two-thirds of U.S. agricultural exports to 

Korea are now eligible for duty-free treatment.543

On October 5, the second meeting of the KORUS FTA Joint Committee was held on the margins 

of the APEC ministerial in Bali, Indonesia. The Joint Committee is the premier committee under 

the FTA, responsible for supervising its implementation, coordinating the work of its other 

committees, and resolving issues that may arise. The two parties discussed origin verification, 

financial services, and automotive issues, and also updated each other on free trade 

agreements and regional trade agreements that were being negotiated.544 A Senior Officials 

Meeting was held on November 17, 2013, to follow up on the topics discussed in the October 

meeting and report on the FTA committees and working groups.545

In 2013, 12 of the 19 FTA committees and working groups held meetings. Among these were 

the Environmental Affairs Council, the Committee on Sanitary and Phytosanitary Matters, the 

Labor Affairs Council, the Professional Services Working Group, the Fisheries Committee, the 

Committee on Technical Barriers to Trade, the Automotive Working Group, the Working Group 

on Small and Medium Sized Enterprises, the Committee on Trade in Goods, and the Medicines 

and Medical Devices Committee.546 The Labor Affairs Council held its first meeting on March 

540 USTR, “Statement by U.S. Trade Representative Michael Froman on Korea’s Announcement,” November 29, 

2013.

541 WTO,“Dispute Settlement: DS464; United States—Anti-dumping and Countervailing Measures on Large 

Residential Washers from Korea” (accessed April 9, 2014); USTR, 2014 Trade Policy Agenda and 2013 Annual 

Report, March 3, 2014, 96–97. 542 USTR, “U.S.-Korea Free Trade Agreement Shows Strong Results,” March 12, 2014. 543 USTR, 2014 National Trade Estimate Report on Foreign Trade Barriers, March 2014, 208. 544 USTR, “Readout of the Second Meeting,” October 18, 2013; USTR, 2014 Trade Policy Agenda and 2013 Annual 

Report, March 2014, 127. 545 USTR, “Readout of the Second Meeting,” October 18, 2013. 546 Ibid.

158

 
18–19, 2013, in Washington, DC. Participants reaffirmed commitments under the Labor Chapter 

and discussed specific priority areas to address, which included information sharing on 

employment and labor statistics and collaboration on global supply chain issues.547

Beef 

Until 2008, the Korean market had been closed to imports of U.S. beef for several years. In 

2008, the United States and Korea reached an agreement under which Korea would reopen its 

markets fully to U.S. beef and beef products. As a result of a voluntary commercial 

understanding, the United States may export beef from animals less than 30 months of age to 

Korea until Korean consumer confidence improves. Additionally, under KORUS, Korea has 

agreed to eliminate its 40 percent tariff on beef over a period of 15 years. In 2013, Korea was 

the fifth-largest export market for U.S. beef.548

Brazil

In 2013, Brazil was the United States’ ninth-largest single-country trading partner. Brazil is also 

the United States’ second-largest Latin American trading partner and its largest South American 

trading partner. Two-way merchandise trade between the United States and Brazil shrank 6.5 

percent to $64.5 billion in 2013, accounting for 1.8 percent of total U.S. trade with the world. 

The decline in two-way trade was a result of a decrease in U.S. imports from Brazil, as U.S. 

exports to Brazil increased very slightly from 2012 levels. After a steady increase in the 

merchandise trade balance from 2009 to 2011, the United States’ 2012 trade surplus fell by 

nearly 20 percent from 2010 and 2011 levels. In 2013, however, the U.S. trade surplus with 

Brazil recovered and surpassed 2010 and 2011 levels, reaching $10.8 billion, or a striking 94.6

percent increase from 2012 (figure 5.13). Brazil was the United States’ eighth-largest singlecountry two-way trading partner in services. The U.S. trade surplus in services trade with Brazil 

rose by 2.8 percent in 2013, reaching $17.5 billion (figure 5.14).

Leading U.S. exports to Brazil included aircraft and parts, petroleum-related oils and refined 

petroleum products, wheat, coal, light oils and preparations, medicaments, and propane. In 

2013, exports of U.S. wheat to Brazil jumped over 9,000 percent from 2012 levels, reaching a 

value of $1.2 billion, the highest level in 30 years.549 This increase was a result of a poor crop in 

Argentina caused by bad weather and subsequent export restrictions in Argentina, traditionally 

Brazil’s main supplier of imported wheat. In 2013, Brazil temporarily lowered the 10 percent 

tariff on wheat from non-Mercosur countries to zero.550 The remaining top five exports to Brazil 

declined from 2012 levels, though there were increases in the other leading exports, including 

propane and insecticides.

547 Department of Labor, “Joint Statement of the Labor Affairs Council,” March 19, 2013. 548 USTR, 2014 National Trade Estimate Report on Foreign Trade Barriers, March 2014, 208–9. 549 USDA, FAS, “Brazil: U.S. Wheat Exports to Brazil,” February 19, 2014. 550 USDA, FAS, “Brazil: Grain and Feed Update,” January 23, 2014. Mercosur (or Mercosul, in Portuguese) is a South 

American common market agreement among Argentina, Brazil, Paraguay, Uruguay, and Venezuela. Bolivia, Chile, 

Colombia, Ecuador, Guyana, Peru, and Suriname are associate members.

159

 
Figure 5.13 U.S. merchandise trade with Brazil, 2009–13

Source: Official trade statistics of the USDOC as maintained by USITC. 

Figure 5.14 U.S. private services trade with Brazil, 2009-13a

Source: Official trade statistics of the USDOC as maintained by USITC. a

Data for 2013 are preliminary. 

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

2009 2010 2011 2012 2013

Billion $

Exports Imports Trade balance

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

2009 2010 2011 2012 2013

Billion $

Exports Imports Trade balance

160
U.S. imports from Brazil decreased in value by over 15.3 percent from 2012, falling to $26.9 

billion in 2013. Over half of the nearly $5 billion decrease in imports from Brazil is a result of the 

50.5 percent decline in value of U.S. imports of crude petroleum from Brazil, which reflected a 

42.3 percent decline in the quantity of crude petroleum imported from Brazil.551 Other leading 

imports that decreased in value include semifinished iron products, petroleum oils, ethyl 

alcohol, unroasted coffee, and non-alloy pig iron. U.S. imports from Brazil that increased from 

2012 levels included aircraft, wood pulp, granite, and tobacco. U.S.-Brazil merchandise trade 

data are shown in appendix tables A.45 through A.47. 

A number of developments in 2013 affected economic relations between the United States and 

Brazil. The October 2012 temporary tariff increases on 100 products imposed on imports from 

non-Mercosur countries expired in November 2013, and the Brazilian government announced 

that it did not intend to extend those tariffs or impose new tariff increases.552 In December 

2013, USDA and the Brazil Ministry of Agriculture released a joint statement indicating that the 

two agencies had agreed on a path towards amending rules that limit bilateral beef trade.553 In 

February 2013, the United States and Brazil informed the WTO DSB of a mutually satisfactory 

solution to a dispute regarding antidumping duties the United States had imposed on imported 

orange juice from Brazil.554 In September 2013, the amount of the monthly settlement payment 

to the Brazilian cotton fund resulting from a WTO dispute with Brazil on upland cotton was 

halved.555 

Agreement on Trade and Economic Cooperation 

The United States and Brazil held the second meeting of the Commission on Economic and 

Trade Relations under the United States-Brazil Agreement on Trade and Economic Cooperation 

in September 2013 in Brazil. The parties discussed trade and investment issues, including 

increased cooperation on investment; innovation; and small, medium-sized, and micro 

enterprises, as well as regulatory cooperation, market access, and procurement issues at this 

meeting.556 The parties also agreed to hold a third meeting in Washington, DC, in 2014. 

Taiwan 

In 2013, the United States reported $60.8 billion in two-way merchandise trade with Taiwan, a 

modest increase of 0.4 percent over 2012 trade of $60.6 billion. Taiwan remained the 11thlargest single-economy trading partner with the United States in 2013, accounting for 1.7

percent of total U.S. trade with the world. In 2013, U.S. exports to Taiwan increased, while U.S. 

551 USEIA, official statistics (accessed April 21, 2014). 552 USTR, 2014 National Trade Estimate Report, March 2014, 33. 553 USDA, “Joint Statement on U.S.-Brazil Beef Trade,” December 18, 2013. 554 WTO, “Dispute Settlement: DS 382; “Administrative Reviews and Other Measures Related to Imports of Certain 

Orange Juice from Brazil” (accessed April 17, 2014).

555 Inside U.S. Trade, “U.S. Cuts Cotton Payment,” October 1, 2013. For more information, see USITC, The Year in 

Trade 2012, July 2013, 5-21. 556 USTR, “United States and Brazil Hold Second Meeting,” September 13, 2013. 

161

 
imports from Taiwan declined slightly compared to the 2012 level. As a result, the United 

States’ bilateral trade deficit with Taiwan fell by 15.5 percent, from $16.9 billion in 2012 to 

$14.3 billion in 2013 (figure 5.15). On the other hand, the U.S. services trade surplus with 

Taiwan increased 1.0 percent, from $3.9 billion in 2012 to $4.0 billion in 2013 (figure 5.16).

U.S. merchandise exports to Taiwan amounted to $23.3 billion in 2013, a 6.6 percent increase 

from $21.8 billion in 2012. Machines and instruments related to semiconductor manufacturing 

remained the leading U.S. exports to Taiwan, increasing 21.2 percent from 2012 and accounting 

for $2.3 billion, or 10.1 percent, of 2013 merchandise exports. Other leading U.S. exports to 

Taiwan in 2013 were ferrous waste and scrap, aircraft and parts, light oils, soybeans, and 

military weapons and munitions. The increase in U.S. merchandise exports to Taiwan was 

mostly attributable to dramatic increases in two categories. U.S. exports of military weapons 

and munitions grew over 2,500 percent, from $21.6 million in 2012 to $564.1 million in 2013, 

while U.S. exports of light oils grew 154.0 percent, from $352.1 million in 2012 to $894.4 million 

in 2013.

U.S. merchandise imports from Taiwan amounted to $37.5 billion in 2013, a 3.1 percent 

decrease from $38.7 billion in 2012. Leading U.S. imports by value were cellphones, data 

processing machines, memory chips, electronic integrated circuits, processors, and radio 

navigational aid apparatus (GPS devices). Although cellphone imports fell 63.5 percent in 2012 

and 25.4 percent in 2013, they remained the leading U.S. merchandise import from Taiwan. 

U.S. imports of GPS devices and reception apparatus for television also fell 41.4 percent and 

44.1 percent in 2013, respectively. On the other hand, U.S. imports of memory chips and 

photosensitive semiconductor devices increased 32.0 percent and 32.9 percent in 2013, to $1.4 

billion and $0.6 billion, respectively. U.S.-Taiwan merchandise trade data are shown in appendix 

tables A.48 through A.50. 

In 2013, U.S.-Taiwan trade relations focused on the resumption of the high-level meetings 

under the U.S.-Taiwan Trade and Investment Framework Agreement (TIFA), Taiwan’s import 

ban on U.S. beef and beef products, Taiwan’s TRQ system for rice imports, and its inconsistent 

grading practice, which has affected imports of U.S. rice.

U.S.-Taiwan Trade and Investment Framework 

Agreement 

The U.S.-Taiwan Trade and Investment Framework Agreement (TIFA), signed in 1994, has 

served as a key mechanism to strengthen bilateral commercial ties between the United States 

and Taiwan, and covers a broad range of trade and investment issues important to U.S. and 

Taiwan stakeholders.557 High-level meetings under the TIFA were to take place on an annual 

basis. However, the talks were suspended in 2007 due to a dispute over Taiwan’s restrictions on 

imports of U.S. beef. In light of positive developments in the U.S.-Taiwan beef issue in 2012 (see 

557 USTR, “United States and Taiwan Enhance Trade Ties,” April, 2014.

162

 
Figure 5.15 U.S. merchandise trade with Taiwan, 2009–13

Source: Official trade statistics of the USDOC as maintained by USITC. 

Figure 5.16 U.S. private services trade with Taiwan, 2009-13a

Source: Official trade statistics of the USDOC as maintained by USITC. a

Data for 2013 are preliminary. 

-30

-20

-10

0

10

20

30

40

50

2009 2010 2011 2012 2013

Billion $

Exports Imports Trade balance

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

2009 2010 2011 2012 2013

Billion $

Exports Imports Trade balance

163
section below), the United States and Taiwan resumed the TIFA talks in March 2013.558 The 

outcome of the March meeting included the establishment of two working groups on 

investment and technical barriers to trade, as well as joint statements on principles for 

information and communications technology (ICT) services and investment.559 Additionally, a 

joint working group on SPS and agricultural standards, led by the USDA’s Animal and Plant 

Health Inspection Service (APHIS) and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, met to discuss 

agricultural trade issues in December 2013.560

Beef and Beef Products 

In September 2012, Taiwan authorities implemented a maximum residue limit (MRL) for 

ractopamine in beef, an important milestone in the U.S.-Taiwan trade dispute over beef and 

beef products. As noted earlier in the China section, ractopamine is a veterinary drug used in 

animal feed to promote muscle growth in pigs, cattle, and, to a limited extent, heavy turkeys. It

was approved for use in cattle by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration in 2003.

561 Following 

the implementation of the MRL measure, U.S. beef exports to Taiwan nearly doubled, from 

$128.1 million in 2012 to $254.2 million in 2013.

562 However, in 2013 Taiwan had not 

established a MRL for ractopamine in pork, which continued to disrupt U.S. exports of pork to 

Taiwan.563

Taiwan banned imports of U.S. beef and beef products following the detection of BSE in the 

United States in 2003. In 2009, the United States and Taiwan reached an agreement on a 

bilateral protocol defining the conditions for the exportation of U.S. beef and beef products to 

Taiwan. However, in 2013, USTR continued to note that Taiwan has failed to comply fully with

the protocol and provide full market access for U.S. beef and beef products.564

Rice

Upon accession to the WTO in 2002, Taiwan committed to lifting its ban on rice imports and 

opened an import quota of 144,720 metric tons (mt) on a brown rice basis under a “special 

treatment” regime. Subsequently, Taiwan adopted a complex TRQ system for rice imports that 

includes a ceiling price mechanism and a country-specific quota (CSQ) regime. Taiwan's annual 

rice TRQ is divided into two portions: 35 percent, or 50,652 mt, for private sector imports, and 

65 percent, or 94,068 mt, for public sector imports. The amount allocated to public sector 

imports is divided by country of origin and tender type. The U.S. quota accounted for the 

largest share of the public sector import quota at 64,634 mt.

565

558 USTR, “Deputy U.S. Trade Representative Demetrios Marantis,” March 10, 2013. 559 USTR, 2014 Trade Policy Agenda and 2013 Annual Report, March 2013, 146. 560 Ibid. 561 FAO, “Discussion on Ractopamine in Codex,” April 26, 2012; USTR, 2011 Report on Sanitary and Phytosanitary 

Measures, March 2011, 24. 562 USITC DataWeb/USDOC (accessed March 11, 2014). 563 USTR, 2014 Trade Policy Agenda and 2013 Annual Report, March 2014, 146. 564 Ibid., 147. 565 USTR, 2014 National Trade Estimate Report, March, 2014, 320.

164

 
In 2007 and 2008, Taiwan rejected all bids for U.S. rice under the CSQ, arguing that U.S. prices 

were high and exceeded Taiwan's ceiling price. U.S. exporters raised concerns that Taiwan’s 

ceiling price mechanism, which is not transparent, had arbitrarily set prices lower than the 

levels bid by U.S. exporters, causing their bids to fail. The United States has continued to urge 

Taiwan to fill the 2007 and 2008 shortfalls (approximately 80,000 mt on a brown rice basis), but 

Taiwan authorities have not agreed.

566 According to USTR, Taiwan fully met its obligations to

purchase U.S. rice for the years 2009–12.

567 As of March 2014, however, Taiwan had yet to 

fulfill 2013 purchase obligations under the U.S. CSQ, with a potential shortfall of 3,000 mt to 

5,000 mt.

568

In 2013, the United States also continued to engage Taiwan on issues related to Taiwan’s 

inconsistent grading practice for imports of U.S. rice under the U.S. CSQ. Discrepancies 

increased between the grades that U.S. rice received as it was leaving the United States and 

those it received as it arrived in Taiwan, which resulted in U.S. rice failing grade inspections on 

arrival in Taiwan. To remedy this, the United States worked with Taiwan’s Agriculture and Food 

Agency as well as Taiwan’s Council on Agriculture in May 2013 to establish standardized grading 

mechanisms between the two economies.569

India

In 2013, India remained the 12th-largest single-country U.S. trading partner. U.S.-India two-way 

merchandise trade was valued at $58.4 billion, accounting for 1.6 percent of U.S. merchandise 

trade with the world. U.S. imports of goods from India grew to $41.5 billion as U.S. exports to 

India declined to $16.9 billion, resulting in an increase in the U.S. merchandise trade deficit with 

India from $21.1 billion in 2012 to $24.5 billion in 2013 (figure 5.17). 

The United States also registered a services trade deficit with India—its only deficit in services 

with any major trading partner in 2013. However, the services deficit, which amounted to $6.0 

billion in 2013, fell by 9.5 percent from $6.6 billion in 2012. Although U.S. imports of Indian 

services increased from $18.5 billion in 2012 to $18.8 billion in 2013, U.S. exports of services to 

India increased from $11.9 billion in 2012 to $12.8 billion in 2013 (figure 5.18).

India was the 19th-largest single-country destination for U.S. merchandise exports in 2013, 

down from 18th in 2012. U.S. merchandise exports to India decreased by 10.9 percent, from 

$19.0 billion in 2012 to $16.9 billion in 2013. Leading U.S. exports to India included aircraft and 

parts; nonmonetary gold; aircraft; certain petroleum products used to manufacture tires; coal; 

and almonds. The decline in exports to India was the net effect of widely varying growth trends 

in underlying products. Exports of most major raw material products, including nonmonetary 

gold, coal, and nonindustrial diamonds, as well as certain chemical products, such as 

diammonium phosphate, experienced major declines. Other large sectors, such as aircraft and 

parts and certain petroleum products, experienced significant export growth. 

566 Ibid. 567 Ibid., 346. 568 Ibid., 320. 569 USTR, 2014 Trade Policy Agenda and 2013 Annual Report, March, 2014, 147.

165

 
Figure 5.17 U.S. merchandise trade with India, 2009–13

Source: Official trade statistics of the USDOC as maintained by USITC. 

Figure 5.18 U.S. private services trade with India, 2009-13a

Source: Official trade statistics of the USDOC as maintained by USITC. a

Data for 2013 are preliminary. 

-30

-20

-10

0

10

20

30

40

50

2009 2010 2011 2012 2013

Billion $

Exports Imports Trade balance

-10

-5

0

5

10

15

20

25

2009 2010 2011 2012 2013

Billion $

Exports Imports Trade balance

166
India remained the 10th-largest single-country source of U.S. merchandise imports in 2013. U.S. 

imports from India amounted to $41.5 billion in 2013, representing a 3.4 percent increase from 

$40.1 billion in 2012. Leading U.S. imports from India were nonindustrial diamonds, certain 

medicaments (medicines), light oils and preparations, mucilages and thickeners, and jewelry. 

The overall growth in imports from India was driven by substantial growth in certain major 

sectors like nonindustrial diamonds (which grew by $2.0 billion), light oils and preparations, 

frozen shrimp, and crude petroleum. At the same time, imports of mucilages and thickeners fell 

by $1.8 billion, and some imports of lesser value, such as certain tractors and cotton T-shirts, 

also declined. U.S.-India merchandise trade data are shown in appendix tables A.51 through 

A.53. 

During 2013, the United States and India continued discussions of diverse bilateral trade and 

investment issues through multilateral forums, direct high-level contact, and negotiations 

toward a bilateral investment treaty (BIT). U.S. policymakers engaged the government of India 

on several issues that continue to pose challenges in the trade relationship, including 

localization and testing requirements and issues related to the protection of IPR. The United 

States continued with WTO dispute settlement proceedings regarding India’s maintenance of 

nontariff barriers on U.S. exports of various agricultural products, including poultry and chicken 

eggs.570 The United States also initiated WTO dispute settlement consultations regarding India’s 

national solar policy and its preferential treatment of domestically produced solar cells and 

modules.

Trade and Investment Dialogue 

While the U.S.-India Trade Policy Forum, created in 2005, remains the formal platform for 

bilateral trade, investment, and economic dialogue between the two countries, the United 

States and India have not held a meeting of the forum since 2010.571 However, the U.S.-India 

trade and investment dialogue continued through a variety of other forums in 2013, including 

during Prime Minister Manmohan Singh’s visit to Washington in September 2013, in which 

President Obama addressed Indian manufacturing and IPR policies.572 USTR Froman and the 

Indian Minister of Commerce and Industry, Anand Sharma, met several times during the year. 

They discussed the need for a continuation of sustained and substantive dialogue under the 

U.S.-India Trade Policy Forum to address trade and investment issues such as India’s localization 

barriers to trade, copyright and patent protection, and green technology (all discussed 

below).573 In addition, the United States and India continued negotiations toward a BIT. These 

negotiations resumed in 2012 following the release of a new U.S. model BIT, which forms the 

basis for the way U.S. policymakers are negotiating BITs going forward.

574 This version enhances 

570 USTR, 2014 Report on Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures, March 2014, 57-58. 571 USTR, “United States and India Hold Seventh Trade Policy Forum,” September 21, 2010. 572 USTR, 2014 Trade Policy Agenda and 2013 Annual Report, March 2013, 153. 573 USTR, “Readout of the Meeting,” July 11, 2013. 574 USTR, 2014 Trade Policy Agenda and 2013 Annual Report, March 2013, 153.

167

 
the 2004 model BIT by promoting transparency, strengthening labor rights and environmental 

protections, and adding provisions for state-led economies.575

Electronic Goods 

The United States remained concerned about a possible expansion of India’s National 

Manufacturing Policy affecting U.S. exports of electronic goods in 2013. Announced in 

November 2011, the policy calls for greater local-content requirements in certain key sectors, 

such as ICT and clean energy.576 India pursued these goals by issuing the Preferential Market 

Access notification in February 2012, which required government entities and private firms to 

meet their needs for electronic products, such as telecommunications and certain computer 

equipment, in part by purchasing domestically produced goods. India revised this policy in 

December 2013 after significant engagement with U.S. officials and industry members, and 

these requirements now pertain exclusively to government procurement.

577

India maintains various security and safety regulations concerning electronic goods. India 

planned to institute a requirement that telecommunications equipment vendors test all 

imported ICT equipment in Indian laboratories beginning in July 2014.578 Indian policymakers 

also worked to implement a September 2012 order that mandates compulsory registration with 

Indian laboratories for 15 categories of imported electronic and IT goods, even if those 

products are fully certified in internationally recognized laboratories. This policy was originally 

set to take effect in April 2013, but entry into force was delayed until January 2014.579 U.S. 

exporters of ICT equipment report that they incur significant expenses during the testing phase, 

struggle to find Indian labs that are capable of testing the equipment, and are forced to leave 

their products in labs for extended periods of time.580 USTR continued to work with Indian 

officials on these testing requirements both bilaterally and at the WTO Technical Barriers to 

Trade (TBT) Committee in 2013, including pushing for delays to implementation of the 

burdensome Indian policies.581

Solar Equipment 

Another concern for U.S. policymakers in 2013 was the expansion of local-content 

requirements for Indian developers of solar power-generating projects under the Jawaharlal 

Nehru National Solar Mission (JNNSM), India’s national solar policy. Launched in 2010, this 

policy sets the goal of developing 20,000 megawatts of grid-connected solar power by 2022 

through large-scale deployment goals, research and development, and local production of 

power-generating equipment. The JNNSM is scheduled to take place over three phases, with 

575 USDOS, “Model BIT Fact Sheet,” April 20, 2012. 576 USTR, 2014 Section 1377 Review, April 2014, 19. 577 Ibid., 19-20; USTR, 2014 Report on Technical Barriers to Trade, April 2014, 80–81. 578 USTR, 2014 National Trade Estimate Report, March 2014, 150–151. 579 USTR, 2014 Report on Technical Barriers to Trade, April 2014, 81; USTR, “2013 Year in Review,” January 3, 2014. 580 Shapiro, Garfield, and Seiffert, letter to Penny S. Pritzker, Michael B. Froman, and Caroline Atkinson, September 

23, 2013.

581 USTR, 2014 Report on Technical Barriers to Trade, April 2014, 81; USTR, “2013 Year in Review,” January 3, 2014.

168

 
the first phase ending in 2013 and the second phase extending through 2017.582 Phase 1, which 

was split into two batches, required domestic sourcing for crystalline silicon (c-Si) photovoltaic 

modules for the first batch, while domestic sourcing requirements for the second batch applied 

to both c-Si modules and c-Si cells.583 

In February 2013, the United States requested WTO dispute settlement consultations with India 

concerning local-content requirements in Phase 1.584 In October 2013, India issued guidelines 

for the first set of projects under phase 2 of the JNNSM: one group of projects would be 

required to use only domestic sources for c-Si cells and modules as well as thin-film modules, 

while another group had no restrictions on origins of cells and modules.585

Intellectual Property Rights 

India has been on USTR’s Priority Watch List or designated a priority foreign country— 

designations reserved for countries with significant IPR problems—since 1989,586 and it was still 

on the Priority Watch List as of May 2013.587 USTR’s 2013 Special Report noted concerns with 

patents and regulatory data protection, copyright protections, IPR enforcement, and 

localization requirements.588 

USTR reported that in the pharmaceutical sector some innovative firms were facing serious 

challenges securing and enforcing patents. For example, USTR cited a 2013 decision by the 

Indian Supreme Court (upholding the denial of a patent for Novartis’s leukemia drug Glivec), 

which appeared to confirm that India’s law imposes an additional requirement for obtaining 

patents for certain chemical forms.589 A March 2013 decision by the Indian Intellectual Property 

Appellate Board to uphold a compulsory license for Bayer’s cancer drug Nexavar, which granted 

an Indian generic drug manufacturer the right to produce the drug at a reduced royalty rate, 

also raised substantial concerns among multinational pharmaceutical companies.590 

USTR further noted in the 2013 Special 301 Report that both physical and online piracy 

remained significant problems for creative and software industries in India. In May 2012, India 

passed the Copyright (Amendment) Act, with the goal of bringing the copyright law into 

582 Government of India, Ministry of New and Renewable Energy, Jawaharlal Nehru National Solar Mission: 

Towards Building SOLAR INDIA (accessed April 6, 2014). 583 USTR, “United States Challenges India’s Restrictions on U.S. Solar Exports,” February 2013. India also instituted a 

local-content requirement of 30 percent for concentrated solar power projects during Phase 1. Government of 

India, Ministry of New and Renewable Energy, Jawaharlal Nehru National Solar Mission: Guidelines, July 2010; 

Government of India, Ministry of New and Renewable Energy, Jawaharlal Nehru National Solar Mission: 

Guidelines, August 2011. 584 USTR, “United States Challenges India’s Restrictions on U.S. Solar Exports,” February 2013. 585 USTR, 2014 National Trade Estimate Report, March 2014, 153. In February 2014, the United States requested 

WTO dispute settlement consultations with India concerning the domestic content requirements in Phase 2 of the 

JNNSM. USTR, “Remarks by USTR Michael Froman,” February 20, 2014.

586 International Intellectual Property Alliance, “Chart of Countries’ Special 301 Placement,” February 8, 2013. 587 USTR, 2013 Special 301 Report, May 2013, 38–40. 588 Ibid. 589 Ibid. 590 See Chatterjee, “India’s First Compulsory Licence Upheld,” March 4, 2013.

169

 
compliance with the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) Internet Treaties, which 

protect digital works and works distributed over the Internet. While acknowledging 

improvements made under this law, USTR found that questions remained regarding the scope 

of exclusive rights under Indian law and the ability of rights holders to properly exercise those 

rights.591 USTR recommended additional legislation, such as an anti-camcording law, to help 

content-based industries effectively combat physical and online piracy.592 In the 2013 Special 

301 Out-of-Cycle Review of Notorious Markets Report, USTR also identified several Indian 

physical marketplaces in New Delhi, Mumbai, and Hyderabad that provide widespread 

distribution of counterfeit media such as CDs, DVDs, and video games.593

591 Ibid. 592 Ibid. 593 USTR, 2013 Out-of-Cycle Review of Notorious Markets, February 12, 2014, 16. The localization concerns raised 

by USTR are addressed above in the sections on Electronic Goods and Solar Equipment.

170

 
Bibliography

Abbot, Frederick M. “Inside Views: The Judgment in Novartis v. India: What the Supreme Court 

of India Said.” Intellectual Property Watch, April 4, 2013. 

http://www.ip-watch.org/2013/04/04/the-judgment-in-novartis-v-india-what-thesupreme-court-of-india-said/. 

Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC). 21st APEC Economic Leaders’ Meeting: Supporting 

the Multilateral Trading System and the 9th Ministerial Conference of the World Trade 

Organization. Bali, Indonesia: APEC, October 8, 2013. http://www.apec.org/MeetingPapers/Leaders-Declarations/2013/2013_aelm/2013_aelm_mts.aspx. 

———.21st APEC Economic Leaders’ Meeting: The Bali Declaration; Resilient Asia-Pacific, 

Engine of Global Growth. Bali, Indonesia: APEC, October 8, 2013.

http://publications.apec.org/publication-detail.php?pub_id=1471. 

———. 25th APEC Ministerial Meeting: Joint Statement. Bali, Indonesia: APEC, October 5, 

2013. http://publications.apec.org/publication-detail.php?pub_id=1471. 

———. The Report on APEC’s 2010 Economies’ Progress towards the Bogor Goals, 2010.

http://www.apec.org/About-Us/About-APEC/Achievements-and-Benefits/2010-BogorGoals.aspx. 

Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC). Committee on Trade and Investment (CTI). 2011 CTI 

Annual Report to Ministers. APEC#211-CT-01.5. Honolulu: APEC, November, 2011.

http://publications.apec.org/publication-detail.php?pub_id=1209. 

———. Annual Report to Ministers: 2013. APEC#213-CT-01.10. Bali: APEC, October 2013.

http://publications.apec.org/publication-detail.php?pub_id=1457. 

Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC). Policy Support Unit (PSU). APEC’s Bogor Goals 

Progress Report, August 2012. APEC#212-SE-01.12. Singapore: APEC, August 2012.

http://publications.apec.org/publication-detail.php?pub_id=1308. 

Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC). Secretariat. APEC at a Glance, 2014. APEC#212-SE05.4. Singapore: APEC, October 2013. http://publications.apec.org/publicationdetail.php?pub_id=1451. 

———. Outcomes and Outlook 2013–14. APEC#213-SE-05.5. Singapore: APEC, March 2014.

http://publications.apec.org/publication-detail.php?pub_id=1508. 

Associated Equipment Distributors. “Exports of U.S.-Made Construction Equipment Decline 25 

Percent in 2013 to $20 Billion.” AED.News, February 27, 2014.

http://www.aednet.org/aednews/index.cfm. 

171
Barrie, Leonie. “Haiti: Sae-A Trading on Track to Begin Production.” Just-style.com, 

September 18, 2012. http://www.just-style.com. 

Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System. “Federal Reserve Issues FOMC Statement.” 

Press release, June 19, 2013.

http://www.federalreserve.gov/newsevents/press/monetary/20130619a.htm. 

———. “Foreign Exchange Rates: H.10 Weekly,” n.d.

http://www.federalreserve.gov/releases/h10/hist/ (accessed January 8, 2014).

———. “Open Market Operations,” n.d.

http://www.federalreserve.gov/monetarypolicy/openmarket.htm (accessed March 12, 

2014).

Chatterjee, Patralekha. “India’s First Compulsory Licence Upheld, but Legal Fights Likely to 

Continue.” Intellectual Property Watch, March 4, 2013. http://www.ipwatch.org/2013/03/04/indias-first-compulsory-licence-upheld-but-legal-fights-likely-tocontinue/. 

Commission for Environmental Cooperation (CEC). “CEC Ministerial Statement: Twentieth 

Regular Session of the CEC Council,” July 11, 2013.

http://www.cec.org/Page.asp?PageID=122&ContentID=25594&SiteNodeID=219&BL_Ex

pandID=566. 

———. “Part Three: Commission for Environment Cooperation.” Article 14 and Article 15, n.d.

http://www.cec.org/Page.asp?PageID=122&ContentID=2732&SiteNodeID=567&BL_Exp

andID=#A14 (accessed March 19, 2014).

———. “Submission on Enforcement Matters: Active Submissions,” n.d.

http://www.cec.org/Page.asp?PageID=1226&SiteNodeID=544 (accessed March 12, 

2014).

———. “Submission on Enforcement Matters,” n.d.

http://www.cec.org/Page.asp?PageID=924&SiteNodeID=210 (accessed March 19, 

2014).

Commission for Environmental Cooperation (CEC). Secretariat. “Three Countries Working 

Together,” n.d.

http://www.cec.org/Page.asp?PageID=1226&SiteNodeID=206&BL_ExpandID=569

(accessed March 19, 2014).

Commission for Labor Cooperation (CLC). “The National Administrative Offices.”

http://www.naalc.org/commission/nao.htm (accessed March 18, 2014).

172
Congressional Research Service (CRS). Japan Joins the Trans-Pacific Partnership: What Are the 

Implications? by W. Cooper and M. Manyin. CRS Report R42676, August 13, 2013.

https://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/row/R42676.pdf. 

———. Trade Adjustment Assistance (TAA) and Its Role in U.S. Trade Policy, by J.F. Hornbeck.

CRS Report R41922, August 5, 2013. http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/R41922.pdf. 

———. Trade Adjustment Assistance for Farmers, by Remy Jurenas. CRS Report R40206, 

September 5, 2012. http://www.nationalaglawcenter.org/assets/crs/R40206.pdf. 

———. U.S.-Japan Economic Relations: Significance, Prospects, and Policy Options, by William 

H. Cooper. CRS Report RL32649, February 18, 2014.

http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/row/RL32649.pdf. 

Economist Intelligence Unit (EIU). Data Tool database (accessed April 4, 2014).

EU Council of Ministers. “Council Approves Launch of Trade and Investment Negotiations with 

United States.” Press release, June 14, 2013.

http://www.consilium.europa.eu/uedocs/cms_data/docs/pressdata/EN/foraff/137485.

pdf. 

EU-U.S. High-Level Working Group on Jobs and Growth (HLWG). “Interim Report to Leaders 

from the Co-Chairs,” June 19, 2012.

http://trade.ec.europa.eu/doclib/docs/2012/june/tradoc_149557.pdf. 

———. “Final Report,” February 11, 2013. http://www.ustr.gov/about-us/press-office/reportsand-publications/2013/final-report-us-eu-hlwg. 

European Commission (EC). “EU and U.S. Conclude First Round of TTIP Negotiations in 

Washington.” Press release, IP/13/691, July 12, 2013.

http://trade.ec.europa.eu/doclib/press/index.cfm?id=941. 

———. “EU and U.S. Conclude Second Round of TTIP Negotiations in Brussels.” Press release, 

November 15, 2013. http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_IP-13-1091_en.htm. 

Executive Office of the President. Office of the Intellectual Property Enforcement Coordinator 

(IPEC). 2010 Joint Strategic Plan on Intellectual Property Enforcement. Washington, DC: 

IPEC, June 2010.

http://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/omb/assets/intellectualproperty/intelle

ctualproperty_strategic_plan.pdf. 

Federal Reserve Bank of New York (FRBNY). “Treasury and Federal Reserve Foreign Exchange 

Operations, January–March, 2013.” Quarterly Reports, May 9, 2013.

http://www.newyorkfed.org/newsevents/news/markets/2013/fx130509.html. 

———. April-June 2013.” Quarterly Reports, August 8, 2013.

http://www.newyorkfed.org/newsevents/news/markets/2013/fx130808.html. 

173
———. July–September, 2013.” Quarterly Reports, November 14, 2013.

http://www.newyorkfed.org/newsevents/news/markets/2013/fx131114.html. 

———. October–December 2013.” Quarterly Reports, February 13, 2014.

http://www.newyorkfed.org/newsevents/news/markets/2014/fx140213.html. 

Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO). “Information Sheet: Discussion 

on Ractopamine in Codex and in the Joint FAO/WHO Expert Committee on Food 

Additives (JECFA),” April 26, 2012.

http://www.fao.org/fileadmin/user_upload/agns/pdf/Ractopamine_info_sheet_CodexJECFA_rev_26April2012__2_.pdf. 

GAO. See U.S. Government Accountability Office (GAO).

Global Trade Information Service, Inc. (GTIS). Global Trade Atlas database (accessed April 4, 

2014).

Glotz, Julia. “Beef Industry Hails Lifting of US Export Ban.” The Grocer, November 4, 2013.

http://www.thegrocer.co.uk/fmcg/fresh/beef-industry-hails-lifting-of-15-year-usexport-ban/351247.article. 

Government of Australia. Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade (DFAT). “Eighteenth Round 

of Trans-Pacific Partnership Agreement (TTP) Negotiation.” News release, July 23, 2013.

http://www.dfat.gov.au/fta/tpp/130725-tpp-stakeholder-update-18.html. 

———. “Trade in Services Agreement (TiSA),” n.d.

https://www.dfat.gov.au/trade/negotiations/services/trade-in-services-agreement.html

(accessed March 10, 2014).

Government of India. Ministry of New and Renewable Energy (MNRE). Jawaharlal Nehru 

National Solar Mission: Guidelines for Selection of New Grid Connected Solar Power 

Projects, July 2010.

http://www.mnre.gov.in/file-manager/UserFiles/jnnsm_gridconnected_25072010.pdf. 

———. Jawaharlal Nehru National Solar Mission: Guidelines for Selection of New Grid 

Connected Solar Power Projects, Batch-II, August 2011. 

http://mnre.gov.in/file-manager/UserFiles/jnnsm_gridconnected_24082011.pdf.

———. Jawaharlal Nehru National Solar Mission: Towards Building SOLAR INDIA, n.d.

http://www.mnre.gov.in/solar-mission/jnnsm/mission-document-3/ 

(accessed April 6, 2014).

Inside U.S. Trade. “U.S. Cuts Cotton Payment, Leading Brazil to Gear Up for Retaliation,” 

October 1, 2013. 

http://insidetrade.com/201310012448501/WTO-Daily-News/Daily-News/us-cutscotton-payment-leading-brazil-to-gear-up-for-retaliation/menu-id-948.html. 

174
———. “U.S. Lifts ‘Mad Cow’ Restrictions on EU Beef, But Other Hurdles Remain,” November 

7, 2013.

———. “China Joins ITA Talks; Pushes Back against Expansive Product List,” October 4, 2012.

http://insidetrade.com/Inside-US-Trade/Inside-U.S.-Trade-10/05/2012/china-joins-itatalks-pushes-back-against-expansive-product-list/menu-id-710.html. 

———. “China Poses New Roadblock to Concluding ITA Expansion Talks in July,” June 27, 2013.

http://insidetrade.com/Inside-US-Trade/Inside-U.S.-Trade-06/28/2013/china-posesnew-roadblock-to-concluding-ita-expansion-talks-in-july/menu-id-710.html. 

———. “Focus on TPP, TTIP and TISA; North American Leaders’ Summit,” February 18, 2014.

http://insidetrade.com/WTO-Daily-News/This-Week-In-Trade/focus-on-tpp-ttip-andtisa-north-american-leaders-summit/menu-id-949.html/. 

———. “ITA Expansion Negotiators Make Push to Finalize Deal by Mid-July,” June 6, 2013.

http://insidetrade.com/Inside-US-Trade/Inside-U.S.-Trade-06/07/2013/ita-expansionnegotiators-make-push-to-finalize-deal-by-mid-july/menu-id-710.html. 

———. “ITA Expansion Talks Suspended Again; No Timeline for Resumption Set,” November

21, 2013. http://insidetrade.com/Inside-US-Trade/Inside-U.S.-Trade-11/22/2013/itaexpansion-talks-suspended-again-no-timeline-for-resumption-set/menu-id-710.html. 

———. “Slow Restart to ITA Expansion Talks, As China Seeks Long Phaseouts,” 

October 4, 2013. 

http://insidetrade.com/Inside-US-Trade/Inside-U.S.-Trade-10/25/2013/slow-restart-toita-expansion-talks-as-china-seeks-long-phaseouts/menu-id-710.html. 

———. “TISA Negotiators Begin Mode 4 Talks; New Proposals Expected in June,” May 9, 2013.

http://insidetrade.com/Inside-US-Trade/Inside-U.S.-Trade-05/10/2013/tisa-negotiatorsbegin-mode-4-talks-new-proposals-expected-in-june/menu-id-710.html. 

———. “U.S. Tables Financial Services TISA Proposal As Round Gets Underway,” 

February 20, 2014. 

http://insidetrade.com/Inside-US-Trade/Inside-U.S.-Trade-02/21/2014/us-tablesfinancial-services-tisa-proposal-as-round-gets-underway/menu-id-710.html. 

———. “U.S., Others Suspend ITA Talks to Pressure China to Soften Its Stance,” 

July 18, 2013.

http://insidetrade.com/Inside-US-Trade/Inside-U.S.-Trade-07/19/2013/us-otherssuspend-ita-talks-to-pressure-china-to-soften-its-stance/menu-id-710.html. 

International Intellectual Property Alliance (IIPA). “Appendix C: Chart of Countries’ Special 301 

Placement (1989–2012) and IIPA 2013 Special 301 Recommendations.” International 

Intellectual Property Alliance 2013 Special 301 Report, February 8, 2013.

http://www.iipa.com/pdf/2013SPEC301HISTORICALCHART.pdf. 

