United States

International Trade Commission

The Year in Trade 2014

Operation of the Trade Agreements 

Program

66th Report

July 2015

Publication Number: 4543
United States International Trade Commission

Commissioners

Meredith M. Broadbent, Chairman

Dean A. Pinkert, Vice Chairman

Irving A. Williamson

David S. Johanson

F. Scott Kieff

Rhonda K. Schmidtlein

Catherine B. DeFilippo

Director, Office of Operations

William Powers

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 2014

Operation of the Trade Agreements 

Program

66th Report

July 2015

Publication Number: 4543
United States International Trade Commission

This report was prepared principally by:

Project Leader

Joanne Guth, Office of Economics

Deputy Project Leader

Lin Jones, Office of Economics

Office of Economics

Justino De La Cruz, William Greene,

Jeffrey Horowitz, Alexi Maxwell, Alissa Tafti, Edward Wilson, and Wen Jin Yuan

Office of General Counsel

William W. Gearhart

Office of Industries

Cathy Jabara, Joann Peterson, and Laura Rodriguez

Office of Investigations

Angela Newell

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, Peg Hausman, and Jeremy Wise

Content Reviewer

Jan Summers

Special Assistance

Cynthia Payne, Sonya Wilson

Help Desk and Customer Service Division (CIO)

Under the direction of

Arona Butcher, Chief

Country and Regional Analysis Division
Year in Trade

U.S. International Trade Commission | 1 

Preface 

This report is the 66th 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) 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 2014. 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 by 

congressional legislation.

Year in Trade

U.S. International Trade Commission | 3 

Table of Contents

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

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

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

Chapter 1 Overview of U.S. Trade ..................................................................... 37

Scope and Approach of the Report .......................................................................................... 37

Trade Data................................................................................................................................. 37

Overview of the U.S. Economy in 2014 .................................................................................... 38

Exchange-Rate Trends........................................................................................................... 41

Balance of Payments............................................................................................................. 41

U.S. Trade in Goods in 2014...................................................................................................... 43

U.S. Merchandise Trade by Product Category...................................................................... 44

Exports .............................................................................................................................. 44

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

U.S. Imports under Preferential Programs and Free Trade Agreements ............................. 45

U.S. Merchandise Trade with Leading Partners.................................................................... 46

U.S. Trade in Services in 2014................................................................................................... 48

U.S. Services Trade by Product Category.............................................................................. 48

Exports .............................................................................................................................. 48

Imports.............................................................................................................................. 49

U.S. Services Trade with Leading Partners............................................................................ 50

Chapter 2 Administration of U.S. Trade Laws and Regulations.......................... 53

Import Relief Laws.................................................................................................................... 53

Safeguard Actions................................................................................................................. 53

Laws against Unfair Trade Practices......................................................................................... 53

Section 301 Investigations.................................................................................................... 53

Section 301 Investigations................................................................................................ 54

Special 301 ........................................................................................................................ 56

Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Investigations and Reviews..................................... 60

Antidumping Duty Investigations ..................................................................................... 60

Countervailing Duty Investigations................................................................................... 63

Reviews of Outstanding Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Orders/Suspension 

Agreements....................................................................................................................... 64

Section 337 Investigations.................................................................................................... 65

Trade Adjustment Assistance ................................................................................................... 67

Assistance for Workers......................................................................................................... 68

Assistance for Firms.............................................................................................................. 70

Tariff Preference Programs....................................................................................................... 72
Table of Contents

4 | www.usitc.gov

Generalized System of Preferences...................................................................................... 72

African Growth and Opportunity Act.................................................................................... 74

Andean Trade Preference Act............................................................................................... 79

Caribbean Basin Economic Recovery Act.............................................................................. 80

Haiti Initiatives.................................................................................................................. 82

Chapter 3 The World Trade Organization .......................................................... 87

DDA and General Council Work under the Bali Package.......................................................... 87

Agreement on Trade Facilitation and Food Security Stockholdings......................................... 88

November Special General Council Session ............................................................................. 89

Work Programs, Decisions, and Reviews.................................................................................. 90

Waivers ................................................................................................................................. 90

Accessions............................................................................................................................. 91

Selected Plurilateral Agreements ............................................................................................. 93

Information Technology Agreement (ITA)............................................................................ 93

Agreement on Government Procurement (GPA) ................................................................. 94

Negotiations on an Environmental Goods Agreement (EGA) .............................................. 95

Dispute Settlement Body.......................................................................................................... 97

New Requests for Consultations and New Panels Established .......................................... 101

Requests for Consultations Filed during 2014 in which the United States was the 

Complaining Party or Named Respondent ..................................................................... 101

Panels Established during 2014 at the Request of the United States............................ 102

Panels Established during 2014 in which the United States was the 

Named Respondent ........................................................................................................ 103