175
International Monetary Fund. World Economic Outlook. Washington, D.C: IMF, April 2014.

Japan External Trade Organization (JETRO). FY2013 Survey on the International Operations of 

Japanese Firms. Tokyo: JETRO, February 27, 2014.

http://www.jetro.go.jp/en/news/releases/20140324533-

news/FY2013_Survey_International_Operations_of_Japanese_Firms.pdf. 

Japan Post Group. Annual Report 2013. Tokyo: Japan Post Group, July 2013.

http://www.japanpost.jp/en/group/disclosure/2013/pdf/all.pdf. 

London Court of International Arbitration. “Joint Request for Arbitration---Submitted on Behalf 

of Canada and the United States of America.” Case No. 81010-B, September 30, 2013.

http://www.ustr.gov/sites/default/files/Joint%20Request%20for%20Arbitration.pdf. 

Milner, Gordon, Paul McKenzie, Sherry Lin, and Jing Bu. “China’s MIIT Releases Long-Awaited 

Draft Amended Telecoms Catalogue for Public Comment.” Morrison Foerster, 

June 13, 2013. 

http://www.mofo.com/files/Uploads/Images/130613-MIIT-Draft-Catalogue.pdf. 

National Foreign Trade Council. “NFTC Releases Cheat Sheet to the WTO Trade Facilitation 

Agreement.” Press release, December 13, 2013.

http://www.nftc.org/default/Publications/Trade_Policy/WTO%20Trade%20Facilitation%

20Agreement%20%20Cheat%20Sheet.pdf. 

North American Development Bank (NADB). BECC-COCEF Quarterly Status Report, 

December 31, 2013.

http://www.nadb.org/pdfs/FreqUpdates/JointStatusReport.pdf. 

———. “Summary of Project Implementation Activities,” December 31, 2013.

http://www.nadb.org/pdfs/FreqUpdates/ProjectMatrix.pdf. 

North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA). Secretariat. “Overview of the Dispute 

Settlement Provisions,” n.d.

https://www.nafta-sec-alena.org/Default.aspx?tabid=93&language=en-US

(accessed March 19, 2014)

———. “Status Report of Dispute Settlement Proceedings, NAFTA—Chapter 19 Active Cases,” 

n.d. https://www.nafta-sec-alena.org/Default.aspx?tabid=94&language=en-US

(accessed March 12, 2014).

Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD). “Canada.” Economic 

Outlook. Vol. 2013/2. Paris, OECD: November 2013. 

http://www.oecd-ilibrary.org/economics/oecd-economic-outlook-volume-2013-issue2/canada_eco_outlook-v2013-2-10-en. 

176
———. “Chair’s Summary––OECD Ministerial Council Meeting (MCM), 29–30 May 2013––It’s 

All about People: Jobs, Equality and Trust,” n.d.

http://www.oecd.org/mcm/chairssummary-oecdministerialcouncilmeetingmcm29-

30may2013-itsallaboutpeoplejobsequalityandtrust.htm (accessed March 18, 2014). 

———. Interconnected Economies: Benefiting from Global Value Chains—Synthesis Report. 

Paris: OECD, 2013.

———. “OECD-WTO Database on Trade in Value-Added––FAQs: Background Note,” n.d.

http://www.oecd.org/sti/ind/TIVA_FAQ_Final.pdf (accessed January 2, 2014).

———. Secretary-General’s Report to Ministers, 2013. Paris: OECD, 2013.

———. “Statement by the OECD Regarding the Status of the Accession Process with Russia and 

Co-operation with Ukraine,” March 13, 2014.

http://www.oecd.org/russia/statement-by-the-oecd-regarding-the-status-of-theaccession-process-with-russia-and-co-operation-with-ukraine.htm. 

Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD). Council. “Meeting of the 

Council at Ministerial Level, 29–30 May 2013––Ministerial Council Statement (Adopted 

at the Council at Ministerial Level on 30 May 2013,” n.d.

http://www.oecd.org/mcm/background/ministerial-meeting-2013-new-approaches-toeconomic-challenges-and-prioritising-inclusive-growth.htm (accessed March 18, 2014).

Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD). Trade and Agriculture 

Directorate (TAD). Trade Committee. “161st Session of the Trade Committee: 

Confidential Session––Draft Agenda––14 May 2013.” TAD/TC/A(2013)1/ANN, April 9, 

2013.

———. “161st Session of the Trade Committee: Plenary Session––Draft Agenda––15–16 May 

2013.” TAD/TC/A(2013)1, April 11, 2013.

———. “162nd Session of the Trade Committee: Plenary Session––Draft Agenda––5–6 

November 2013.” TAD/TC/A(2013)2, October 29, 2013.

———.“Chair’s Highlights: The Recent Activities of the Joint Working Party on Trade and 

Environment (JWPTE)––14–16 May 2013.” TAD/TC(2013)3, May 10, 2013.

———. “Report to the 161st Session of the Trade Committee: Export Credits––14–16 May 

2013.” TAD/TC(2013)4, May 2, 2013.

———. “Summary Record: 161st Session of the Trade Committee––Confidential Session––14 

May 2013.” TAD/TC/M(2013)1/ANN, September 5, 2013.

———. “Summary Record: 162nd Session of the Trade Committee––Confidential Session––6 

November 2013.” TAD/TC/M(2013)2/ANN, January 31, 2014.

177
———. “Summary Record: 161st Session of the Trade Committee––Plenary Session––15 May 

2013.” TAD/TC/M(2013)1, September 5, 2013.

———. “Summary Record: 161st Session of the Trade Committee––Session with the 

Participation of G20 Members––16 May 2013.” TAD/TC/M(2013)1/ADD, September 5, 

2011.

———. “Summary Record: 162nd Session of the Trade Committee––Plenary Session––5 

November 2013.” TAD/TC/M(2013)2, January 31, 2014.

Organization of American States (OAS). “OAS-IADB-UNECLAC Tripartite Committee Multilingual 

dictionary of FTAA trade terms.” SICE (Sistema de Información sobre Comercio Exterior / 

Foreign Trade Information System), n.d.

http://www.sice.oas.org/Dictionary/Dictio_e.asp#Negative_list_approach 

(accessed March 18, 2014).

Parliament of Canada. “C-8: An Act to Amend the Copyright Act and the Trade-marks Act and To 

Make Consequential Amendments to Other Acts: Short Title: Combating Counterfeit 

Products Act.” LEGISinfo database. 41st Parliament, 2nd Session, October 16, 2013–

Present. http://www.parl.gc.ca/LEGISinfo/BillDetails.aspx?billId=6266835&Language=E

&Mode=1(accessed March 28, 2014).

Shapiro, Gary (Consumer Electronics Association), Dean C. Garfield (Information Technology 

Industry Council), and Grant Seiffert (Telecommunications Industry Association). Letter 

to Penny S. Pritzker (Secretary, United States Department of Commerce), Michael B. 

Froman (U.S. Trade Representative), and Caroline Atkinson (Deputy Assistant to the 

President and Deputy National Security Advisor for International Economic Affairs), 

September 23, 2013. http://blog.itic.org/dotAsset/14a42a08-15ac-48fa-9b64-

8d2d2ae6c4f9.pdf. 

United States-Mexico Regulatory Cooperation Council (HLRCC). “Progress Report to Leaders,” 

August 15, 2013. http://trade.gov/hlrcc/documents/HLRCC-progress-report-0813.docx. 

U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA). Budget Summary and Annual Performance Plan, FY 

2015, n.d. http://www.obpa.usda.gov/budsum/FY15budsum.pdf 

(accessed March 19, 2014). 

———. Budget Summary and Annual Performance Plan, FY 2014, n.d.

http://www.obpa.usda.gov/budsum/FY14budsum.pdf (accessed March 19, 2014). 

———. Budget Summary and Annual Performance Plan, FY 2013, n.d.

http://www.obpa.usda.gov/budsum/FY13budsum.pdf (accessed March 19, 2014). 

———. Budget Summary and Annual Performance Plan, FY 2012, n.d.

http://www.obpa.usda.gov/budsum/FY12budsum.pdf (accessed March 19, 2014). 

178
U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA). Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS). 

“APHIS Finalizes Bovine Import Regulations in Line with International Animal Health 

Standards.” News release, November 1, 2013.

http://www.usda.gov/wps/portal/usda/usdamediafb?contentid=2013/11/0207.xml&pri

ntable=true&contentidonly=true. 

U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA). Economic Research Service (ERS). “Top 15 U.S. 

Agricultural Export Destinations, by Calendar Year, $U.S. Value,” June 13, 2013.

http://www.ers.usda.gov/data-products/foreign-agricultural-trade-of-the-united-states-

(fatus)/calendar-year.aspx. 

U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA). Food Safety and Inspection Service (FSIS). “Export 

Requirements for the People’s Republic of China,” May 8, 2014.

http://www.fsis.usda.gov/wps/portal/fsis/topics/international-affairs/exportingproducts/export-library-requirements-by-country/Peoples-Republic-of-China. 

U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA). Foreign Agricultural Service (FAS). Brazil Grain and Feed 

Update: North American Wheat Fills Up Brazilian Warehouses, by Laura J. Geller. GAIN 

Report Number BR0926, January 23, 2014.

http://gain.fas.usda.gov/Recent%20GAIN%20Publications/Grain%20and%20Feed%20Up

date_Brasilia_Brazil_1-23-2014.pdf. 

———. Brazil: U.S. Wheat Exports to Brazil Highest in 30 Years, by Laura J. Geller. GAIN Report 

Number BR0929, February 19, 2014.

http://gain.fas.usda.gov/Recent%20GAIN%20Publications/U.S.%20Wheat%20Exports%2

0to%20Brazil%20Highest%20in%2030%20Years_Brasilia_Brazil_2-19-2014.pdf. 

———. “Joint Statement on U.S.-Brazil Beef Trade.” News release, December 18, 2013.

http://www.fas.usda.gov/newsroom/joint-statement-us-brazil-beef-trade. 

U.S. Department of Commerce (USDOC). “U.S. Secretary of Commerce Penny Pritzker Attends 

North American Leaders Summit with President Obama, U.S. Delegation.” Press release, 

February 19, 2014. 

http://www.commerce.gov/news/press-releases/2014/02/19/us-secretary-commercepenny-pritzker-attends-north-american-leaders-s. 

———. “Secretary Pritzker Co-Chairs U.S.-Mexico High Level Economic Dialogue and Outlines 

Future Engagement.” The Commerce Blog, September 20, 2013.

http://www.commerce.gov/blog/2013/09/20/secretary-pritzker-co-chairs-us-mexicohigh-level-economic-dialogue-and-outlines-fut. 

U.S. Department of Commerce (USDOC). Bureau of Economic Analysis (BEA). “A Guide to the 

U.S. International Transactions Accounts and the U.S. International Investment Position 

Accounts,” by Christopher L. Bach. Survey of Current Business 90, no. 2 (February 2010): 

33–51. http://www.bea.gov/scb/pdf/2010/02%20February/0210_guide.pdf. 

179
———. “Gross Domestic Product: Fourth Quarter and Annual 2013 (Second Estimate).” News 

release, BEA 14-06, February 28, 2014.

https://www.bea.gov/newsreleases/national/gdp/2014/pdf/gdp4q13_2nd.pdf. 

———. “U.S. International Services: Cross-Border Trade in 2012 and Services Supplied through 

Affiliates in 2011,” by Alexis Grimm and Charu Sharma. Survey of Current Business 93, 

no. 10 (October 2013): 25–41.

http://www.bea.gov/scb/pdf/2013/10%20October/1013_international_services.pdf. 

———. “U.S. International Services: Cross-Border Trade in 2012 and Services Supplied through 

Affiliates in 2011,” by Alexis Grimm and Charu Sharma. Survey of Current Business 93, 

no. 10 (October 2013): 60–61 (accompanying tables).

http://www.bea.gov/scb/pdf/2013/10%20October/1013_international_%20services_%

20tables.pdf. 

———. “U.S. International Transactions Accounts Data,” March 19, 2014, “Table 3a: Private 

Services Transactions,” “U.S. International Transactions, by Area.”

http://www.bea.gov/iTable/iTable.cfm?ReqID=6&step=1#reqid=6&step=3&isuri=1&600

=7. 

———. “U.S. International Transactions Accounts Data,” March 19, 2014, “Table 12: U.S. 

International Transactions, by Area.”

http://www.bea.gov/iTable/iTable.cfm?ReqID=6&step=1#reqid=6&step=1&isuri=1. 

———. “U.S. International Transactions: Fourth Quarter and Year 2013.” News release, BEA 

14-09, March 19, 2014.

http://www.bea.gov/newsreleases/international/transactions/2014/pdf/trans413.pdf. 

U.S. Department of Commerce (USDOC). Census Bureau (Census) and Bureau of Economic 

Analysis (BEA). “U.S. International Trade in Goods and Services January 2014.” News 

release, CB14-36/BEA 14-08, FT900 (14-01), March 7, 2014.

http://www.bea.gov/newsreleases/international/trade/2014/pdf/trad0114.pdf. 

U.S. Department of Commerce (USDOC). Economic Development Administration (EDA). Fiscal 

Year 2013, Annual Report to Congress: Trade Adjustment Assistance for Firms Program. 

n.d. http://www.eda.gov/pdf/FY13_TAAF_Annual_Report_to_Congress.pdf (accessed 

March 29, 2014).

U.S. Department of Commerce (USDOC). International Trade Administration (ITA). “African 

Growth and Opportunity Act,” n.d. http://trade.gov/agoa/index.asp (accessed 

November 20, 2013).

———. “High Level Economic Dialogue.” Fact sheet, n.d.

http://www.trade.gov/hled/hled_fact_sheet.asp (accessed March 13, 2014).

180
———. “June 19, 2013: Meeting of Canada-United States Regulatory Cooperation Council,” 

n.d. http://www.trade.gov/rcc/meeting-of-canada-us-rcc-0619202013.asp (accessed 

March 26, 2014).

———. “June 20, 2013: RCC Stakeholder Dialogue Session,” n.d.

http://www.trade.gov/rcc/meeting-of-canada-us-rcc-0619202013.asp (accessed March 

26, 2014).

———. “U.S.-Canada Regulatory Cooperation Council,” n.d.

http://www.trade.gov/rcc/ (accessed March 25, 2014).

U.S. Department of Commerce (USDOC). Office of Textiles and Apparel (OTEXA). “Trade 

Preference Programs: The African Growth and Opportunity Act (AGOA).”

http://web.ita.doc.gov/tacgi/eamain.nsf/d511529a12d016de852573930057380b/1e854

88eb01fd2fd852573940049047d?OpenDocument (accessed December 6, 2013).

———. Office of Textiles and Apparel (OTEXA). “U.S. Imports under Trade Preference 

Programs.” http://otexa.ita.doc.gov/agoa-cbtpa/catv0.htm (accessed February 2014).

U.S. Department of Homeland Security (USDHS). U.S. Customs and Border Protection (USCBP). 

“GSP, ATPA, and ATPDEA Due to Expire,” n.d. http://www.cbp.gov/trade/tradecommunity/outreach-programs/trade-agreements/special-tradeprograms/andean/atpa-atpdea-expire (accessed April 14, 2014).

———. “Memorandum on the Renewal of ATPA,” October 24, 2011.

———. What Every Member of the Trade Community Should Know about the African Growth 

and Opportunity Act. An Informed Compliance Publication, August 2003.

http://www.cbp.gov/sites/default/files/documents/icp065_3.pdf. 

U.S. Department of Labor (USDOL). U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS). “Labor Force Statistics 

from the Current Population Survey,” n.d. http://data.bls.gov/timeseries/LNS14000000

(accessed January 16, 2014).

U.S. Department of Labor (USDOL). Employment and Training Administration (ETA). “Petition 

Filing Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ),” n.d.

http://www.doleta.gov/tradeact/FAQ.cfm (accessed March 14, 2014).

———. “Trade Adjustment Assistance Community College and Career Training (TAACCCT) 

Grant Program,” September 18, 2013. http://www.doleta.gov/taaccct/. 

———. “Trade Adjustment Assistance for Workers: Comparison of Benefits and Services by 

Petition Number,” n.d. http://www.doleta.gov/tradeact/pdf/side-by-side.pdf 

(accessed March 19, 2014).

181
U.S. Department of Labor (USDOL). Office of Trade and Labor Affairs (OTLA). “Joint Statement 

of the Labor Affairs Council of the United States- Korea Free Trade Agreement,” 

March 19, 2013.http://www.dol.gov/ilab/programs/otla/KORUS-LAC2013.pdf. 

———. “Submissions under the Labor Provisions of Free Trade Agreements,” n.d.

http://www.dol.gov/ilab/trade/agreements/fta-subs.htm (accessed March 12, 2014).

———. “Submissions under the Labor Provisions of Free Trade Agreements: Mexico,” n.d.

http://www.dol.gov/ilab/trade/agreements/fta-subs.htm (accessed March 18, 2014). 

———. “Submissions under the North American Agreement on Labor Cooperation (NAALC),” 

n.d. http://www.dol.gov/ilab/trade/agreements/naalc.htm (accessed March 18, 2014). 

U.S. Department of State (USDOS). “AGOA Forum 2013,” n.d.

http://www.state.gov/p/af/rt/agoa/2013/index.htm (accessed January 3, 2014).

———. “Model BIT Fact Sheet.” Press release, April 20, 2012.

http://www.state.gov/r/pa/prs/ps/2012/04/188199.htm. 

———. “NAFTA Investor-State Arbitrations: Cases Filed Against the Government of Canada,” 

n.d. http://www.state.gov/s/l/c3740.htm (accessed March 19, 2014).

———. “NAFTA Investor-State Arbitrations: Cases Filed against United Mexican States,” n.d.

http://www.state.gov/s/l/c3742.htm (accessed March 19, 2014).

———. “NAFTA Investor-State Arbitrations: Cases Filed against the United States of America,” 

n.d. http://www.state.gov/s/l/c3741.htm (accessed March 19, 2014).

———. “Ninth WTO Ministerial Conference Makes History (State 167712),” 

December 18, 2013.

U.S. Department of State (USDOS). Bureau of Western Hemisphere Affairs. “U.S. Relations with 

Canada.” Fact sheet, August 23, 2013. http://www.state.gov/r/pa/ei/bgn/2089.htm. 

U.S. Department of State (USDOS). U.S. Embassy, Ottawa. “2013 Investment Climate 

Statement,” n.d. http://canada.usembassy.gov/business/reports-andstatistics/investment-climate-statement.html (accessed March 25, 2014).

———. “Canada: 2014 National Trade Estimate Report on Foreign Trade Barriers (Ottawa 

001658),” December 12, 2013.

———. “U.S.-Canada Economic Relations.” U.S.-Canada Economic Fact Sheet. U.S.-Canada 

Trade News, n.d. http://canada.usembassy.gov/business/u.s.-canada-trade-news

(accessed March 25, 2014).

U.S. Department of State (USDOS). U.S. Embassy, Port-au-Prince. “Haiti: FY2012 Second Quarter 

Report on the NEI Initiative (Port au-Prince 000658),” April 27, 2012.

182
———. “Haiti Response to USITC Biennial Caribbean Basin Investment Survey (Port-au-Prince 

001952),” July 5, 2013.

U.S. Department of State (USDOS). U.S. Mission, Geneva. “March 2013 WTO Committee on 

Agriculture (Geneva 000346),” May 7, 2013.

———. “WTO General Council Meeting, 24–25 July 2013 (Geneva 000076),” August 6, 2013.

———. “WTO General Council Meeting, 4 June 2012 (Geneva 000050),” August 6, 2013.

———. “WTO Trade Negotiations Committee, 11 April 2013 (Geneva 00030),” April 18, 2013.

———. “WTO Trade Negotiations Committee, 22 February 2013 (Geneva 000016),” March 7, 

2013.

———. “WTO Trade Negotiations Committee, 3 June 2013 (Geneva 000054),” June 24, 2013.

U.S. Department of State (USDOS). U.S. Mission to the OECD, Paris. “Evolving the OECD into a 

Modern and Relevant Organization (Paris 000220),” September 17, 2013.

———. “Inclusive Growth: OECD Working It Out, but No Good Definition (Paris 000016),” 

February 12, 2014.

U. S. Department of Transportation (USDOT). Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration 

(FMCSA). “Increased Participation and Improved Oversight Mechanisms Would Benefit 

the NAFTA Pilot Program.” Report No. MH-2012-169, August 16, 2012.

http://www.fmcsa.dot.gov/documents/intl-programs/trucking/NAFTA-INTERIMREPORT.pdf. 

———. “Memorandum of Understanding Between The Department of Transportation of the 

United States of America and the Secretaría de Comunicaciones y Transportes of the 

United Mexican States on International Freight Cross-border Trucking Services,” 

July 6, 2011. http://www.fmcsa.dot.gov/documents/Mexican_MOU_Eng.pdf. 

———. “Mexico Cross-Border Trucking Pilot Program– Aggregate Data Charts.” Aggregated 

data thru December 29, 2013. 

http://www.fmcsa.dot.gov/intl-programs/trucking/aggregate_charts.aspx (accessed 

March 21, 2014).

———. “Mexico Cross-Border Trucking Pilot Program: Operational Update Reports—

12/23/2013–12/29/2013 (Revised 01/27/2014): Number of Motor Carriers with Active 

Operating Authority.” http://www.fmcsa.dot.gov/intl-programs/trucking/reports.aspx

(accessed March 21, 2014).

U. S. Department of the Treasury. “Joint U.S.-China Economic Track Fact Sheet of the Fifth 

Meeting of the U.S.-China Strategic and Economic Dialogue,” July 12, 2013.

http://www.treasury.gov/press-center/press-releases/Pages/jl2010.aspx. 

183
———. “U.S. and China Breakthrough Announcement on the Bilateral Investment Treaty 

Negotiations.” Treasury Notes (blog), July 15, 2013.

http://www.treasury.gov/connect/blog/Pages/U.S.-and-China-BreakthroughAnnouncement-.aspx.

———. “U.S. and China Joint Fact Sheet Sixth Meeting of the Strategic and Economic 

Dialogue,” July 11, 2014. http://www.treasury.gov/press-center/pressreleases/Pages/jl2561.aspx. 

———. “U.S. Fact Sheet — Economic Track Fifth Meeting of the U.S.-China Strategic and 

Economic Dialogue,” July 12, 2013. http://www.treasury.gov/press-center/pressreleases/Pages/jl2011.aspx. 

U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA). Official statistics database.

http://www.eia.gov/dnav/pet/pet_move_impcus_a2_nus_epc0_im0_mbbl_a.htm

(accessed April 21, 2014).

———. “Short-term Energy Outlook,” February 11, 2014.

http://www.eia.gov/forecasts/steo/report/us_oil.cfm. 

U.S. Government Accountability Office (GAO). “Letter to the Honorable Max Baucus and the 

Honorable Dave Camp Concerning the Follow-up on the Haiti Earned Import Allowance 

Program,” December 14, 2012.

U.S. International Trade Commission (USITC). Andean Trade Preference Act: Impact on U.S. 

Industries and Consumers and on Drug Crop Eradication and Crop Substitution, 2011. 

USITC Publication 4352. Washington, DC: USITC, September 2012.

http://www.usitc.gov/publications/332/pub4352.pdf. 

———. Caribbean Basin Economic Recovery Act, 21st Report 2011–12. USITC Publication 4428. 

Washington, DC: USITC, September 2013.

http://www.usitc.gov/publications/332/pub4428.pdf. 

———. China’s Agricultural Trade: Competitive Conditions and Effects on U.S. Exports. USITC

Publication 4219. Washington, DC: USITC, March 2011.

http://www.usitc.gov/publications/332/pub4219.pdf. 

———. China: Effects of Intellectual Property Infringement and Indigenous Innovation Policies 

on the U.S. Economy. USITC Publication 4226. Washington, DC: USITC, May 2011.

http://www.usitc.gov/publications/332/pub4226.pdf. 

———. China: Intellectual Property Infringement, Indigenous Innovation Policies, and 

Frameworks for Measuring the Effects on the U.S. Economy. USITC Publication 

4199.Washington, DC: USITC, November 2010.

http://www.usitc.gov/publications/332/pub4199.pdf. 

184
———. Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (2013), Annotated for Statistical 

Reporting Purposes, 2013. USITC Publication 4368. Washington, DC: USITC, 

January 2013. 

———. Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (2014), Annotated for Statistical 

Reporting Purposes, 2014. USITC Publication 4446. Washington, DC: USITC, January 

2014. http://www.usitc.gov/publications/docs/tata/hts/bychapter/1400htsa.pdf. 

———. The Information Technology Agreement: Advice and Information on the Proposed 

Expansion, Part 1. Investigation No. 332-532. USITC Publication 4355. Washington, DC: 

USITC, October 2012. http://www.usitc.gov/publications/332/pub4355.pdf. 

———. Recent Trends in U.S. Services Trade: 2012 Annual Report. USITC Publication 4338. 

Washington, DC: USITC, July 2012. http://www.usitc.gov/publications/332/pub4338.pdf. 

———. Recent Trends in U.S. Services Trade: 2013 Annual Report. USITC Publication 4412. 

Washington, DC: USITC, July 2013. http://www.usitc.gov/publications/332/pub4412.pdf. 

———. “Sub-Saharan African Trade and Investment under AGOA Will Be Focus of Four New 

USITC Investigations.” News release, November 13, 2013.

http://www.usitc.gov/press_room/news_release/2013/er1113ll2.htm. 

———. Textiles and Apparel: Effects of Special Rules for Haiti on Trade, Markets, and 

Industries. USITC Publication 4016. Washington, DC: USITC, June 2008.

http://www.usitc.gov/publications/332/pub4016.pdf. 

———. The Year in Trade 2008: Operations of the Trade Agreements Program, 60th Report.

USITC Publication 4091. Washington, DC: July 2009.

http://www.usitc.gov/publications/332/pub4091.pdf. 

———. The Year in Trade 2009: Operation of the Trade Agreements Program, 61st Report. 

USITC Publication 4174. Washington, DC: U.S. International Trade Commission, 

July 2010. http://www.usitc.gov/publications/miscellaneous/pub4174.pdf. 

———. The Year in Trade 2010: Operation of the Trade Agreements Program, 62nd Report.

USITC Publication 4247. Washington, DC: July 2011.

http://www.usitc.gov/publications/332/pub4247.pdf. 

———. The Year in Trade 2011: Operation of the Trade Agreements Program; 63rd Report. 

USITC Publication 4336. Washington, DC: July 2012.

http://www.usitc.gov/publications/332/pub4336.pdf. 

———. The Year in Trade 2012: Operation of the Trade Agreements Program, 64th Report. 

USITC Publication 4416. Washington, DC: July 2013.

http://www.usitc.gov/publications/332/pub4416.pdf. 

185
U.S. International Trade Commission Interactive Tariff and Trade DataWeb (USITC 

DataWeb)/U.S. Department of Commerce (USDOC). http://dataweb.usitc.gov (accessed 

various dates).

U.S. Trade Representative (USTR). 2011 Report on Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures. 

Washington, DC: USTR, March 2011.

http://www.ustr.gov/sites/default/files/SPS%20Report%20Master%20Final%20Draft%2

0March%2025.pdf. 

———. 2012 National Trade Estimate Report on Foreign Trade Barriers. Washington, DC: USTR, 

March 2012. http://www.ustr.gov/sites/default/files/NTE%20Final%20Printed_0.pdf. 

———. 2012 Report on Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures. Washington, DC: USTR, 

April 2012. http://www.ustr.gov/webfm_send/3324. 

———. 2012 Trade Policy Agenda and 2011 Annual Report. Washington, DC: USTR, 

March 2012. http://www.ustr.gov/sites/default/files/FULL%20REPORT%20-

%20PRINTED%20VERSION.pdf. 

———. 2013 National Trade Estimate Report on Foreign Trade Barriers. Washington, DC: USTR, 

April 2013. http://www.ustr.gov/sites/default/files/2013%20NTE.pdf. 

———. 2013 Out-of-Cycle Review of Notorious Markets. Washington, DC: USTR, 

February 12, 2014. http://www.ustr.gov/sites/default/files/FINALPUBLISHED%202013_Notorious_Markets_List-02122014.pdf. 

———. 2013 Report on Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures. Washington, DC: USTR, 

March, 2013. http://www.ustr.gov/sites/default/files/2013%20SPS.pdf. 

———. 2013 Report to Congress on China’s WTO Compliance. Washington, DC: USTR, 

December, 2013. http://www.ustr.gov/sites/default/files/2013-Report-to-CongressChina-WTO-Compliance.pdf. 

———. 2013 Section 1377 Review on Compliance with Telecommunications Trade Agreements. 

Washington, DC: USTR, April 2013.

http://www.ustr.gov/sites/default/files/04032013%202013%20SECTION%201377%20Re

view.pdf. 

———. 2013 Special 301 Report. Washington, DC: USTR, May 2013.

http://www.ustr.gov/sites/default/files/05012013%202013%20Special%20301%20Repo

rt.pdf. 

———. “2013 Year in Review: A Look Back at USTR’s Work to Support Jobs and Economic 

Growth Here at Home.” USTR Blog, January 3, 2014. 

http://www.ustr.gov/about-us/press-office/blog/2014/january/2013-year-review-lookback-ustr%E2%80%99s-work-support-jobs-and-econ. 

186
———. 2014 National Trade Estimate Report on Foreign Trade Barriers. Washington, DC: USTR, 

March 2014.

http://www.ustr.gov/sites/default/files/2014%20NTE%20Report%20on%20FTB.pdf. 

———. 2014 Report on Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures. Washington, DC: USTR, March 

2014. http://www.ustr.gov/sites/default/files/FINAL-2014-SPS-Report-Compiled.pdf. 

———. 2014 Report on Technical Barriers to Trade. Washington, DC: USTR, 

April 2014. http://www.ustr.gov/sites/default/files/2014%20TBT%20Report.pdf. 

———. 2014 Section 1377 Review on Compliance with Telecommunications Trade Agreements. 

Washington, DC: USTR, April 2014. http://www.ustr.gov/sites/default/files/2013-

14%20-1377Report-final.pdf. 

———. 2014 Trade Policy Agenda and 2013 Annual Report. Washington, DC: USTR, March 

2014.

http://www.ustr.gov/sites/default/files/2014%20Trade%20Policy%20Agenda%20and%2

02013%20Annual%20Report.pdf. 

———. “24th U.S.-China Joint Commission on Commerce and Trade (JCCT) Signings.” Fact 

sheet, December 20, 2013. http://www.ustr.gov/about-us/press-office/factsheets/2013/December/JCCT-outcomes. 

———. “Acting Deputy U.S. Trade Representative Wendy Cutler to Visit Japan, Initiate Bilateral 

Negotiations on Autos, Insurance, Non-Tariff Measures.” Press release, July 31, 2013.

http://www.ustr.gov/ACTING-DEPUTY-USTR-WENDY-CUTLER-TO-VISIT-JAPAN-INITIATEBILATERAL-NEGOTIATIONS-ON%20AUTOS-INSURANCE-NON-TARIFF-MEASURES%20. 

———. “Acting U.S. Trade Representative Marantis and Action Labor Secretary Harris 

Announce Groundbreaking Labor Rights Enforcement Agreement with Guatemala.”

Press release, April 11, 2013. http://www.ustr.gov/about-us/press-office/pressreleases/2013/april/marantis-harris-labor-enforcement-guatemala. 

———. “Acting U.S. Trade Representative Marantis Lauds Progress in APEC and Trans-Pacific 

Partnership, Notes Shared Concern on World Trade Organization Talks.” Press release,

April 21, 2013. http://www.ustr.gov/about-us/press-office/pressreleases/2013/april/amb-marantis-apec-tpp. 

———. “Acting U.S. Trade Representative Miriam Sapiro Hails Signature of United StatesCaribbean Community Trade and Investment Framework Agreement.” Press release, 

May 29, 2013. http://www.ustr.gov/about-us/press-office/pressreleases/2013/may/amb-sapiro-hails-caricom-tifa. 

———. “Acting U.S. Trade Representative Sapiro Announces Section 301 Investigation of 

Ukraine.” Press release, May 30, 2013. http://www.ustr.gov/about-us/pressoffice/press-releases/2013/may/amb-sapiro-ukraine-investigation. 

187
———. “African Growth and Opportunity Act (AGOA).” http://www.ustr.gov/tradetopics/trade-development/preference-programs/african-growth-and-opportunity-actagoa (accessed November 20, 2013).

———. “The African Growth and Opportunity Act Implementation Guide.” Washington, DC: 

USTR, October 2000.

http://www.ustr.gov/archive/assets/Trade_Development/Preference_Programs/AGOA/

AGOA_Implementation_Guide/asset_upload_file505_6510.pdf. 

———. “Ambassador Froman Joins Vice President Biden in Mexico City to Kick Off the U.S.-

Mexico High Level Economic Dialogue.” Press release, September 20, 2013.

http://www.ustr.gov/about-us/press-office/blog/2013/september/froman-us-mexicohigh-level-economic-dialogue. 

———. “Announcement of Next Round of Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership 

Negotiation.” Press release, November 4, 2013. http://www.ustr.gov/about-us/pressoffice/press-releases/2013/November/announcement-TTIP-second-round. 

———. “Assistant U.S. Trade Representative for Environment and Natural Resources Jennifer 

Prescott Participates in Meetings with Peruvian Government.” Press release, June 6, 

2013. http://www.ustr.gov/about-us/press-office/press-releases/2013/june/assistantus-trade-representative-environment-and-nat. 

———. “Assistant U.S. Trade Representative for the Western Hemisphere John Melle Co-Chairs 

the Third Meeting of the Free Trade Commission under the United States-Peru Trade 

Promotion Agreement.” Press release, June 7, 2013. http://www.ustr.gov/aboutus/press-office/press-releases/2013/june/assistant-us-trade-representative-westernhemisphere. 

———. “Deputy U.S. Trade Representative Demetrios Marantis Welcomes Hard Work, 

Productive Outcomes in Revived U.S.-Taiwan Talks.” Press release, March 10, 2013.

http://www.ustr.gov/about-us/press-office/press-releases/2013/march/amb-marantisTaiwan-TIFA. 

———. “Joint Press Statement TPP Ministerial Meeting Bandar Seri Begawan, Brunei 

Darussalam.” Press release, August 23, 2013.

http://www.ustr.gov/Joint-Press-Statement-TPP-Ministerial-Brunei. 

———. “Joint Statement from 2012 NAFTA Free Trade Commission (FTC) Meeting.” Press 

release, April 3, 2012. http://www.ustr.gov/about-us/press-office/pressreleases/2012/april/joint-statement-2012-nafta-commission-meeting. 

———. “Joint Statement from the United States-Central Asia Trade and Investment Framework 

Agreement (TIFA) Council Meeting.” Press release, November 14, 2013.

http://www.ustr.gov/about-us/press-office/press-releases/2013/November/US-CentralAsia-TIFA-Council-Joint-Statement. 

188
———. “Joint Statement from U.S.-CARICOM.” Press release, March 31, 2012.

http://www.ustr.gov/about-us/press-office/press-releases/2012/march/jointstatement-us-caricom-trade-and-investment-coun. 

———. Letter from the United States Trade Representative Ambassador Ron Kirk to the 

Honorable Irving A. Williamson, Chairman, United States International Trade 

Commission, July 31, 2012.

http://www.usitc.gov/research_and_analysis/ongoing/documents/Request_letter_332-

532.pdf. 

———. Letter from the United States Trade Representative Ambassador Ron Kirk to the 

Honorable John Boehner, Speaker, U.S. House of Representatives, January 15, 2013.

http://www.ustr.gov/about-us/press-office/blog/2013/january/wts-enteringnegotiations-for-ista/. 

———. “Mali Now Eligible for Trade Benefits under U.S. African Growth and Opportunity Act 

(AGOA). Press release, December 24, 2013. http://www.ustr.gov/about-us/pressoffice/press-releases/2013/December/Mali-Eligible-for-Trade-Benefits-Under-AGOA. 

———. “Ministerial Guidance Energizes Negotiators’ Work during 19th Round of TPP 

Negotiations.” Press release, August 30, 2013. 

http://www.ustr.gov/19th-TPP-Round-Summary. 

———. Motor Vehicle Trade: Terms of Reference. April 12, 2014.

http://www.ustr.gov/sites/default/files/Motor%20Vehicle%20TOR%20-

%20Attachment%20to%20Amb%20Sasae%20Letter%204-12-13.pdf. 

———. “New U.S. Proposal on Tobacco Regulations in the Trans-Pacific Partnership.” Press 

release, August 22, 2013. 

http://www.ustr.gov/New-Proposal-Tobacco-Regulation-Trans-Pacific-Partnership. 

———. “Non-Tariff Measures: U.S. Consultations with Japan.” Fact sheet, April 12, 2013.

http://www.ustr.gov/about-us/press-office/fact-sheets/2013/april/non-tariff-measuresconsultations-japan. 

———. “Obama Administration Notifies Congress of Intent to Include Japan in Trans-Pacific 

Partnership Negotiations.” Press release, April 24, 2013. http://www.ustr.gov/aboutus/press-office/press-releases/2013/april/congressional-notification-japan-tpp. 

———. “Obama Administration Notifies Congress of Intent to Negotiate Transatlantic Trade 

and Investment Partnership.” Press release, March 20, 2013.

http://www.ustr.gov/about-us/press-office/press-releases/2013/march/administrationnotifies-congress-ttip. 

———. Out-of-Cycle Review of Notorious Markets. Washington, DC: USTR, December 13, 2012.

http://www.ustr.gov/sites/default/files/121312%20Notorious%20Markets%20List.pdf. 

189
———. “Promoting Food Security, Facilitating Competition, Enhancing Exports: New 

Multilateral Agriculture Provisions at the WTO.” Fact sheet, December 7, 2013.

http://www.ustr.gov/about-us/press-office/fact-sheets/2013/December/NewMultilateral-Agriculture-Provisions-at-the-WTO. 

———. “Readout from the Seventh Meeting of the United States-Afghanistan TIFA Council.” 

Press release, February 28, 2013. http://www.ustr.gov/about-us/press-office/pressreleases/2013/february/readout-US-Afghanistan-TIFA. 

———. “Readout of Ambassador Michael Froman’s Oct. 3 Meeting in Bali, Indonesia.” Press 

release, October 17, 2013. http://www.ustr.gov/about-us/press-office/pressreleases/2013/October/Readout-Bali-Meeting-TPP. 

———. “Readout of the Meeting between U.S. Trade Representative Michael Froman and 

Indian Minister of Commerce and Industry Anand Sharma.” Press release, July 11, 2013.

http://www.ustr.gov/about-us/press-office/press-releases/2013/july/readout-fromansharma. 

———. “Readout of the Meetings of Chief Negotiators for the Trans-Pacific Partnership.” Press 

release, November 25, 2013. http://www.ustr.gov/about-us/press-office/pressreleases/2013/November/Readout-TPP-Chief-Negotiators. 

———. “Readout of the Second Meeting of the U.S.-Korea Free Trade Agreement Joint 

Committee.” Press release, October 18, 2013. http://www.ustr.gov/about-us/pressoffice/press-releases/2013/October/Readout-second-US-Korea-FTA-Joint-Committee. 

———. “Readout of This Week’s Trans-Pacific Partnership Discussions in Washington, DC.” 

Press release, September 23, 2013. http://www.ustr.gov/about-us/press-office/pressreleases/2013/September/Readout-Washington-TPP-discussions. 

———. “Readout of Trade in Services Agreement (TISA) Negotiations.” Press release, 

November 8, 2013. http://www.ustr.gov/about-us/press-office/pressreleases/2013/November/readout-Trade-In-Services-Agreement-Negotiations.

———. “Remarks by United States Trade Representative Michael Froman Announcing 

Enforcement Action with Regard to India.” Press release, February 10, 

2014. http://www.ustr.gov/about-us/press-office/pressreleases/2014/February/Remarks-by-USTR-Froman-announcing-enforcement-actionwith-regard-to-India. 

———. “Saving Money, Growing Trade, Raising Incomes Worldwide: The New WTO Trade 

Facilitation Agreement.” Fact sheet, December 7, 2013. http://www.ustr.gov/aboutus/press-office/fact-sheets/2013/December/WTO-Trade-Facilitation-Agreement. 

190
———. “Statement by Acting U.S. Trade Representative Demetrios Marantis on Japan’s 

Announcement Regarding the Trans-Pacific Partnership.” Press release, March 15, 2013.

http://www.ustr.gov/about-us/press-office/press-releases/2013/march/amb-marantisstatement-japan-tpp. 

———. “Statement by Acting U.S. Trade Representative Demetrios Marantis Regarding Japan 

and the Trans-Pacific Partnership.” Press release, April 12, 2013.

http://www.ustr.gov/about-us/press-office/press-releases/2013/april/amb-marantisjapan-tpp. 

———. “Statement by U.S. Trade Representative Froman on the Conclusion of Round Two of 

TTIP Negotiations.” Press release, November 15, 2013. http://www.ustr.gov/aboutus/press-office/press-releases/2013/November/Froman-TTIP-Second-Round-Statement. 

———. “Statement by U.S. Trade Representative Froman on the Conclusion of the Third Round 

of TTIP Negotiations.” Press release, December 20, 2013. http://www.ustr.gov/aboutus/press-office/press-releases/2013/December/Statement-by-Ambassador-Froman-onThird-Round-TTIP-Negotiations. 

———. “Statement by U.S. Trade Representative Froman on the First Round of TTIP 

Negotiations.” Press release, July 12, 2013. http://www.ustr.gov/node/8346. 