Panel and Appellate Body Reports Issued and/or Adopted during 2014 That Involve the 

United States....................................................................................................................... 104

Reports in which the United States was the Complainant............................................. 104

Reports in which the United States was the Respondent.............................................. 109

Chapter 4 Other Trade Agreements and Regional Activities............................ 115

Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development................................................. 115

Ministerial Council Meeting................................................................................................ 115

Trade Committee ................................................................................................................ 116

Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation ........................................................................................ 117

Background ......................................................................................................................... 117

2014 APEC Developments................................................................................................... 118

The Bogor Goals.............................................................................................................. 119

Free Trade Area of the Asia-Pacific (FTAAP)................................................................... 120

Advancing Global Value Chain Development and Supply Chain Connectivity ............... 121

Negotiations on a Trade in Services Agreement .................................................................... 122

Trade and Investment Framework Agreements..................................................................... 123

Developments in New TIFAs during 2014........................................................................... 125
Year in Trade

U.S. International Trade Commission | 5 

Developments in Existing TIFAs during 2014...................................................................... 126

Chapter 5 U.S. Free Trade Agreements............................................................ 129

U.S. Trade with FTA Partners in 2014 ..................................................................................... 129

U.S. Total Merchandise Trade with FTA Partners............................................................... 129

U.S. Imports Entered under FTAs........................................................................................ 131

Developments in FTA Negotiations during 2014.................................................................... 132

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

Agreement .......................................................................................................................... 132

U.S. Trade with TPP Partners.......................................................................................... 136

Negotiations and Consultations toward the Transatlantic Trade and Investment 

Partnership (TTIP) Agreement ............................................................................................ 137

Developments in the North American Free Trade Agreement .............................................. 140

Commission for Labor Cooperation.................................................................................... 141

Commission for Environmental Cooperation ..................................................................... 143

Dispute Settlement............................................................................................................. 144

Chapter 11 Dispute Settlement Developments.............................................................. 145

Chapter 19 Dispute Panel Reviews................................................................................. 145

Developments in Other FTAs Already in Force during 2014 .................................................. 146

CAFTA-DR ............................................................................................................................ 147

Dispute Settlement......................................................................................................... 147

Environment ................................................................................................................... 148

Rules of Origin................................................................................................................. 148

U.S.-Colombia TPA .............................................................................................................. 149

U.S.-Jordan FTA................................................................................................................... 149

Labor Rights .................................................................................................................... 149

Environment ................................................................................................................... 150

U.S.-Korea FTA (KORUS)...................................................................................................... 150

U.S.-Morocco FTA ............................................................................................................... 150

Labor Rights .................................................................................................................... 150

Environment ................................................................................................................... 151

U.S.-Panama TPA................................................................................................................. 151

Labor Rights .................................................................................................................... 152

Environment ................................................................................................................... 152

U.S.-Peru TPA ...................................................................................................................... 153

Chapter 6 U.S. Relations with Selected Major Trading Partners ...................... 155

European Union ...................................................................................................................... 156

Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP)..................................................... 158

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

Canada .................................................................................................................................... 159
Table of Contents

6 | www.usitc.gov

Agriculture........................................................................................................................... 162

Regulatory Cooperation Council..................................................................................... 162

Softwood Lumber Agreement ........................................................................................ 164

Procurement ....................................................................................................................... 165

China ....................................................................................................................................... 166

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

Agricultural Market Access................................................................................................. 170

Agricultural Biotechnology ............................................................................................. 171

Medical Devices and Pharmaceuticals Market Access....................................................... 172

U.S.-China Bilateral Investment Treaty............................................................................... 173

Mexico..................................................................................................................................... 174

High Level Economic Dialogue ............................................................................................ 176

Cross-Border Trucking between the United States and Mexico ........................................ 177

Sugar Suspension Agreements between the United States and Mexico ........................... 178

Japan ....................................................................................................................................... 179

TPP Negotiations and Dialogue........................................................................................... 182

Passenger Vehicle Market Access................................................................................... 182

Agricultural Products ...................................................................................................... 183

Japan Post ....................................................................................................................... 183

Republic of Korea.................................................................................................................... 184

U.S.-Korea FTA .................................................................................................................... 187

Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP)........................................................................................... 187

Organic Labeling Agreement............................................................................................... 188

Brazil........................................................................................................................................ 188

Cotton ................................................................................................................................. 191

Taiwan..................................................................................................................................... 192

U.S.-Taiwan Trade and Investment Framework Agreement.............................................. 194

Agricultural Market Access................................................................................................. 195

Maximum Residue Limits................................................................................................ 195

Rice.................................................................................................................................. 196

Agricultural Biotechnology ............................................................................................. 197

India ........................................................................................................................................ 198

Trade and Investment Dialogue.......................................................................................... 200

Localization Requirements.................................................................................................. 201