———. “Statement by U.S. Trade Representative Michael Froman on Korea’s Announcement 

Regarding the Trans-Pacific Partnership.” Press release, November 29, 2013.

http://www.ustr.gov/about-us/press-office/press-releases/2013/November/Fromanstatement-TPP-Korea. 

———. “Statement from United States President Barack Obama, European Council President 

Herman Van Rompuy and European Commission President José Manuel Barroso.” Press 

release, February 13, 2013. http://www.ustr.gov/about-us/press-office/pressreleases/2013/february/statement-US-EU-Presidents. 

———. “Statement of the Ministers and Heads of Delegation for the Trans-Pacific Partnership 

Countries.” Press release, December 10, 2013. http://www.ustr.gov/about-us/pressoffice/press-releases/2013/December/TPP-Ministers-Statement. 

———. “Statement of U.S. Trade Representative Michael Froman Following the 9th Ministerial 

Conference of the World Trade Organization.” Press release, December 6, 2013.

http://www.ustr.gov/about-us/press-office/press-releases/2013/December/Fromanstatement-following-Ninth-Ministerial-Conference-WTO. 

———. “Statement on the 18th Round of Trans-Pacific Partners Negotiations.” Press release, 

July 25, 2013. http://www.ustr.gov/about-us/press-office/pressreleases/2013/july/statement-18th-round-tpp. 

191
———. “Substantial Progress in Singapore toward Trans-Pacific Partnership Agreement.” Press 

release, December 10, 2013. http://www.ustr.gov/about-us/press-office/pressreleases/2013/December/TPP-Ministers-Statement. 

———. Tenth Report to Congress on the Operation of the Caribbean Basin Economic Recovery 

Act. Washington, DC: USTR, December 31, 2013.

———. “TPP Negotiations Shift into High Gear at 16th Round.” Press release, March 13, 2013.

http://www.ustr.gov/about-us/press-office/press-releases/2013/march/tppnegotiations-higher-gear. 

———. “Trade and Investment Framework Agreements.” http://www.ustr.gov/tradeagreements/trade-investment-framework-agreements (accessed April 21, 2014).

———. “Trade as a Tool to Alleviate Poverty: Multilateral Results on Development at the 

World Trade Organization.” Fact sheet, December 7, 2013. 

http://www.ustr.gov/about-us/press-office/fact-sheets/2013/December/MultilateralResults-on-Development-at-the-WTO. 

———. “Transcript: Briefing by USTR Ambassador Froman.” Press release, December 10, 2013.

http://www.ustr.gov/about-us/press-office/press-releases/2013/December/TranscriptBriefing-by-Ambassador-Froman.

———. “Trans-Pacific Partnership Leaders Statement.” Press release, October 17, 2013.

http://www.ustr.gov/about-us/press-office/press-releases/2013/october/tpp-leadersstatement. 

———. “Trans-Pacific Partnership Negotiations Maintain Strong Momentum.” Press release, 

May 24, 2013. http://www.ustr.gov/about-us/press-office/pressreleases/2013/may/tpp-negotiations-strong-momentum. 

———. “United States Advances Trans-Pacific Partnership Goals with Vietnam.” Press release, 

April 24, 2013. http://www.ustr.gov/about-us/press-office/pressreleases/2013/april/US-advances-TPP-goals-Vietnam. 

———. “Toward the Trans-Pacific Partnership: U.S. Consultations with Japan.” Fact sheet, 

April 12, 2013. http://www.ustr.gov/about-us/press-office/fact-sheets/2013/april/USconsultations-Japan. 

———. “United States and Brazil Hold Second Meeting of the Commission on Economic and 

Trade Relations under the United States-Brazil Agreement on Trade and Economic 

Cooperation.” Press release, September 13, 2013. http://www.ustr.gov/about-us/pressoffice/press-releases/2013/september/us-and-brazil-hold-second-meeting-commissioneco. 

192
———. “United States and Burma Sign Trade and Investment Framework Agreement.” Press 

release, May 21, 2013. http://www.ustr.gov/about-us/press-office/pressreleases/2013/may/u.s.-burma-sign-tifa. 

———. “United States and Caribbean Community Forge Stronger Relationship.” Press release, 

November 15, 2013. http://www.ustr.gov/about-us/press-office/pressreleases/2013/November/US-CARICOM-TIFA. 

———. “United States and Central America-Dominican Republic Hold Environmental Affairs 

Council Meeting.” USTR Blog, May 10, 2013. http://www.ustr.gov/about-us/pressoffice/blog/2013/may/us-ca-dr-eac-meeting. 

———. “United States and Chile Hold Sixth Meeting of the Environmental Affairs Council under 

the U.S.-Chile Trade Agreement.” Press release, January 10, 2013.

http://www.ustr.gov/about-us/press-office/press-releases/2013/january/us-chile-sixtheac-us-chile-ft. 

———. “United States and Colombia Hold Inaugural Meeting on Labor Affairs Council under 

the U.S.-Colombia Trade Promotion Agreement.” Press release, June 5, 2013.

http://www.ustr.gov/about-us/press-office/press-releases/2013/june/us-colombia-lacusctpa. 

———. “United States and India Hold Seventh Trade Policy Forum.” Press release, 

September 21, 2010. http://www.ustr.gov/about-us/press-office/pressreleases/2010/september/united-states-and-india-hold-seventh-trade-polic. 

———. “United States and Indonesia Meet under Trade and Investment Framework 

Agreement.” Press release, June 13, 2013. http://www.ustr.gov/about-us/pressoffice/press-releases/2013/june/us-indonesia-tifa. 

———. “United States and Japan Streamline Organic Trade across the Pacific.” Press release, 

September 26, 2013. http://www.ustr.gov/about-us/press-office/pressreleases/2013/september/us-japan-organic-trade-across-pacific. 

———. “United States and Korea Hold First Meeting of the Environmental Affairs Council 

under the U.S.-Korea Trade Agreement.” Press release, February 14, 2013.

http://www.ustr.gov/about-us/press-office/press-releases/2013/february/US-Koreafirst-EAC-meeting. 

———. “United States and Korea Hold First Meeting of the Labor Affairs Council under the 

United States-Korea Trade Agreement.” Press release, March 19, 2013.

http://www.ustr.gov/about-us/press-office/press-releases/2013/march/US-Korea-LACmeeting. 

193
———. “United States and Peru Reach Agreement on Action Plan to Strengthen Forest Sector 

Governance.” Press release, January 11, 2013. http://www.ustr.gov/about-us/pressoffice/press-releases/2013/january/us-peru-action-plan-forest-sector-governance. 

———. “United States and Russian Federation Agree on Action Plan to Improve Intellectual 

Property Rights Protection.” Press release, December 21, 2012.

http://www.ustr.gov/about-us/press-office/press-releases/2012/december/us-russiaagree-action-plan-ipr. 

———. “United States and Taiwan Enhance Trade Ties.” Press release, April 5, 2014.

http://www.ustr.gov/about-us/press-office/press-releases/2014/April/United-Statesand-Taiwan-Enhance-Trade-Ties. 

———. “United States and Thailand Deepen Commitments to Engagement at Trade and 

Investment Framework Agreement Meeting.” Press release, January 17, 2013.

http://www.ustr.gov/about-us/press-office/press-releases/2013/january/US-Thailandengagement. 

———. “United States, Bangladesh Sign Trade and Investment Cooperation Forum Agreement 

(TICFA).” Press release, November 25, 2013. http://www.ustr.gov/about-us/pressoffice/press-releases/2013/November/US-Bangladesh-TICFA-Signing. 

———. “United States, Libya Sign Trade and Investment Framework Agreement.” Press 

release, December 18, 2013. http://www.ustr.gov/about-us/press-office/pressreleases/2013/December/US-Libya-Sign-Trade-Investment-Framework-Agreement. 

———. “United States Challenges India’s Restrictions on U.S. Solar Exports.” Press release, 

February 2013. http://www.ustr.gov/about-us/press-office/pressreleases/2013/february/us-challenges-india-restrictions-solar. 

———. “United States Continues to Press Guatemala on Enforcement of Worker Rights.” Press 

release, October 28, 2013. http://www.ustr.gov/about-us/press-office/pressreleases/2013/October/US-Guatemala-enforcement-worker-rights. 

———. “The United States Explores New Opportunity to Boost Trade and Investment with 

West Africa.” Press release, March 29, 2013. http://www.ustr.gov/about-us/pressoffice/press-releases/2013/march/US-explores-opportunity-west-Africa. 

———. “United States Launched Negotiations of an Investment Treaty with China.” Trade 

Facts, June 2008.

http://www.ustr.gov/sites/default/files/uploads/factsheets/2008/asset_upload_file993

_14943.pdf. 

———. “United States, Morocco Sign Bilateral Trade Facilitation Agreement.” Press release, 

November 21, 2013. http://www.ustr.gov/press-office/pressreleases/2013/November/US-Morocco-Trade-Facilitation-Agreement. 

194
———. “United States of America and the Republic of Iraq Announce Progress on Entry into 

Force of Trade and Investment Framework Agreement.” Press release, 

March 6, 2013.http://www.ustr.gov/about-us/press-office/pressreleases/2013/march/US-Iraq-TIFA-progress. 

———. “United States Requests WTO Panel in Case against Argentina’s Widespread Use of 

Import Restrictions.” Press release, December 6, 2012. http://www.ustr.gov/aboutus/press-office/press-releases/2012/december/us-requests-wto-panel-argentina-ir. 

———. “United States Seeks to Protect Worker Rights under U.S.-Bahrain Trade Agreement.” 

Press release, May 7, 2013. http://www.ustr.gov/about-us/press-office/pressreleases/2013/may/us-bahrain-worker-rights. 

———. “Update on the Third Round of Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership 

Negotiations.” Press release, December 19, 2013. http://www.ustr.gov/about-us/pressoffice/press-releases/2013/December/Readout-TTIP-third-round-update. 

———. “U.S. Announces Compliance in World Trade Organization ‘Dolphin-Safe’ Labeling 

Dispute.” Press release, July 12, 2013. http://www.ustr.gov/about-us/press-office/pressreleases/2013/july/US-complies-tuna-dolphin. 

———. “U.S., EU Announce Decision to Launch Negotiations on a Transatlantic Trade and 

Investment Partnership.” Press release, February 13, 2013. http://www.ustr.gov/aboutus/press-office/press-releases/2013/february/statement-US-EU-Presidents. 

———. “U.S.-Korea Free Trade Agreement Shows Strong Results on Second Anniversary.” Press 

release, March 12, 2014. http://www.ustr.gov/about-us/press-office/pressreleases/2014/March/US-Korea-Free-Trade-Agreement-Shows-Strong-Results-onSecond-Anniversary. 

———. “U.S.-Mexico High Level Economic Dialogue.” Fact sheet, May 2, 2013.

http://www.ustr.gov/about-us/press-office/fact-sheets/2013/may/us-mexico-hled. 

———. “U.S. Trade Representative Ron Kirk Announces Agreements between the United 

States and Jordan to Boost Investment and Economic Growth Enhance Labor 

Cooperation.” Press release, January 28, 2013. http://www.ustr.gov/about-us/pressoffice/press-releases/2013/january/ustr-kirk-announces-us-jordan-agreements. 

———. “U.S. Trade Representative Kirk Seeks World Trade Organization Dispute Settlement on 

Indonesia’s Import Restrictions on Horticultural and Animal Products.” Press release, 

March 14, 2013. http://www.ustr.gov/about-us/press-office/pressreleases/2013/july/US-complies-tuna-dolphin. 

195
———. “U.S. Trade Representative Ron Kirk Announces Next Step in Labor Rights Enforcement 

Case against Guatemala.” Press release, August 9, 2011. http://www.ustr.gov/aboutus/press-office/press-releases/2011/august/us-trade-representative-ron-kirkannounces-next-ste. 

———. “U.S. Trade Representative Ron Kirk and Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack Announce 

Agreement to Further Open Japan’s Market to U.S. Beef.” Press release, 

January 28, 2013. http://www.ustr.gov/about-us/press-office/pressreleases/2013/january/ustr-kirk-ag-sec-vilsack-japan-beef-announcement. 

———. “USTR Froman Expresses U.S. Disappointment at Halt of Information Technology 

Agreement Talks.” Press release, July 17, 2013. http://www.ustr.gov/about-us/pressoffice/press-releases/2013/july/amb-froman-disappointment-ita. 

———. “USTR Froman Looks to Next Steps in Review, Renewal of African Growth and 

Opportunity Act.” Press release, August 13, 2013. http://www.ustr.gov/Froman-NextSteps-in-Review-Renewal-of-AGOA. 

———. “USTR Froman, Secretary of Agriculture Vilsack Announce Continued EU Market Access 

for American Producers of High-Quality Beef.” Press release, August 1, 2013.

http://www.ustr.gov/Froman-Vilsack-Announce-Continued-EU-Market-Access-forAmerican-Beef-Producers. 

———. “USTR Froman Welcomes EU Action to Ensure Duty-Free Treatment for High-Tech 

Products as a Result of U.S. Victory in WTO Dispute.” News release, October 25, 2013.

http://www.ustr.gov/about-us/press-office/press-releases/2013/October/WTO-EUduty-free-high-tech. 

———. “USTR Kirk Announced Labor Rights Enforcement Case against Guatemala.”

Press release, July 30, 2010. http://www.ustr.gov/about-us/press-office/pressreleases/2010/july/united-states-trade-representative-kirk-announces-lab. 

———. “USTR Participates in Forestry Sub-Committee and Environmental Cooperation 

Commission Meetings in Lima.” Press release, April 10, 2013.

http://www.ustr.gov/about-us/press-office/blog/2013/april/USTR-forestry-meetingsPeru. 

———. “USTR Releases Annual Special 301 Report.” Press release, May 1, 2013.

http://www.ustr.gov/about-us/press-office/press-releases/2012/april/ustr-releasesannual-special-301-report-intellectual. 

———. “Weekly Trade Spotlight: USTR’s 2012 Year in Review,” USTR Blog, December 28, 2012.

http://www.ustr.gov/about-us/press-office/blog/2012/december/weekly-tradespotlight-ustr%E2%80%99s-2012-year-review. 

196
University of Washington. School of Environmental and Forest Sciences (SEFS). “CINTRAFOR 

Scores Major Victory for Pacific Northwest Timber and Forest Products Industry,” 

January 15, 2014. http://depts.washington.edu/sefsblog/tag/wood-use-pointsprogram/. 

Valencia, Alexandra and Ellsworth, Brian. “Ecuador Offers U.S. Rights Aid, Waives Trade 

Benefits.” Reuters, June 27, 2013. http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/06/27/us-usasecurity-ecuador-idUSBRE95Q0L820130627. 

White House. “Fact Sheet: Key Deliverables for the 2014 North American Leaders Summit.” Fact 

sheet, February 19, 2014. http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-pressoffice/2014/02/19/fact-sheet-key-deliverables-2014-north-american-leaders-summit. 

———. “Fact Sheet: Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership.” Fact sheet, 

June 17, 2013. 

http://www.ustr.gov/about-us/press-office/fact-sheets/2013/june/wh-ttip. 

———. “Fact Sheet: U.S.-Mexico High-Level Economic Dialogue.” Fact sheet, 

September 20, 2013. http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2013/09/20/factsheet-us-mexico-high-level-economic-dialogue. 

———. “Fact Sheet: U.S.-Mexico Partnership.” Fact sheet, May 2, 2013.

http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2013/05/02/fact-sheet-us-mexicopartnership. 

———. “Joint Statement from President Barack Obama and President Felipe Calderón.” 

Statements and Releases, May 19, 2010. http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-pressoffice/joint-statement-president-barack-obama-and-president-felipe-calder-n. 

———. “Joint Statement by North American Leaders—21st Century North America: Building 

the Most Competitive and Dynamic Region in the World.” Statements and Releases, 

February 19, 2014. http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2014/02/19/jointstatement-north-american-leaders-21st-century-north-america-buildi. 

———. “Press Conference by President Obama, President Peña Nieto, and Prime Minister 

Harper.” Statements and Releases, February 19, 2014. http://www.whitehouse.gov/thepress-office/2014/02/19/press-conference-president-obama-president-pe-nieto-andprime-minister-h. 

———. “Readout by the Press Secretary on the President’s Meeting with Prime Minister Noda 

of Japan.” Statements and Releases, November 12, 2011.

http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2011/11/12/readout-press-secretarypresidents-meeting-prime-minister-noda-japan. 

197
———. “Remarks by President Obama, U.K. Prime Minister Cameron, European Commission 

President Barroso, and European Council President Van Rompuy on the Transatlantic 

Trade and Investment Partnership.” Speeches and Remarks, June 17, 2013.

http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2013/06/17/remarks-president-obamauk-prime-minister-cameron-european-commission-pr.

———. “Terms of Reference for the High-Level Regulatory Cooperation Council,” 

March 3, 2011. http://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/omb/oira/irc/highlevel_regulatory_cooperation_council-terms_of_reference_final.pdf. 

———. “Trans-Pacific Partnership Leaders Statement.” Press release, October 8, 2013.

http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2013/10/08/trans-pacific-partnershipleaders-statement. 

White House. Executive Office of the President. United States-Mexico High-Level Regulatory 

Cooperation Council Work Plan. Washington, DC: Executive Office of the President, 

February 2012.

World Customs Organization (WCO). “International Convention on the Harmonized Commodity 

Description and Coding System.” Brussels, Belgium, June 14, 1983.

http://www.wcoomd.org/en/topics/nomenclature/instrument-andtools/hs_convention.aspx. 

———. “Substantial Transformation: Concept of ‘Originating Goods’ / ‘Sufficient Working or 

Processing,’” n.d. http://www.wcoomd.org/en/topics/origin/instrument-andtools/comparative-study-on-preferential-rules-of-origin/specific-topics/studytopics/suf.aspx. (accessed March 13, 2014).

World Trade Organization (WTO). “9th WTO Ministerial Conference, Bali, 2013: Briefing Note: 

Information Technology Agreement (ITA) and Product Expansion Negotiations.” Briefing 

note, n.d. http://www.wto.org/english/thewto_e/minist_e/mc9_e/brief_ita_e.htm

(accessed March 14, 2014).

———. “Accessions: Tajikistan,” n.d.

http://www.wto.org/english/thewto_e/acc_e/a1_tajikistan_e.htm (accessed March 13, 

2014).

———. “Accessions: Yemen Brings WTO Membership to 160.” News release, June 26, 2014. 

http://www.wto.org/english/news_e/news14_e/acc_yem_26jun14_e.htm. 

———. “Agreement on Agriculture. Annex 2––Domestic Support: The Basis for Exemption from 

the Reduction Commitments. Government Service Programmes. 2. General Services.” 

Agreement Establishing the World Trade Organization. Geneva: WTO, April 15, 1994.

http://www.wto.org/english/docs_e/legal_e/legal_e.htm#wtoagreement. 

198
———. “Agreement on Trade Facilitation––Ministerial Decision of 7 December 2013.” 

WT/MIN(13)/36, L/911, December 11, 2013.

http://wto.org/english/thewto_e/minist_e/mc9_e/balipackage_e.htm. 

———. “Aid for Trade––Ministerial Decision of 7 December 2013.” WT/MIN(13)/34, L/909, 

December 11, 2013.

http://wto.org/english/thewto_e/minist_e/mc9_e/balipackage_e.htm. 

———. “Aid for Trade: Mobilizing Aid for Trade: Fourth Global Review of Aid for Trade: 

‘Connecting to Value Chains,’” n.d.

http://www.wto.org/english/tratop_e/devel_e/a4t_e/global_review13_e.htm (accessed 

March 13, 2014).

———. Annual Report 2013. Geneva: WTO, 2013.

———. “Bali Ministerial Declaration––Adopted on 7 December 2013.” MIN(13)/DEC, 

December 11, 2013.

http://wto.org/english/thewto_e/minist_e/mc9_e/balipackage_e.htm. 

———. “Chronological List of Disputes Cases,” n.d.

http://www.wto.org/english/tratop_e/dispu_e/dispu_status_e.htm (accessed March 

12, 2014).

———. “Committee Debates Pros and Cons of Standard for Lean Meat Additive.” News 

release, June 30, 2011.

http://www.wto.org/english/news_e/news11_e/sps_30jun11_e.htm. 

———. “Cotton––Ministerial Decision of 7 December 2013.” WT/MIN(13)/41, L/916, 

December 11, 2013.

http://wto.org/english/thewto_e/minist_e/mc9_e/balipackage_e.htm. 

———. “Dispute Settlement,” n.d.

http://www.wto.org/english/tratop_e/dispu_e/dispu_e.htm (accessed March 19, 2014).

———. “Dispute Settlement: DS316; European Communities—Measures Affecting Trade in 

Large Civil Aircraft.” Online summary prepared by the WTO Secretariat, n.d.

http://www.wto.org/english/tratop_e/dispu_e/cases_e/ds316_e.htm 

(accessed April 10, 2014).

———. “Dispute Settlement: DS353; United States—Measures Affecting Trade in Large Civil 

Aircraft—Second Complaint.” Online summary prepared by the WTO Secretariat, n.d.

http://www.wto.org/english/tratop_e/dispu_e/cases_e/ds353_e.htm 

(accessed April 10, 2014).

199
———. “Dispute Settlement: DS381; United States—Measures Concerning the Importation, 

Marketing and Sale of Tuna and Tuna Products.” Online summary prepared by the WTO 

Secretariat, n.d. http://www.wto.org/english/tratop_e/dispu_e/cases_e/ds381_e.htm

(accessed April 10, 2014).

———. “Dispute Settlement: DS 382; United States—Administrative Reviews and Other 

Measures Related to Imports of Certain Orange Juice from Brazil.” Online summary 

prepared by the WTO Secretariat, n.d.

http://www.wto.org/english/tratop_e/dispu_e/cases_e/ds382_e.htm (accessed April 

17, 2014).

———. “Dispute Settlement: DS384; United States—Certain Country of Origin Labelling (COOL) 

Requirements.” Online summary prepared by the WTO Secretariat, n.d.

http://www.wto.org/english/tratop_e/dispu_e/cases_e/ds384_e.htm (accessed April 

10, 2014).

———. “Dispute Settlement: DS386; United States—Certain Country of Origin Labelling 

Requirements.” Online summary prepared by the WTO Secretariat, n.d.

http://www.wto.org/english/tratop_e/dispu_e/cases_e/ds386_e.htm (accessed April 

10, 2014).

———. “Dispute Settlement: DS394; China—Measures Related to the Exportation of Various 

Raw Materials.” Online summary prepared by the WTO Secretariat, n.d.

http://www.wto.org/english/tratop_e/dispu_e/cases_e/ds394_e.htm (accessed January 

3, 2014).

———. “Dispute Settlement: DS413, China—Certain Measures Affecting Electronic Payment 

Services.” Online summary prepared by the WTO Secretariat, n.d.

http://www.wto.org/english/tratop_e/dispu_e/cases_e/ds413_e.htm (accessed January 

3, 2014).

———. “Dispute Settlement: DS422, United States—Anti-dumping Measures on Shrimp and 

Diamond Sawblades from China.” Online summary prepared by the WTO Secretariat, 

n.d. http://www.wto.org/english/tratop_e/dispu_e/cases_e/ds422_e.htm (accessed 

January 3, 2014).

———. “Dispute Settlement: DS427; China—Anti-dumping and Countervailing Duty Measures 

on Broiler Products from the United States.” Online summary prepared by the WTO 

Secretariat, n.d. http://www.wto.org/english/tratop_e/dispu_e/cases_e/ds427_e.htm

(accessed January 3, 2014).

———. “Dispute Settlement: DS431; China—Measures Related to the Exportation of Rare 

Earths, Tungsten, and Molybdenum.” Online summary prepared by the WTO 

Secretariat, n.d. http://www.wto.org/english/tratop_e/dispu_e/cases_e/ds431_e.htm

(accessed January 3, 2014).

200
———. “Dispute Settlement: DS444; Argentina—Measures Affecting the Importation of 

Goods.” Online summary prepared by the WTO Secretariat, n.d.

http://www.wto.org/english/tratop_e/dispu_e/cases_e/ds444_e.htm (accessed March 

21, 2014).

———. “Dispute Settlement: DS447; United States—Measures Affecting the Importation of 

Animals, Meat and Other Animal Products from Argentina.” Online summary prepared 

by the WTO Secretariat, n.d.

http://www.wto.org/english/tratop_e/dispu_e/cases_e/ds447_e.htm 

(accessed April 4, 2014).

———. “Dispute Settlement: DS455; Indonesia—Importation of Horticultural Products, 

Animals and Animal Products.” Online summary prepared by the WTO Secretariat, n.d.

http://www.wto.org/english/tratop_e/dispu_e/cases_e/ds455_e.htm (accessed March 

21, 2014).

———. “Dispute Settlement: DS456; India—Certain Measures Relating to Solar Cells and Solar 

Modules.” Online summary prepared by the WTO Secretariat, n.d.

http://www.wto.org/english/tratop_e/dispu_e/cases_e/ds456_e.htm 

(accessed March 28, 2014).

———. “Dispute Settlement: DS464; United States—Anti-dumping and Countervailing 

Measures on Large Residential Washers from Korea.” Online summary prepared by the 

WTO Secretariat, n.d.

http://www.wto.org/english/tratop_e/dispu_e/cases_e/ds464_e.htm 

(accessed March 31, 2014).

———. “Dispute Settlement: DS465; Indonesia—Importation of Horticultural Products, 

Animals and Animal Products.” Online summary prepared by the WTO Secretariat, n.d.

http://www.wto.org/english/tratop_e/dispu_e/cases_e/ds465_e.htm 

(accessed March 28, 2014).

———. “Dispute Settlement: DS471; United States—Certain Methodologies and Their 

Application to Anti-Dumping Proceedings Involving China.” Online summary prepared by 

the WTO Secretariat, n.d.

http://www.wto.org/english/tratop_e/dispu_e/cases_e/ds471_e.htm 

(accessed March 31, 2014).

———. “Duty-free and Quota-free (DFQF) Market Access for Least-developed Countries––

Ministerial Decision of 7 December 2013.” WT/MIN(13)/44, L/919, December 11, 2013. 

http://wto.org/english/thewto_e/minist_e/mc9_e/balipackage_e.htm. 

———. “Export Competition––Ministerial Decision of 7 December 2013.” WT/MIN(13)/40, 

L/915, December 11, 2013. 

http://wto.org/english/thewto_e/minist_e/mc9_e/balipackage_e.htm. 

201
———. “General Council––Annual Report (2013).” WT/GC/156, November 28, 2013.

———. “General Services––Ministerial Decision of 7 December 2013.” WT/MIN(13)/37, L/912, 

December 11, 2013.

http://wto.org/english/thewto_e/minist_e/mc9_e/balipackage_e.htm. 

———. “Member Information: Lao People’s Democratic Republic and the WTO,” n.d.

http://www.wto.org/english/thewto_e/countries_e/lao_e.htm 

(accessed March 13, 2014).

———. “Ministerial Conferences: Briefing Notes for the Ninth Ministerial Conference.” Briefing 

note, n.d. http://www.wto.org/english/thewto_e/minist_e/mc9_e/brief_e.htm

(accessed December 9, 2013).

———. “Monitoring Mechanism on Special and Differential Treatment––Ministerial Decision of 

7 December 2013.” WT/MIN(13)/45, L/920, December 11, 2013.

http://wto.org/english/thewto_e/minist_e/mc9_e/balipackage_e.htm. 

———. “Ninth WTO Ministerial Conference: Day 1: Bali Conference Kicks Off with Warnings 

That Failure Will Hurt the Poor.” News release, December 3, 2013.

http://www.wto.org/english/news_e/news13_e/mc9_day1_e.htm. 

———. “Ninth WTO Ministerial Conference: Days 3, 4 and 5: Round-the-clock Consultations 

Produce ‘Bali Package.’” News release, December 7, 2013.

http://www.wto.org/english/news_e/news13_e/mc9sum_07dec13_e.htm. 

———. “Operationalization of the Waiver Concerning Preferential Treatment to Services and 

Service Suppliers of Least-developed Countries––Ministerial Decision of 7 December 

2013.” WT/MIN(13)/43, L/918, December 11, 2013.

http://wto.org/english/thewto_e/minist_e/mc9_e/balipackage_e.htm. 

———. “Preferential Rules of Origin for Least-developed Countries––Ministerial Decision of 7 

December 2013.” WT/MIN(13)/42, L/917, December 11, 2013.

http://wto.org/english/thewto_e/minist_e/mc9_e/balipackage_e.htm. 

———. “Public Stockholding for Food Security Purposes––Ministerial Decision of 7 December 

2013.” WT/MIN(13)/38, L/913, December 11, 2013.

http://wto.org/english/thewto_e/minist_e/mc9_e/balipackage_e.htm. 

———. “Report (2013) of the Committee on Trade in Civil Aircraft.” WT/L/897, November 7, 

2013.

———. “Report (2013) of the Committee on Trade in Government Procurement.” GPA/121, 

October 24, 2013.

202
———. Statistics Database: Time Series on International Trade.

http://stat.wto.org/StatisticalProgram/WSDBStatProgramHome.aspx?Language=E

(accessed May 12, 2014).

———. “Trade and Transfer of Technology––Ministerial Decision of 7 December 2013.” 

WT/MIN(13)/35, L/910, December 11, 2013.

http://wto.org/english/thewto_e/minist_e/mc9_e/balipackage_e.htm. 

———. Trade Policy Review: Japan. Geneva: WTO, February 21, 2013.

http://www.wto.org/english/tratop_e/tpr_e/tp376_e.htm. 

———. “TRIPS: ‘Non-violation’ Complaints (Article 64.2)––Background and the Current 

Situation,” n.d.

http://www.wto.org/english/tratop_e/trips_e/nonviolation_background_e.htm

(accessed March 18, 2014).

———. “TRIPS Non-violation and Situation Complaints––Ministerial Decision of 7 December 

2013.” WT/MIN(13)/31, WT/L/906, December 11, 2013.

http://wto.org/english/thewto_e/minist_e/mc9_e/balipackage_e.htm. 

———. “Understanding on Tariff Rate Quota Administration Provisions of Agricultural 

Products, As Defined in Article 2 of the Agreement on Agriculture––Ministerial Decision 

of 7 December 2013.” WT/MIN(13)/39, L/914, December 11, 2013.

http://wto.org/english/thewto_e/minist_e/mc9_e/balipackage_e.htm. 

———. “Work Programme on Electronic Commerce––Ministerial Decision of 7 December 

2013.” WT/MIN(13)/32, L/907, December 11, 2013.

http://wto.org/english/thewto_e/minist_e/mc9_e/balipackage_e.htm. 

———. “Work Programme on Small Economies––Ministerial Decision of 7 December 2013.” 

WT/MIN(13)/33, L/908, December 11, 2013.

http://wto.org/english/thewto_e/minist_e/mc9_e/balipackage_e.htm. 

World Trade Organization (WTO). Committee on Government Procurement. “Ministerial-level 

Meeting of the Committee on Government Procurement (3 December 2013, at Bali, 

Indonesia)—Declaration.” GPA/122, December 3, 2013.

World Trade Organization (WTO). Committee of Participants on the Expansion of Trade in 

Information Technology Products. “Classification Divergences––Note by the 

Secretariat.” G/IT/W/30, March 11, 2009.

———. “Minutes of the Meeting of 1 November 2012.” G/IT/M/56, March 14, 2013.

———. “Report (2013) of the Committee of Participants on the Expansion of Trade in 

Information Technology Products.” G/L/1050, October 15, 2013.

203
———. “Status of Implementation––Note by the Secretariat––Revision.” G/IT/1/Rev.49, 

October 4, 2013.

World Trade Organization (WTO). Committee on Trade in Civil Aircraft. “Minutes of the Meeting 

Held on 7 November 2013.” TCA/M/29, November 12, 2013.

204
Appendix A

Data Tables

205
206
Table A.1 U.S. merchandise trade with major trading partners (total exports and general imports), 2013

Major partners

U.S. total 

exports

U.S. general 

imports

Merchandise trade 

balance, 

Census basis

Two-way trade 

(total exports plus 

general imports)

Million $

EU-28 262,116 387,127 -125,011 649,243

Canada 300,347 332,078 -31,731 632,425

China 122,016 440,434 -318,417 562,450

Mexico 226,153 280,456 -54,303 506,608

Japan 65,145 138,534 -73,389 203,678

Korea 41,555 62,228 -20,673 103,783

Brazil 44,116 27,553 16,563 71,669

Taiwan 25,639 37,931 -12,292 63,570

India 21,875 41,829 -19,954 63,704

All others 470,017 519,252 -49,235 989,269

World 1,578,979 2,267,421 -688,443 3,846,400

Source: Census Bureau, U.S. Department of Commerce. http://www.census.gov/foreign-trade/.

Note: Merchandise trade data used to derive country and world trade balances in this table differ from trade data used 

elsewhere in this report. This table uses U.S. total exports and U.S. general imports to derive the official merchandise trade 

balance on the Census basis. The merchandise trade balance presented here is that used by Census to describe official trade 

balances. Merchandise trade data used to derive country and world trade balances throughout the report use imports for 

consumption and domestic exports. For more information, please see footnote 24 in chapter 1; the Census merchandise trade 

balance definition at http://www.census.gov/foreign-trade/reference/definitions/#M; and the “View data field descriptions” 

selection at http://dataweb.usitc.gov.

207
Table A.2 U.S. merchandise trade with FTA partners (total exports and general imports), 2013

FTA partners

U.S. total 

exports

U.S. general 

imports

Merchandise 

trade balance, 

Census basis

Two-way trade 

(total exports plus 

general imports)

Million $

Israel 13,738 22,676 -8,938 36,414

NAFTA 526,398 612,533 -86,136 1,138,931

Jordan 2,087 1,197 890 3,284

Chile 17,585 10,363 7,221 27,948

Singapore 30,724 17,828 12,896 48,552

Australia 26,047 9,272 35,319 16,776

Morocco 2,305 977 1,328 3,282

Bahrain 1,018 635 383 1,653

CAFTA-DR 29,451 30,114 -662 59,565

Oman 1,504 1,022 482 2,527

Peru 10,056 8,122 1,933 18,178

Korea 41,555 62,228 -20,673 103,783

Colombia 18,606 21,617 -3,011 40,224

Panama 10,782 449 10,333 11,231

FTA partner total 757,495 836,965 -79,471 1,594,460

World 1,578,979 2,267,421 -688,443 3,846,400

Source: Census Bureau, U.S. Department of Commerce. http://www.census.gov/foreign-trade/.

Note: Merchandise trade data used to derive FTA-partner trade balances in this table differ from trade data used in chapter 4. 

This table uses U.S. total exports and U.S. general imports to derive the official merchandise trade balance on the Census basis. 

The merchandise trade balance presented here is that used by Census to describe official trade balances. Merchandise trade 

data used to derive FTA-partner trade balances in chapter 4 uses imports for consumption and domestic exports. For more 

information, please see footnote 24 in chapter 1; the Census merchandise trade balance definition 

at http://www.census.gov/foreign-trade/reference/definitions/#M; and the “View data field descriptions” selection at 

http://dataweb.usitc.gov.

208
Table A.3 U.S. merchandise trade with the world, by USITC digest sectors, 2011–13

Sector

Grouping Description 2011 2012 2013

% change

2012–13

Million $

Domestic exports:

1 Agricultural products 145,724 149,293 152,162 1.9

2 Forest products 39,274 38,309 39,244 2.4

3 Chemicals and related products 213,983 217,452 218,078 0.3

4 Energy-related products 134,088 142,294 152,652 7.3

5 Textiles and apparel 19,433 19,211 19,754 2.8

6 Footwear 832 824 789 -4.3

7 Minerals and metals 140,640 140,516 133,749 -4.8

8 Machinery 115,193 122,404 122,269 -0.1

9 Transportation equipment 257,589 285,772 293,023 2.5

10 Electronic products 164,537 167,003 166,976 0.0

11 Miscellaneous manufactures 26,759 27,914 29,843 6.9

12 Special provisions 41,123 42,218 43,501 3.0

Total U.S. domestic exports 1,299,176 1,353,211 1,372,039 1.4

Imports for consumption:

1 Agricultural products 115,585 122,400 125,699 2.7

2 Forest products 36,271 37,116 39,966 7.7

3 Chemicals and related products 254,229 252,153 250,484 -0.7

4 Energy-related products 430,796 398,441 352,853 -11.4

5 Textiles and apparel 113,611 113,507 117,225 3.3

6 Footwear 22,559 23,745 24,612 3.7

7 Minerals and metals 192,550 194,712 190,474 -2.2

8 Machinery 154,948 166,237 169,113 1.7

9 Transportation equipment 306,579 358,409 371,548 3.7

10 Electronic products 400,592 413,767 417,226 0.8

11 Miscellaneous manufactures 99,415 104,443 109,412 4.8

12 Special provisions 59,815 66,105 71,137 7.6

Total U.S. imports for consumption 2,186,951 2,251,035 2,239,750 -0.5

Source: Official trade statistics of the USDOC as maintained by the USITC. 

Note: Because of rounding, figures may not add up to totals shown.

209
Table A.4 Leading U.S. domestic exports to the world by Schedule B subheading, 2011–13

Schedule B

subheading Description 2011 2012 2013

% change

2012–13

Million $

8800.00 Aircraft, spacecraft, and parts thereof 74,961 86,050 96,287 11.9

2710.19 Petroleum oils & oils (not light) from bituminous minerals or preps n.e.s.o.i. 70%+ by weight from petroleum 

oils or bituminous minerals

62,984 71,452 76,878 7.6

2710.12 Light oils and preparations (

a

) 30,413 33,773 11.0

7108.12 Gold, nonmonetary, unwrought n.e.s.o.i. (other than powder) 24,134 33,339 31,585 -5.3

8703.23 Passenger motor vehicles with spark-ignition internal combustion reciprocating piston engine, cylinder capacity 

over 1,500 cc but not over 3,000 cc

22,318 19,478 21,808 12.0

1201.90 Soybeans, whether or not broken, other than seed (

b

) 24,695 21,456 -13.1

8703.24 Passenger motor vehicles with spark-ignition internal combustion reciprocating piston engine, cylinder capacity 

over 3,000 cc

15,537 18,611 20,356 9.4

3004.90 Medicaments, in measured doses, etc. (excluding vaccines, etc., coated bandages, etc., and pharmaceutical 

goods), n.e.s.o.i.

18,386 19,436 17,322 -10.9

8542.31 Processors or controllers 10,667 11,325 11,355 0.3

2701.12 Bituminous coal, whether or not pulverized, but not agglomerated 15,587 14,349 10,506 -26.8

1001.99 Wheat and meslin other than durum or seed wheat (

c

) 7,953 10,242 28.8

8708.99 Parts and accessories for motor vehicles, n.e.s.o.i. 10,215 10,970 9,892 -9.8

8708.29 Parts and accessories of bodies (including cabs) for motor vehicles, n.e.s.o.i. 7,622 8,177 8,579 4.9

8704.31 Motor vehicles for goods transport n.e.s.o.i., with spark-ignition internal combustion piston engine, gross 

vehicle weight not over 5 metric tons

7,122 7,474 8,570 14.7

9018.90 Instruments and appliances for medical, surgical or veterinary sciences, n.e.s.o.i., and parts and accessories 

thereof

8,044 8,102 8,182 1.0

3002.10 Antisera and other blood fractions, and modified immunological products 5,038 6,439 8,059 25.2

8517.62 Machines for the reception, conversion and transmission or regeneration of voice, images or other data, 

including switching and routing apparatus

7,206 7,530 7,085 -5.9

1005.90 Corn (maize), other than seed corn 13,756 9,419 6,503 -31.0

8708.40 Gear boxes and parts thereof, for motor vehicles 4,943 5,165 6,000 16.2

7204.49 Ferrous waste and scrap, n.e.s.o.i. 9,217 7,482 5,991 -19.9

8431.43 Parts for boring or sinking machinery, n.e.s.o.i. 6,507 6,541 5,919 -9.5

2711.21 Natural gas, gaseous 5,436 4,346 5,818 33.9

8486.20 Machines and apparatus for the manufacture of semiconductor devices or electronic integrated circuits 5,331 5,279 5,813 10.1

5201.00 Cotton, not carded or combed 8,424 6,246 5,589 -10.5

8542.39 Electronic integrated circuits, n.e.s.o.i. 5,566 5,312 5,361 0.9

Total of items shown 349,000 435,581 448,929 3.1

All other 950,176 917,630 923,110 0.6

Total of all commodities 1,299,176 1,353,211 1,372,039 1.4

Source: Official trade statistics of the USDOC as maintained by the USITC.

Note: Because of rounding, figures may not add up to totals shown. The abbreviation “n.e.s.o.i.” stands for “not elsewhere specified or included.” a

Trade in 2011 reported under HTS tariff line 2710.11.

b

Trade in 2011 reported under HTS tariff line 1201.00.

c

Trade in 2011 reported under HTS tariff line 1001.90.

210
Table A.5 Leading U.S. imports for consumption from the world by HTS subheading, 2011–13

HTS

subheading Description 2011 2012 2013

% change

2012–13

Million $

2709.00 Petroleum oils and oils from bituminous minerals, crude 246,894 228,944 195,487 -14.6

8703.23 Passenger motor vehicles with spark-ignition internal combustion reciprocating piston engine, 

cylinder capacity over 1,500 cc but not over 3,000 cc

64,355 77,086 84,873 10.1

8703.24 Passenger motor vehicles with spark-ignition internal combustion reciprocating piston engine, 

cylinder capacity over 3,000 cc

56,502 66,287 62,953 -5.0

2710.19 Petroleum oils & oils (not light) from bituminous minerals or preps n.e.s.o.i. 70%+ by wt. from 

petroleum oils or bitum. min.