Jawaharlal Nehru National Solar Mission....................................................................... 201

Telecommunication License Amendments..................................................................... 202

Intellectual Property Rights ................................................................................................ 202

Bibliography ................................................................................................... 205

Appendix A Data Tables.................................................................................. 243
Year in Trade

U.S. International Trade Commission | 7

Appendix B Additional Tables Corresponding to Figures in the Report............343

Boxes

Box 1.1: International digital trade.............................................................................................. 39

Box 3.1: Overview of the WTO dispute settlement procedures................................................. 98

Box 6.1: Regulatory initiatives under the RCC Joint Action Plan undertaken in the

agriculture and food sector ........................................................................................................ 163

Figures

Figure ES.1: U.S. trade balance in goods and services, 1996–2014 ............................................ 15

Figure 1.1: U.S. real gross domestic product, percentage change, 2005–14.............................. 40

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

2014 .............................................................................................................................................. 42

Figure 1.3: U.S. merchandise trade with the world, 2012–14..................................................... 44

Figure 1.4: Leading U.S. merchandise export markets, by share, 2014 ...................................... 47

Figure 1.5: Leading U.S. merchandise import sources, by share, 2014 ...................................... 47

Figure 1.6: U.S. private cross-border services trade with the world, 2012–14........................... 49

Figure 1.7: Leading U.S. export markets for private services, by share, 2014 ............................ 51

Figure 1.8: Leading U.S. import sources for private services, by share, 2014............................. 52

Figure 6.1: Map of selected major U.S. trading partners.......................................................... 155

Figure 6.2: U.S. merchandise trade with the EU, 2010–14 ....................................................... 157

Figure 6.3: U.S. private services trade with the EU, 2010–14 ................................................... 157

Figure 6.4: U.S. merchandise trade with Canada, 2010–14 ...................................................... 161

Figure 6.5: U.S. private services trade with Canada, 2010–14.................................................. 161

Figure 6.6: U.S. merchandise trade with China, 2010–14 ......................................................... 167

Figure 6.7: U.S. private services trade with China, 2010–14..................................................... 167

Figure 6.8: U.S. merchandise trade with Mexico, 2010–14 ...................................................... 175

Figure 6.9: U.S. private services trade with Mexico, 2010–14 .................................................. 175

Figure 6.10: U.S. merchandise trade with Japan, 2010–14....................................................... 181

Figure 6.11: U.S. private services trade with Japan, 2010–14................................................... 181

Figure 6.12: U.S. merchandise trade with South Korea, 2010–14 ............................................ 186

Figure 6.13: U.S. private services trade with South Korea, 2010–14 ........................................ 186

Figure 6.14: U.S. merchandise trade with Brazil, 2010–14 ....................................................... 190

Figure 6.15: U.S. private services trade with Brazil, 2010–14................................................... 190

Figure 6.16: U.S. merchandise trade with Taiwan, 2010–14..................................................... 193

Figure 6.17: U.S. private services trade with Taiwan, 2010–14 ................................................ 193

Figure 6.18: U.S. merchandise trade with India, 2010–14 ........................................................ 199

Figure 6.19: U.S. private services trade with India, 2010–14.................................................... 199
Table of Contents

8 | www.usitc.gov

Tables 

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

2014 .............................................................................................................................................. 46

Table 1.2: U.S. private services trade with major trading partners and the world, 2014........... 51

Table 2.1: Antidumping duty orders that became effective during 2014................................... 62

Table 2.2: Countervailing duty orders that became effective during 2014 ................................ 64

Table 2.3: TAA certifications, FY 2014 ......................................................................................... 70

Table 2.4: U.S. imports for consumption from GSP beneficiaries, 2012–14............................... 74

Table 2.5: U.S. imports for consumption from AGOA beneficiaries, 2012–14 ........................... 77

Table 2.6: U.S. imports for consumption from ATPA countries, 2012–14 .................................. 80

Table 2.7: U.S. imports for consumption from CBERA/CBTPA countries, 2012–14.................... 82

Table 2.8: U.S. imports for consumption of apparel from Haiti, 2012–14.................................. 84

Table 3.1: WTO membership in 2014........................................................................................... 91

Table 3.2: WTO observers in 2014............................................................................................... 93

Table 3.3: WTO dispute settlement panels established during 2014 ......................................... 99

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

adopted in 2014 in which the United States was a party........................................................... 105

Table 4.1: United States Trade and Investment Framework Agreements in 2014.................... 124

Table 5.1: U.S. merchandise trade with FTA partners, by FTA partner, 2012–14...................... 130

Table 5.2: U.S. imports for consumption entered under FTAs, by FTA partner, 2012–14........ 133

Table 5.3: The evolution of the TPP........................................................................................... 134

Table 5.4: Timetable of major TPP negotiation meetings, 2014............................................... 134