74,995 68,113 61,295 -10.0

8517.12 Telephones for cellular networks or for other wireless networks 42,213 43,665 47,185 8.1

8471.30 Portable automatic data processing machines, weight not more than 10 kg, consisting of at least a 

central processing unit, keyboard and display

42,091 43,216 42,634 -1.3

3004.90 Medicaments, in measured doses, etc. (excluding vaccines, etc., coated bandages, etc., and 

pharmaceutical goods), n.e.s.o.i.

37,802 34,541 33,924 -1.8

2710.12 Light oils and preparations (

a

) 35,606 33,005 -7.3

8517.62 Machines for the reception, conversion and transmission or regeneration of voice, images or other 

data, including switching and routing apparatus

23,758 27,254 29,869 9.6

7102.39 Diamonds, nonindustrial, worked, including polished or drilled 21,691 19,638 22,673 15.5

2713.11 Petroleum coke, not calcined 16,543 18,914 17,161 -9.3

8542.31 Processors or controllers 14,378 14,895 16,828 13.0

8473.30 Parts and accessories for automatic data processing machines and units thereof, magnetic or optical 

readers, transcribing machines, etc., n.e.s.o.i.

15,553 14,330 15,498 8.2

8471.50 Processing units other than those of 8471.41 and 8471.49, n.e.s.o.i.. 15,023 15,125 15,231 0.7

8528.72 Reception apparatus for television, incorporating a screen or video display device, color 16,621 16,642 14,425 -13.3

7108.12 Gold, nonmonetary, unwrought n.e.s.o.i. (other than powder) 14,330 15,912 14,124 -11.2

8803.30 Parts of airplanes or helicopters, n.e.s.o.i. 9,707 11,929 13,095 9.8

8708.99 Parts and accessories for motor vehicles, n.e.s.o.i. 11,460 12,911 12,266 -5.0

8471.70 Automatic data processing storage units, n.e.s.o.i.. 9,969 13,149 11,965 -9.0

9503.00 Toys, including riding toys o/than bicycles, puzzles, reduced scale models 10,877 10,914 11,096 1.7

8411.91 Parts of turbojets or turbopropellers 9,148 10,087 10,831 7.4

8708.29 Parts and accessories of bodies (including cabs) for motor vehicles, n.e.s.o.i. 8,477 10,202 10,817 6.0

8443.99 Parts and accessories of printing machinery, n.e.s.o.i. 11,527 10,842 10,738 -1.0

8704.31 Motor vehicles for goods transport n.e.s.o.i., with spark-ignition internal combustion piston engine, 

gvw not over 5 metric tons

7,573 9,193 10,360 12.7

2711.21 Natural gas, gaseous 13,290 8,292 9,540 15.1

Total of items shown 794,778 837,686 807,876 -3.6

All other 1,392,173 1,413,349 1,431,875 1.3

Total of all commodities 2,186,951 2,251,035 2,239,750 -0.5

Source: Official trade statistics of the USDOC as maintained by the USITC.

Note: Because of rounding, figures may not add up to totals shown. The abbreviation “n.e.s.o.i.” stands for “not elsewhere specified or included.” a

Trade in 2011 reported under HTS tariff line 2710.11.

211
212

Table A.6 U.S. trade with top 15 single-country trading partners, 2013

Rank Country

Domestic

exports

Imports for 

Consumption Total

% of total 

trade

Million $

1 Canada 251,685 332,887 584,572 16.2 

2 China 114,313 438,147 552,460 15.3 

3 Mexico 181,690 277,664 459,354 12.7 

4 Japan 59,689 137,954 197,643 5.5 

5 Germany 42,372 112,233 154,605 4.3 

6 Korea 39,008 61,979 100,987 2.8 

7 United Kingdom 41,228 52,165 93,393 2.6 

8 France 28,351 44,697 73,048 2.0 

9 Brazil 37,627 26,861 64,488 1.8 

10 Saudi Arabia 17,656 46,576 64,232 1.8 

11 Taiwan 23,270 37,539 60,808 1.7 

12 India 16,911 41,459 58,370 1.6 

13 Netherlands 37,137 18,850 55,987 1.6 

14 Italy 15,362 38,274 53,636 1.5 

15 Switzerland 22,040 28,095 50,135 1.4 

Top 15 928,340 1,695,378 2,623,718 72.6 

All others 443,699 544,372 988,071 27.4 

Total 1,372,039 2,239,750 3,611,789 100.0 

Source: Official trade statistics of the USDOC as maintained by the USITC.

Note: Because of rounding, figures may not add up to totals shown.

212
213

Table A.7 Top 15 U.S. single-country export markets and import sources, 2013

Rank Country

Million $ % of total exports

Domestic exports:

1 Canada 251,685 18.3

2 Mexico 181,690 13.2

3 China 114,313 8.3

4 Japan 59,689 4.4

5 Germany 42,372 3.1

6 United Kingdom 41,228 3.0

7 Korea 39,008 2.8

8 Brazil 37,627 2.7

9 Netherlands 37,137 2.7

10 Hong Kong 31,644 2.3

11 France 28,351 2.1

12 Belgium 26,736 1.9

13 Singapore 26,690 1.9

14 Australia 23,976 1.7

15 Taiwan 23,270 1.7

Top 15 countries 965,417 70.4

All others 406,622 29.6

Total U.S. domestic exports to the world 1,372,039 100.0

Imports for consumption: Million $ % of total exports

1 China 438,147 19.6

2 Canada 332,887 14.9

3 Mexico 277,664 12.4

4 Japan 137,954 6.2

5 Germany 112,233 5.0

6 Korea 61,979 2.8

7 United Kingdom 52,165 2.3

8 Saudi Arabia 46,576 2.1

9 France 44,697 2.0

10 India 41,459 1.9

11 Italy 38,274 1.7

12 Taiwan 37,539 1.7

13 Ireland 31,336 1.4

14 Switzerland 28,095 1.3

15 Malaysia 27,241 1.2

Top 15 countries 1,708,245 76.3

All others 531,505 23.7

Total U.S. imports for consumption 2,239,750 100.0

Source: Official trade statistics of the USDOC as maintained by the USITC.

Note: Because of rounding, figures may not add up to totals shown.

213
214

Table A.8 U.S. private services exports and imports from the world, by category, 2011–13

Service industry 2011 2012 2013

% change, 

2012–13

Million $

Exports

Business, professional, and technical services 140,974 153,093 156,883 2.5

Travel 115,552 126,214 139,569 10.6

Royalties and license fees 120,717 124,182 129,331 4.1

Financial services 78,243 76,418 81,270 6.3

Passenger fares 36,763 39,360 41,145 4.5

Education 22,823 24,710 26,357 6.7

Port services 21,334 21,562 22,987 6.6

Freight 21,733 22,293 22,427 0.6

Insurance services 14,958 16,067 15,311 -4.7

Telecommunications 12,851 14,009 14,083 0.5

Other 9,796 10,231 10,535 3.0

Total 595,744 628,138 659,899 5.1

Imports

Business, professional, and technical services 111,332 116,217 119,846 3.1

Travel 78,229 83,451 86,243 3.3

Insurance services 55,794 52,563 50,590 -3.8

Freight 40,418 41,873 44,740 6.8

Royalties and license fees 34,786 39,889 41,291 3.5

Passenger fares 31,079 34,654 37,344 7.8

Financial services 17,566 16,952 18,027 6.3

Port services 14,212 13,572 13,939 2.7

Telecommunications 7,792 8,007 7,633 -4.7

Education 5,763 6,037 6,393 5.9

Other 1,407 1,450 1,485 2.4

Total 398,378 414,666 427,530 3.1

Source: USDOC, BEA, U.S. International Transactions Accounts Data, March 19, 2014, table 3a.

Note: Data for 2013 are preliminary.

214
Table A.9 Antidumping cases active in 2013, by USITC investigation number

USITC 

investigation

number Product

Country 

of origin

Date of 

institution

USITC 

prelim

ITAa

prelim

ITA

final

USITC 

final

Date of 

final actionb

Affirmative = A; Negative = N

731-TA-1195 Utility-scale wind towers China 12/29/2011 A A A A 2/8/2013

731-TA-1196 Utility-scale wind towers Vietnam 12/29/2011 A A A A 2/8/2013

731-TA-1197 Steel wire garment hangers Taiwan 12/29/2011 A A A A 2/8/2013

731-TA-1198 Steel wire garment hangers Vietnam 12/29/2011 A A A A 1/28/2013

731-TA-1199 Large residential washers Korea 12/30/2011 A A A A 2/8/2013

731-TA-1200 Large residential washers Mexico 12/30/2011 A A A A 2/8/2013

731-TA-1201 Drawn stainless steel sinks China 3/1/2012 A A A A 4/4/2013

731-TA-1202 Xanthan gum Austria 6/5/2012 A A A N 7/12/2013

731-TA-1203 Xanthan gum China 6/5/2012 A A A A 7/12/2013

731-TA-1204 Hardwood plywood China 9/27/2012 A A A N 11/25/2013

731-TA-1205 Silica bricks China 11/15/2012 A A A N (

c

)

731-TA-1206 Nickel-plated steel Japan 3/27/2013 A A (

c

) (

c

) (

c

)

731-TA-1207 Prestressed steel tie wire China 4/23/2013 A A (

c

) (

c

) (

c

)

731-TA-1208 Prestressed steel tie wire Mexico 4/23/2013 A A (

c

) (

c

) (

c

)

731-TA-1209 Prestressed steel tie wire Thailand 4/23/2013 A N (

c

) (

c

) (

c

)

731-TA-1210 Welded stainless steel pressure pipe Malaysia 5/16/2013 A (

c

) (

c

) (

c

) (

c

)

731-TA-1211 Welded stainless steel pressure pipe Thailand 5/16/2013 A (

c

) (

c

) (

c

) (

c

)

731-TA-1212 Welded stainless steel pressure pipe Vietnam 5/15/2013 A (

c

) (

c

) (

c

) (

c

)

731-TA-1213 Steel threaded rod India 6/27/2013 A A (

c

) (

c

) (

c

)

731-TA-1214 Steel threaded rod Thailand 6/27/2013 A A (

c

) (

c

) (

c

)

731-TA-1215 Oil country tubular goods India 7/2/2013 A (

c

) (

c

) (

c

) (

c

)

731-TA-1216 Oil country tubular goods Korea 7/2/2013 A (

c

) (

c

) (

c

) (

c

)

731-TA-1217 Oil country tubular goods Philippines 7/2/2013 A (

c

) (

c

) (

c

) (

c

)

731-TA-1218 Oil country tubular goods Saudi Arabia 7/2/2013 A (

c

) (

c

) (

c

) (

c

)

731-TA-1219 Oil country tubular goods Taiwan 7/2/2013 A (

c

) (

c

) (

c

) (

c

)

731-TA-1220 Oil country tubular goods Thailand 7/2/2013 A (

c

) (

c

) (

c

) (

c

)

731-TA-1221 Oil country tubular goods Turkey 7/2/2013 A (

c

) (

c

) (

c

) (

c

)

731-TA-1222 Oil country tubular goods Ukraine 7/2/2013 A (

c

) (

c

) (

c

) (

c

)

731-TA-1223 Oil country tubular goods Vietnam 7/2/2013 A (

c

) (

c

) (

c

) (

c

)

731-TA-1224 Ferrosilicon Russia 7/19/2013 A (

c

) (

c

) (

c

) (

c

)

731-TA-1225 Ferrosilicon Venezuela 7/19/2013 A (

c

) (

c

) (

c

) (

c

)

731-TA-1226 Chlorinated isocyanurates China 8/29/2013 A (

c

) (

c

) (

c

) (

c

)

731-TA-1227 Steel concrete rebar Mexico 9/4/2013 A (

c

) (

c

) (

c

) (

c

)

731-TA-1228 Steel concrete rebar Turkey 9/4/2013 A (

c

) (

c

) (

c

) (

c

)

731-TA-1229 Monosodium glutamate China 9/16/2013 A (

c

) (

c

) (

c

) (

c

)

731-TA-1230 Monosodium glutamate Indonesia 9/16/2013 A (

c

) (

c

) (

c

) (

c

)

731-TA-1231 Grain-oriented electrical steel China 9/18/2013 A (

c

) (

c

) (

c

) (

c

)

731-TA-1232 Grain-oriented electrical steel Czech Republic 9/18/2013 A (

c

) (

c

) (

c

) (

c

)

731-TA-1233 Grain-oriented electrical steel Germany 9/18/2013 A (

c

) (

c

) (

c

) (

c

)

215
USITC 

investigation

number Product

Country 

of origin

Date of 

institution

USITC 

prelim

ITAa

prelim

ITA

final

USITC 

final

Date of 

final actionb

731-TA-1234 Grain-oriented electrical steel Japan 9/18/2013 A (

c

) (

c

) (

c

) (

c

)

731-TA-1235 Grain-oriented electrical steel Korea 9/18/2013 A (

c

) (

c

) (

c

) (

c

)

731-TA-1236 Grain-oriented electrical steel Poland 9/18/2013 A (

c

) (

c

) (

c

) (

c

)

731-TA-1237 Grain-oriented electrical steel Russia 9/18/2013 A (

c

) (

c

) (

c

) (

c

)

731-TA-1238 Non-oriented electrical steel China 9/30/2013 A (

c

) (

c

) (

c

) (

c

)

731-TA-1239 Non-oriented electrical steel Germany 9/30/2013 A (

c

) (

c

) (

c

) (

c

)

731-TA-1240 Non-oriented electrical steel Japan 9/30/2013 A (

c

) (

c

) (

c

) (

c

)

731-TA-1241 Non-oriented electrical steel Korea 9/30/2013 A (

c

) (

c

) (

c

) (

c

)

731-TA-1242 Non-oriented electrical steel Sweden 9/30/2013 A (

c

) (

c

) (

c

) (

c

)

731-TA-1243 Non-oriented electrical steel Taiwan 9/30/2013 A (

c

) (

c

) (

c

) (

c

)

731-TA-1244 Tetrafluoroethane China 10/22/2013 A (

c

) (

c

) (

c

) (

c

)

731-TA-1245 Calcium hypochlorite China 12/18/2013 (

c

) (

c

) (

c

) (

c

) (

c

)

731-TA-1246 Crystalline silicon photovoltaic products China 12/31/2013 (

c

) (

c

) (

c

) (

c

) (

c

)

731-TA-1247 Crystalline silicon photovoltaic products Taiwan 12/31/2013 (

c

) (

c

) (

c

) (

c

) (

c

)

Source: U.S. International Trade Commission.

a

“ITA” is the International Trade Administration of the USDOC.

b

For cases in which the final action was taken by the ITA, the date shown is the Federal Register notice date of that action. For cases in which the final action was taken by USITC, 

the date of the USITC notification of USDOC is shown.

c

216

Pending as of December 31, 2013.
217

Table A.10 Antidumping duty orders and suspension agreements in effect as of December 31, 2013

Country Commodity

Effective date of 

original action

Argentina Lemon juice (suspended) Sept. 10, 2007

Australia Electrolytic manganese dioxide Oct. 7, 2008

Belarus Steel concrete reinforcing bar Sept. 7, 2001

Belgium Stainless steel plate in coils May 21, 1999

Brazil Polyethylene terephthalate film, sheet, and strip Nov. 10, 2008

Frozen or canned warmwater shrimp and prawns Feb. 1, 2005

Prestressed concrete steel wire strand Jan. 28, 2004

Carbon and certain alloy steel wire rod Oct. 29, 2002

Stainless steel bar Feb. 21, 1995

Circular welded nonalloy steel pipe Nov. 2, 1992

Carbon steel butt-weld pipe fittings Dec. 17, 1986

Iron construction castings May 9, 1986

Canada Citric acid and certain citric salts May 29, 2009

Iron construction castings Mar. 5, 1986

Chile Preserved mushrooms Dec. 2, 1998

China Xanthan gum July 19, 2013

Drawn stainless steel sinks Apr. 11, 2013

Utility-scale wind towers Feb. 15, 2013

Crystalline silicon photovoltaic cells Dec. 07, 2012

High-pressure steel cylinders Jun. 21, 2012

Stilbenic optical brightening agent May 10, 2012

Multilayered wood flooring Dec. 8, 2011

Aluminum extrusions May 26, 2011

Drill pipe and drill collars Mar. 3, 2011

Seamless refined copper pipe and tube Nov. 22, 2010

Coated paper Nov. 17 2010

Seamless carbon and alloy steel standard, line, and pressure pipe Nov. 10, 2010

Magnesia carbon bricks Sept. 20, 2010

Narrow woven ribbons Sept. 1, 2010

Woven electric blankets Aug. 18, 2010

Steel grating July 23, 2010

Prestressed concrete steel wire strand June 29, 2010

Oil country tubular goods May 21, 2010

Potassium phosphate salts July 22, 2010

Kitchen appliance shelving and racks Sept. 14, 2009

Tow-behind lawn groomer Aug. 3, 2009

Citric acid and certain citric salts May 29, 2009

Circular welded carbon-quality steel line pipe May 13, 2009

Frontseating service valves April 28, 2009

HEDP April 28, 2009

Steel threaded rod April 14, 2009

Circular welded austenitic stainless pressure pipe Mar. 17, 2009

Small-diameter graphite electrodes Feb. 26, 2009

Uncovered innerspring units Feb. 19, 2009

Lightweight thermal paper Nov. 24, 2008

Polyethylene terephthalate film, sheet, and strip Nov. 10, 2008

Electrolytic manganese dioxide Oct. 7, 2008

Steel wire garment hangers Oct. 6, 2008

Raw flexible magnets Sept. 17, 2008

Off-the-road tires Sept. 4, 2008

Sodium nitrite Aug. 27, 2008

Laminated woven sacks Aug. 7, 2008

Light-walled rectangular pipe and tube Aug. 5, 2008

Steel nails Aug. 1, 2008

Circular welded carbon-quality steel pipe July 22, 2008

217
218

Country Commodity

Effective date of 

original action

Sodium hexametaphosphate Mar. 19, 2008

Certain polyester staple fiber June 1, 2007

Certain activated carbon April 27, 2007

Certain lined paper school supplies Sept. 28, 2006

Artist's canvas June 1, 2006

Chlorinated isocyanurates June 24, 2005

Magnesium April 15, 2005

Tissue paper Mar. 30, 2005

Frozen or canned warmwater shrimp and prawns Feb. 1, 2005

Crepe paper Jan. 25, 2005

Wooden bedroom furniture Jan. 4, 2005

Carbazole violet pigment 23 Dec. 29, 2004

Hand trucks Dec. 2, 2004

Polyethylene retail carrier bags Aug. 9, 2004

Ironing tables Aug. 6, 2004

Tetrahydrofurfuryl alcohol Aug. 6, 2004

Malleable iron pipe fittings Dec. 12, 2003

Refined brown aluminum oxide Nov. 19, 2003

Barium carbonate Oct. 1, 2003

Polyvinyl alcohol Oct. 1, 2003

Saccharin July 9, 2003

Non-malleable cast iron pipe fittings Apr. 7, 2003

Ferrovanadium Jan. 28, 2003

Folding gift boxes Jan. 8, 2002

Honey Dec. 10, 2001

Hot-rolled carbon steel flat products Nov. 29, 2001

Pure magnesium (granular) Nov. 19, 2001

Foundry coke Sept. 17, 2001

Steel concrete reinforcing bars Sept. 7, 2001

Preserved mushrooms Feb. 19, 1999

Carbon steel plate Oct. 24, 1997

Crawfish tail meat Sept. 15, 1997

Persulfates July 7, 1997

Furfuryl alcohol June 21, 1995

Pure magnesium (ingot) May 12, 1995

Glycine Mar. 29, 1995

Cased pencils Dec. 28, 1994

Silicomanganese Dec. 22, 1994

Paper clips Nov. 25, 1994

Fresh garlic Nov. 16, 1994

Helical spring lock washers Oct. 19, 1993

Sulfanilic acid Aug. 19, 1992

Carbon steel butt-weld pipe fittings July 6, 1992

Silicon metal June 10, 1991

Axes and adzes Feb. 19, 1991

Bars and wedges Feb. 19, 1991

Hammers and sledges Feb. 19, 1991

Picks and mattocks Feb. 19, 1991

Tapered roller bearings June 15, 1987

Porcelain-on-steel cooking ware Dec. 2, 1986

Petroleum wax candles Aug. 28, 1986

Iron construction castings May 9, 1986

Barium chloride Oct. 17, 1984

Chloropicrin Mar. 22, 1984

Potassium permanganate Jan. 31, 1984

Finland Carboxymethylcellulose July 11, 2005

France Low-enriched uranium Feb. 13, 2002

218
219

Country Commodity

Effective date of 

original action

Brass sheet and strip Mar. 6, 1987

Germany Lightweight thermal paper Nov. 24, 2008

Sodium nitrite Aug. 27, 2008

Seamless pipe Aug. 3, 1995

Brass sheet and strip Mar. 6, 1987

India Commodity matchbooks Dec. 11, 2009

HEDP Apr. 28, 2009

Certain lined paper school supplies Sept. 28, 2006

Frozen or canned warmwater shrimp and prawns Feb. 1, 2005

Carbazole violet pigment 23 Dec. 29, 2004

Prestressed concrete steel wire strand Jan. 28, 2004

Polyethylene terephthalate (PET) film July 1, 2002

Silicomanganese May 23, 2002

Hot-rolled carbon steel flat products Dec. 3, 2001

Carbon steel plate Feb. 10, 2000

Preserved mushrooms Feb. 19, 1999

Stainless steel bar Feb. 21, 1995

Stainless steel wire rod Dec. 1, 1993

Sulfanilic acid Mar. 2, 1993

Welded carbon-steel pipe May 12, 1986

Indonesia Coated paper suitable for high-quality print graphics using sheet-fed presses Nov. 11, 2010

Polyethylene retail carrier bags May 4, 2010

Carbon and certain alloy steel wire rod Oct. 29, 2002

Hot-rolled carbon steel flat products Dec. 3, 2001

Steel concrete reinforcing bars Sept. 7, 2001

Carbon steel plate Feb. 10, 2000

Preserved mushrooms Feb. 19, 1999

Iran Raw in-shell pistachios July 17, 1986

Italy Stainless steel butt-weld pipe fittings Feb. 23, 2001

Stainless steel wire rod Sept. 15, 1998

Pasta July 24, 1996

Granular polytetrafluoroethylene resin Aug. 30, 1988

Brass sheet and strip Mar. 6, 1987

Pressure-sensitive plastic tape Oct. 21, 1977

Japan Polyvinyl alcohol July 2, 2003

Welded large-diameter line pipe Dec. 6, 2001

Tin- and chromium-coated steel sheet Aug. 28, 2000

Large-diameter seamless pipe June 26, 2000

Small-diameter seamless pipe June 26, 2000

Stainless steel sheet and strip July 27, 1999

Stainless steel wire rod Sept. 15, 1998

Clad steel plate July 2, 1996

Stainless steel bar Feb. 21, 1995

Gray portland cement and clinker May 10, 1991

Brass sheet and strip Aug. 12, 1988

Carbon steel butt-weld pipe fittings Feb. 10, 1987

Prestressed concrete steel wire strand Dec. 8, 1978

Kazakhstan Silicomanganese May 23, 2002

Korea Large residential washers Feb. 15, 2013

Large power transformers Aug. 31, 2012

Light-walled rectangular pipe and tube Aug. 5, 2008

Prestressed concrete steel wire strand Jan. 28, 2004

Polyvinyl alcohol Oct. 1, 2003

Polyester staple fiber May 25, 2000

Carbon steel plate Feb. 10, 2000

Stainless steel sheet and strip July 27, 1999

Stainless steel plate in coils May 21, 1999

219
220

Country Commodity

Effective date of 

original action

Stainless steel wire rod Sept. 15, 1998

Welded ASTM A-312 stainless steel pipe Dec. 30, 1992

Circular welded non-alloy steel pipe Nov. 2, 1992

Latvia Steel concrete reinforcing bars Sept. 7, 2001

Malaysia Polyethylene retail carrier bags Aug. 9, 2004

Stainless steel butt-weld pipe fittings Feb. 23, 2001

Mexico Large residential washers Feb. 15, 2013

Seamless refined copper pipe and tube Nov. 22, 2010

Magnesia carbon bricks Sept. 20, 2010

Light-walled rectangular pipe and tube Aug. 5, 2008

Prestressed concrete steel wire strand Jan. 28, 2004

Carbon and certain alloy steel wire rod Oct. 29, 2002

Fresh tomatoes (suspended) Nov. 1, 1996

Circular welded non-alloy steel pipe Nov. 2, 1992

Moldova Carbon and certain alloy steel wire rod Oct. 29, 2002

Steel concrete reinforcing bars Sept. 7, 2001

Netherlands Carboxymethylcellulose July 11, 2005

Philippines Stainless steel butt-weld pipe fittings Feb. 23, 2001

Poland Steel concrete reinforcing bars Sept. 7, 2001

Romania Small-diameter seamless pipe Aug. 10, 2000

Russia Silicon metal Mar. 26, 2003

Ammonium nitrate (suspended) May 19, 2000

Hot-rolled carbon steel flat products (suspended) July 12, 1999

Carbon steel plate (suspended) Oct. 24, 1997

Uranium (suspended) Oct. 16, 1992

Solid urea July 14, 1987

South Africa Uncovered innerspring units Dec. 11, 2008

Ferrovanadium Jan. 28, 2003

Stainless steel plate in coils May 21, 1999

Spain Chlorinated isocyanurates June 24, 2005

Stainless steel wire rod Sept. 15, 1998

Stainless steel bar Mar. 2, 1995

Taiwan Steel wire garment hangers Dec. 10, 2012

Stilbenic optical brightening agent May 10, 2012

Polyvinyl alcohol Mar. 15, 2011

Narrow woven ribbons Sept. 1, 2010

Polyethylene retail carrier bags May 4, 2010

Raw flexible magnets Sept. 17, 2008

Polyethylene terephthalate (PET) film July 1, 2002

Hot-rolled carbon steel flat products Nov. 29, 2001

Polyester staple fiber May 25, 2000

Stainless steel sheet and strip July 27, 1999

Stainless steel plate in coils May 21, 1999

Stainless steel wire rod Sept. 15, 1998

Helical spring lockwashers June 28, 1993

Welded ASTM A-312 stainless steel pipe Dec. 30, 1992

Circular welded non-alloy steel pipe Nov. 2, 1992

Light-walled rectangular pipe Mar. 27, 1989

Carbon steel butt-weld pipe fittings Dec. 17, 1986

Small-diameter carbon steel pipe May 7, 1984

Thailand Frozen or canned warmwater shrimp and prawns Feb. 1, 2005

Polyethylene retail carrier bags Aug. 9, 2004

Prestressed concrete steel wire strand Jan. 28, 2004

Hot-rolled carbon steel flat products Nov. 29, 2001

Carbon steel butt-weld pipe fittings July 6, 1992

Welded carbon steel pipe Mar. 11, 1986

220
221

Country Commodity

Effective date of 

original action

Trinidad & Tobago Carbon and certain alloy steel wire rod Oct. 29, 2002

Turkey Light-walled rectangular pipe and tube May 30, 2008

Pasta July 24, 1996

Welded carbon steel pipe May 15, 1986

Ukraine Carbon and certain alloy steel wire rod Oct. 29, 2002

Hot-rolled carbon steel flat products Nov. 29, 2001

Silicomanganese Sept. 17, 2001

Ammonium nitrate Sept. 12, 2001

Steel concrete reinforcing bars Sept. 7, 2001

Carbon steel plate (suspended) Oct. 24, 1997

Solid urea July 14, 1987

United Arab Emirates Steel nails May 10, 2012

Polyethylene terephthalate film, sheet, and strip Nov. 10, 2008

Venezuela Silicomanganese May 23, 2002

Vietnam Utility-scale wind towers Feb. 15, 2013

Steel wire garment hangers Feb. 5, 2013

Polyethylene retail carrier bags May 4, 2010

Uncovered innerspring units Dec. 11, 2008

Frozen or canned warmwater shrimp and prawns Feb. 1, 2005

Frozen fish fillets Aug. 12, 2003

Source: U.S. International Trade Commission.

221
Table A.11 Countervailing duty cases active in 2013, by USITC investigation number

USITC 

investigation 

number Product

Country 

of origin

Date of 

institution

USITC 

prelim

ITAa

prelim

ITA

final

USITC

final

Date of final 

actionb

Affirmative = A; Negative = N

701-TA-486 Utility-scale wind towers China 12/29/2011 A A A A 2/8/2013

701-TA-487 Steel wire garment hangers Vietnam 12/29/2011 A A A A 1/28/2013

701-TA-488 Large residential washers Korea 12/30/2011 A A A A 2/8/2013

701-TA-489 Drawn stainless steel sinks China 3/1/2012 A A A A 4/4/2013

701-TA-490 Hardwood plywood China 9/27/2012 A A A N 11/25/2013

701-TA-491 Frozen warmwater shrimp China 12/28/2012 A A A N 10/21/2013

701-TA-492 Frozen warmwater shrimp Ecuador 12/28/2012 A N A N 10/21/2013

701-TA-493 Frozen warmwater shrimp India 12/28/2012 A A A N 10/21/2013

701-TA-494 Frozen warmwater shrimp Indonesia 12/28/2012 A N N (

c

) 8/19/2013

701-TA-495 Frozen warmwater shrimp Malaysia 12/28/2012 A A A N 10/21/2013

701-TA-496 Frozen warmwater shrimp Thailand 12/28/2012 A A N (

c

) 8/19/2013

701-TA-497 Frozen warmwater shrimp Vietnam 12/28/2012 A A A N 10/21/2013

701-TA-498 Steel threaded rod India 6/27/2013 A (

d

) (

d

) (

d

) (

d

)

701-TA-499 Oil country tubular goods India 7/2/2013 A (

d

) (

d

) (

d

) (

d

)

701-TA-500 Oil country tubular goods Turkey 7/2/2013 A (

d

) (

d

) (

d

) (

d

)

701-TA-501 Chlorinated isocyanurates China 8/29/2013 A (

d

) (

d

) (

d

) (

d

)

701-TA-502 Steel concrete rebar Turkey 9/4/2013 A (

d

) (

d

) (

d

) (

d

)

701-TA-503 Monosodium glumate China 9/16/2013 A (

d

) (

d

) (

d

) (

d

)

701-TA-504 Monosodium glumate Indonesia 9/16/2013 A (

d

) (

d

) (

d

) (

d

)

701-TA-505 Grain-oriented electrical steel China 9/18/2013 A (

d

) (

d

) (

d

) (

d

)

701-TA-506 Non-oriented electrical steel China 9/30/2013 A (

d

) (

d

) (

d

) (

d

)

701-TA-507 Non-oriented electrical steel Korea 9/30/2013 A (

d

) (

d

) (

d

) (

d

)

701-TA-508 Non-oriented electrical steel Taiwan 9/30/2013 A (

d

) (

d

) (

d

) (

d

)

701-TA-509 Tetrafluoroethane China 10/22/2013 A (

d

) (

d

) (

d

) (

d

)

701-TA-510 Calcium hypoclorite China 12/18/2013 (

d

) (

d

) (

d

) (

d

) (

d

)

701-TA-511 Crystalline silicon photovoltaic products China 12/31/2013 (

d

) (

d

) (

d

) (

d

) (

d

)

Source: U.S. International Trade Commission. a

International Trade Administration, USDOC. b

For cases in which the final action was taken by the ITA, the date shown is the Federal Register notice date of that action. For cases in which the final action was taken by USITC, 

the date of the USITC notification of USDOC is shown. c

Not applicable. 

d

Pending as of December 31, 2013.

222
Table A.12 Countervailing duty orders in effect as of December 31, 2013

Country Commodity

Effective date of 

original action

Brazil Carbon and certain alloy steel wire rod Oct. 22, 2002

Heavy iron construction castings May 15, 1986

China Utility-scale wind towers Feb. 15, 2013

Drawn stainless steel sinks April 11, 2013

Crystalline silicon photovoltaic cells Dec. 07, 2012

High pressure steel cylinders Jun. 21, 2012

Multilayered wood flooring Dec. 8, 2011

Aluminum extrusions May 26, 2011

Drill pipe and drill collars Mar. 3, 2011

Seamless refined copper pipe and tube Nov. 22, 2010

Coated paper Nov. 17, 2010

Seamless carbon and alloy steel standard, line, and pressure pipe Nov. 10, 2010

Magnesia carbon bricks Sept. 21, 2010

Narrow woven ribbons Sept. 1, 2010

Steel grating July 23, 2010

Potassium phosphate salts July 22, 2010

Prestressed concrete steel wire strand July 7, 2010

Oil country tubular goods Jan. 20, 2010

Citric acid and certain citric salts May 29, 2009

Kitchen appliance shelving and racks Sept. 14, 2009

Tow-behind lawn groomers Aug. 3, 2009

Welded stainless steel pressure pipe Mar. 19, 2009

Circular welded carbon-quality steel line pipe Jan. 23, 2009

Lightweight thermal paper Nov. 24, 2008

Raw flexible magnets Sept. 17, 2008

Off-the-road tires Sept. 4, 2008

Sodium nitrite Aug. 27, 2008

Laminated woven sacks Aug. 7, 2008

Light-walled rectangular pipe and tube Aug. 5, 2008

Circular welded carbon-quality steel pipe July 22, 2008

India Commodity matchbooks Dec. 11, 2009

Lined paper school supplies Sept. 28, 2006

Carbazole violet pigment 23 Dec. 29, 2004

Prestressed concrete steel wire strand Feb. 4, 2004

Polyethylene terephthalate (PET) film July 1, 2002

Hot-rolled carbon steel flat products Dec. 3, 2001

Carbon steel plate Feb. 10, 2000

Sulfanilic acid Mar. 2, 1993

Indonesia Coated paper Nov. 17, 2010

Hot-rolled carbon steel flat products Dec. 3, 2001

Carbon steel plate Feb. 10, 2000

Iran Roasted in-shell pistachios Oct. 7, 1986

Raw in-shell pistachios Mar. 11, 1986

Italy Pasta July 24, 1996

Korea Large residential washers Feb. 15, 2013

Carbon steel plate Feb. 10, 2000

Stainless steel sheet and strip Aug. 6, 1999

South Africa Stainless steel plate in coils May 11, 1999

Thailand Hot-rolled carbon steel flat products Dec. 3, 2001

Turkey Pasta July 24, 1996

Welded carbon steel pipe Mar. 7, 1986

Vietnam Polyethylene retail carrier bags May 4, 2010

Steel wire garment hangers Feb. 5, 2013

Source: U.S. International Trade Commission.

223
Table A.13 Reviews of existing antidumping and countervailing duty orders completed in 2013, by date 

of completion

USITC investigation 

number Product

Country 

of origin

Completion 

datea Action

731-TA-739 Clad steel plate Japan Continued 1/28/2013

731-TA-1103 Activated carbon China Continued 2/22/22013

701-TA-350 Corrosion-resistant carbon steel Korea Revoked 3/5/2013

731-TA-616 Corrosion-resistant carbon steel Germany Revoked 3/5/2013

731-TA-618 Corrosion-resistant carbon steel Korea Revoked 3/5/2013

731-TA-894 Ammonium nitrate Ukraine Continued 5/24/2013

731-TA-1110 Sodium hexametaphosphate China Continued 6/28/2013

731-TA-873 Steel concrete reinforcing bar Belarus Continued 7/2/2013

731-TA-874 Steel concrete reinforcing bar China Continued 7/2/2013

731-TA-875 Steel concrete reinforcing bar Indonesia Continued 7/2/2013

731-TA-878 Steel concrete reinforcing bar Latvia Continued 7/2/2013

731-TA-879 Steel concrete reinforcing bar Moldova Continued 7/2/2013

731-TA-880 Steel concrete reinforcing bar Poland Continued 7/2/2013

731-TA-882 Steel concrete reinforcing bar Ukraine Continued 7/2/2013

731-TA-1105 Lemon juice Argentina Continued 7/26/2013

731-TA-1106 Lemon juice Mexico Revoked 7/26/2013

701-TA-365 Pasta Italy Continued 8/30/2013

701-TA-366 Pasta Turkey Continued 8/30/2013

731-TA-734 Pasta Italy Continued 8/30/2013

731-TA-735 Pasta Turkey Continued 8/30/2013

731-TA-929 Silicomanganese India Continued 9/18/2013

731-TA-930 Silicomanganese Kazakhstan Continued 9/18/2013

731-TA-931 Silicomanganese Venezuela Continued 9/18/2013

731-TA-919 Welded large-diameter line pipe Japan Continued 9/26/2013

701-TA-447 Circular welded carbon-quality pipe China Continued 11/18/2013

731-TA-116 Circular welded carbon-quality pipe China Continued 11/18/2013

Source: U.S. International Trade Commission. a

The completion date shown is the date of the USITC notification of USDOC.

224
Table A.14 Section 337 investigations and related proceedings completed by the U.S. International Trade Commission during 2013 and those

pending on December 31, 2013

Status of investigation Article Countrya Commission determinationb

Completed:

337-TA-562 Certain Incremental Dental Positioning Adjustment 

Appliances and Methods of Producing Same

British Virgin Islands, Pakistan One related (ancillary) enforcement proceeding; 

terminated based on a finding of no violation.

337-TA-659 Certain Prepregs, Laminates, and Finished Circuit Boards Taiwan, Hong Kong, China One related (ancillary) enforcement proceeding; 

terminated based on a settlement agreement.

337-TA-666 Certain Cold Cathode Fluorescent Lamp (CCFL) Inverter 

Circuits and Products Containing Same

Taiwan, Korea One related (ancillary) modification proceeding; 

terminated based on a modification to a consent 

order.

337-TA-710 Certain Personal Data and Mobile Communications Devices 

and Related Software

Taiwan One related (ancillary) enforcement proceeding; 

terminated based on a settlement agreement.

337-TA-739 Certain Ground Fault Circuit Interrupters and Products 

Containing Same

China One related (ancillary) enforcement proceeding; 

issued cease and desist orders.

337-TA-744 Certain Mobile Devices, Associated Software, and 

Components Thereof

No foreign respondents One related (ancillary) bond forfeiture and one 

related (ancillary) bond return proceeding; 

terminated as premature.

337-TA-745 Certain Wireless Communication Devices, Portable Music 

and Data Processing Devices, Computers and Components 

Thereof

No foreign respondents Terminated based on a finding of no violation.

337-TA-746 Certain Automated Media Library Devices Germany, China, Mexico Terminated based on a finding of no violation.

337-TA-752 Certain Gaming and Entertainment Consoles, Related 

Software, and Components Thereof

No foreign respondents Terminated based on a finding of no violation.

337-TA-770 Certain Video Game Systems and Wireless Controllers and 

Components Thereof

Japan Terminated based on a finding of no violation.

337-TA-781 Certain Microprocessors, Components Thereof, and 

Products Containing Same

Costa Rica, Malaysia, Philippines, 

China

Terminated based on a finding of no violation.

337-TA-791 (consolidated 

with 337-TA-826) 

Certain Electric Fireplaces, Components Thereof, Manuals 

for Same, Certain Processes For Manufacturing or Relating to 

Same and Certain Products Containing Same

China Issued limited exclusion order.

337-TA-792 Certain Static Random Access Memories and Products 

Containing Same

France, Sweden, Netherlands Terminated based on a finding of no violation.

337-TA-794 Certain Electronic Devices, Including Wireless 

Communication Devices, Portable Music and Data Processing 

Devices, and Tablet Computers

No foreign respondents Terminated based on disapproval of limited 

exclusion order and cease and desist order by the 

USTR.

337-TA-796 Certain Electronic Digital Media Devices and Components 

Thereof

Korea Issued limited exclusion order and cease and 

desist orders.

337-TA-797 Certain Portable Electronic Devices and Related Software Taiwan Terminated based on a settlement agreement.

337-TA-804 Certain LED Photographic Lighting Devices and Components 

Thereof

China, Taiwan Issued general exclusion order.

337-TA-805 Certain Devices for Improving Uniformity Used in a 

Backlight Module and Components Thereof and Products 

Containing the Same

Korea Terminated based on a finding of no violation.

225
Status of investigation Article Countrya Commission determinationb

337-TA-807 Certain Digital Photo Frames and Image Display Devices and 

Components Thereof

Taiwan, Canada, Japan Issued limited exclusion order and cease and 

desist orders.

337-TA-808 Certain Electronic Devices with Communication Capabilities, 

Components Thereof, and Related Software

No foreign respondents Terminated based on a settlement agreement.

337-TA-812 Certain Computing Devices with Associated Instruction Sets 

and Software

No foreign respondents Terminated based on a settlement agreement.

337-TA-813 Certain Electronic Devices with Graphics Data Processing 

Systems, Components Thereof, and Associated Software

No foreign respondents Terminated based on a settlement agreement.

337-TA-819 Certain Semiconductor Chips with DRAM Circuitry, and 

Modules and Products Containing Same

Taiwan Terminated based on a settlement agreement.

337-TA-820 Certain Products Containing Interactive Program Guide and 

Parental Controls Technology

China Terminated based on a settlement agreement.

337-TA-823 Certain Kinesiotherapy Devices and Components Thereof Sweden, China, Netherlands Issued general exclusion order and cease and 

desist orders.

337-TA-824 Certain Blu-Ray Disc Players, Components Thereof and 

Products Containing Same

Japan, China, Korea Terminated based on a settlement agreement.

337-TA-825 Certain Silicon Microphone Packages and Products 

Containing Same

No foreign respondents Terminated based on a settlement agreement.

337-TA-826 (consolidated 

with 337-TA-791) 

Certain Electric Fireplaces, Components Thereof, Manuals 

for Same, Certain Processes for Manufacturing or Relating to 

Same and Certain Products Containing Same

China Issued a limited exclusion order.

337-TA-828 Certain Video Displays and Products Using and Containing 

Same

Taiwan Terminated based on a settlement agreement.

337-TA-829 Certain Toner Cartridges and Components Thereof Vietnam, Mexico, China, 

Hong Kong, Canada

Issued a general exclusion order and cease and 

desist orders.

337-TA-830 Certain Dimmable Compact Fluorescent Lamps and Products 

Containing Same

China Terminated based on a settlement agreement and 

withdrawal of the complaint.

337-TA-831 Certain Electronic Devices for Capturing and Transmitting 

Images, and Components Thereof

Taiwan Terminated based on a settlement agreement.

337-TA-832 Certain Ink Application Devices and Components Thereof 

and Methods of Using the Same

Canada, China Issued a limited exclusion order.

337-TA-834 Certain Mobile Electronic Devices Incorporating Haptics Taiwan Terminated based on withdrawal of the complaint.

337-TA-836 Certain Consumer Electronics and Display Devices and 

Products Containing Same

Canada, Taiwan, Korea, Japan, 

Sweden

Terminated based on a settlement agreement.

337-TA-838 Certain Food Waste Disposers and Components and 

Packaging Thereof

No foreign respondents Terminated based on withdrawal of the complaint.

337-TA-839 Certain Consumer Electronics, Including Mobile Phones and 

Tablets

Taiwan, Korea, Canada Terminated based on a settlement agreement.

337-TA-841 Certain Computers and Computer Peripheral Devices and 

Components Thereof and Products Containing the Same

Taiwan, Japan, France, Korea Terminated based on a finding of no violation.

337-TA-854 Certain Two-Way Global Satellite Communication Devices, 

System and Components Thereof

United Kingdom Terminated based on a consent order.

226
Status of investigation Article Countrya Commission determinationb

337-TA-855 Certain Sintered Rare Earth Magnets, Methods of Making 

Same and Products Containing Same

China, Hong Kong, Austria, Germany Terminated based on a settlement agreement.

337-TA-857 Certain Reduced Folate Nutraceutical Products and LMethylfolate Raw Ingredients Used ThereinItaly, Switzerland Terminated based on withdrawal of the complaint.

337-TA-858 Certain Devices with Secure Communication Capabilities, 

Components Thereof, and Products Containing Same

No foreign respondents Terminated based on withdrawal of the complaint.

337-TA-863 Certain Paper Shredders, Certain Processes for 

Manufacturing or Relating to Same and Certain Products 

Containing Same and Certain Parts Thereof

China, Hong Kong Terminated based on a settlement agreement.

337-TA-864 Certain Mobile Handset Devices and Related Touch 

Keyboard Software

China Terminated based on a settlement agreement.

337-TA-865 Certain Balloon Dissection Devices and Products Containing 

Same

Germany Terminated based on a consent order.

337-TA-869 Certain Robotic Toys and Components Thereof British Virgin Islands, Hong Kong, 

New Zealand

Terminated based on a consent order.

337-TA-870 Certain Electronic Bark Control Collars No foreign respondents Terminated based on a settlement agreement.

337-TA-874 Certain Products Having Laminated Packaging, Laminated 

Packaging, and Components Thereof

France Terminated based on a finding of no violation.

337-TA-875 Certain Radio Frequency Identification (RFID) Products and 

Components Thereof

No foreign respondents Terminated based on a settlement agreement.

337-TA-878 Certain Electronic Devices Having Placeshifting or Display 

Replication Functionality and Products Containing Same

No foreign respondents Issued a limited exclusion order and cease and 

desist orders.

337-TA-879 Certain Sleep-Disordered Breathing Treatment Systems and 

Components Thereof

Taiwan Terminated based on a consent order.

337-TA-880 Certain Linear Actuators China Terminated based on withdrawal of the complaint.

337-TA-891 Certain Laundry and Household Cleaning Products and 

Related Packaging

Mexico Terminated based on a settlement agreement.

Pending:

337-TA-501 Certain Encapsulated Integrated Circuit Devices and 

Products Containing Same

Malaysia One related (ancillary) remand proceeding; 

pending before the Commission.

337-TA-613 Certain 3G Mobile Handsets and Components Thereof Finland One related (ancillary) remand proceeding; 

pending before the Commission.

337-TA-641 Certain Variable Speed Wind Turbines and Components 

Thereof

Japan One related (ancillary) remand proceeding; 

pending before the Commission.

337-TA-739 Certain Ground Fault Circuit Interrupters and Products 

Containing Same

China One related (ancillary) bond return proceeding 

and one related (ancillary) advisory proceeding; 

pending before the Commission.

337-TA-750 Certain Mobile Devices and Related Software No foreign respondents One related (ancillary) remand proceeding; 

pending before the Commission.

337-TA-796 Certain Electronic Digital Media Devices and Components 

Thereof

Korea One related (ancillary) bond return proceeding; 

pending before the ALJ.

227
Status of investigation Article Countrya Commission determinationb

337-TA-800 Certain Wireless Devices with 3G Capabilities and 

Components Thereof

China, Finland Pending before the Commission.

337-TA-816 Certain Wiper Blades Korea, China, Taiwan Pending before the ALJ.

337-TA-823 Certain Kinesiotherapy Devices and Components Thereof Sweden, China, Netherlands One related (ancillary) advisory proceeding; 

pending before the Commission.

337-TA-830 Certain Dimmable Compact Fluorescent Lamps and Products 

Containing Same

China One related (ancillary) enforcement proceeding 

and one related (ancillary) modification 

proceeding; pending before the ALJ.

337-TA-833 Certain Digital Models, Digital Data, and Treatment Plans for 

Use in Making Incremental Dental Positioning Adjustment 

Appliances, the Appliances Made Therefrom, and Methods 

of Making the Same

Pakistan Pending before the Commission.

337-TA-837 Certain Audiovisual Components and Products Containing 

the Same

Japan, Taiwan Pending before the Commission.

337-TA-847 Certain Electronic Devices, Including Mobile Phones and 

Tablet Computers, and Components Thereof

Taiwan Pending before the Commission.

337-TA-849 Certain Rubber Resins and Processes for Manufacturing 

Same

China, Hong Kong, Canada Pending before the Commission.

337-TA-850 Electronic Imaging Devices Taiwan, Korea, China Pending before the Commission.

337-TA-853 Certain Wireless Consumer Electronics Devices and 

Components Thereof

Taiwan, Switzerland, China, Japan, 

Korea, Canada

Pending before the Commission.

337-TA-854 Certain Two-Way Global Satellite Communication Devices, 

System and Components Thereof

United Kingdom One related (ancillary) enforcement proceeding; 

pending before the ALJ.

337-TA-859 Certain Integrated Circuit Chips and Products Containing 

the Same

No foreign respondents Pending before the ALJ.

337-TA-860 Certain Optoelectronic Devices for Fiber Optic 

Communications, Components Thereof, and Products 

Containing the Same

Denmark, Germany, France, Israel Pending before the Commission.

337-TA-861 (consolidated 

with 337-TA-867)

Certain Cases for Portable Electronic Devices China, Taiwan, Hong Kong Pending before the ALJ.

337-TA-862 Certain Electronic Devices, Including Wireless 

Communication Devices, Tablet Computers, Media Players, 

and Televisions, and Components Thereof

Korea Pending before the ALJ.

337-TA-866 Certain Wireless Communications Equipment and Articles 

Therein

Sweden Pending before the ALJ.

337-TA-867 (consolidated 

with 337-TA-861)

Certain Cases for Portable Electronic Devices China, Taiwan Pending before the ALJ.

337-TA-868 Certain Wireless Devices with 3G and/or 4G Capabilities and 

Components Thereof

China, Finland, Korea Pending before the ALJ.

337-TA-871 Certain Wireless Communications Base Stations and 

Components Thereof

Sweden Pending before the Commission.

337-TA-872 Compact Fluorescent Reflector Lamps, Products Containing 

Same and Components Thereof

No foreign respondents Pending before the ALJ.

228
Status of investigation Article Countrya Commission determinationb

337-TA-873 Certain Integrated Circuit Devices and Products Containing 

the Same

Taiwan, Korea, Finland Pending before the ALJ.

337-TA-876 Certain Microelectromechanical Systems (MEMs Devices) 

and Products Containing Same

No foreign respondents Pending before the ALJ.

337-TA-877 Certain Omega-3 Extracts from Marine or Aquatic Biomass 

and Products Containing the Same

Norway, Israel, New Zealand, 

Canada

Pending before the ALJ.

337-TA-879 Certain Sleep-Disordered Breathing Treatment Systems and 

Components Thereof

Taiwan One related (ancillary) advisory proceeding; 

pending before the ALJ.

337-TA-881 Certain Windshield Wiper Devices and Components Thereof Mexico Pending before the ALJ.

337-TA-882 Certain Digital Media Devices, Including Televisions, 

Blu-Ray Disc Players, Home Theater Systems, Tablets and 

Mobile Phones, Components Thereof and Associated 

Software

Korea, Japan Pending before the ALJ.

337-TA-883 Certain Opaque Polymers Turkey, Netherlands Pending before the ALJ.

337-TA-884 Certain Consumer Electronics with Display and Processing 

Capabilities

China, Japan, Taiwan Pending before the ALJ.

337-TA-885 Certain Portable Electronic Communications Devices, 

Including Mobile Phones and Components Thereof

Taiwan Pending before the ALJ.

337-TA-886 Certain TV Programs, Literary Works for TV Production and 

Episode Guides Pertaining to Same

Canada Pending before the ALJ.

337-TA-887 Certain Crawler Cranes and Components Thereof China Pending before the ALJ.

337-TA-888 Certain Silicon Microphone Packages and Products 

Containing Same

China Pending before the ALJ.

337-TA-889 Certain Wireless Devices, Including Mobile Phones and 

Tablets

Korea Pending before the ALJ.

337-TA-890 Certain Sleep-Disordered Breathing Treatment Systems and 

Components Thereof

China Pending before the ALJ.

337-TA-892 Certain Point-to Point Network Communication Devices and 

Products Containing Same

Taiwan, Korea, Japan, Sweden Pending before the ALJ.

337-TA-893 Certain Flash Memory Chips and Products Containing Same Taiwan, Japan, Hong Kong Pending before the ALJ.

337-TA-894 Certain Tires and Products Containing Same China, Thailand Pending before the ALJ.

337-TA-895 Certain Multiple Mode Outdoor Grills and Parts Thereof China, Hong Kong Pending before the ALJ.

337-TA-896 Certain Thermal Support Devices for Infants, Infant 

Incubators, Infant Warmers, and Components Thereof

Japan Pending before the ALJ.

337-TA-897 Certain Optical Disc Drives, Components Thereof, and 

Products Containing the Same

Hong Kong, Korea, Japan, Taiwan Pending before the ALJ.

337-TA-898 Certain Marine Sonar Imaging Devices, Products Containing 

the Same, and Components Thereof

Hong Kong, United Kingdom Pending before the ALJ.

337-TA-899 Certain Vision-Based Driver Assistance System Cameras and 

Components Thereof

No foreign respondents Pending before the ALJ.

337-TA-900 Certain Navigation Products, Including GPS Devices, 

Navigation and Display Systems, Radar Systems, 

Navigational Aids, Mapping Systems and Related Software

Switzerland, Norway, United 

Kingdom

Pending before the ALJ.

229
Status of investigation Article Countrya Commission determinationb

337-TA-901 Certain Handheld Magnifiers and Products Containing 

Same

China Pending before the ALJ.

337-TA-902 Certain Windshield Wipers and Components Thereof Belgium Pending before the ALJ.

337-TA-903 Certain Antivenom Compositions and Products Containing 

the Same

Mexico Pending before the ALJ.

Source: U.S. International Trade Commission. a

The country designation is based on the address of the foreign respondents named in the notice of investigation. "Hong Kong” refers to "Hong Kong, China”; “Korea” refers to 

“Republic of Korea.”

b

ALJ stands for Administrative Law Judge.

230
Table A.15 Outstanding Section 337 exclusion orders as of December 31, 2013

Investigation no. Article Countrya Date patent expiresb

337-TA-55 Certain Novelty Glasses Hong Kong Nonpatent

337-TA-69 Certain Airtight Cast-Iron Stoves Taiwan, Korea Nonpatent

337-TA-87 Certain Coin-Operated Audio-Visual Games and Components 

Thereof

Japan, Taiwan Nonpatent

337-TA-105 Certain Coin-Operated Audio-Visual Games and Components 

Thereof (viz. Rally-X and Pac-Man)

Japan, Taiwan Nonpatent

337-TA-112 Certain Cube Puzzles Taiwan, Japan, 

Canada

Nonpatent

337-TA-114 Certain Miniature Plug-In Blade Fuses Taiwan Nonpatent

337-TA-118 Certain Sneakers with Fabric Uppers and Rubber Soles Korea Nonpatent

337-TA-137 Certain Heavy-Duty Staple Gun Tackers Taiwan, Hong Kong Nonpatent

337-TA-152 Certain Plastic Food Storage Containers Hong Kong, Taiwan Nonpatent

337-TA-167 Certain Single Handle Faucets Taiwan Nonpatent

337-TA-174 Certain Woodworking Machines Taiwan, 

South Africa

Nonpatent

337-TA-195 Certain Cloisonne Jewelry Taiwan Nonpatent

337-TA-197 Certain Compound Action Metal Cutting Snips and 

Components Thereof

Taiwan Nonpatent

337-TA-229 Certain Nut Jewelry and Parts Thereof Taiwan Nonpatent

337-TA-231 Certain Soft Sculpture Dolls, Popularly Known as "Cabbage 

Patch Kids," Related Literature, and Packaging Therefor

No foreign 

respondents

Nonpatent

337-TA-266 Certain Reclosable Plastic Bags and Tubing Singapore, Taiwan, 

Korea, Thailand, 

Hong Kong

Nonpatent

337-TA-279 Certain Plastic Light Duty Screw Anchors Taiwan Nonpatent

337-TA-285 Certain Chemiluminescent Compositions and Components 

Thereof and Methods of Using, and Products Incorporating, 

the Same

France Nonpatent

337-TA-287 Certain Strip Lights Taiwan Nonpatent

337-TA-295 Certain Novelty Teleidoscopes Hong Kong Nonpatent

337-TA-319 Certain Automotive Fuel Caps and Radiator Caps and Related 

Packaging and Promotional Materials

Taiwan Nonpatent

337-TA-321 Certain Soft Drinks and Their Containers Colombia Nonpatent

337-TA-378 Certain Asian-Style Kamaboko Fish Cakes Japan Nonpatent

337-TA-380 Certain Agricultural Tractors under 50 Power Take-Off 

Horsepower

Japan Nonpatent

337-TA-413 Certain Rare-Earth Magnets and Magnetic Material and 

Articles Containing Same

Taiwan July 8, 2014

337-TA-424 Certain Cigarettes and Packaging Thereof No foreign 

respondents

Nonpatent

337-TA-440 Certain 4-Androstenediol China July 13, 2018

337-TA-448 Certain Oscillating Sprinklers, Sprinkler Components, and 

Nozzles

Taiwan, Israel, 

Germany

July 8, 2014

July 8, 2014

337-TA-473 Certain Video Game Systems, Accessories, and Components 

Thereof

No foreign 

respondents

Dec. 18, 2015 

Dec. 25, 2015

337-TA-481/491 Certain Display Controllers with Upscaling Functionality and 

Products Containing Same; and Certain Display Controllers 

and Products Containing Same

Taiwan Feb. 24, 2017

337-TA-482 Certain Compact Disc and DVD Holders Denmark, 

Hong Kong, Taiwan

May 1, 2015

337-TA-486 Certain Agricultural Tractors, Lawn Tractors, Riding 

Lawnmowers, and Components Thereof 

China Nonpatent

337-TA-487c Certain Agricultural Vehicles and Components Thereof China, Netherlands, 

France, Germany, 

Canada

Nonpatent

231
Investigation no. Article Countrya Date patent expiresb

337-TA-494 Certain Automotive Measuring Devices, Products Containing 

Same, and Bezels for Such Devices

Taiwan Nonpatent

337-TA-498 Certain Insect Traps No foreign 

respondents

Jan. 30, 2018

337-TA-500 Certain Purple Protective Gloves Malaysia Nonpatent

337-TA-505 Certain Gun Barrels Used in Firearms Training Systems Switzerland, 

Netherlands

Sept. 25, 2015 

Aug. 25, 2017

337-TA-512 Certain Light-Emitting Diodes and Products Containing Same Malaysia Jan. 18, 2015

Sept. 22, 2017

Sept. 22, 2017

Sept. 22, 2017

Sept. 22, 2017

Sept. 22, 2017

July 27, 2018

July 27, 2018

July 27, 2018

337-TA-514 Certain Plastic Food Containers China Dec. 23, 2017

Dec. 23, 2017

337-TA-518 Certain Ear Protection Devices China, Taiwan June 2, 2015

337-TA-522 Certain Ink Markers and Packaging Thereof China, India, Korea, 

Hong Kong

Nonpatent

337-TA-539 Certain Tadalafil or Any Salt or Solvate Thereof, and Products 

Containing Same 

India, Panama, Haiti, 

Nicaragua, Mexico, 

Australia

June 12, 2016

337-TA-541 Certain Power Supply Controllers and Products Containing 

Same

Taiwan Sept. 24, 2019 Sept. 

24, 2019

337-TA-545 Certain Laminated Floor Panels Canada, Netherlands, 

China, Malaysia

June 10, 2017

June 10, 2017

June 10, 2017

337-TA-549 Certain Ink Sticks for Solid Ink Printers Korea Apr. 29, 2022

Apr. 29, 2022

Apr. 29, 2022

337-TA-557 Certain Automotive Parts Taiwan June 22, 2018

July 27, 2018

Sept. 28, 2018

Oct. 5, 2018

Oct. 26, 2018 

Mar. 1, 2019

Mar. 22, 2019

337-TA-563 Certain Portable Power Stations and Packaging Thereof China Feb. 4, 2017

Nonpatent

Nonpatent

337-TA-565 Certain Ink Cartridges and Components Thereof Hong Kong, China, 

Germany, Korea

Apr. 1, 2014

May 18, 2019

May 18, 2019

Apr. 3, 2022

Aug. 17, 2023

Aug. 26, 2023

337-TA-567 Certain Foam Footwear Canada Oct. 3, 2020

Mar. 28, 2020

337-TA-575 Certain Lighters Hong Kong, China Nonpatent

337-TA-582 Certain Hydraulic Excavators and Components Thereof Canada Nonpatent

337-TA-588 Certain Digital Multimeters, and Products with Multimeter 

Functionality

Hong Kong, China Nonpatent

337-TA-590 Certain Coupler Devices for Power Supply Facilities, 

Components Thereof, and Products Containing Same

Taiwan, Germany, 

China

Aug. 5, 2024

232
Investigation no. Article Countrya Date patent expiresb

337-TA-603 Certain DVD Players and Recorders and Certain Products 

Containing Same

China, Hong Kong Dec. 23, 2014

Jan. 18, 2015

Jan. 30, 2016

337-TA-604 Certain Sucralose, Sweeteners Containing Sucralose, and 

Related Intermediate Compounds Thereof

China, United 

Kingdom, Hong Kong

Oct. 17, 2017

Apr. 18, 2023

337-TA-611 Certain Magnifying Loupe Products and Components Thereof China May 20, 2022

337-TA-615 Certain Ground Fault Circuit Interrupters and Products 

Containing the Same

China Oct. 24, 2014

Nov. 21, 2020

May 3, 2021

Apr. 28, 2025

337-TA-617 Certain Digital Televisions and Certain Products Containing 

Same and Methods of Using Same

Taiwan, Hong Kong, 

China

Apr. 9, 2018

337-TA-629 Certain Silicon Microphone Packages and Products Containing 

the Same

Malaysia June 21, 2021

Sept. 16, 2022

337-TA-637 Certain Hair Irons and Packaging Thereof Singapore, China, 

Hong Kong

Nonpatent

337-TA-638 Certain Intermediate Bulk Containers China Mar. 21, 2015

337-TA-643 Certain Cigarettes and Packaging Thereof Moldova, Belize, 

Singapore, Ukraine, 

Kyrgyzstan, Gibraltar, 

United Kingdom, 

Switzerland

Nonpatent

337-TA-644 Certain Composite Wear Components and Products 

Containing the Same

India, Italy Aug. 27, 2017

337-TA-650d Certain Coaxial Cable Connectors and Components Thereof 

and Products Containing Same

Taiwan, China Sept. 12, 2014

Aug. 2, 2017

Jan. 24, 2020

337-TA-655 Certain Cast Steel Railway Wheels, Certain Processes for 

Manufacturing or Relating to Same and Certain Products 

Containing Same

China Nonpatent

337-TA-678 Certain Energy Drink Products No foreign 

respondents

Nonpatent

337-TA-679 Certain Products Advertised As Containing Creatine Ethyl 

Ester

No foreign 

respondents

Nonpatent

337-TA-691 Certain Inkjet Ink Supplies and Components Thereof China, Hong Kong Mar. 9, 2018

May 11, 2018

337-TA-700 Certain MEMS Devices and Products Containing Same No foreign 

respondents

Jan. 29, 2021

337-TA-710 Certain Personal Data and Mobile Communication Devices 

and Related Software

Taiwan Feb. 1, 2016

337-TA-718 Certain Electronic Paper Towel Dispensing Devices and 

Components Thereof

Canada, Hong Kong, 

Taiwan, Turkey

Feb. 9, 2021

Feb. 9, 2021

Mar.15, 2021

May 27, 2021

337-TA-720 Certain Biometric Scanning Devices, Components Thereof, 

Associated Software, and Products Containing the Same

Korea May 9, 2017

Jan. 16, 2023

337-TA-722 Certain Automotive Vehicles and Designs Therefore China Jan. 3, 2020

337-TA-723 Certain Inkjet Ink Cartridges with Printheads and Components 

Thereof

Taiwan, Hong Kong, 

China

Aug. 30, 2019

July 24, 2020

July 24, 2020

Oct. 30, 2020

Oct. 30, 2020

337-TA-725 Certain Caskets Mexico May 10, 2015

May 10, 2015

May 10, 2015

July 9, 2016

Sept. 13, 2020

233
Investigation no. Article Countrya Date patent expiresb

337-TA-730 Certain Inkjet Ink Supplies and Components Thereof Hong Kong, China Aug. 20, 2023

Oct. 29, 2023

337-TA-739 Certain Ground Fault Circuit Interrupters and Products 

Containing Same

China Oct. 21, 2023

337-TA-740 Certain Toner Cartridges and Components Thereof China, Hong Kong, 

Canada, Korea, 

Macao

Feb. 16, 2016

Feb. 16, 2016

Dec. 20, 2016

Dec. 20, 2016

Dec. 20, 2016

Dec. 20, 2016

Feb. 18, 2018

Sept. 22, 2019

July 18, 2021

July 15, 2022

July 15, 2022

Apr. 29, 2023

May 21, 2023

Dec. 19, 2024

337-TA-744 Certain Mobile Devices, Associated Software, and 

Components Thereof

No foreign 

respondents

Apr. 10, 2018

337-TA-754 Certain Handbags, Luggage, Accessories, and Packaging 

Thereof

China Nonpatent

337-TA-759 Certain Birthing Simulators and Associated Systems China May 8, 2016

May 8, 2016

337-TA-763 Certain Radio Control Hobby Transmitters and Receivers and 

Products Containing Same

China Oct. 18, 2025

Nonpatent

337-TA-776 Certain Lighting Control Devices Including Dimmer Switches 

and Parts Thereof

China June 10, 2014

337-TA-780 Certain Protective Cases and Components Thereof China, Hong Kong Sept. 29, 2023

June 15, 2024

May 11, 2024

June 15, 2024

Mar. 22, 2025

Apr. 19, 2025

Jan. 25, 2029

Nonpatent

337-TA-791/826 Certain Electric Fireplaces, Components Thereof, Manuals for 

Same, Certain Processes for Manufacturing or Relating to 

Same and Certain Products Containing Same; and Certain 

Electric Fireplaces, Components Thereof, Manuals for Same, 

Certain Processes for Manufacturing or Relating to Same and 

Certain Products Containing Same

China Nonpatent

337-TA-796 Certain Electronic Digital Media Devices and Components 

Thereof

Korea Sept. 6, 2026

Jan. 5, 2027

337-TA-804 Certain LED Photographic Lighting Devices and Components 

Thereof

China, Taiwan Dec. 7, 2021

Dec. 7, 2021

337-TA-807 Certain Digital Photo Frames and Image Display Devices and 

Components Thereof

Taiwan, Canada, 

Japan

July 6, 2020

Dec. 26, 2020

Oct. 29, 2021

337-TA-823 Certain Kinesiotherapy Devices and Components Thereof Sweden, China, 

Netherlands

Sept. 18, 2026

337-TA-829 Certain Toner Cartridges and Components Thereof Vietnam, Mexico, 

China, Hong Kong, 

Canada

March 26, 2016

March 26, 2016

337-TA-832 Certain Ink Application Devices and Components Thereof and 

Methods of Using the Same

Canada, China Feb. 28, 2020

Sept. 2, 2020

234
Investigation no. Article Countrya Date patent expiresb

337-TA-878 Certain Electronic Devices Having Placeshifting or Display 

Replication Functionality and Products Containing Same

No foreign 

respondents

May 26, 2019

May 26, 2019

June 7, 2025

June 7, 2025

June 7, 2025

May 1, 2029

Source: U.S. International Trade Commission.

a

This column lists the countries of the foreign respondents named in the notice of investigation.

b

Multiple dates indicate the expiration dates of separate patents within the investigation. c

There are three outstanding exclusion orders in inv. no. 337-TA-487. d

There are three outstanding exclusion orders in inv. no. 337-TA-650. 

235
Table A.16 U.S. imports for consumption under the GSP, by leading GSP beneficiary, 2011–13

Source 2011 2012 2013

% change

2012–13

Thousand $

India 3,736,156 4,453,874 4,222,999 -5.2

Thailand 3,719,574 3,709,582 3,341,136 -9.9

Brazil 2,059,096 2,317,083 2,306,520 -0.5

Indonesia 1,965,418 2,208,075 1,834,042 -16.9

Philippines 1,133,796 1,239,219 1,267,527 2.3

Turkey 894,703 1,139,221 1,213,494 6.5

South Africa 1,332,575 1,294,108 1,089,648 -15.8

Angola 300,237 631,683 710,350 12.5

Russia 574,780 543,880 465,868 -14.3

Pakistan 130,686 195,187 225,267 15.4

Ecuador 147,406 106,823 182,951 71.3

Sri Lanka 135,237 157,980 158,360 0.2

Bolivia 81,963 128,193 158,129 23.4

Tunisia 98,747 149,124 146,004 -2.1

Venezuela 115,914 98,573 110,262 11.9

Georgia 117,947 124,058 107,444 -13.4

Kazakhstan 93,322 111,379 93,597 -16.0

Uruguay 51,383 56,476 92,408 63.6

Armenia 79,539 80,600 86,784 7.7

Côte d’Ivoire 48,579 96,148 84,440 -12.2

Paraguay 77,117 69,685 78,972 13.3

Egypt 48,655 60,413 70,906 17.4

Lebanon 35,822 40,713 55,979 37.5

Ukraine 53,202 72,359 50,782 -29.8

Congo, Democratic Republic of the 691 93,704 50,155 -46.5

Subtotal, top 25 GSP beneficiaries 17,032,545 19,178,139 18,204,026 -5.1

All other beneficiaries 1,506,536 678,563 311,968 -54.0

Total U.S. imports for consumption under the GSP 18,539,081 19,856,702 18,515,994 -6.8

Source: Official trade statistics of the USDOC as maintained by the USITC.

Note: Because of rounding, figures may not add to totals shown.

236
Table A.17 U.S. imports for consumption under the GSP, by USITC digest sectors, 2011–13

Sector

Grouping Description 2011 2012 2013

% change

2012–13

Million $

U.S. imports for consumption:

1 Agricultural products 2,865 3,015 2,984 -1.0

2 Forest products 469 546 600 9.9

3 Chemicals and related products 4,047 4,216 3,700 -12.2

4 Energy-related products 482 724 711 -1.8

5 Textiles and apparel 631 611 570 -6.8

6 Footwear 1 1 4 295.7

7 Minerals and metals 4,177 4,300 3,897 -9.4

8 Machinery 1,816 2,115 2,092 -1.1

9 Transportation equipment 1,691 1,885 1,688 -10.4

10 Electronic products 730 853 959 12.5

11 Miscellaneous manufactures 1,630 1,591 1,310 -17.7

Total U.S. imports for consumption under the GSP 18,539 19,857 18,516 -6.8

Percent of total

Share of U.S. imports for consumption:

1 Agricultural products 15.5 15.2 16.1

2 Forest products 2.5 2.7 3.2

3 Chemicals and related products 21.8 21.2 20.0

4 Energy-related products 2.6 3.6 3.8

5 Textiles and apparel 3.4 3.1 3.1

6 Footwear 0.0 0.0 0.0

7 Minerals and metals 22.5 21.7 21.0

8 Machinery 9.8 10.7 11.3

9 Transportation equipment 9.1 9.5 9.1

10 Electronic products 3.9 4.3 5.2

11 Miscellaneous manufactures 8.8 8.0 7.1

Total U.S. imports for consumption under the GSP 100.0 100.0 100.0

Source: Official trade statistics of the USDOC as maintained by the USITC.

Note: Because of rounding, figures may not add to totals shown.

237
Table A.18 Leading U.S. imports for consumption under the GSP, by HTS provision, 2011–13

HTS

provision Description 2011 2012 2013

% change

2012–13

Million $

2709.00 Petroleum oils and oils from bituminous minerals, crude 481 664 649 -2.3

4011.10 New pneumatic tires, of rubber, of a kind used on motor cars (including station wagons and racing cars) 421 575 345 -39.9

7113.19 Jewelry and parts thereof, of precious metal other than silver 248 335 333 -0.4

7202.41 Ferrochromium, containing more than 4% (weight) carbon 386 373 319 -14.4

1005.90 Corn (maize), other than seed corn 9 119 312 161.0

7606.12 Aluminum alloy rectangular (including square) plates, sheets and strip, over 0.2 mm thick 493 399 267 -33.1

8415.90 Parts, n.e.s.o.i., of air conditioning machines 126 193 262 36.2

4015.19 Gloves, mittens and mitts, other than surgical, of vulcanized rubber 224 250 239 -4.8

2106.90 Food preparations n.e.s.o.i. 262 224 211 -5.8

8708.99 Parts and accessories for motor vehicles, n.e.s.o.i. 261 260 205 -21.3

6802.99 Worked monumental or building stone n.e.s.o.i., of stone n.e.s.o.i. 86 145 196 34.9

2202.90 Nonalcoholic beverages, n.e.s.o.i. (including milk-based drinks and nonalcoholic beer) 91 149 185 23.9

7202.30 Ferrosilicon manganese 279 280 172 -38.7

7202.21 Ferrosilicon, containing more than 55% (weight) silicon 170 201 164 -18.3

2008.99 Fruit and other edible parts of plants, n.e.s.o.i., prepared or preserved, whether or not containing added sweetening 

or spirit, n.e.s.o.i.

126 127 149 17.6

4412.31 Plywood n.e.s.o.i., not of bamboo, not over 6mm thickness with at least one outer ply of wood as specified in 

subheading note 1 to chapter 44

108 137 145 5.6

8481.80 Taps, cocks, valves and similar appliances for pipes, vats or the like, including thermostatically controlled valves, 

n.e.s.o.i.

157 176 145 -17.9

1704.90 Sugar confectionery (including white chocolate), not containing cocoa, n.e.s.o.i. 137 130 138 6.8

8483.10 Transmission shafts (including camshafts and crankshafts) and cranks 147 191 134 -29.6

7323.93 Table, kitchen or other household articles and parts thereof, of stainless steel 102 112 134 19.9

2934.10 Heterocyclic compounds containing an unfused triazole ring (whether or not hydrogenated) in the structure 38 85 133 57.0

7403.11 Refined copper cathodes and sections of cathodes 4 0 130 (

a

)

9001.50 Spectacle lenses of materials other than glass 97 96 128 33.8

3907.60 Polyethylene terephthalate, in primary forms 47 72 125 75.3

8708.94 Steering wheels, steering columns and steering boxes and parts thereof, for motor vehicles 75 104 125 19.8

Total of items shown 4,574 5,397 5,347 -0.9

All other HTS subheadings 13,965 14,459 13,169 -8.9

Total of all commodities 18,539 19,857 18,516 -6.8

Source: Official trade statistics of the USDOC as maintained by the USITC.

Note: Because of rounding, figures may not add to totals shown. The abbreviation “n.e.s.o.i.” stands for “not elsewhere specified or included.” a

Undefined.

238
Table A.19 U.S. imports for consumption under AGOA, by source, 2011–13 

Source 2011 2012 2013

% change

2012–13

Thousand $

Nigeria 31,003,705 17,723,567 10,818,897 -39.0

Angola 11,534,112 6,660,738 6,003,258 -9.9

South Africa 2,464,831 2,384,109 2,578,238 8.1

Chad 2,991,226 2,376,665 2,397,799 0.9

Congo, Republic of the 1,935,187 1,225,539 1,039,454 -15.2

Gabon 477,521 1,271,621 924,951 -27.3

Kenya 288,273 287,737 336,535 17.0

Lesotho 314,311 300,609 320,807 6.7

Mauritius 155,982 160,030 187,895 17.4

Swaziland 77,121 62,373 53,940 -13.5

Malawi 56,146 46,307 47,084 1.7

Cameroon 137,372 111,765 36,427 -67.4

Ethiopia 10,887 18,294 31,711 73.3

Tanzania 5,131 10,446 10,360 -0.8

Botswana 15,479 10,427 5,856 -43.8

Ghana 414,094 16,988 2,811 -83.5

Mozambique 689 30 1,362 4,513.2

Côte d’Ivoire 0 29,901 229 -99.2

Cabo Verde 154 117 146 25.2

Uganda 787 64 56 -13.3

Senegal 3 5,634 11 -99.8

Rwanda 17 8 9 19.5

Zambia 10 7 8 23.0

Burkina Faso 2 5 7 32.4

Guinea 0 3 6 122.1

Niger 0 1 (

a

) -75.3

Gambia 1 0 0 (

b

)

Namibia 13 216 0 -100.0

Mali 2 21 0 -100.0

Togo 0 44,448 0 -100.0

Total U.S. imports for consumption under AGOA 51,883,054 32,747,670 24,797,856 -24.3

Source: Official trade statistics of the USDOC as maintained by the USITC.

Note: Because of rounding, figures may not add to totals shown. a

Less than $500.

b

Undefined.

239
Table A.20 Leading U.S. imports for consumption under AGOA, by HTS provision, 2011–13

HTS

provision Description 2011 2012 2013

% change

2012–13

Million $

2709.00 Petroleum oils and oils from bituminous minerals, crude 47,434 28,114 19,984 -28.9

8703.23 Passenger motor vehicles with spark-ignition internal combustion reciprocating piston engine, cylinder capacity 

over 1,500 cc but not over 3,000 cc

1,995 1,872 2,098 12.1

2710.12 Light oils and preparations (

a

) 896 771 -13.9

2710.19 Petroleum oils and oils (not light) from bituminous minerals or preps n.e.s.o.i. 70%+ by weight from petroleum 

oils or bituminous minerals

262 453 465 2.8

7202.11 Ferromanganese, containing more than 2% (wt.) carbon 205 197 180 -8.8

6205.20 Men’s or boys’ shirts of cotton, not knitted or crocheted 117 129 149 15.2

6203.42 Men’s or boys’ trousers, bib and brace overalls, breeches and shorts of cotton, not knitted or crocheted 141 135 140 3.7

6110.30 Sweaters, pullovers, sweatshirts, vests and similar articles of manmade fibers, knitted or crocheted 75 68 99 45.0

6204.62 Women’s or girls’ trousers, bib and brace overalls, breeches and shorts of cotton, not knitted or crocheted 126 105 88 -16.6

6104.63 Women’s or girls’ trousers, bib and brace overalls, breeches and shorts of synthetic fibers, knitted or crocheted 41 47 84 78.5

3823.70 Industrial fatty alcohols 47 54 61 11.5

0802.62 Macadamia nuts, shelled (

b

) 57 52 -8.5

0805.10 Oranges, fresh 38 40 51 28.8

6105.20 Men’s or boys’ shirts of manmade fibers, knitted or crocheted 28 35 49 38.2

6109.90 T-shirts, singlets, tank tops and similar garments, of textile materials n.e.s.o.i., knitted or crocheted 18 27 40 45.7

2401.20 Tobacco, partly or wholly stemmed/stripped 40 39 37 -6.6

2204.21 Wine of fresh grapes (other than sparkling wine) and grape must with fermentation prevented, etc., by adding 

alcohol, containers of not over 2 liters

27 29 33 13.4

6204.63 Women’s or girls’ trousers, bib and brace overalls, breeches and shorts of synthetic fibers, not knitted or 

crocheted

15 20 30 54.7

6103.43 Men’s or boys’ trousers, bib and brace overalls, breeches and shorts of synthetic fibers, knitted or crocheted 26 26 28 10.0

6110.20 Sweaters, pullovers, sweatshirts, vests and similar articles of cotton, knitted or crocheted 62 34 27 -20.5

8111.00 Manganese and artcles thereof, including waste and scrap 8 24 23 -4.2

6104.62 Women’s or girls’ trousers, bib and brace overalls, breeches and shorts of cotton, knitted or crocheted 49 56 22 -60.7

2204.29 Wine of fresh grapes (other than sparkling wine) and grape must with fermentation prevented, etc., by adding 

alcohol, containers holding over 2 liters

3 15 18 18.9

2207.10 Ethyl alcohol, undenatured, of an alcoholic strength by volume of 80% vol. or higher 17 17 17 -1.3

6105.10 Men’s or boys’ shirts of cotton, knitted or crocheted 31 19 15 -20.1

Total of items shown 50,807 32,509 24,562 -24.4

All other HTS subheadings 1,077 238 236 -0.9

Total of all commodities 51,883 32,748 24,798 -24.3

Source: Official trade statistics of the USDOC as maintained by the USITC.

Note: Because of rounding, figures may not add to totals shown. The abbreviation “n.e.s.o.i.” stands for “not elsewhere specified or included.” a

Trade in 2011 reported under HTS tariff line 2710.11

b

Trade in 2011 reported under HTS tariff line 0802.60

240
Table A.21 U.S. imports for consumption under ATPA/ATPDEA, by source, 2011–13

Source 2011 2012 2013

% change

2012–13

Million $

Colombiaa 2,675 5,536 0 -100.0

Ecuadorb 1,706 5,870 2,538 -56.8

Peruc 5 0 0 (

d

)

Total 4,385 11,406 2,538 -77.7

Source: Official trade statistics of the USDOC as maintained by the USITC.

Note: Because of rounding, figures may not add to totals shown. a

Colombia’s status as an ATPA beneficiary country ended effective May 15, 2012. This table includes imports valued at $222 

million from Colombia that claimed ATPA/ATPDEA preferences after that date. b

Ecuador’s status as an ATPA beneficiary country ended when the program expired on July 31, 2013. This table includes imports 

valued at $80 million from Ecuador that claimed ATPA/ATPDEA preferences after that date. c

Peru’s status as an ATPA beneficiary country ended on January 1, 2011. This table includes imports valued at $5 million from 

Peru that claimed ATPA/ATPDEA preferences after that date. d

Undefined.

241
Table A.22 Leading U.S. imports for consumption under ATPA/ATPDEA, by HTS provision, 2011–13

HTS

provision Description 2011 2012 2013

% change

2012–13

Million $

2709.00 Petroleum oils and oils from bituminous minerals, crude 3,629 10,029 2,228 -77.8

0603.11 Fresh roses of a kind suitable for bouquets or other ornamental purposes 140 245 72 -70.6

1604.14 Tunas, skipjack and bonito (sarda spp.), prepared or preserved, whole or in pieces, but not minced 18 94 59 -37.5

0603.19 Fresh flowers,n.e.s.o.i., of a kind suitable for bouquets or other ornamental purposes 64 125 47 -62.5

2710.12 Light oils and preparations (

a

) 109 39 -64.3

2008.99 Fruit and other edible parts of plants, n.e.s.o.i., prepared or preserved, whether or not containing added 

sweetening or spirit, n.e.s.o.i.

7 32 18 -43.6

0710.80 Vegetables, n.e.s.o.i., uncooked or cooked by steaming or boiling in water, frozen 6 23 11 -51.6

0714.90 Roots and tubers with high starch or inulin content, n.e.s.o.i., fresh, chilled, frozen or dried, whether or not 

sliced or in form of pellet; sago pith

4 11 8 -26.8

8544.49 Insulated electric conductors, for a voltage not exceeding 1000 v, not fitted with connectors 2 5 5 5.5

2005.99 Vegetables, prepared or preserved otherwise than by vinegar or acetic acid, not frozen, other than products of 

heading 20.06, n.e.s.o.i.

3 9 4 -58.2

0804.50 Guavas, mangoes and mangosteens, fresh or dried 15 21 4 -83.0

3907.60 Polyethylene terephthalate, in primary forms (

b

) 1 3 224.7

0811.90 Fruit, n.e.s.o.i., and nuts, uncooked or cooked by steaming or boiling in water, whether or not containing added 

sweetening, frozen

2 9 3 -65.1

3923.21 Sacks and bags (including cones), of polymers of ethylene 1 5 2 -52.7

6115.21 Panty hose and tights (excluding graduated compression hosiery), knitted or crocheted, of synthetic fibers 

measuring < 67 decitex per single yarn

2 3 2 -28.4

0604.90 Foliage, branches, and other parts of plants for ornamental purposes (

c

) 3 2 -35.4

0603.15 Fresh cut lilies (lillium spp.) (

d

) 9 2 -78.0

2009.89 Juice of any single vegetable, other than cranberry juice or other fruit juice, n.e.s.o.i., concentrated or not 

concentrated

(

e

) 3 2 -51.1

6908.90 Glazed ceramic flags and paving, hearth or wall tiles n.e.s.o.i. 4 7 1 -77.9

0710.29 Leguminous vegetables, n.e.s.o.i., uncooked or cooked by steaming or boiling in water, frozen 1 2 1 -48.6

0804.30 Pineapples, fresh or dried 3 5 1 -77.5

0714.50 Fresh frozen, dried, or chilled yautia (xanthosoma spp.) (

f

) 1 1 -6.6

0811.10 Strawberries, uncooked or cooked by steaming or boiling in water, whether or not sweetened, frozen (

b

) 1 1 -33.9

3823.19 Industrial monocarboxylic fatty acids, n.e.s.o.i.; acid oils from refining 0 0 1 226.5

0603.14 Fresh chrysanthemums of a kind suitable for bouquets or other ornamental purposes 34 53 1 -98.3

Total of items shown 3,935 10,806 2,518 -76.7

All other HTS subheadings 450 600 20 -96.6

Total of all commodities 4,385 11,406 2,538 -77.7

Source: Official trade statistics of the USDOC as maintained by the USITC.

Note: Because of rounding, figures may not add to totals shown. The abbreviation “n.e.s.o.i.” stands for “not elsewhere specified or included.” a

Trade in 2011 reported under HTS tariff line 2710.11. b

Less than $500,000.

c

Trade in 2011 reported under HTS tariff line 0604.99. 

d

Trade in 2011 reported under HTS tariff line 0603.19. e

Trade in 2011 reported under HTS tariff line 2009.80. f

Trade in 2011 reported under HTS tariff line 0714.90. 

242
Table A.23 U.S. imports for consumption under CBERA/CBTPA, by source, 2011–13

Source 2011 2012 2013

% change

2012–13

Thousand $

Trinidad and Tobago 2,594,465 2,171,207 1,640,693 -24.4

Haiti 474,602 436,783 361,625 -17.2

Bahamas 123,854 130,309 142,890 9.7

Belize 146,045 131,898 104,822 -20.5

Jamaica 179,045 206,046 91,931 -55.4

St. Kitts-Nevis 27,273 22,350 18,933 -15.3

Guyana 11,129 5,300 4,532 -14.5

St. Lucia 1,889 1,836 3,155 71.9

Barbados 4,493 3,812 2,040 -46.5

Grenada 257 341 295 -13.5

Dominica 149 117 170 45.3

St. Vincent and Grenadines 88 138 141 2.2

British Virgin Islands 136 451 103 -77.1

Antigua and Barbuda 23 30 24 -17.6

Aruba 249 27 18 -32.1

Panamaa 55,184 26,319 0 -100.0

Montserrat Island 0 24 0 -100.0

Total U.S. imports for consumption under CBERA/CBTPA 3,618,883 3,136,986 2,371,374 -24.4

Source: Official trade statistics of the USDOC as maintained by the USITC.

Note: Because of rounding, figures may not add to totals shown. a

U.S. imports from Panama are included only for the period during which Panama was eligible for CBERA benefits before the 

U.S.-Panama Trade Promotion Agreement entered into effect on October 31, 2013.

243
Table A.24 Leading U.S. imports for consumption under CBERA/CBTPA, by HTS provision, 2011–13

HTS

provision Description 2011 2012 2013

% change

2012-13

Million $

2905.11 Methanol (methyl alcohol) 1,097 1,022 1,172 14.6

2709.00 Petroleum oils and oils from bituminous minerals, crude 1,274 1,164 371 -68.1

6109.10 T-shirts, singlets, tank tops and similar garments of cotton, knitted or crocheted 213 225 209 -7.1

3903.11 Polystyrene, expandable, in primary forms 122 129 142 9.4

2710.19 Petroleum oils and oils (not light) from bituminous minerals or preps n.e.s.o.i. 70%+ by weight from 

petroleum oils or bituminous minerals

125 40 133 231.1

6110.20 Sweaters, pullovers, sweatshirts, vests and similar articles of cotton, knitted or crocheted 221 176 118 -32.9

2207.10 Ethyl alcohol, undenatured, of an alcoholic strength by volume of 80% vol. or higher 244 153 27 -82.5

0714.30 Fresh, frozen, or dried, or chilled yams (dioscorea spp.) (

a

) 16 17 7.4

2933.61 Melamine 24 22 17 -22.0

0804.50 Guavas, mangoes and mangosteens, fresh or dried 10 9 12 37.5

0807.20 Papayas (papaws), fresh 13 11 12 10.1

2103.90 Sauces and preparations therefor, n.e.s.o.i.; mixed condiments and mixed seasonings 10 11 11 5.5

8525.50 Transmission apparatus for television 16 12 11 -12.8

6109.90 T-shirts, singlets, tank tops and similar garments, of textile materials n.e.s.o.i., knitted or crocheted 18 16 11 -31.7

2106.90 Food preparations n.e.s.o.i. 4 6 8 37.0

2009.11 Orange juice, frozen, whether or not sweetened 6 8 7 -11.7

2009.19 Orange juice, other than frozen, not fortified with vitamins or minerals, of a brix value exceeding 20 5 8 5 -36.8

2008.99 Fruit and other edible parts of plants, n.e.s.o.i., prepared or preserved, whether or not containing added 

sweetening or spirit, n.e.s.o.i.

6 6 5 -15.1

2202.10 Waters, including mineral waters and aerated waters, sweetened or flavored 7 5 5 -12.7

2005.99 Vegetables, prepared or preserved otherwise than by vinegar or acetic acid, not frozen, other than products 

of heading 20.06, n.e.s.o.i.

3 4 5 18.1

2818.10 Artificial corundum, whether or not chemically defined 0 0 4 (

b

)

8503.00 Parts of electric motors, generators, generating sets and rotary converters 4 4 4 -4.9

2202.90 Nonalcoholic beverages, n.e.s.o.i. (including milk-based drinks and nonalcoholic beer) 5 5 4 -24.5

8504.90 Parts for electrical transformers, static converters and inductors 4 4 3 -16.1

2104.10 Soups and broths and preparations therefor 2 2 3 56.5

Total of items shown 3,433 3,056 2,313 -24.3

All other HTS subheadings 186 81 58 -28.2

Total of all commodities 3,619 3,137 2,371 -24.4

Source: Official trade statistics of the USDOC as maintained by the USITC.

Note: Because of rounding, figures may not add to totals shown. The abbreviation “n.e.s.o.i.” stands for “not elsewhere specified or included.” Data for 2012 include U.S. 

imports from Panama only for the period during which Panama was eligible for CBERA benefits before the U.S. Panama Trade Promotion Agreement entered into force on 

October 31, 2013. a

Trade in 2011 reported under HTS tariff line 0714.20.

b

Undefined.

244
Table A.25 WTO dispute settlement cases to which the United States was a party, developments in 

2013

Case no. Title Complainant Action (month/day/year)

DS217 United States—

Continued Dumping 

and Subsidy Offset Act 

of 2000 (Byrd 

Amendment)

Australia, Brazil, 

Chile, European 

Communities (EC), 

India, Indonesia, 

Japan, Korea,

Thailand

Complaining parties request consultations (12/21/00).

Panel established (08/23/01) and composed (10/25/01).

Panel report circulated to members (09/16/02).

U.S. notifies Dispute Settlement Body (DSB) it will appeal panel 

decision (10/18/02).

Appellate Body circulates its report (06/16/03).

Arbitrator finds that U.S. has failed to implement the DSB 

recommendations and rulings (01/15/04).

Arbitrator circulates decisions relating to level of suspension of 

concessions to offset U.S. Byrd Amendment distributions (08/31/04).

Authority to retaliate granted (11/26/04, 12/17/04).

DSB authorizes or takes note of various requests or agreements to 

suspend concessions (2004–05). 

U.S. states at DSB meeting that recent changes bring U.S. law into 

conformity with its WTO obligations (02/17/06).

Japan and EC notify DSB annually of the new list of products on which 

the additional import duty would apply, prior to the entry into force 

of a level of suspension of concessions (2006–13).

DS294 United States—Laws, 

Regulations and 

Methodology for 

Calculating Dumping 

Margins (Zeroing)

European 

Communities

EC requests consultations (06/12/03).

Panel established (03/19/04) and composed (10/27/04).

Panel report circulated (10/31/05).

Appellate Body report circulated (04/18/06).

DSB adopts Appellate Body report and panel report as modified 

(05/09/06).

U.S. announces that it intends to implement the DSB 

recommendations and rulings (05/30/06).

U.S. and EC agree, pursuant to Dispute Settlement Understanding 

(DSU) Article 21.3(b), to the reasonable period of time for 

implementation (07/28/06).

U.S. and EC reach an understanding on Article 21 and 22 procedures 

(05/04/07).

EC requests Article 21.5 consultations (07/09/07).

Brazil and Korea request to join consultations (07/20/07).

EC requests establishment of Article 21.5 panel (09/13/07). Article 

21.5 Appellate Body report adopted (06/11/09).

EC requests authorization to suspend concessions or other 

obligations per Article 22.2 of DSU (01/29/10).

U.S. informs DSB it objects to suspension level proposed by the EU 

(02/12/10).

DSB refers the matter to arbitration (02/18/10).

European Union and United States at various times during 2010–early 

2012 jointly requested that the arbitrator suspend work; work 

suspended through June 28, 2012.

EU and U.S. inform the DSB of a memorandum between the U.S. and 

the EC which envisages a roadmap addressing the dispute (02/06/12).

EU withdraws its request for authorization to suspend concessions or 

other obligations under Article 22.2 of DSU following completion by 

the U.S. of the steps undertaken pursuant to roadmap notified in 

February 2012 (06/22/12).

Arbitrator informs the DSB of receipt of joint communication of June 

22, 2012, from the EU and U.S. and that the U.S. and EU request that 

the arbitrator notify the DSB that it is not necessary for it to issue a 

report/ award in this dispute; the arbitrator therefore considers that 

it has completed its work (07/02/12).

245
Case no. Title Complainant Action (month/day/year)

DS316 European 

Communities—

Measures Affecting 

Trade in Large Civil 

Aircraft

United States U.S. requests consultations with EC (10/06/04).

Panel established (07/20/05) and composed (10/17/05).

Panel circulates its report (06/30/10).

EU appeals decision to Appellate Body (07/21/10); U.S. does the 

same (08/19/10).

Appellate Body report circulated (05/18/11). 

DSB adopts Appellate Body report and panel report (as modified) 

(06/01/11).

EU informs DSB it intends to implement DSB recommendation 

(06/17/11).

EU informs DSB it has taken steps to bring its measures into 

conformity with obligations (12/01/11).

U.S. requests consultations with EU under Article 21.5 and requests 

authority to take countermeasures (12/09/11).

EU objects to requested level of U.S. measures and requests matter 

be referred to arbitration under Article 22.6; DSB refers to arbitration

(12/22/11).

U.S. and EU request arbitrator to suspend work (01/19/12).

Arbitrator suspends work until either party requests resumption 

(01/20/12).

DS322 United States—

Measures Relating to 

Zeroing and Sunset 

Reviews

Japan Japan requests consultations (11/24/04).

Panel established (02/28/05) and composed (04/15/05).

Panel report circulated (09/20/06).

Appellate Body report circulated (01/9/07).

DSB adopts Appellate Body report and panel report (as modified) 

(01/23/07).

Agreement reached on the reasonable period of time for 

implementation (05/04/07).

Article 21.3(c) arbitration report circulated (05/11/07).

Japan seeks authorization to suspend concessions (01/10/08).

Japan asks for establishment of Article 21.5 panel (04/07/08).

United States and Japan request arbitrator to suspend work 

(06/06/08).

Article 21.5 panel report circulated (04/24/09).

U.S. notifies DSB of intent to appeal (05/20/09).

Article 21.5 Appellate Body report adopted (08/31/09).

Japan requests arbitrator to resume arbitration proceedings 

(04/23/10).

U.S. and Japan request arbitrator to suspend work (12/15/10). 

Subsequent requests continue suspension through August 21, 2012 

(02/01/12).

U.S. and Japan inform DSB of memorandum of understanding 

regarding the dispute (02/06/12).

Japan withdraws request for authorization to suspend 

concessions/obligations under Article 22.6 after U.S. completes steps 

notified to the DSB in Feb. 2012 (08/03/12).

Arbitrator informs DSB, following receipt of request from Japan and 

U.S., that no award is necessary, that it is not necessary to issue a 

decision, and that work is considered completed (08/14/12).

246
Case no. Title Complainant Action (month/day/year)

DS344 United States—Final 

Antidumping 

Measures on Stainless 

Steel from Mexico

Mexico Mexico requests consultations (05/26/06).

Panel established (10/26/06) and composed (12/20/06).

Panel report circulated (12/20/07).

Mexico notifies DSB of decision to appeal (01/31/08).

DSB adopts Appellate Body report and panel report (as modified) 

(05/20/08).

Mexico requests that the reasonable period of time for U.S. 

implementation be determined through binding arbitration pursuant 

to Article 21.3(c) (08/11/08).

Article 21.3 arbitration report circulated (10/31/08), setting April 30, 

2009, as a reasonable time for the U.S. to implement.

U.S. informs DSB that U.S. and Mexico concluded a sequencing 

agreement (05/20/09).

Mexico requests establishment of a compliance panel (09/07/10).

DSB agrees to refer the matter to the original panel if possible 

(09/21/10).

Compliance panel composed (05/13/11).

Panel chairman informs DSB that he expects to circulate a final report 

in March 2012 (11/09/11).

Mexico asks compliance panel to suspend work until May 14, 2012 

(04/27/12).

Mexico asks compliance panel to suspend work until May 31, 2012 

(05/14/12).

Mexico asks compliance panel to suspend work until further notice 

(05/31/12), and panel agrees.

Mexico and the U.S. notify the DSB that the parties have reached a 

mutually satisfactory solution (04/08/13).

DS350 United States—

Continued Existence 

and Application of 

Zeroing Methodology

European 

Communities

EC requests consultations (10/02/06).

Panel established (06/04/07) and composed (07/06/07).

Panel report circulated (10/01/08).

EC (11/06/08) and U.S. (11/18/08) notify DSB of decision to appeal.

Appellate Body and modified panel reports adopted (02/19/09).

U.S. and EC agree that a reasonable time for the U.S. to implement is 

Dec. 19, 2009 (06/02/09).

EU and U.S. notify the DSB of agreed procedures under Articles 21 

and 22 (01/04/10).

EU and U.S. inform the DSB of a memorandum between the U.S. and 

European Commission which envisages a roadmap addressing the 

dispute (02/06/12).

247
Case no. Title Complainant Action (month/day/year)

DS353 United States—

Measures Affecting 

Trade in Large Civil 

Aircraft—Second 

Complaint

European 

Communities

EC requests consultations (06/27/05).

Panel established (02/17/06) and composed (11/22/06).

Panel chairman informs DSB multiple times that panel needs 

additional time to complete work in light of complexities of the 

dispute (05/18/07, 07/11/08, 12/16/09, 07/07/10).

Panel report circulated to members (03/31/11).

EU notifies DSB of its decision to appeal to Appellate Body 

(04/01/11), and U.S. also notifies decision to appeal (04/28/11).

Appellate Body report circulated to members (03/12/12) and 

adopted (03/23/12).

U.S. informs DSB it intends to implement DSB recommendations and 

rulings (04/13/12).

EU and U.S. inform DSB of agreed procedures under Articles 21 and 

22 of DSU and Article 7 of SCM Agreement (04/24/12).

U.S. notifies DSB of withdrawal of subsidies and adverse effects of 

dispute, and that it fully complies with DSB recommendations and 

rulings (09/23/12).

EU requests consultations under Article 21.5 (09/25/12).

EU requests authority to take countermeasures under Article 22 of 

DSU and Agreement on Subsidies and Countervailing Measures (SCM 

Agreement) (09/27/12). 

EU requests establishment of compliance panel (10/11/12).

Compliance panel composed (10/30/12).

Compliance panel chairman informs DSB that panel will circulate 

report during first half of 2014 (01/15/13).

U.S. objects to level of suspension of concessions/ obligations sought; 

U.S. seeks arbitration under Article 22.6 of the DSU (10/22/12).

At request of U.S. and EU, arbitrator to suspend arbitration 

proceedings (11/28/12).

248
Case no. Title Complainant Action (month/day/year)

DS363 China—Measures 

Affecting Trading 

Rights and Distribution 

Services for Certain 

Publications and 

Audiovisual 

Entertainment 

Products

United States U.S. requests consultations with China (04/10/07).

Panel established (11/27/07) and composed (03/27/08).

Panel report circulated (08/12/09).

China (09/22/09) and U.S. (10/05/09) notify the DSB of their 

respective decisions to appeal.

Appellate Body report circulated to members (12/21/09).

DSB adopts Appellate Body report and panel report (as modified) 

(01/19/10).

China and U.S. inform DSB that they have agreed that a reasonable 

period for China to implement the DSB recommendations is by March 

14, 2011 (07/12/10).

China reports to DSB that it has made efforts to implement DSB 

recommendations; U.S. expresses concern about lack of progress by 

China (03/25/11).

U.S. and China inform DSB of agreed procedures under Articles 21 

and 22 of the DSU (04/13/11).

China reports to the DSB it has completed amendments to most 

measures and has signed a memorandum of understanding with the 

U.S. (02/22/12).

China tells DSB that it has ensured full implementation of DSB 

recommendations and rulings except for measures concerning films 

for theatrical release. U.S. states that it is not in a position to agree 

that China has fully implemented DSB recommendations and rulings 

in all areas except films for theatrical release (03/23/12).

China and the U.S. inform the DSB of key elements relating to 

theatrical release as set forth in the MOU noted at the Feb. 22, 2012, 

DSB meeting (05/09/12).

China tells DSB it has taken all necessary steps and has complied with 

DSB recommendations. U.S. says that MOU represented significant 

progress but not a final resolution (05/24/12).

DS379 United States—

Definitive AntiDumping and 

Countervailing Duties 

on Certain Products 

from China

China China requests consultations with U.S. (09/19/08).

Panel established (01/20/09) and composed (03/04/09).

Panel report circulated (10/22/10).

China notifies DSB it will appeal the panel’s decision to the Appellate 

Body (12/01/10).

Appellate Body report circulated (03/11/11).

DSB adopts Appellate Body report and panel report (as modified) 

(03/25/11).

China and the U.S. inform DSB that they have agreed that a 

reasonable time for the U.S. to implement the DSB’s 

recommendations is Feb. 25, 2012 (07/5/11).

China and the U.S. inform the DSB that they have modified the 

reasonable time period, with the period to expire April 25, 2012 

(01/17/12).

China and U.S. notify the DSB of agreed procedures under Articles 21 

and 22 of the DSU (05/11/12).

U.S. tells DSB it has brought the measures at issue into full 

compliance with DSB recommendations and rulings (08/31/12), but 

China says that it does not agree with the U.S. claim to such effect 

(09/28/12).

249
Case no. Title Complainant Action (month/day/year)

DS381 United States—

Measures Concerning 

the Importation, 

Marketing and Sale of 

Tuna and Tuna 

Products

Mexico Mexico requests consultations with the U.S. (10/24/08).

Panel established (04/20/09) and composed (12/14/09).

Panel chairman informs DSB panel expects to issue report in February 

2011 (06/15/10).

Parties agree on new panel member following death of one member 

(08/12/10).

Panel report circulated to members (09/15/11).

U.S. notifies DSB of its decision to appeal the panel’s decision 

(01/20/12); Mexico does the same (01/25/12).

Appellate Body report is circulated to members (05/16/12) and 

adopted by DSB (06/13/12). 

U.S. states that it intends to implement the DSB recommendations 

and rulings (06/25/12), and the U.S. and Mexico inform the DSB that 

they have agreed that a reasonable time to do so is by July 13, 2013 

(09/17/12).

U.S. advises DSB that it has made effective a final rule amending 

dolphin-safe labelling requirements, bringing its requirements into 

compliance (07/23/13).

Mexico and U.S. inform the DSB of agreed procedures under Articles 

21 and 22 of the DSU (08/02/13).

Mexico requests establishment of a compliance panel (11/14/13); 

DSB agrees to refer to original panel (01/22/14), and panel is 

composed (01/27/14).

Panel chair informs DSB that the panel expects to issue its final report 

by December 2014 (04/16/14).

DS382 United States—AntiDumping 

Administrative 

Reviews and Other 

Measures Related to 

Imports of Certain 

Orange Juice from 

Brazil

Brazil Brazil requests consultations with the U.S. (11/27/08).

Panel established (09/25/09) and composed (05/10/10).

Panel report circulated (03/25/11).

DSB adopts the panel report, and Brazil and U.S. notify the DSB that 

they have agreed that a reasonable time for the U.S. to implement 

the DSB recommendations expires on March 17, 2012 (06/17/11).

U.S. informs the DSB that following a 5-year sunset review the USITC 

has recently determined to revoke the existing antidumping order on 

orange juice as of March 9, 2011 (03/23/12). Brazil tells DSB it is still 

assessing whether the U.S. implementation measure would resolve 

the dispute.

Brazil and the U.S. inform the DSB of agreed procedures regarding 

Articles 21 and 22 of the DSU (04/03/12).

Brazil and the U.S. inform the DSB that the parties have reached a 

mutually satisfactory solution to the dispute (02/14/13).

250
Case no. Title Complainant Action (month/day/year)

DS384 United States—

Certain Country of 

Origin Labelling 

(COOL) Requirements 

Canada Canada requests consultations with the U.S. (12/01/08).

Single panel established to examine this dispute and DS386 

(11/19/09); panel composed (05/10/10).

Panel report circulated to members (11/18/11).

U.S. notifies the DSB of its decision to appeal certain issues of law and 

legal interpretations (03/23/12), and Canada notifies the DSB it will 

do the same (03/28/12).

Appellate Body report is circulated to members (06/29/12) and 

adopted (07/23/12).

U.S. informs DSB it intends to implement DSB recommendations and 

rulings (08/21/12).

Canada requests that reasonable time to implement be determined 

through binding arbitration (09/13/12), and requests that the 

Director-General appoint an arbitrator (09/26/12); arbitrator 

appointed (10/04/12).

Arbitrator determines that the reasonable time is by May 23, 2013 

(12/04/12).

U.S. informs DSB that USDA has issued a final rule that brings U.S. 

labelling requirements into compliance (05/24/13).

Canada disagrees that changes bring U.S. requirements into 

compliance, and the U.S. and Canada inform DSB of agreed 

procedures under Articles 21 and 22 of DSU (06/10/13).

Canada requests establishment of compliance panel (08/19/13); DSB 

refers to original panel if possible (09/25/13); compliance panel 

composed (09/27/13).

Compliance panel chair informs DSB that panel expects to issue its 

final report towards end of July 2014 (03/26/14).

DS386 United States—

Certain Country of 

Origin Labelling 

Requirements

Mexico Mexico requests consultations with the U.S. (12/17/08).

Single panel established to examine this dispute and DS384 

(11/19/09); panel composed (05/10/10).

Panel report circulated to members (11/18/11).

U.S. notifies the DSB of its decision to appeal certain issues of law and 

legal interpretations (03/23/12), and Mexico notifies the DSB it will 

do the same (03/28/12).

Appellate Body report is circulated to members (06/29/12) and 

adopted (07/23/12).

U.S. informs DSB it intends to implement DSB recommendations and 

rulings (08/21/12).

Mexico requests that reasonable time to implement be determined 

through binding arbitration (09/13/12), and requests that the 

Director-General appoint an arbitrator (09/26/12); arbitrator 

appointed (10/04/12).

Arbitrator determines that the reasonable time is by May 23, 2013 

(12/04/12).

U.S. informs DSB that USDA has issued a final rule that brings U.S. 

labelling requirements into compliance (05/24/13).

Mexico disagrees that changes bring U.S. requirements into 

compliance, and the U.S. and Mexico inform DSB of agreed 

procedures under Articles 21 and 22 of DSU (06/10/13).

Mexico requests establishment of compliance panel (08/19/13); DSB 

refers to original panel if possible (09/25/13); compliance panel 

composed (09/27/13).

Compliance panel chair informs DSB that panel expects to issue its 

final report towards end of July 2014 (03/26/14).

DS387 China—Grants, Loans 

and other Incentives

United States U.S. requests consultations (12/19/08).

251
Case no. Title Complainant Action (month/day/year)

DS389 European 

Communities—Certain 

Measures Affecting 

Poultry Meat and 

Poultry Meat Products 

from the United States

United States U.S. requests consultations (01/16/09).

Panel established (11/19/09).

DS394 China—Measures 

Related to the 

Exportation of Various 

Raw Materials

United States U.S. requests consultations (06/23/09).

U.S. requests establishment of a panel (12/21/09).

Single panel established to examine this dispute and disputes DS395 

and DS398 (12/21/09); panel composed (03/29/10).

Panel circulated to members (07/05/11).

China notifies the DSB of its decision to appeal (08/31/11).

U.S. notifies the DSB of its decision to appeal (09/06/11).

Appellate Body report is circulated to members (01/30/12).

DSB adopts Appellate Body report and panel report as modified by 

Appellate Body (02/22/12). 

China informs DSB of its intention to implement DSB 

recommendations and of its need for a reasonable time to do so 

(03/23/12).

China and the U.S. notify the DSB that they have agreed that the 

reasonable time is by Dec. 31, 2012 (05/24/12).

China and the U.S. inform the DSB of agreed procedures under 

Articles 21 and 22 of the DSU (01/17/13).

China reports to DSB that the application of export duties and export 

quotas to certain raw materials has been removed effective January 

1, 2013, and that China has fully implemented the DSB’s 

recommendations and rulings (01/28/13).

DS403 Philippines—Taxes on 

Distilled Spirits

United States U.S. requests consultations (01/14/10).

Single panel established to consider DS403 and DS396 (complaint by 

the EU) (04/20/10); panel composed (07/05/10).

Panel report circulated to members (08/15/11).

Philippines notifies the DSB of its decision to appeal to the Appellate 

Body (09/23/11), as does EU (09/28/11).

Appellate Body report is circulated to members (12/21/11).

DSB adopts Appellate Body report and panel report as modified by 

Appellate Body (01/20/12).

Philippines states that it intends to implement DSB’s 

recommendations and ruling and would require a reasonable time to 

do so (02/22/12).

Philippines and U.S. inform DSB that they have agreed that the 

reasonable time is by March 8, 2013 (04/20/12).

Philippines reports enactment of legislation that completes 

implementation of the DSB’s recommendations and rulings 

(01/28/13).

DS404 United States—Antidumping Measures on 

Certain Shrimp from 

Viet Nam

Vietnam Vietnam requests consultations (02/01/10).

Panel established (05/18/10) and composed (07/26/10).

Panel report circulated to members (07/11/11).

DSB adopts panel report (09/02/11).

Vietnam and U.S. inform DSB they have agreed that a reasonable 

time for the U.S. to implement the DSB recommendations expires on 

July 2, 2012 (10/31/11).

252
Case no. Title Complainant Action (month/day/year)

DS406 United States—

Measures Affecting 

the Production and 

Sale of Clove 

Cigarettes

Indonesia Indonesia requests consultations (04/07/10).

Panel established (07/20/10) and composed (09/09/10).

Panel report circulated to members (09/02/11).

U.S. notifies DSB of its decision to appeal to the Appellate Body 

(01/05/12).

Appellate Body report is circulated to members (04/04/12) and 

adopted (04/24/12). 

U.S. informs DSB of its intent to implement DSB recommendations 

and rulings and of need for a reasonable period of time to do so 

(05/24/12).

Indonesia and the U.S. inform the DSB that the reasonable period of 

time is by July 24, 2013 (06/14/12).

Indonesia requests authorization from DSB to suspend concessions or 

other obligations under Article 22.2 of the DSU (08/12/13).

U.S. objects to level of suspension of concessions or other obligations 

and refers the matter to arbitration pursuant to Article 22.6 of the 

DSU (08/22/13).

Matter referred to arbitration at DSB meeting (08/23/13).

DS413 China—Certain 

Measures Affecting 

Electronic Payment 

Services

United States U.S. requests consultations (09/15/10).

Panel established (03/25/11) and composed (07/04/11). 

Panel report circulated to members (07/16/12) and adopted by DSB 

(08/31/12).

China states that it intends to implement the DSB’s recommendations 

and rulings and will need a reasonable amount of time to do so 

(09/28/12).

China and U.S. inform DSB that the reasonable period of time for 

China to implement is by July 31, 2013 (11/22/12).

China reports to DSB that it has fully implemented the DSB’s 

recommendations and rulings; the U.S. states that it does not agree, 

and that it will monitor and review China’s actions (07/23/13).

China and the U.S. inform the DSB of agreed procedures under 

Articles 21 and 22 of the DSU.

DS414 China—Countervailing 

and Anti-Dumping 

Duties on Grain 

Oriented Flat-rolled 

Electrical Steel from 

the United States

United States U.S. requests consultations (09/15/10).

Panel established (03/25/11) and composed (05/10/11).

Panel report circulated to members (06/15/12).

China notifies DSB of its decision to appeal to the Appellate Body 

(07/20/12).

Appellate Body report is circulated to members (10/18/12) and 

adopted by DSB (11/16/12).

China states that it intends to implement the DSB’s recommendations 

and rulings and will need a reasonable amount of time to do so 

(11/30/12).

U.S. requests that the reasonable period of time be determined 

through binding arbitration pursuant to Article 21.3(c) of the DSU 

(02/08/13).

Director-General appoints arbitrator (02/28/13).

Arbitration report circulated; arbitrator determines that the 

reasonable period of time is July 31, 2013 (05/03/13).

China and U.S. inform DSB of agreed procedures under Articles 21 

and 22 of DSU (08/19/13).

U.S. requests consultations pursuant to Article 21.5 of the DSU 

(01/13/14). 

U.S. requests establishment of a compliance panel (02/13/14); DSB 

agrees to refer to original panel if possible (02/26/14). 

DS419 China—Measures 

Concerning Wind 

Power Equipment

United States U.S. requests consultations (12/22/10).

EU and Japan request to join consultations (01/12/11 and 01/17/11, 

respectively).

253
Case no. Title Complainant Action (month/day/year)

DS420 United States—Antidumping Measures on 

Corrosion-Resistant 

Carbon Steel Flat 

Products from Korea

Korea Korea requests consultations (01/31/11).

Korea requests establishment of a panel (09/15/11).

Korea withdraws request for panel (09/27/11).

Korea requests establishment of a panel (02/09/12). 

Korea informs DSB of agreement on procedures between U.S. and 

Korea (02/14/12).

Panel established (02/22/12).

Prior to composition of the panel, Korea requests that panel 

proceedings be suspended in accordance with Article 12.12 of the 

DSU until further notification (06/12/12).

DS422 United States—AntiDumping Measures on 

Shrimp and Diamond 

Sawblades from China

China China requests consultations (02/28/11).

Panel established (10/25/11) and composed (12/21/11).

Panel report circulated to members (06/08/12) and adopted by DSB 

(07/23/12).

China and U.S. inform DSB that they have agreed that the reasonable 

period of time for the U.S. to implement is by March 23, 2013 

(07/27/12).

U.S. informs DSB that it has fully implemented DSB recommendations 

and rulings; China states that it does not share U.S. view as U.S. has 

not revoked antidumping duty on sawblades (03/26/13).

DS424 United States—AntiDumping Measures on 

Imports of Stainless 

Steel Sheet and Strip 

in Coils from Italy

European Union EU requests consultations (04/01/11).

Japan requests to join the consultations (04/18/11).

DS427 China—Anti-Dumping 

and Countervailing 

Duty Measures on 

Broiler Products from 

the United States

United States U.S. requests consultations (09/20/11).

Panel established (01/20/12) and composed (05/24/12).

Panel report circulated to members (08/02/13) and adopted by DSB 

(09/25/13).

China informs DSB it intends to implement DSB recommendations 

and rulings (10/22/13).

China and U.S. inform DSB that they have agreed that a reasonable 

period of time to implement is by July 9, 2014 (12/19/13).

DS429 United States—AntiDumping Measures on 

Certain Frozen 

Warmwater Shrimp 

from Viet Nam

Vietnam Vietnam requests consultations (02/20/12).

Panel established (02/27/13) and composed (07/12/13).

Panel chair informs DSB that the panel expects to issue its final report 

to the parties by Sept. 30, 2014 (01/30/14).

DS430 India—Measures 

Concerning the 

Importation of Certain 

Agricultural Products 

from the United States

United States U.S. requests consultations (03/06/12).

Panel established (06/25/12) and composed (02/18/13).

Panel chair informs DSB that the panel expects to issue its final report 

to the parties no later than June 2014 (08/05/13).

DS431 China—Measures 

Related to the 

Exportation of Rare 

Earths, Tungsten and 

Molybdenum

United States U.S. requests consultations (03/13/12).

Single panel to examine DS431, DS432, and DS433 is established 

(07/23/12) and composed (09/24/12).

Panel report circulated to members (03/26/14). 

U.S. notifies the DSB of its decision to appeal to the Appellate Body 

certain issues of law and legal interpretation (04/08/14); China 

notifies the DSB of its decision to appeal (04/17/14).

DS436 United States—

Counter- vailing 

Measures on Certain 

Hot-Rolled Carbon 

Steel Flat Products 

from India

India India requests consultations (04/24/12).

Panel established (08/31/12) and composed (02/18/13).

Panel chair informs DSB that the panel expects to issue its final report 

to the parties by April 2014 (07/08/13).

254
Case no. Title Complainant Action (month/day/year)

DS437 United States—

Counter- vailing Duty 

Measures on Certain 

Products from China

China China requests consultations (05/25/12).

Panel established (09/28/12) and composed (11/26/12).

Panel chair informs DSB that the panel expects to issue its final report 

to the parties by January 2014 (04/29/13).

Panel chair informs DSB that panel expects to complete its work in 

May 2014 (11/18/13).

DS440 China—Anti-Dumping 

and Countervailing 

Duties on Certain 

Automobiles from the 

United States

United States U.S. requests consultations (07/05/12).

Panel established (10/23/12) and composed (02/11/13).

Panel chair informs DSB that the panel expects to issue its final report 

to the parties by March 2014 (09/25/13).

Panel report circulated to members (05/23/14).

DS444 Argentina—Measures 

Affecting the 

Importation of Goods

United States U.S. requests consultations (08/21/12).

Single panel established to examine DS438, DS44, and DS445 

(01/28/13); and panel composed (05/27/13).

Panel chair informs DSB that the panel expects to issue its final report 

to the parties by end of May 2014 (11/15/13).

Panel chair informs DSB that it estimates it will issue a final report to 

the parties by the end of June 2014 (05/05/13).

DS447 United States—

Measures Affecting 

the Importation of 

Animals, Meat and 

Other Animal Products 

from Argentina

Argentina Argentina requests consultations (08/30/12).

Panel established (01/28/13) and composed (08/08/13).

Panel chair informs DSB that the panel expects to issue its final report 

to the parties in early 2015 (03/07/14).

DS448 United States—

Measures Affecting 

the Importation of 

Fresh Lemons

Argentina Argentina requests consultations (09/03/12).

Argentina requests establishment of a panel (12/06/12); 

establishment deferred (12/17/12).

DS449 United States—

Counter- vailing and 

Anti-dumping 

Measures on Certain 

Products from China

China China requests consultations (09/17/12).

Panel established (12/17/12) and composed (03/04/13).

Panel report circulated to members (03/27/14).

China notifies the DSB of its decision to appeal to the Appellate Body 

certain issues of law and legal interpretation (04/08/14); the U.S. 

notifies the DSB of its decision to appeal (04/17/14).

DS450 China—Certain 

Measures Affecting 

the Automobile and 

Automobile-Parts 

Industries

United States U.S. requests consultations (09/17/12).

DS455 Indonesia—

Importation of 

horticultural products, 

animals and animal 

products

United States U.S. requests consultations (01/10/13).

Panel established (04/24/13).

DS456 India—Certain 

Measures Relating to 

Solar Cells and Solar 

Modules

United States U.S. requests consultations (02/06/13); U.S. requests supplementary 

consultations (02/10/14).

U.S. requests establishment of a panel (04/14/13).

DS464 United States—Antidumping and 

Countervailing 

Measures on large 

residential washers 

from Korea

Korea Korea requests consultations (08/29/13).

Panel established (01/22/14).

255
Case no. Title Complainant Action (month/day/year)

DS465 Indonesia—

Importation of 

Horticultural Products, 

Animals and Animal 

Products

United States U.S. requests consultations (08/30/13).

DS471 United States—

Certain 

Methodologies and 

their Application to 

Anti-Dumping 

Proceedings Involving 

China

China China requests consultations (12/3/13).

Panel established (03/26/14).

Source: WTO, “Chronological List of Disputes Cases,” http://www.wto.org/english/tratop_e/dispu_e/dispu_status_e.htm. 

Note: This list focuses on formal actions in disputes during 2013; some intermediate procedural actions are omitted. Selected 

pre-2013 and post-2013 actions are noted to place the 2013 actions in context. Actions reflected in the table are generally 

those posted on the WTO website as of June 1, 2014.

256
Table A.26 NAFTA Chapter 19 substantive challenges to original and five-year review determinations of 

USITC and USDOC, developments in 2013

File no. Disputea Action (month/day/year)

USA-CDA-2009-1904-01 Steel Wire Rod (AD) (Investigating authority: 

International Trade Administration)

Request for panel review (01/16/09).

Oral argument (12/18/12).

Status: Active.

USA-MEX-2008-1904-01 Stainless Steel Sheet and Strip in Coils (AD) (Investigating 

authority: International Trade Administration)

Request for panel review (03/12/08).

Status: Terminated: 02/08/13.

USA-MEX-2009-1904-02 Stainless Steel Sheet and Strip in Coils (AD) (Investigating 

authority: International Trade Administration)

Request for panel review (03/11/09).

Oral argument (06/07/12).

Status: Terminated: 01/18/13.

USA-MEX-2010-1904-01 Stainless Steel Sheet and Strip in Coils (AD) (Investigating 

authority: International Trade Administration)

Request for panel review (03/11/10).

Status: Terminated: 02/12/13.

USA-MEX-2011-1904-01 Stainless Steel Sheet and Strip in Coils (AD) (Investigating 

authority: International Trade Administration)

Request for panel review (02/11/11).

Status: Terminated: 03/18/13.

USA-MEX-2011-1904-02 Light-Walled Rectangular Pipe and Tube (AD) 

(Investigating authority: International Trade 

Administration)

Request for panel review (03/18/11).

Decision date 1: 12/05/12.

Decision date 2: 08/06/13.

Status: Completed.

USA-MEX-2012-1904-01 Light-Walled Rectangular Pipe and Tube (AD)

(Investigating authority: International Trade 

Administration)

Request for panel review (02/10/12).

Status: Terminated: 08/09/12.

USA-MEX-2012-1904-02 Bottom Mount Combination Refrigerator-Freezers (AD) 

(Investigating authority: International Trade 

Administration)

Request for panel review (04/24/12).

Status: Active.

USA-MEX-2012-1904-03 Seamless Refined Copper Pipe and Tube (AD) 

(Investigating authority: International Trade 

Administration)

Request for panel review (10/24/12).

Status: Terminated: 07/03/13.

MEX-USA-2011-1904-01 Stearic Acid (CVD) (Investigating authority: Secretaría de 

Economía) 

Request for panel review (11/04/11).

Decision date 1: 10/10/13.

Status: Terminated.

MEX-USA-2012-1904-01 Chicken Thighs and Legs (AD) (Investigating authority: 

Secretaría de Economía)

Request for panel review (09/03/12).

Status: Active.

MEX-USA-2012-1904-02 Ethylene Glycol Monobutyl Ether (AD) (Investigating 

authority: Secretaría de Economía) 

Request for panel review (10/09/12).

Status: Active.

Source: NAFTA Secretariat, “Status Report: NAFTA and FTA Dispute Settlement Proceedings,” http://www.nafta-secalena.org/en/StatusReport.aspx (accessed March 24, 2014). 

Note: This list includes active cases during 2013, including those in which little if any formal action occurred during 2013. a

AD stands for antidumping duty and CVD stands for countervailing duty.

257
Table A.27 U.S. merchandise trade with the European Union (28 countries), by USITC digest sectors, 2011–13

Sector

Grouping Description 2011 2012 2013

% change

2012–13

Million $

Domestic exports:

1 Agricultural products 12,066 12,019 13,554 12.8

2 Forest products 5,244 5,111 5,071 -0.8

3 Chemicals and related products 53,679 54,470 54,394 -0.1

4 Energy-related products 26,597 25,703 26,437 2.9

5 Textiles and apparel 2,140 2,073 2,125 2.5

6 Footwear 56 56 60 7.2

7 Minerals and metals 26,493 23,126 16,737 -27.6

8 Machinery 17,249 16,939 17,344 2.4

9 Transportation equipment 48,299 48,020 47,955 -0.1

10 Electronic products 36,630 35,134 34,836 -0.8

11 Miscellaneous manufactures 5,445 5,715 5,626 -1.6

12 Special provisions 7,689 7,549 7,537 -0.1

Total 241,587 235,916 231,676 -1.8

Imports for consumption:

1 Agricultural products 18,917 19,926 20,833 4.5

2 Forest products 4,560 4,528 4,742 4.7

3 Chemicals and related products 91,738 86,566 86,274 -0.3

4 Energy-related products 26,706 27,033 24,012 -11.2

5 Textiles and apparel 5,259 5,376 5,640 4.9

6 Footwear 1,568 1,683 1,860 10.5

7 Minerals and metals 29,028 30,107 29,061 -3.5

8 Machinery 40,246 41,167 41,564 1.0

9 Transportation equipment 71,357 82,400 88,148 7.0

10 Electronic products 40,863 41,589 42,091 1.2

11 Miscellaneous manufactures 13,692 15,151 17,217 13.6

12 Special provisions 18,923 19,043 20,149 5.8

Total 362,856 374,570 381,591 1.9

Source: Official trade statistics of the USDOC as maintained by the USITC.

Note: Because of rounding, figures may not add to totals shown.

258
Table A.28 Leading U.S. domestic exports to the European Union (28), by Schedule B subheading, 2011–13

Schedule B

subheading Description 2011 2012 2013

% change

2012–13

Million $

8800.00 Aircraft, spacecraft, and parts thereof 24,701 23,975 25,723 7.3

2710.19 Petroleum oils and oils (not light) from bituminous minerals or preps n.e.s.o.i. 70%+ by weight from 

petroleum oils or bituminous minerals 15,017 16,016 18,148 13.3

3004.90 Medicaments, in measured doses, etc. (excluding vaccines, etc., coated bandages, etc., and 

pharmaceutical goods), n.e.s.o.i. 9,470 10,497 8,906 -15.1

3002.10 Antisera and other blood fractions, and modified immunological products 3,229 3,725 4,751 27.5

2701.12 Bituminous coal, whether or not pulverized, but not agglomerated 6,596 6,220 4,542 -27.0

8703.33 Passenger motor vehicles with compression-ignition internal combustion piston engine (diesel), cylinder 

capacity over 2,500 cc 1,535 3,671 3,345 -8.9

9018.90 Instruments and appliances for medical, surgical or veterinary sciences, n.e.s.o.i., and parts and 

accessories thereof 3,022 2,924 3,001 2.7

3822.00 Composite diagnostic or laboratory reagents, other than those pharmaceuticals in heading 3002 or 3006; 

certified reference materials 2,368 2,327 2,514 8.1

9018.39 Medical etc. needles n.e.s.o.i., catheters, cannulae and the like; parts and accessories therof 2,113 2,097 2,209 5.3

8703.32 Passenger motor vehicles with compression-ignition internal combustion piston engine (diesel), cylinder 

capacity over 1,500 cc but not over 2,500 cc 344 2,267 1,926 -15.0

2933.59 Heterocyclic compounds containing a pyrimidine ring (hydrogenated or not) or a piperazine ring in the 

structure, n.e.s.o.i. 574 1,124 1,874 66.7

8517.62 Machines for the reception, conversion and transmission or regeneration of voice, images or other data, 

including switching and routing apparatus 1,991 1,956 1,778 -9.1

1201.90 Soybeans, whether or not broken, other than seed (

a

) 1,481 1,528 3.2

7108.12 Gold, nonmonetary, unwrought n.e.s.o.i. (other than powder) 8,892 7,363 1,497 -79.7

8411.99 Parts of gas turbines, n.e.s.o.i. (other than parts for turbojets or turbopropellers) 1,658 1,817 1,481 -18.5

0802.12 Almonds, fresh or dried, shelled 938 1,012 1,446 42.8

9701.10 Paintings, drawings and pastels, hand-executed works of art, framed or not framed 1,080 1,126 1,402 24.4

8703.23 Passenger motor vehicles with spark-ignition internal combustion reciprocating piston engine, cylinder 

capacity over 1,500 cc but not over 3,000 cc 5,616 1,381 1,319 -4.5

9018.19 Electro-diagnostic apparatus (and apparatus for functional exploratory examination or for checking 

physiological parameters) n.e.s.o.i., and parts, etc. 1,376 1,214 1,161 -4.4

9021.39 Artificial parts of the body (other than artificial joints) and parts and accessories thereof, n.e.s.o.i. 754 1,049 1,125 7.3

7112.99 Precious metal (other than of gold or platinum) waste and scrap, including metal clad with precious 

metals, n.e.s.o.i. 1,724 1,453 1,122 -22.8

8803.30 Parts of airplanes or helicopters, n.e.s.o.i. 1,179 1,175 1,105 -6.0

2933.39 Heterocyclic compounds containing an unfused pyridine ring (whether or not hydrogenated) in the 

structure, n.e.s.o.i. 1,024 1,142 1,072 -6.2

8471.50 Processing units other than those of 8471.41 and 8471.49, n.e.s.o.i.. 1,082 1,244 1,015 -18.5

2934.99 Nucleic acids and their salts, whether or not chemically defined; other heterocyclic compounds; n.e.s.o.i. 952 819 990 21.0

Total of items shown 97,238 99,074 94,980 -4.1

All other HTS subheadings 144,349 136,842 136,696 -0.1

Total U.S. domestic exports to the EU-28 241,587 235,916 231,676 -1.8

Source: USDOC.

Note: Because of rounding, figures may not add to totals shown. The abbreviation “n.e.s.o.i.” stands for “not elsewhere specified or included.” a

Trade in 2011 reported under HTS tariff line 1201.00.

259
Table A.29 Leading U.S. imports for consumption from the European Union (28), by HTS provision, 2011–13

HTS

provision Description 2011 2012 2013

% change

2012–13

Million $

8703.24 Passenger motor vehicles with spark-ignition internal combustion reciprocating piston engine, cylinder capacity 

over 3,000 cc

15,399 18,571 19,012 2.4

8703.23 Passenger motor vehicles with spark-ignition internal combustion reciprocating piston engine, cylinder capacity 

over 1,500 cc but not over 3,000 cc

12,634 14,839 17,691 19.2

2710.12 Light oils and preparations (

a

) 17,778 15,250 -14.2

3004.90 Medicaments, in measured doses, etc. (excluding vaccines, etc., coated bandages, etc., and pharmaceutical 

goods), n.e.s.o.i.

20,438 16,888 14,871 -11.9

8411.91 Parts of turbojets or turbopropellers 5,909 6,510 6,878 5.6

8802.40 Airplanes and other aircraft n.e.s.o.i., of an unladen weight exceeding 15,000 kg 4,018 3,750 5,510 46.9

2710.19 Petroleum oils and oils (not light) from bituminous minerals or preps n.e.s.o.i. 70%+ by weight from petroleum 

oils or bituminous minerals

6,043 4,785 5,458 14.1

9701.10 Paintings, drawings and pastels, hand-executed works of art, framed or not framed 3,745 4,476 5,190 16.0

8803.30 Parts of airplanes or helicopters, n.e.s.o.i. 3,791 4,490 4,522 0.7

3002.10 Antisera and other blood fractions, and modified immunological products 2,576 3,501 4,312 23.2

7102.39 Diamonds, nonindustrial, worked, including polished or drilled 3,792 3,647 4,127 13.2

2933.59 Heterocyclic compounds containing a pyrimidine ring (hydrogenated or not) or a piperazine ring in the 

structure, n.e.s.o.i.

2,920 3,259 4,066 24.8

2933.99 Heterocyclic compounds with nitrogen hetero-atom(s) only, n.e.s.o.i. 6,027 5,087 3,845 -24.4

2934.99 Nucleic acids and their salts, whether or not chemically defined; other heterocyclic compounds; n.e.s.o.i. 6,770 4,694 3,698 -21.2

3004.39 Medicaments, in measured doses, etc., containing hormones or other steroids used primarily as hormones, but 

not containing antibiotics, n.e.s.o.i.

3,414 4,027 3,606 -10.5

8411.12 Turbojets of a thrust exceeding 25 kn 2,602 3,477 3,594 3.4

3004.31 Medicaments, in measured doses, etc., containing insulin but not containing antibiotics 2,105 2,885 3,587 24.3

9021.39 Artificial parts of the body (other than artificial joints) and parts and accessories thereof, n.e.s.o.i. 2,263 2,519 2,787 10.7

2204.21 Wine of fresh grapes (other than sparkling wine) and grape must with fermentation prevented, etc., by adding 

alcohol, containers of not over 2 liters

2,493 2,573 2,765 7.5

3002.20 Vaccines for human medicine 1,548 1,382 2,383 72.4

9018.90 Instruments and appliances for medical, surgical or veterinary sciences, n.e.s.o.i., and parts and accessories 

thereof

2,222 2,193 2,318 5.7

8517.62 Machines for the reception, conversion and transmission or regeneration of voice, images or other data, 

including switching and routing apparatus

1,444 2,153 2,164 0.5

3302.10 Mixtures of odoriferous substances and mixtures (including alcoholic solutions) with a basis of these substances 

used in the food or drink industries

1,832 1,787 2,044 14.4

3002.90 Human blood; animal blood prepared for therapeutic, etc., uses; toxins, cultures of micro-organisms (excluding 

yeasts) and similar products n.e.s.o.i.

4,864 3,276 1,779 -45.7

8481.80 Taps, cocks, valves and similar appliances for pipes, vats or the like, including thermostatically controlled valves, 

n.e.s.o.i.

1,605 1,701 1,777 4.5

Total of items shown 120,454 140,248 143,235 2.1

All other HTS subheadings 242,402 234,322 238,356 1.7

Total U.S. imports for consumption from the EU-28 362,856 374,570 381,591 1.9

Source: Official trade statistics of the USDOC as maintained by the USITC.

Note: Because of rounding, figures may not add to totals shown. The abbreviation "n.e.s.o.i." stands for "not elsewhere specified or included." a

Trade in 2011 reported under HTS tariff line 2710.11.

260
Table A.30 U.S. merchandise trade with Canada, by USITC digest sectors, 2011–13

Sector

Grouping Description 2011 2012 2013

% change

2012–13

Million $

Domestic exports:

1 Agricultural products 20,637 22,285 23,087 3.6

2 Forest products 10,249 10,236 10,257 0.2

3 Chemicals and related products 35,319 36,027 36,043 0.0

4 Energy-related products 17,437 18,204 24,720 35.8

5 Textiles and apparel 3,675 3,873 3,849 -0.6

6 Footwear 94 116 125 7.7

7 Minerals and metals 28,710 28,691 27,585 -3.9

8 Machinery 23,025 24,938 24,658 -1.1

9 Transportation equipment 63,354 67,427 68,452 1.5

10 Electronic products 18,207 18,455 17,731 -3.9

11 Miscellaneous manufactures 5,710 6,451 6,476 0.4

12 Special provisions 7,357 7,496 8,701 16.1

Total 233,774 244,199 251,685 3.1

Imports for consumption:

1 Agricultural products 21,893 23,203 24,913 7.4

2 Forest products 16,521 16,464 18,088 9.9

3 Chemicals and related products 34,515 34,161 33,762 -1.2

4 Energy-related products 103,749 103,042 109,739 6.5

5 Textiles and apparel 2,320 2,413 2,323 -3.8

6 Footwear 55 49 47 -2.8

7 Minerals and metals 35,358 32,529 33,380 2.6

8 Machinery 12,511 13,350 13,521 1.3

9 Transportation equipment 64,420 73,230 71,358 -2.6

10 Electronic products 9,758 9,513 9,074 -4.6

11 Miscellaneous manufactures 4,628 4,472 4,394 -1.7

12 Special provisions 10,668 11,498 12,287 6.9

Total 316,397 323,925 332,887 2.8

Source: Official trade statistics of the USDOC as maintained by the USITC.

Note: Because of rounding, figures may not add to totals shown. 

261
Table A.31 Leading U.S. domestic exports to Canada, by Schedule B subheading, 2011–13

Schedule B

subheading Description 2011 2012 2013

% change

2012–13

Million $

8704.31 Motor vehicles for goods transport n.e.s.o.i., with spark-ignition internal combustion piston engine, 

gross vehicle weight not over 5 metric tons

6,359 6,581 7,291 10.8

2710.12 Light oils and preparations (

a

) 5,170 7,196 39.2

8703.24 Passenger motor vehicles with spark-ignition internal combustion reciprocating piston engine, 

cyclinder capacity over 3,000 cc

5,076 5,304 5,909 11.4

8703.23 Passenger motor vehicles with spark-ignition internal combustion reciprocating piston engine, cylinder 

capacity over 1,500 cc but not over 3,000 cc

5,622 5,942 5,902 -0.7

2710.19 Petroleum oils and oils (not light) from bituminous minerals or preps n.e.s.o.i. 70%+ by weight from 

petroleum oils or bituminous minerals

4,951 4,281 5,386 25.8

8800.00 Aircraft, spacecraft, and parts thereof 4,544 4,320 5,363 24.1

8708.29 Parts and accessories of bodies (including cabs) for motor vehicles, n.e.s.o.i. 4,640 5,060 5,071 0.2

2709.00 Petroleum oils and oils from bituminous minerals, crude 1,459 2,183 4,818 120.8

2711.21 Natural gas, gaseous 3,685 2,761 3,655 32.4

8407.34 Spark-ignition reciprocating piston engines for propulsion of vehicles except railway or tramway stock, 

over 1,000 cc cylinder capacity

3,029 3,723 3,548 -4.7

8708.40 Gear boxes and parts thereof, for motor vehicles 2,468 2,381 2,788 17.1

8708.99 Parts and accessories for motor vehicles, n.e.s.o.i. 2,060 2,190 2,156 -1.5

8701.20 Road tractors for semi-trailers 1,709 2,032 1,848 -9.1

3004.90 Medicaments, in measured doses, etc. (excluding vaccines, etc., coated bandages, etc., and 

pharmaceutical goods), n.e.s.o.i.

2,330 1,939 1,757 -9.4

8481.80 Taps, cocks, valves and similar appliances for pipes, vats or the like, including thermostatically 

controlled valves, n.e.s.o.i.

1,197 1,357 1,372 1.1

8716.10 Trailers and semi-trailers for housing or camping 1,056 1,123 1,192 6.2

8716.39 Trailers and semi-trailers for the transport of goods, n.e.s.o.i. 928 1,101 1,162 5.5

8708.80 Suspension systems and parts thereof, for motor vehicles 1,151 1,272 1,161 -8.7

2106.90 Food preparations n.e.s.o.i. 941 1,098 1,144 4.2

7108.12 Gold, nonmonetary, unwrought n.e.s.o.i. (other than powder) 180 498 1,111 123.2

7606.12 Aluminum alloy rectangular (including square) plates, sheets and strip, over 0.2 mm thick 1,174 1,162 1,110 -4.4

8704.22 Motor vehicles for goods transport n.e.s.o.i., with compression-ignition internal combustion piston 

engine (diesel), gross vehicle weight over 5 but not over 20 metric tons

913 891 1,069 19.9

8708.30 Brakes and servo-brakes and parts thereof n.e.s.o.i., for motor vehicles 973 1,092 1,017 -6.8

8708.94 Steering wheels, steering columns and steering boxes and parts thereof, for motor vehicles 744 841 978 16.2

1905.90 Bread, pastry, cakes, biscuits and similar baked products, n.e.s.o.i., and puddings, whether or not 

containing chocolate, fruit, nuts or confectionery

736 847 937 10.6

Total of items shown 57,923 65,146 74,941 15.0

All other HTS subheadings 175,851 179,053 176,744 -1.3

Total U.S. domestic exports to Canada 233,774 244,199 251,685 3.1

Source: Official trade statistics of the USDOC as maintained by the USITC.

Note: Because of rounding, figures may not add to totals shown. The abbreviation “n.e.s.o.i.” stands for “not elsewhere specified or included.” a

Trade in 2011 reported under HTS tariff line 2710.11.

262
Table A.32 Leading U.S. imports for consumption from Canada, by HTS provision, 2011–13

HTS

provision Description 2011 2012 2013

% change

2012–13

Million $

2709.00 Petroleum oils and oils from bituminous minerals, crude 65,436 69,468 74,053 6.6

8703.24 Passenger motor vehicles with spark-ignition internal combustion reciprocating piston engine, cylinder 

capacity over 3,000 cc

25,474 28,787 25,458 -11.6

8703.23 Passenger motor vehicles with spark-ignition internal combustion reciprocating piston engine, cylinder 

capacity over 1,500 cc but not over 3,000 cc

12,609 16,257 17,679 8.7

2711.21 Natural gas, gaseous 12,825 7,927 9,446 19.2

2710.19 Petroleum oils and oils (not light) from bituminous minerals or preps n.e.s.o.i. 70%+ by weight from 

petroleum oils or bituminous minerals

8,645 9,431 9,236 -2.1

2710.12 Light oils and preparations (

a

) 7,122 7,123 0.0

4407.10 Coniferous wood sawn or chipped lengthwise, sliced or peeled, whether or not planed, etc., over 6 mm 

(.236 in.) thick

2,658 3,246 4,226 30.2

7108.12 Gold, nonmonetary, unwrought n.e.s.o.i. (other than powder) 3,646 2,553 3,179 24.5

8708.29 Parts and accessories of bodies (including cabs) for motor vehicles, n.e.s.o.i. 2,615 2,972 3,119 4.9

7601.10 Aluminum, not alloyed, unwrought 2,627 2,242 3,118 39.1

3104.20 Potassium chloride 3,560 3,225 3,073 -4.7

3004.90 Medicaments, in measured doses, etc. (excluding vaccines, etc., coated bandages, etc., and 

pharmaceutical goods), n.e.s.o.i.

2,503 2,758 2,579 -6.5

8708.99 Parts and accessories for motor vehicles, n.e.s.o.i. 2,195 2,294 2,312 0.8

8802.40 Airplanes and other aircraft n.e.s.o.i., of an unladen weight exceeding 15,000 kg 1,299 1,467 2,294 56.3

2716.00 Electrical energy 2,096 1,914 2,293 19.8

7601.20 Aluminum alloys, unwrought 2,346 2,157 2,121 -1.7

2711.12 Propane, liquefied 2,156 1,878 1,915 2.0

8407.34 Spark-ignition reciprocating piston engines for propulsion of vehicles except railway or tramway stock, 

over 1,000 cc cylinder capacity

2,486 2,612 1,900 -27.3

3901.90 Polymers of ethylene n.e.s.o.i., in primary forms 1,832 1,629 1,823 11.9

2713.20 Petroleum bitumen 1,732 1,546 1,550 0.3

7118.90 Coin, n.e.s.o.i. 1,589 1,237 1,541 24.6

4802.61 Uncoated paper/paperboard for writing/printing/other graphic purposes n.e.s.o.i., over 10% total fiber by 

mechanical/chemical process, in rolls

1,639 1,401 1,491 6.4

4703.21 Chemical woodpulp, soda or sulfate, other than dissolving grades, semibleached or bleached, coniferous 1,836 1,398 1,446 3.5

8803.30 Parts of airplanes or helicopters, n.e.s.o.i. 1,030 1,213 1,367 12.6

3901.20 Polyethylene having a specific gravity of 0.94 or more, in primary forms 1,187 1,246 1,357 8.9

Total of items shown 166,024 177,980 185,699 4.3

All other HTS subheadings 150,373 145,945 147,188 0.9

Total U.S. imports for consumption from Canada 316,397 323,925 332,887 2.8

Source: Official trade statistics of the USDOC as maintained by the USITC.

Note: Because of rounding, figures may not add to totals shown. The abbreviation “n.e.s.o.i.” stands for “not elsewhere specified or included.” a

Trade in 2011 reported under HTS tariff line 2710.11.

263
Table A.33 U.S. merchandise trade with China, by USITC digest sectors, 2011–13

Sector

Grouping Description 2011 2012 2013

% change

2012–13

Million $

Domestic exports:

1 Agricultural products 20,089 27,266 27,176 -0.3

2 Forest products 6,722 6,208 6,791 9.4

3 Chemicals and related products 15,021 14,205 14,128 -0.5

4 Energy-related products 2,308 2,785 3,057 9.8

5 Textiles and apparel 1,240 1,243 1,412 13.6

6 Footwear 56 47 44 -5.7

7 Minerals and metals 13,489 12,099 11,998 -0.8

8 Machinery 8,946 8,539 9,085 6.4

9 Transportation equipment 15,827 17,494 25,038 43.1

10 Electronic products 11,889 12,331 14,123 14.5

11 Miscellaneous manufactures 425 458 508 10.9

12 Special provisions 886 834 954 14.3

Total 96,898 103,508 114,313 10.4

Imports for consumption:

1 Agricultural products 6,498 7,043 6,967 -1.1

2 Forest products 7,333 8,080 8,277 2.4

3 Chemicals and related products 25,637 27,975 29,445 5.3

4 Energy-related products 620 390 498 27.7

5 Textiles and apparel 44,798 44,949 46,239 2.9

6 Footwear 16,677 17,026 16,876 -0.9

7 Minerals and metals 25,258 26,890 27,616 2.7

8 Machinery 36,534 40,730 44,024 8.1

9 Transportation equipment 15,284 16,866 17,813 5.6

10 Electronic products 158,671 171,159 175,212 2.4

11 Miscellaneous manufactures 57,041 59,339 60,574 2.1

12 Special provisions 4,116 4,425 4,606 4.1

Total 398,467 424,874 438,147 3.1

Source: Official trade statistics of the USDOC as maintained by the USITC.

Note: Because of rounding, figures may not add to totals shown. 

264
Table A.34 Leading U.S. domestic exports to China, by Schedule B subheading, 2011–13

Schedule B

subheading Description 2011 2012 2013

% change

2012–13

Million $

1201.90 Soybeans, whether or not broken, other than seed (

a

) 14,973 13,365 -10.7

8800.00 Aircraft, spacecraft, and parts thereof 6,322 7,874 12,076 53.4

8703.23 Passenger motor vehicles with spark-ignition internal combustion reciprocating piston engine, cylinder 

capacity over 1,500 cc but not over 3,000 cc

2,912 2,881 4,916 70.6

8703.24 Passenger motor vehicles with spark-ignition internal combustion reciprocating piston engine, cylinder 

capacity over 3,000 cc

1,562 1,955 2,996 53.2

7404.00 Copper waste and scrap 3,454 2,944 2,773 -5.8

7602.00 Aluminum waste and scrap 2,731 2,370 2,253 -4.9

5201.00 Cotton, not carded or combed 2,562 3,422 2,181 -36.3

8542.31 Processors or controllers 2,188 1,339 1,549 15.6

2303.30 Brewing or distilling dregs and waste, whether or not in the form of pellets 340 618 1,395 125.8

1001.99 Wheat and meslin other than durum or seed wheat (

b

) 213 1,295 508.1

1005.90 Corn (maize), other than seed corn 850 1,319 1,255 -4.9

4707.10 Waste and scrap of unbleached kraft paper or paperboard or of corrugated paper or paperboard 1,086 1,210 1,061 -12.3

4101.50 Whole raw bovine or equine hides and skins, of weight exceed 16 kg, fresh, pickled or otherwise preserved 

but not tanned or further prepared

618 827 1,040 25.8

9030.40 Instruments and apparatus n.e.s.o.i., specially designed for telecommunications (for example, cross-talk 

meters, gain measuring instruments, etc.)

149 571 986 72.5

2701.12 Bituminous coal, whether or not pulverized, but not agglomerated 828 1,222 895 -26.7

4403.20 Coniferous wood in the rough, whether or not stripped of bark or sapwood or roughly squared, not treated 825 570 862 51.4

8542.32 Memories 337 301 832 175.9

4703.21 Chemical woodpulp, soda or sulfate, other than dissolving grades, semibleached or bleached, coniferous 782 702 824 17.5

8486.20 Machines and apparatus for the manufacture of semiconductor devices or electronic integrated circuits 565 439 801 82.6

7204.49 Ferrous waste and scrap, n.e.s.o.i. 1,588 678 626 -7.7

2603.00 Copper ores and concentrates 687 664 612 -7.8

8408.90 Compression-ignition internal combustion piston engines (diesel or semi-diesel engines), n.e.s.o.i. 678 569 573 0.7

7108.12 Gold, nonmonetary, unwrought n.e.s.o.i. (other than powder) 156 (

c

) 572 (

d

)

2710.12 Light oils and preparations (

e

) 394 559 41.8

2713.11 Petroleum coke, not calcined 471 342 524 53.3

Total of items shown 31,691 48,398 56,822 17.4

All other HTS subheadings 65,207 55,109 57,491 4.3

Total U.S. domestic exports to China 96,898 103,508 114,313 10.4

Source: Official trade statistics of the USDOC as maintained by the USITC.

Note: Because of rounding, figures may not add to totals shown. The abbreviation “n.e.s.o.i.” stands for “not elsewhere specified or included.” a

Trade in 2011 reported under HTS tariff line 1201.00. b

Trade in 2011 reported under HTS tariff line 1001.90. c

Less than $500,000.

d

Over 1000%.

e

Trade in 2011 reported under HTS tariff line 2710.11.

265
Table A.35 Leading U.S. imports for consumption from China, by HTS provision, 2011–13

HTS

provision Description 2011 2012 2013

% change

2012–13

Million $

8471.30 Portable automatic data processing machines, weight not more than 10 kg, consisting of at least a 

central processing unit, keyboard and display

39,336 40,896 39,612 -3.1

8517.12 Telephones for cellular networks or for other wireless networks 22,916 33,351 36,878 10.6

8517.62 Machines for the reception, conversion and transmission or regeneration of voice, images or other 

data, including switching and routing apparatus

9,319 10,871 11,956 10.0

9503.00 Toys, including riding toys other than bicycles, puzzles, reduced-scale models 9,401 9,307 9,454 1.6

8473.30 Parts and accessories for automatic data processing machines and units thereof, magnetic or optical 

readers, transcribing machines, etc., n.e.s.o.i.

8,780 8,582 8,803 2.6

9504.50 Video game consoles and machines, other than of 9504.30; parts and accessories (

a

) 4,733 4,649 -1.8

6403.99 Footwear, with outer soles of rubber, plastics or composition leather and uppers of leather n.e.s.o.i., 

not covering the ankle

4,399 4,148 4,268 2.9

8504.40 Electrical static converters; power supplies for adp machines or units of 8471 3,475 3,619 3,997 10.4

8471.70 Automatic data processing storage units, n.e.s.o.i. 3,614 4,225 3,784 -10.4

6402.99 Footwear, with outer soles and uppers of rubber or plastics n.e.s.o.i., not covering the ankle 3,697 3,977 3,774 -5.1

8443.99 Parts and accessories of printing machinery, n.e.s.o.i. 3,519 3,344 3,721 11.3

8443.31 Machines which perform two or more of the functions of printing, copying or facsimile transmission, 

capable of connecting to an automatic data processing machine or to a network

4,018 3,827 3,542 -7.5

6110.20 Sweaters, pullovers, sweatshirts, vests and similar articles of cotton, knitted or crocheted 3,408 3,066 3,301 7.7

4202.92 Container bags, boxes, cases and satchels n.e.s.o.i., with outer surface of sheeting of plastics or of 

textile materials

2,893 3,071 3,071 0.0

8528.51 Monitors, other than CRT, designed for use with automatic data processing machines 3,452 3,138 2,999 -4.4

8528.72 Reception apparatus for television, incorporating a screen or video display device, color 4,012 4,224 2,989 -29.2

8471.50 Processing units other than those of 8471.41 and 8471.49, n.e.s.o.i. 3,373 2,838 2,787 -1.8

9401.61 Seats with wooden frames, upholstered, n.e.s.o.i. 2,085 2,464 2,761 12.0

8471.49 Automatic data processing machines and units thereof presented in the form of systems, n.e.s.o.i. 1,957 1,762 2,740 55.5

9403.20 Metal furniture, n.e.s.o.i. 2,299 2,528 2,692 6.5

6403.91 Footwear, with outer soles of rubber, plastics or composition leather and uppers of leather, n.e.s.o.i., 

covering the ankle

2,486 2,537 2,451 -3.4

9405.40 Electric lamps and lighting fittings, n.e.s.o.i. 1,544 2,075 2,421 16.7

9403.60 Wooden furniture, n.e.s.o.i. 2,311 2,390 2,416 1.1

6204.62 Women’s or girls’ trousers, bib and brace overalls, breeches and shorts of cotton, not knitted or 

crocheted

2,092 2,335 2,398 2.7

8517.70 Parts of telecommunications apparatus 2,161 2,198 2,378 8.2

Total of items shown 146,547 165,510 169,841 2.6

All other HTS subheadings 251,920 259,364 268,306 3.4

Total U.S. imports for consumption from China 398,467 424,874 438,147 3.1

Source: Official trade statistics of the USDOC as maintained by the USITC.

Note: Because of rounding, figures may not add to totals shown. The abbreviation “n.e.s.o.i.” stands for “not elsewhere specified or included.” a

Trade in 2011 reported under HTS tariff line 9504.10.

266
Table A.36 U.S. merchandise trade with Mexico, by USITC digest sectors, 2011–13

Sector

Grouping Description 2011 2012 2013

% change

2012–13

Million $

Domestic exports:

1 Agricultural products 18,425 18,981 18,258 -3.8

2 Forest products 5,067 5,239 5,391 2.9

3 Chemicals and related products 27,670 30,652 31,736 3.5

4 Energy-related products 23,652 24,152 23,386 -3.2

5 Textiles and apparel 4,075 4,162 4,419 6.2

6 Footwear 65 57 44 -23.2

7 Minerals and metals 15,764 17,766 18,918 6.5

8 Machinery 13,450 15,508 16,491 6.3

9 Transportation equipment 27,130 31,213 33,695 8.0

10 Electronic products 16,733 18,945 20,737 9.5

11 Miscellaneous manufactures 1,755 1,890 1,736 -8.1

12 Special provisions 6,126 6,596 6,878 4.3

Total 159,910 175,159 181,690 3.7

Imports for consumption:

1 Agricultural products 17,122 17,732 19,066 7.5

2 Forest products 1,490 1,525 1,651 8.3

3 Chemicals and related products 8,374 9,101 9,686 6.4

4 Energy-related products 44,475 39,375 34,126 -13.3

5 Textiles and apparel 5,881 5,782 5,826 0.8

6 Footwear 371 492 548 11.3

7 Minerals and metals 21,944 21,997 19,257 -12.5

8 Machinery 23,144 25,280 26,292 4.0

9 Transportation equipment 67,167 77,547 84,769 9.3

10 Electronic products 61,996 65,344 63,627 -2.6

11 Miscellaneous manufactures 3,908 4,976 5,364 7.8

12 Special provisions 6,798 7,258 7,451 2.7

Total 262,671 276,408 277,664 0.5

Source: Official trade statistics of the USDOC as maintained by the USITC.

Note: Because of rounding, figures may not add to totals shown

267
Table A.37 Leading U.S. domestic exports to Mexico, by Schedule B subheading, 2011–13

Schedule B

subheading Description 2011 2012 2013

% change

2012–13

Million $

2710.12 Light oils and preparations (

a

) 11,648 11,373 -2.4

2710.19 Petroleum oils and oils (not light) from bituminous minerals or preps n.e.s.o.i. 70%+ by weight from 

petroleum oils or bituminous minerals

5,826 8,269 7,215 -12.7

8708.99 Parts and accessories for motor vehicles, n.e.s.o.i. 4,751 4,971 4,254 -14.4

8800.00 Aircraft, spacecraft, and parts thereof 1,408 2,219 2,859 28.8

8708.29 Parts and accessories of bodies (including cabs) for motor vehicles, n.e.s.o.i. 1,940 2,009 2,347 16.9

8473.30 Parts and accessories for automatic data processing machines and units thereof, magnetic or optical 

readers, transcribing machines, etc., n.e.s.o.i.

858 2,165 2,266 4.6

8408.20 Compression-ignition internal combustion piston engines (diesel or semi-diesel), for the propulsion of 

vehicles except railway or tramway stock

1,682 1,865 2,248 20.5

2711.21 Natural gas, gaseous 1,748 1,584 2,163 36.5

3926.90 Articles of plastics, n.e.s.o.i. 1,458 1,684 1,887 12.1

8708.40 Gear boxes and parts thereof, for motor vehicles 1,421 1,645 1,860 13.1

8703.23 Passenger motor vehicles with spark-ignition internal combustion reciprocating piston engine, cylinder

capacity over 1,500 cc but not over 3,000 cc

1,841 2,178 1,816 -16.6

1005.90 Corn (maize), other than seed corn 2,658 2,560 1,789 -30.1

8703.24 Passenger motor vehicles with spark-ignition internal combustion reciprocating piston engine, cylinder 

capacity over 3,000 cc

1,183 1,309 1,597 22.0

2603.00 Copper ores and concentrates 813 922 1,549 68.0

1201.90 Soybeans, whether or not broken, other than seed (

b

) 1,860 1,544 -17.0

8538.90 Parts for electrical apparatus for electrical circuits, boards, panels, etc., for electric control or distribution 

of electricity, n.e.s.o.i.

1,264 1,456 1,492 2.5

2902.43 Para-xylene (1,4-dimethylbenzene) 1,516 1,423 1,456 2.3

7326.90 Articles of iron or steel, n.e.s.o.i. 1,077 1,268 1,288 1.6

8544.49 Insulated electric conductors, for a voltage not exceeding 1000 v, not fitted with connectors 883 1,236 1,279 3.5

8536.90 Electrical apparatus for switching, protecting or making connections to or in electrical circuits, for a 

voltage not exceeding 1,000 v, n.e.s.o.i.

887 1,134 1,218 7.4

8409.91 Parts for use with spark-ignition internal combustion piston engines (including rotary engines), n.e.s.o.i. 798 976 1,090 11.7

2909.19 Acyclic ethers (excluding diethyl ether) and their halogenated, sulfonated, nitrated or nitrosated 

derivatives

792 1,219 1,060 -13.1

3901.20 Polyethylene having a specific gravity of 0.94 or more, in primary forms 845 856 954 11.4

8708.50 Drive axles with differential and non-drive axles and parts thereof, for motor vehicles 778 917 940 2.6

7606.12 Aluminum alloy rectangular (including square) plates, sheets and strip, over 0.2 mm thick 817 869 939 8.0

Total of items shown 37,244 58,244 58,482 0.4

All other HTS subheadings 122,666 116,916 123,208 5.4

Total U.S. domestic exports to Mexico 159,910 175,159 181,690 3.7

Source: Official trade statistics of the USDOC as maintained by the USITC.

Note: Because of rounding, figures may not add to totals shown. The abbreviation “n.e.s.o.i.” stands for “not elsewhere specified or included.” a

Trade in 2011 reported under HTS tariff line 2710.11. b

Trade in 2011 reported under HTS tariff line 1201.00.

268
Table A.38 Leading U.S. imports for consumption from Mexico, by HTS provision, 2011–13

HTS

provision Description 2011 2012 2013

% change

2012–13

Million $

2709.00 Petroleum oils and oils from bituminous minerals, crude 40,165 36,776 31,208 -15.1

8703.23 Passenger motor vehicles with spark-ignition internal combustion reciprocating piston engine, cylinder 

capacity over 1,500 cc but not over 3,000 cc

11,415 12,208 15,501 27.0

8471.50 Processing units other than those of 8471.41 and 8471.49, n.e.s.o.i. 10,503 11,055 11,172 1.1

8528.72 Reception apparatus for television, incorporating a screen or video display device, color 11,973 11,477 10,733 -6.5

8704.31 Motor vehicles for goods transport n.e.s.o.i., with spark-ignition internal combustion piston engine, 

gross vehicle weight not over 5 metric tons

7,494 9,016 9,897 9.8

8517.62 Machines for the reception, conversion and transmission or regeneration of voice, images or other data, 

including switching and routing apparatus

5,234 5,958 6,545 9.9

8544.30 Insulated ignition wiring sets and other wiring sets for vehicles, aircraft and ships 4,735 5,499 5,681 3.3

9401.90 Parts of seats (except parts of medical, dentist’s, barbers’ and similar seats), n.e.s.o.i. 3,917 4,850 5,165 6.5

8701.20 Road tractors for semi-trailers 4,074 4,477 5,010 11.9

8708.29 Parts and accessories of bodies (including cabs) for motor vehicles, n.e.s.o.i. 2,680 3,391 3,797 12.0

7108.12 Gold, nonmonetary, unwrought n.e.s.o.i. (other than powder) 5,543 5,427 3,665 -32.5

8537.10 Boards, panels, consoles, etc., with electrical apparatus, for electric control or distribution of electricity, 

for a voltage not exceeding 1,000 v

2,328 2,846 3,438 20.8

8704.22 Motor vehicles for goods transport n.e.s.o.i., with compression-ignition internal combustion piston 

engine (diesel), gross vehicle weight over 5 but not over 20 metric tons

2,568 2,842 3,293 15.9

8708.99 Parts and accessories for motor vehicles, n.e.s.o.i. 2,531 3,185 3,146 -1.2

9018.90 Instruments and appliances for medical, surgical or veterinary sciences, n.e.s.o.i., and parts and 

accessories thereof

2,680 2,682 2,784 3.8

8703.24 Passenger motor vehicles with spark-ignition internal combustion reciprocating piston engine, cylinder 

capacity over 3,000 cc

2,488 3,347 2,753 -17.8

8407.34 Spark-ignition reciprocating piston engines for propulsion of vehicles except railway or tramway stock, 

over 1,000 cc cylinder capacity

1,775 2,051 2,743 33.8

7106.91 Silver, unwrought n.e.s.o.i. (other than powder) 3,433 3,469 2,713 -21.8

8418.10 Combined refrigerator-freezers fitted with separate external doors 2,168 2,241 2,441 8.9

8708.40 Gear boxes and parts thereof, for motor vehicles 1,907 2,089 2,309 10.5

8528.71 Reception apparatus for television, not designed to incorporate a screen or video display device 2,211 3,238 2,163 -33.2

8409.91 Parts for use with spark-ignition internal combustion piston engines (including rotary engines), n.e.s.o.i. 1,906 2,069 2,103 1.7

2203.00 Beer made from malt 1,677 1,819 1,917 5.4

8708.95 Safety airbag with inflator system and parts thereof, for motor vehicles 1,396 1,646 1,771 7.6

8704.21 Motor vehicles for goods transport n.e.s.o.i., with compression-ignition internal combustion piston 

engine (diesel), gross vehicle weight not over 5 metric tons

980 1,342 1,692 26.1

Total of items shown 137,783 144,998 143,642 -0.9

All other HTS subheadings 124,888 131,411 134,022 2.0

Total U.S. imports for consumption from Mexico 262,671 276,408 277,664 0.5

Source: Official trade statistics of the USDOC as maintained by the USITC.

Note: Because of rounding, figures may not add to totals shown. The abbreviation “n.e.s.o.i.” stands for “not elsewhere specified or included.”

269
Table A.39 U.S. merchandise trade with Japan, by USITC digest sectors, 2011–13

Sector

Grouping Description 2011 2012 2013

% change

2012–13

Million $

Domestic exports:

1 Agricultural products 15,277 14,585 13,174 -9.7

2 Forest products 2,209 2,156 2,218 2.9

3 Chemicals and related products 11,609 12,201 10,745 -11.9

4 Energy-related products 3,494 3,547 3,199 -9.8

5 Textiles and apparel 518 549 618 12.6

6 Footwear 66 67 56 -16.2

7 Minerals and metals 3,670 3,088 3,213 4.0

8 Machinery 3,467 3,068 3,409 11.1

9 Transportation equipment 7,748 11,463 10,046 -12.4

10 Electronic products 10,631 11,264 10,419 -7.5

11 Miscellaneous manufactures 1,586 1,591 1,589 -0.1

12 Special provisions 1,133 1,020 1,002 -1.8

Total 61,409 64,599 59,689 -7.6

Imports for consumption:

1 Agricultural products 759 780 766 -1.8

2 Forest products 517 531 474 -10.8

3 Chemicals and related products 12,269 12,433 12,138 -2.4

4 Energy-related products 610 616 746 21.2

5 Textiles and apparel 700 739 688 -6.9

6 Footwear 2 2 5 102.6

7 Minerals and metals 6,971 8,024 7,362 -8.3

8 Machinery 19,014 20,461 18,986 -7.2

9 Transportation equipment 55,569 69,277 67,368 -2.8

10 Electronic products 26,697 26,213 24,216 -7.6

11 Miscellaneous manufactures 1,715 1,604 1,218 -24.1

12 Special provisions 3,077 3,859 3,988 3.3

Total 127,901 144,538 137,954 -4.6

Source: Official trade statistics of the USDOC as maintained by the USITC.

Note: Because of rounding, figures may not add to totals shown.

270
Table A.40 Leading U.S. domestic exports to Japan, by Schedule B subheading, 2011–13

Schedule B

subheading Description 2011 2012 2013

% change

2012–13

Million $

8800.00 Aircraft, spacecraft, and parts thereof 4,024 7,017 5,997 -14.5

3004.90 Medicaments, in measured doses, etc. (excluding vaccines, etc., coated bandages, etc., and pharmaceutical 

goods), n.e.s.o.i.

2,079 2,161 1,838 -15.0

1005.90 Corn (maize), other than seed corn 3,830 2,979 1,767 -40.7

0203.19 Meat of swine, n.e.s.o.i., fresh or chilled 976 1,008 1,077 6.9

1001.99 Wheat and meslin other than durum or seed wheat (

a

) 1,073 1,028 -4.2

1201.90 Soybeans, whether or not broken, other than seed (

b

) 1,126 1,003 -10.8

9018.90 Instruments and appliances for medical, surgical or veterinary sciences, n.e.s.o.i., and parts and accessories 

thereof

794 935 940 0.5

2710.12 Light oils and preparations (

c

) 536 749 39.7

0203.29 Meat of swine, n.e.s.o.i., frozen 791 759 723 -4.7

0201.30 Meat of bovine animals, boneless, fresh or chilled 461 570 707 24.0

8486.20 Machines and apparatus for the manufacture of semiconductor devices or electronic integrated circuits 535 243 684 181.7

2909.19 Acyclic ethers (excluding diethyl ether) and their halogenated, sulfonated, nitrated or nitrosated derivatives 634 685 668 -2.5

8803.30 Parts of airplanes or helicopters, n.e.s.o.i. 594 627 651 3.9

2804.61 Silicon, containing by weight not less than 99.99% of silicon 690 625 642 2.7

9018.39 Medical, etc., needles n.e.s.o.i., catheters, cannulae and the like; parts and accessories therof 785 762 624 -18.1

1214.90 Forage products, n.e.s.o.i., including rutabagas (swedes), mangolds, fodder roots, hay, clover, forage kale, 

vetches, etc., whether or not in pellet form

503 593 562 -5.2

2701.12 Bituminous coal, whether or not pulverized, but not agglomerated 1,199 897 559 -37.6

2711.12 Propane, liquefied 0 117 544 363.4

7113.19 Jewelry and parts thereof, of precious metal other than silver 429 425 472 11.0

4403.20 Coniferous wood in the rough, whether or not stripped of bark or sapwood or roughly squared, not treated 337 350 457 30.3

0202.30 Meat of bovine animals, boneless, frozen 276 306 456 48.7

3822.00 Composite diagnostic or laboratory reagents, other than those pharmaceuticals in heading 3002 or 3006; 

certified reference materials

504 476 451 -5.4

3002.10 Antisera and other blood fractions, and modified immunological products 137 448 432 -3.6

2713.11 Petroleum coke, not calcined 628 484 426 -11.9

9021.39 Artificial parts of the body (other than artificial joints) and parts and accessories thereof, n.e.s.o.i. 492 412 425 3.1

Total of items shown 20,699 25,613 23,883 -6.8

All other HTS subheadings 40,709 38,986 35,806 -8.2

Total U.S. domestic exports to Japan 61,409 64,599 59,689 -7.6

Source: Official trade statistics of the USDOC as maintained by the USITC.

Note: Because of rounding, figures may not add to totals shown. The abbreviation “n.e.s.o.i.” stands for “not elsewhere specified or included.” a

Trade in 2011 reported under HTS tariff line 1001.90.

b

Trade in 2011 reported under HTS tariff line 1201.00.

c

Trade in 2011 reported under HTS tariff line 2710.11.

271
Table A.41 Leading U.S. imports for consumption from Japan, by HTS provision, 2011–13

HTS 

provision Description 2011 2012 2013

% change

2012–13

Million $

8703.23 Passenger motor vehicles with spark-ignition internal combustion reciprocating piston engine, 

cylinder capacity over 1,500 cc but not over 3,000 cc

17,343 22,252 23,047 3.6

8703.24 Passenger motor vehicles with spark-ignition internal combustion reciprocating piston engine, 

cyclinder capacity over 3,000 cc

11,655 13,834 13,268 -4.1

8803.30 Parts of airplanes or helicopters, n.e.s.o.i. 2,553 3,226 3,811 18.1

8443.99 Parts and accessories of printing machinery, n.e.s.o.i. 4,108 3,708 3,393 -8.5

8708.40 Gear boxes and parts thereof, for motor vehicles 2,013 2,941 2,873 -2.3

8703.22 Passenger motor vehicles with spark-ignition internal combustion reciprocating piston engine, 

cylinder capacity over 1,000 cc but not over 1,500 cc

1,941 2,715 2,499 -7.9

8708.99 Parts and accessories for motor vehicles, n.e.s.o.i. 2,493 2,927 2,288 -21.8

8429.52 Mechanical shovels, excavators and shovel loaders with 360 degree revolving superstructure, selfpropelled1,571 2,697 1,865 -30.9

8486.20 Machines and apparatus for the manufacture of semiconductor devices or electronic integrated 

circuits

2,618 2,121 1,665 -21.5

8411.91 Parts of turbojets or turbopropellers 1,149 1,372 1,624 18.3

8525.80 Television cameras; digital cameras and video camera recorders 2,110 2,277 1,422 -37.5

2933.79 Lactams (excluding 6-hexanelactam), n.e.s.o.i. 1,102 1,112 1,278 15.0

8409.91 Parts for use with spark-ignition internal combustion piston engines (including rotary engines), 

n.e.s.o.i.

881 1,099 1,088 -1.0

9102.11 Wrist watches, battery powered, with cases of materials (except of or clad with precious metal) 

n.e.s.o.i., with mechanical display only

842 863 962 11.5

8486.90 Parts and accessories 1,000 968 884 -8.7

8408.90 Compression-ignition internal combustion piston engines (diesel or semi-diesel engines), n.e.s.o.i. 937 1,078 858 -20.5

8481.80 Taps, cocks, valves and similar appliances for pipes, vats or the like, including thermostatically 

controlled valves, n.e.s.o.i.

678 798 810 1.5

8701.90 Tractors, n.e.s.o.i. 822 915 785 -14.3

9018.19 Electro-diagnostic apparatus (and apparatus for functional exploratory examination or for checking 

physiological parameters) n.e.s.o.i., and parts, etc.

660 726 779 7.3

8457.10 Machining centers for working metal 679 941 729 -22.5

8542.31 Processors or controllers 690 723 702 -2.9

8517.62 Machines for the reception, conversion and transmission or regeneration of voice, images or other 

data, including switching and routing apparatus

596 719 675 -6.2

8504.40 Electrical static converters; power supplies for automatic data processing machines or units of 8471 494 636 673 5.7

4011.10 New pneumatic tires, of rubber, of a kind used on motor cars (including station wagons and racing 

cars)

917 752 657 -12.7

3818.00 Chemical elements doped for use in electronics, in the form of discs, wafers or similar forms; chemical 

compounds doped for use in electronics

843 738 624 -15.3

Total of items shown 60,697 72,138 69,258 -4.0

All other HTS subheadings 67,204 72,400 68,695 -5.1

Total U.S. imports for consumption from Japan 127,901 144,538 137,954 -4.6

Source: Official trade statistics of the USDOC as maintained by the USITC.

Note: Because of rounding, figures may not add to totals shown. The abbreviation “n.e.s.o.i.” stands for “not elsewhere specified or included.”

272
Table A.42 U.S. merchandise trade with Korea, by USITC digest sectors, 2011–13

Sector

Grouping Description 2011 2012 2013

% change

2012–13

Million $

Domestic exports:

1 Agricultural products 7,366 6,516 5,686 -12.7

2 Forest products 962 845 856 1.3

3 Chemicals and related products 6,499 6,693 6,945 3.8

4 Energy-related products 2,858 1,965 1,635 -16.8

5 Textiles and apparel 415 358 374 4.5

6 Footwear 94 101 84 -17.4

7 Minerals and metals 4,170 3,829 3,674 -4.1

8 Machinery 5,499 5,632 5,584 -0.9

9 Transportation equipment 4,807 5,578 6,180 10.8

10 Electronic products 7,158 7,172 6,714 -6.4

11 Miscellaneous manufactures 759 734 707 -3.7

12 Special provisions 724 581 569 -2.0

Total 41,311 40,004 39,008 -2.5

Imports for consumption:

1 Agricultural products 510 558 636 13.9

2 Forest products 523 516 539 4.5

3 Chemicals and related products 5,093 5,443 4,938 -9.3

4 Energy-related products 2,200 2,267 2,487 9.7

5 Textiles and apparel 1,260 1,331 1,301 -2.3

6 Footwear 21 26 23 -13.0

7 Minerals and metals 5,038 5,878 5,539 -5.8

8 Machinery 6,379 6,824 6,572 -3.7

9 Transportation equipment 15,542 18,899 21,368 13.1

10 Electronic products 17,953 14,543 16,560 13.9

11 Miscellaneous manufactures 605 663 827 24.8

12 Special provisions 882 925 1,190 28.7

Total 56,006 57,874 61,979 7.1

Source: Official trade statistics of the USDOC as maintained by the USITC.

Note: Because of rounding, figures may not add to totals shown.

273
Table A.43 Leading U.S. domestic exports to Korea, by Schedule B subheading, 2011–13

Schedule B

subheading Description 2011 2012 2013

% change

2012–13

Million $

8800.00 Aircraft, spacecraft, and parts thereof 1,855 2,585 2,568 -0.6

8542.31 Processors or controllers 964 1,976 2,398 21.4

8486.20 Machines and apparatus for the manufacture of semiconductor devices or electronic integrated 

circuits

1,487 1,803 1,218 -32.4

7204.49 Ferrous waste and scrap, n.e.s.o.i. 1,131 951 758 -20.3

3004.90 Medicaments, in measured doses, etc. (excluding vaccines, etc., coated bandages, etc., and 

pharmaceutical goods), n.e.s.o.i.

344 541 680 25.7

2701.12 Bituminous coal, whether or not pulverized, but not agglomerated 1,020 683 494 -27.6

8803.30 Parts of airplanes or helicopters, n.e.s.o.i. 338 409 466 14.0

8431.43 Parts for boring or sinking machinery, n.e.s.o.i. 368 215 464 115.7

8486.90 Parts and accessories 477 454 384 -15.4

1001.99 Wheat and meslin other than durum or seed wheat (

a

) 645 340 -47.3

2926.10 Acrylonitrile 424 521 324 -37.8

2707.30 Xylenes 511 397 313 -21.2

8542.39 Electronic integrated circuits, n.e.s.o.i. 314 317 310 -2.2

8703.23 Passenger motor vehicles with spark-ignition internal combustion reciprocating piston engine, 

cylinder capacity over 1,500 cc but not over 3,000 cc

199 189 296 56.2

2902.50 Styrene (vinylbenzene; phenylethylene) 88 116 295 155.0

4101.50 Whole raw bovine or equine hides and skins, of weight exceeding 16 kg, fresh, pickled or otherwise 

preserved but not tanned or further prepared

180 250 293 17.5

1201.90 Soybeans, whether or not broken, other than seed (

b

) 395 280 -29.0

2710.12 Light oils and preparations (

c

) 42 275 547.6

0202.20 Meat of bovine animals, cuts with bone in (other than half or whole carcasses), frozen 213 206 265 28.7

2106.90 Food preparations n.e.s.o.i. 213 208 247 18.4

9031.41 Optical instruments for inspecting semiconductor wafers or devices or for inspecting photomasks or 

reticles used in manufacturing semiconductor devices

262 388 244 -37.0

7602.00 Aluminum waste and scrap 294 287 240 -16.1

1214.90 Forage products, n.e.s.o.i., including rutabagas (swedes), mangolds, fodder roots, hay, clover, forage 

kale, vetches, etc., whether or not in pellet form

201 234 234 -0.1

8479.89 Machines and mechanical appliances having individual functions, n.e.s.o.i. 96 94 225 137.9

0202.30 Meat of bovine animals, boneless, frozen 368 268 213 -20.3

Total of items shown 11,347 14,174 13,826 -2.5

All other HTS subheadings 29,964 25,829 25,182 -2.5

Total U.S. domestic exports to Korea 41,311 40,004 39,008 -2.5

Source: Official trade statistics of the USDOC as maintained by the USITC.

Note: Because of rounding, figures may not add to totals shown. The abbreviation “n.e.s.o.i.” stands for “not elsewhere specified or included.” a

Trade in 2011 reported under HTS tariff line 1001.90.

b

Trade in 2011 reported under HTS tariff line 1201.00. c

Trade in 2011 reported under HTS tariff line 2710.11.

274
Table A.44 Leading U.S. imports for consumption from Korea, by HTS provision, 2011–13

HTS

provision Description 2011 2012 2013

% change

2012–13

Million $

8703.23 Passenger motor vehicles with spark-ignition internal combustion reciprocating piston engine, cylinder 

capacity over 1,500 cc but not over 3,000 cc

7,617 9,079 8,665 -4.6

8517.12 Telephones for cellular networks or for other wireless networks 7,617 4,501 5,970 32.7

8703.24 Passenger motor vehicles with spark-ignition internal combustion reciprocating piston engine, cylinder 

capacity over 3,000 cc

1,375 1,621 2,289 41.3

2710.19 Petroleum oils and oils (not light) from bituminous minerals or preps n.e.s.o.i. 70%+ by weight from 

petroleum oils or bituminous minerals

1,584 1,953 1,947 -0.3

8542.39 Electronic integrated circuits, n.e.s.o.i. 1,990 1,817 1,692 -6.8

8473.30 Parts and accessories for automatic data processing machines and units thereof, magnetic or optical 

readers, transcribing machines, etc., n.e.s.o.i.

1,522 1,136 1,524 34.2

8703.22 Passenger motor vehicles with spark-ignition internal combustion reciprocating piston engine, cylinder 

capacity over 1,000 cc but not over 1,500 cc

3 188 1,157 517.0

8708.99 Parts and accessories for motor vehicles, n.e.s.o.i. 915 968 1,051 8.6

8418.10 Combined refrigerator-freezers fitted with separate external doors 948 979 1,029 5.1

4011.10 New pneumatic tires, of rubber, of a kind used on motor cars (including station wagons and racing cars) 1,180 1,299 1,010 -22.2

8542.32 Memories 538 542 877 61.8

8708.29 Parts and accessories of bodies (including cabs) for motor vehicles, n.e.s.o.i. 544 782 836 6.9

8905.20 Floating or submersible drilling or production platforms 110 0 830 (

a

)

7306.29 Seamed steel casing or tubing of kind used in drilling oil/gas, with external diameter 406.4mm or less or 

other than circular cross-section

676 831 790 -4.9

8517.62 Machines for the reception, conversion and transmission or regeneration of voice, images or other 

data, including switching and routing apparatus

283 460 662 44.0

8708.40 Gear boxes and parts thereof, for motor vehicles 148 442 614 38.9

8451.29 Drying machines (except centrifugal type) for textile yarns, fabrics or made-up textile articles, with a dry 

linen capacity exceeding 10 kg

540 477 597 25.0

8803.30 Parts of airplanes or helicopters, n.e.s.o.i. 360 409 478 16.9

8429.52 Mechanical shovels, excavators and shovel loaders with 360 degree revolving superstructure, selfpropelled282 652 456 -30.0

7306.19 Seamed (other than welded stainless steel) pipe, with external diameter 406.4mm or less or other than 

circular cross-section, line pipe of a kind used for oil and gas pipelines

417 514 428 -16.7

8471.30 Portable automatic data processing machines, weight not more than 10 kg, consisting of at least a 

central processing unit, keyboard and display

543 566 425 -24.9

8542.31 Processors or controllers 459 340 423 24.5

8523.51 Solid state non-volatile storage devices 329 326 417 28.1

8708.94 Steering wheels, steering columns and steering boxes and parts thereof, for motor vehicles 288 378 411 8.7

8517.70 Parts of telecommunications apparatus 384 359 385 7.1

Total of items shown 30,653 30,615 34,964 14.2

All other HTS subheadings 25,353 27,259 27,015 -0.9

Total U.S. imports for consumption from Korea 56,006 57,874 61,979 7.1

Source: Official trade statistics of the USDOC as maintained by the USITC.

Note: Because of rounding, figures may not add to totals shown. The abbreviation “n.e.s.o.i.” stands for “not elsewhere specified or included.” a

Undefined.

275
Table A.45 U.S. merchandise trade with Brazil, by USITC digest sectors, 2011–13

Sector

Grouping Description 2011 2012 2013

% change

2012–13

Million $

Domestic exports:

1 Agricultural products 1,892 695 1,952 180.8

2 Forest products 481 418 388 -7.2

3 Chemicals and related products 8,875 8,987 9,818 9.2

4 Energy-related products 6,501 7,382 6,712 -9.1

5 Textiles and apparel 271 284 254 -10.4

6 Footwear 4 2 2 -30.1

7 Minerals and metals 1,177 1,257 1,330 5.8

8 Machinery 3,516 3,794 3,961 4.4

9 Transportation equipment 9,140 8,997 8,132 -9.6

10 Electronic products 4,320 4,382 4,079 -6.9

11 Miscellaneous manufactures 291 263 227 -13.7

12 Special provisions 807 790 773 -2.2

Total 37,275 37,252 37,627 1.0

Imports for consumption:

1 Agricultural products 4,643 4,924 4,675 -5.1

2 Forest products 1,793 1,802 2,159 19.8

3 Chemicals and related products 3,191 3,157 2,514 -20.4

4 Energy-related products 8,918 8,631 4,869 -43.6

5 Textiles and apparel 117 111 117 5.1

6 Footwear 253 210 200 -4.8

7 Minerals and metals 5,554 5,603 5,214 -6.9

8 Machinery 1,231 1,279 1,081 -15.5

9 Transportation equipment 2,949 3,325 3,325 0.0

10 Electronic products 288 323 254 -21.2

11 Miscellaneous manufactures 381 418 454 8.6

12 Special provisions 1,049 1,937 1,999 3.2

Total 30,368 31,720 26,861 -15.3

Source: Official trade statistics of the USDOC as maintained by the USITC.

Note: Because of rounding, figures may not add to totals shown.

276
Table A.46 Leading U.S. domestic exports to Brazil, by Schedule B subheading, 2011–13

Schedule B

subheading Description 2011 2012 2013

% change

2012–13

Million $

8800.00 Aircraft, spacecraft, and parts thereof 4,822 4,742 4,313 -9.0

2710.19 Petroleum oils and oils (not light) from bituminous minerals or preps n.e.s.o.i. 70%+ by weight from 

petroleum oils or bituminous minerals

2,440 3,876 3,711 -4.3

1001.99 Wheat and meslin other than durum or seed wheat (

a

) 13 1,245 9,206.6

2701.12 Bituminous coal, whether or not pulverized, but not agglomerated 1,713 1,237 986 -20.3

2710.12 Light oils and preparations (

b

) 1,284 787 -38.7

3004.90 Medicaments, in measured doses, etc. (excluding vaccines, etc., coated bandages, etc., and 

pharmaceutical goods), n.e.s.o.i.

615 707 736 4.0

2711.12 Propane, liquefied 269 239 676 182.9

3808.91 Insecticides 187 267 419 56.9

2902.50 Styrene (vinylbenzene; phenylethylene) 222 242 305 25.8

2815.12 Sodium hydroxide (caustic soda), in aqueous solution (soda lye or liquid soda) 342 379 304 -19.8

8517.62 Machines for the reception, conversion and transmission or regeneration of voice, images or other 

data, including switching and routing apparatus

300 314 289 -8.1

8431.43 Parts for boring or sinking machinery, n.e.s.o.i. 624 403 272 -32.5

3907.20 Polyethers n.e.s.o.i., in primary forms 192 221 262 18.5

3105.30 Diammonium hydrogenorthophosphate (diammonium phosphate) 181 242 253 4.4

2930.90 Organo-sulfur compounds, n.e.s.o.i. 206 197 222 12.7

8708.99 Parts and accessories for motor vehicles, n.e.s.o.i. 211 188 218 15.8

9018.90 Instruments and appliances for medical, surgical or veterinary sciences, n.e.s.o.i., and parts and 

accessories thereof

199 204 214 4.7

8431.49 Parts and attachments, n.e.s.o.i., for derricks, cranes, self-propelled bulldozers, graders, etc., and 

other grading, scraping, etc., machinery

274 226 211 -6.8

3105.59 Mineral or chemical fertilizers containing the two fertilizing elements nitrogen and phosphorus, 

n.e.s.o.i.

0 25 207 720.5

8502.31 Generating sets, electric, wind-powered 100 134 199 48.2

3901.20 Polyethylene having a specific gravity of 0.94 or more, in primary forms 152 158 198 25.3

3901.90 Polymers of ethylene n.e.s.o.i., in primary forms 139 137 198 43.9

3105.40 Ammonium dihydrogenorthophosphate (monoammonium phosphate) and mixtures thereof with 

diammonium hydrogenorthophosphate (diammonium phosphate)

491 306 192 -37.3

3808.93 Herbicides, anti-sprouting products and plant-growth regulators 124 157 190 20.7

3906.90 Acrylic polymers n.e.s.o.i., in primary forms 189 182 186 2.2

Total of items shown 13,992 16,083 16,790 4.4

All other HTS subheadings 23,282 21,170 20,837 -1.6

Total U.S. domestic exports to Brazil 37,275 37,252 37,627 1.0

Source: Official trade statistics of the USDOC as maintained by the USITC.

Note: Because of rounding, figures may not add to totals shown. The abbreviation “n.e.s.o.i.” stands for “not elsewhere specified or included.” a

Trade in 2011 reported under HTS tariff line 1001.90.

b

Trade in 2011 reported under HTS tariff line 2710.11.

277
Table A.47 Leading U.S. imports for consumption from Brazil, by HTS provision, 2011–13

HTS

provision Description 2011 2012 2013

% change

2012–13

Million $

2709.00 Petroleum oils and oils from bituminous minerals, crude 6,498 5,374 2,659 -50.5

7207.12 Semifinished products of iron or nonalloy steel, under 0.25% (weight) carbon, rectangular cross-section, 

width not less than twice the thickness

1,702 1,890 1,487 -21.4

2710.19 Petroleum oils and oils (not light) from bituminous minerals or preps n.e.s.o.i. 70%+ by weight from 

petroleum oils or bituminous minerals

1,319 1,816 1,372 -24.5

2207.10 Ethyl alcohol, undenatured, of an alcoholic strength by volume of 80% vol. or higher 568 1,463 1,199 -18.1

8802.40 Airplanes and other aircraft n.e.s.o.i., of an unladen weight exceeding 15,000 kg 365 395 1,135 187.0

4703.29 Chemical woodpulp, soda or sulfate, other than dissolving grades, semibleached or bleached, 

nonconiferous

911 820 1,032 25.8

0901.11 Coffee, not roasted, not decaffeinated 1,865 1,242 1,007 -18.9

7201.10 Nonalloy pig iron containing 0.5% (weight) or less phosphorus, in primary forms 1,130 882 688 -22.0

6802.93 Worked monumental or building stone n.e.s.o.i., of granite 447 477 609 27.7

8802.30 Airplanes and other aircraft n.e.s.o.i., of an unladen weight exceeding 2,000 kg but not exceeding 15,000 

kg

429 458 448 -2.2

2401.20 Tobacco, partly or wholly stemmed/stripped 271 299 376 26.1

8409.99 Parts for use with compression-ignition internal combustion piston engines, n.e.s.o.i. 472 416 325 -21.9

2902.20 Benzene 192 271 302 11.4

2713.11 Petroleum coke, not calcined 395 694 300 -56.7

1005.90 Corn (maize), other than seed corn 3 215 296 37.6

4409.10 Wood continuously shaped (tongued, grooved, rebated, v-jointed, beaded, molded, etc.) along any of its 

edges or faces, planed, etc. or not, coniferous

162 217 278 28.2

7224.90 Semifinished products of alloy steel (other than stainless) n.e.s.o.i. (

a

) 9 265 2,813.3

1602.50 Meat or meat offal of bovine animals, prepared or preserved, n.e.s.o.i. 146 193 228 17.8

2710.12 Light oils and preparations 0 72 210 193.4

7202.93 Ferroniobium 244 269 205 -23.9

2009.11 Orange juice, frozen, whether or not sweetened 158 91 202 123.0

4802.56 Paper/paperboard for writing/printing/other graphic purpose, weight 40g/m2-150g/m2, not over 10% 

fiber by mechanical/chemical process, sized sheets

142 137 186 36.1

8412.90 Parts for engines and motors, n.e.s.o.i. 175 438 183 -58.2

4011.10 New pneumatic tires, of rubber, of a kind used on motor cars (including station wagons and racing cars) 278 256 183 -28.4

1201.90 Soybeans, whether or not broken, other than seed (

b

) 0 183 (

c

)

Total of items shown 17,873 18,395 15,359 -16.5

All other HTS subheadings 12,495 13,325 11,502 -13.7

Total U.S. imports for consumption from Brazil 30,368 31,720 26,861 -15.3

Source: Official trade statistics of the USDOC as maintained by the USITC.

Note: Because of rounding, figures may not add to totals shown. The abbreviation “n.e.s.o.i.” stands for “not elsewhere specified or included.” a

Less than $500,000.

b

Trade in 2011 reported under HTS tariff line 1201.00. c

Undefined.

278
Table A.48 U.S. merchandise trade with Taiwan, by USITC digest sectors, 2011–13

Sector

Grouping Description 2011 2012 2013

% change

2012–13

Million $

Domestic exports:

1 Agricultural products 3,706 3,291 3,191 -3.0

2 Forest products 495 469 532 13.5

3 Chemicals and related products 4,714 4,416 4,266 -3.4

4 Energy-related products 314 653 1,336 104.7

5 Textiles and apparel 95 99 96 -3.2

6 Footwear 5 5 4 -13.0

7 Minerals and metals 2,867 2,547 2,128 -16.4

8 Machinery 4,529 4,602 4,691 1.9

9 Transportation equipment 1,315 1,309 2,286 74.7

10 Electronic products 4,929 3,735 3,520 -5.8

11 Miscellaneous manufactures 331 297 818 175.3

12 Special provisions 476 411 401 -2.3

Total 23,775 21,832 23,270 6.6

Imports for consumption:

1 Agricultural products 453 467 474 1.5

2 Forest products 193 208 215 3.5

3 Chemicals and related products 2,933 3,119 3,194 2.4

4 Energy-related products 140 278 26 -90.7

5 Textiles and apparel 1,154 1,156 1,139 -1.5

6 Footwear 56 52 50 -3.0

7 Minerals and metals 4,793 5,163 5,081 -1.6

8 Machinery 3,487 3,908 3,942 0.9

9 Transportation equipment 2,797 3,074 3,155 2.6

10 Electronic products 20,990 17,214 16,130 -6.3

11 Miscellaneous manufactures 2,646 2,899 2,819 -2.8

12 Special provisions 1,572 1,185 1,315 11.0

Total 41,213 38,722 37,539 -3.1

Source: Official trade statistics of the USDOC as maintained by the USITC.

Note: Because of rounding, figures may not add to totals shown.

279
Table A.49 Leading U.S. domestic exports to Taiwan, by Schedule B subheading, 2011–13

Schedule B

subheading Description 2011 2012 2013

% change

2012–13

Million $

8486.20 Machines and apparatus for the manufacture of semiconductor devices or electronic integrated 

circuits

1,371 1,935 2,345 21.2

7204.49 Ferrous waste and scrap, n.e.s.o.i. 1,339 1,235 971 -21.4

8800.00 Aircraft, spacecraft, and parts thereof 600 641 904 41.0

2710.12 Light oils and preparations (

a

) 352 894 154.0

1201.90 Soybeans, whether or not broken, other than seed (

b

) 763 582 -23.8

9306.90 Bombs, grenades, torpedoes, mines, missiles and similar munitions of war and parts thereof; other 

ammunition and projectiles and parts thereof, n.e.s.o.i.

33 21 564 2,640.8

8542.32 Memories 1,344 678 469 -30.8

8486.90 Parts and accessories 422 406 456 12.3

8542.31 Processors or controllers 412 347 425 22.5

8803.30 Parts of airplanes or helicopters, n.e.s.o.i. 161 159 401 151.6

8542.39 Electronic integrated circuits, n.e.s.o.i. 569 406 389 -4.0

1001.99 Wheat and meslin other than durum or seed wheat (

c

) 357 364 1.9

8802.12 Helicopters of an unladen weight exceeding 2,000 kg 0 0 346 (

d

)

3824.90 Chemical products and preparations of the chemical or allied industries, n.e.s.o.i.; residual products 

of the chemical or allied industries, n.e.s.o.i.

203 202 281 39.2

9031.41 Optical instruments for inspecting semiconductor wafers or devices or for inspecting photomasks or 

reticles used in manufacturing semiconductor devices

443 466 272 -41.7

2707.30 Xylenes 54 16 246 1,394.3

2933.71 6-hexanelactam (epsilon-caprolactam) 231 153 234 53.0

3004.90 Medicaments, in measured doses, etc. (excluding vaccines, etc., coated bandages, etc., and 

pharmaceutical goods), n.e.s.o.i.

142 168 206 22.8

1005.90 Corn (maize), other than seed corn 807 310 181 -41.6

7204.21 Stainless steel waste and scrap 268 227 171 -24.8

3908.10 Polyamide-6,-11,-12,-6,6,-6,9,-6,10 or -6,12 (nylon type), in primary forms 223 145 157 8.0

2804.61 Silicon, containing by weight not less than 99.99% of silicon 197 159 156 -1.6

0207.14 Chicken cuts and edible offal (including livers), frozen 109 160 156 -2.5

2106.90 Food preparations n.e.s.o.i. 112 130 152 17.2

8401.30 Fuel elements (cartridges), non-irradiated, for nuclear reactors, and parts thereof 131 66 143 116.3

Total of items shown 9,168 9,503 11,465 20.7

All other HTS subheadings 14,606 12,329 11,804 -4.3

Total U.S. domestic exports to Taiwan 23,775 21,832 23,270 6.6

Source: Official trade statistics of the USDOC as maintained by the USITC.

Note: Because of rounding, figures may not add to totals shown. The abbreviation “n.e.s.o.i.” stands for “not elsewhere specified or included.” a

Trade in 2011 reported under HTS tariff line 2710.11.

b

Trade in 2011 reported under HTS tariff line 1201.00.

c

Trade in 2011 reported under HTS tariff line 1001.90. d

Undefined.

280
Table A.50 Leading U.S. imports for consumption from Taiwan, by HTS provision, 2011–13

HTS

provision Description 2011 2012 2013

% change

2012–13

Million $

8517.12 Telephones for cellular networks or for other wireless networks 6,609 2,410 1,797 -25.4

8542.32 Memories 1,072 1,060 1,399 32.0

8473.30 Parts and accessories for automatic data processing machines and units thereof, magnetic or optical 

readers, transcribing machines, etc., n.e.s.o.i.

1,426 1,301 1,397 7.4

8542.39 Electronic integrated circuits, n.e.s.o.i. 1,139 1,134 1,197 5.6

8542.31 Processors or controllers 956 889 882 -0.8

8526.91 Radio navigational aid apparatus 978 1,377 807 -41.4

8541.40 Photosensitive semiconductor devices, including photovoltaic cells; light-emitting diodes 256 478 635 32.9

8517.62 Machines for the reception, conversion and transmission or regeneration of voice, images or other 

data, including switching and routing apparatus

391 544 623 14.6

8525.80 Television cameras; digital cameras and video camera recorders 401 546 600 9.8

8523.51 Solid state non-volatile storage devices 579 514 553 7.6

8528.71 Reception apparatus for television, not designed to incorporate a screen or video display device 874 950 531 -44.1

8512.20 Electrical lighting or visual signaling equipment, for use on cycles or motor vehicles, except for use 

on bicycles

426 446 490 9.9

7318.15 Threaded screws and bolts n.e.s.o.i., with or without their nuts or washers, of iron or steel 513 510 490 -3.8

8708.29 Parts and accessories of bodies (including cabs) for motor vehicles, n.e.s.o.i. 399 437 454 4.0

8712.00 Bicycles and other cycles (including delivery tricycles), not motorized 411 427 435 2.0

7318.14 Self-tapping screws, threaded, of iron or steel 388 427 428 0.2

8471.30 Portable automatic data processing machines, weight not more than 10 kg, consisting of at least a 

central processing unit, keyboard and display

773 436 366 -16.2

8534.00 Printed circuits 353 351 363 3.5

8471.70 Automatic data processing storage units, n.e.s.o.i. 269 324 352 8.8

7318.16 Nuts, threaded, of iron or steel 311 310 324 4.4

8481.80 Taps, cocks, valves and similar appliances for pipes, vats or the like, including thermostatically 

controlled valves, n.e.s.o.i.

302 321 318 -0.8

8504.40 Electrical static converters; power supplies for automatic data processing machines or units of 8471 355 308 304 -1.5

9506.91 Articles and equipment for general physical exercise, gymnastics or athletics, n.e.s.o.i.; parts and 

accessories thereof

312 288 301 4.6

8708.99 Parts and accessories for motor vehicles, n.e.s.o.i. 247 268 268 0.0

8471.50 Processing units other than those of 8471.41 and 8471.49, n.e.s.o.i. 184 225 261 16.1

Total of items shown 19,926 16,281 15,578 -4.3

All other HTS subheadings 21,287 22,441 21,960 -2.1

Total U.S. imports for consumption from Taiwan 41,213 38,722 37,539 -3.1

Source: Official trade statistics of the USDOC as maintained by the USITC.

Note: Because of rounding, figures may not add to totals shown. The abbreviation “n.e.s.o.i.” stands for “not elsewhere specified or included.”

281
Table A.51 U.S. merchandise trade with India, by USITC digest sectors, 2011–13

Sector

Grouping Description 2011 2012 2013

% change

2012–13

Million $

Domestic exports:

1 Agricultural products 732 865 873 1.0

2 Forest products 836 745 740 -0.7

3 Chemicals and related products 4,533 3,624 3,222 -11.1

4 Energy-related products 1,912 1,786 1,329 -25.6

5 Textiles and apparel 162 168 166 -0.8

6 Footwear 4 4 3 -20.8

7 Minerals and metals 2,835 4,645 2,640 -43.2

8 Machinery 1,727 1,778 1,488 -16.3

9 Transportation equipment 2,089 2,449 3,760 53.5

10 Electronic products 2,304 2,306 2,145 -7.0

11 Miscellaneous manufactures 172 212 224 5.8

12 Special provisions 363 392 320 -18.4

Total 17,670 18,972 16,911 -10.9

Imports for consumption:

1 Agricultural products 3,105 5,790 4,444 -23.2

2 Forest products 160 158 177 12.4

3 Chemicals and related products 6,674 8,021 8,267 3.1

4 Energy-related products 3,138 2,976 3,703 24.4

5 Textiles and apparel 6,447 6,397 6,865 7.3

6 Footwear 196 264 290 9.7

7 Minerals and metals 9,149 8,668 10,286 18.7

8 Machinery 1,653 2,003 1,801 -10.1

9 Transportation equipment 1,471 1,743 1,436 -17.6

10 Electronic products 1,393 1,287 1,197 -7.0

11 Miscellaneous manufactures 2,201 2,260 2,477 9.6

12 Special provisions 418 538 515 -4.2

Total 36,003 40,105 41,459 3.4

Source: Official trade statistics of the USDOC as maintained by the USITC.

Note: Because of rounding, figures may not add to totals shown.

282
Table A.52 Leading U.S. domestic exports to India, by Schedule B subheading, 2011–13

Schedule B

subheading Description 2011 2012 2013

% change

2012–13

Million $

8800.00 Aircraft, spacecraft, and parts thereof 620 1,215 1,607 32.4

7108.12 Gold, nonmonetary, unwrought n.e.s.o.i. (other than powder) 769 2,903 1,389 -52.2

8802.40 Airplanes and other aircraft n.e.s.o.i., of an unladen weight exceeding 15,000 kg 0 0 1,152 (

a

)

2707.99 Oils and products of the distillation of high temperature coal tar, n.e.s.o.i.; similar products which have a 

predominate (weight) aromatic constituent, n.e.s.o.i.

537 485 426 -12.3

2701.12 Bituminous coal, whether or not pulverized, but not agglomerated 917 856 400 -53.3

0802.11 Almonds, fresh or dried, in shell 256 279 324 16.2

3105.30 Diammonium hydrogenorthophosphate (diammonium phosphate) 1,237 557 315 -43.4

2713.11 Petroleum coke, not calcined 107 196 229 16.8

2809.20 Phosphoric acid and polyphosphoric acids 272 221 191 -13.6

2710.19 Petroleum oils and oils (not light) from bituminous minerals or preps n.e.s.o.i. 70%+ by weight from 

petroleum oils or bituminous minerals

94 90 190 110.7

7102.39 Diamonds, nonindustrial, worked, including polished or drilled 577 262 163 -37.7

4707.10 Waste and scrap of unbleached kraft paper or paperboard or of corrugated paper or paperboard 150 145 150 3.7

8517.62 Machines for the reception, conversion and transmission or regeneration of voice, images or other data, 

including switching and routing apparatus

178 171 146 -14.4

7204.49 Ferrous waste and scrap, n.e.s.o.i. 416 379 142 -62.5

4801.00 Newsprint, in rolls or sheets 186 128 120 -6.5

9018.90 Instruments and appliances for medical, surgical or veterinary sciences, n.e.s.o.i., and parts and 

accessories thereof

109 100 117 17.5

3824.90 Chemical products and preparations of the chemical or allied industries, n.e.s.o.i.; residual products of the 

chemical or allied industries, n.e.s.o.i.

85 109 111 2.4

8409.99 Parts for use with compression-ignition internal combustion piston engines, n.e.s.o.i. 112 118 103 -13.1

3822.00 Composite diagnostic or laboratory reagents, other than those pharmaceuticals in heading 3002 or 3006; 

certified reference materials

91 88 95 7.9

5201.00 Cotton, not carded or combed 93 73 90 23.7

8803.30 Parts of airplanes or helicopters, n.e.s.o.i. 50 62 89 43.0

7113.19 Jewelry and parts thereof, of precious metal other than silver 77 87 85 -2.3

7602.00 Aluminum waste and scrap 82 90 83 -7.3

8431.43 Parts for boring or sinking machinery, n.e.s.o.i. 74 66 77 16.3

7204.21 Stainless steel waste and scrap 38 74 73 -0.2

Total of items shown 7,129 8,755 7,869 -10.1

All other HTS subheadings 10,541 10,218 9,043 -11.5

Total U.S. domestic exports to India 17,670 18,972 16,911 -10.9

Source: Official trade statistics of the USDOC as maintained by the USITC.

Note: Because of rounding, figures may not add to totals shown. The abbreviation “n.e.s.o.i.” stands for “not elsewhere specified or included.” a

Undefined.

283
Table A.53 Leading U.S. imports for consumption from India, by HTS provision, 2011–13

HTS

provision Description 2011 2012 2013

% change

2012–13

Million $

7102.39 Diamonds, nonindustrial, worked, including polished or drilled 6,263 5,398 7,353 36.2

3004.90 Medicaments, in measured doses, etc. (excluding vaccines, etc., coated bandages, etc., and pharmaceutical 

goods), n.e.s.o.i.

2,465 3,500 3,654 4.4

2710.12 Light oils and preparations (

a

) 2,405 2,825 17.4

1302.32 Mucilages and thickeners, whether or not modified, derived from locust beans, locust bean seeds or guar 

seeds

914 3,373 1,615 -52.1

7113.19 Jewelry and parts thereof, of precious metal other than silver 1,127 1,103 1,191 7.9

0306.17 Other shrimps and prawns, cooked in shell or uncooked, dried, salted or in brine, frozen (

b

) 531 967 82.0

2710.19 Petroleum oils and oils (not light) from bituminous minerals or preps n.e.s.o.i. 70%+ by weight from 

petroleum oils or bituminous minerals

425 552 859 55.6

6302.31 Bed linen (other than printed) of cotton, not knitted or crocheted 635 764 848 10.9

6302.60 Toilet and kitchen linen of cotton terry toweling or similar cotton terry fabrics 532 575 583 1.3

3004.20 Medicaments, in measured doses, etc., containing antibiotics, n.e.s.o.i. 361 378 424 12.2

6110.20 Sweaters, pullovers, sweatshirts, vests and similar articles of cotton, knitted or crocheted 399 341 398 16.7

7113.11 Jewelry and parts thereof, of silver 343 335 366 9.4

8528.71 Reception apparatus for television, not designed to incorporate a screen or video display device 282 200 274 37.0

0801.32 Cashew nuts, fresh or dried, shelled 307 264 265 0.2

6206.30 Women’s or girls’ blouses, shirts and shirt-blouses of cotton, not knitted or crocheted 241 208 247 18.7

6205.20 Men’s or boys’ shirts of cotton, not knitted or crocheted 250 207 220 6.4

7210.49 Flat-rolled iron or nonalloy steel products, not corrugated, 600 mm or more wide, plated or coated with 

zinc other than electrolytically

151 197 219 11.4

2902.20 Benzene 163 210 213 1.2

8701.90 Tractors, n.e.s.o.i. 199 221 193 -12.7

8481.90 Parts for taps, cocks, valves and similar appliances for pipes, vats or the like, including pressure-reducing 

and thermostatically controlled valves

170 188 188 0.3

6109.10 T-shirts, singlets, tank tops and similar garments of cotton, knitted or crocheted 233 191 172 -10.0

6105.10 Men’s or boys’ shirts of cotton, knitted or crocheted 214 165 170 3.4

6802.93 Worked monumental or building stone n.e.s.o.i., of granite 150 157 166 5.8

8708.30 Brakes and servo-brakes and parts thereof n.e.s.o.i., for motor vehicles 155 175 159 -8.8

8708.99 Parts and accessories for motor vehicles, n.e.s.o.i. 237 192 159 -17.5

Total of items shown 16,216 21,830 23,728 8.7

All other HTS subheadings 19,788 18,275 17,731 -3.0

Total U.S. imports for consumption from India 36,003 40,105 41,459 3.4

Source: Official trade statistics of the USDOC as maintained by the USITC.

Note: Because of rounding, figures may not add to totals shown. The abbreviation “n.e.s.o.i.” stands for “not elsewhere specified or included.” a

Trade in 2011 reported under HTS tariff line 2710.11. b

Trade in 2011 reported under HTS tariff line 0306.13.

284