Table 5.5: U.S. merchandise trade with TPP partners, 2012–14............................................... 137

Table 5.6: Timetable of major TTIP negotiations, 2014 ............................................................ 138

Table 5.7: U.S. merchandise trade with the EU, 2012–14......................................................... 140

Table 5.8: Active files as of yearend 2014 under Articles 14 and 15 of the North American 

Agreement on Environmental Cooperation ............................................................................... 144

Table 5.9: NAFTA Chapter 19 binational panels, active reviews as of yearend 2014 ............... 146

Table A.1: U.S. merchandise trade with the world, by USITC digest sector, 2012–14 ............. 245

Table A.2: Leading U.S. total exports to the world by Schedule B subheading, 2012–14 ........ 246

Table A.3: Leading U.S. general imports from the world by HTS subheading, 2012–14 .......... 248

Table A.4: U.S. trade with top 15 single-country trading partners, 2014 ................................. 250

Table A.5: Top 15 U.S. single-country export markets and import sources, 2014.................... 251

Table A.6: U.S. private services exports and imports from the world, by 

category, 2012–14 ...................................................................................................................... 252

Table A.7: Antidumping cases active in 2014, by USITC investigation number ........................ 253

Table A.8: Antidumping duty orders and suspension agreements in effect as of 

December 31, 2014..................................................................................................................... 255
Year in Trade

U.S. International Trade Commission | 9 

Table A.9: Countervailing duty cases active in 2014, by USITC investigation number ............. 261

Table A.10: Countervailing duty orders in effect as of December 31, 2014 .............................. 263

Table A.11: Reviews of existing antidumping and countervailing duty orders completed in 

2014, by date of completion....................................................................................................... 265

Table A.12: Section 337 investigations and related proceedings completed by the U.S. 

International Trade Commission during 2014 and those pending on December 31, 2014 ....... 267

Table A.13: Outstanding Section 337 exclusion orders as of December 31, 2014 ................... 273

Table A.14: U.S. imports for consumption claiming eligibility under the GSP, by leading GSP 

beneficiary, 2012–14 .................................................................................................................. 279

Table A.15: U.S. imports for consumption claiming eligibility under the GSP, by USITC 

digest sector, 2012–14................................................................................................................ 280

Table A.16: Leading U.S. imports for consumption claiming eligibility under the GSP, by HTS 

provision, 2012–14 ..................................................................................................................... 281

Table A.17: U.S. imports for consumption under AGOA, by source, 2012–14 ......................... 282

Table A.18: Leading U.S. imports for consumption under AGOA, by HTS provision, 

2012–14 ...................................................................................................................................... 283

Table A.19: U.S. imports for consumption under ATPA/ATPDEA, by source, 2012–14............ 284

Table A.20: U.S. imports for consumption under CBERA/CBTPA, by source, 2012–14 ............ 284

Table A.21: Leading U.S. imports for consumption under CBERA/CBTPA, by HTS provision, 

2012–14 ...................................................................................................................................... 285

Table A.22: WTO dispute settlement cases to which the United States was a party, 

developments in 2014 ................................................................................................................ 287

Table A.23: NAFTA Chapter 19 substantive challenges to original and five-year review 

determinations of USITC and USDOC, developments in 2014 ................................................... 297

Table A.24: U.S. merchandise trade with the European Union (28 countries), by USITC

digest sector, 2012–14................................................................................................................ 298

Table A.25: Leading U.S. total exports to the European Union (28 countries), by Schedule B 

subheading, 2012–14.................................................................................................................. 299

Table A.26: Leading U.S. general imports from the European Union (28 countries), by HTS 

provision, 2012–14 ..................................................................................................................... 301

Table A.27: U.S. merchandise trade with Canada, by USITC digest sector, 2012–14 ............... 303

Table A.28: Leading U.S. total exports to Canada, by Schedule B subheading, 2012–14......... 304

Table A.29: Leading U.S. general imports from Canada, by HTS provision, 2012–14............... 306

Table A.30: U.S. merchandise trade with China, by USITC digest sector, 2012–14.................. 308

Table A.31: Leading U.S. total exports to China, by Schedule B subheading, 2012–14............ 309

Table A.32: Leading U.S. general imports from China, by HTS provision, 2012–14.................. 311

Table A.33: U.S. merchandise trade with Mexico, by USITC digest sector, 2012–14 ............... 313

Table A.34: Leading U.S total exports to Mexico, by Schedule B subheading, 2012–14 .......... 314

Table A.35: Leading U.S. general imports from Mexico, by HTS provision, 2012–14............... 316
Table of Contents

10 | www.usitc.gov

Table A.36: U.S. merchandise trade with Japan, by USITC digest sector, 2012–14.................. 318

Table A.37: Leading U.S. total exports to Japan, by Schedule B subheading, 2012–14............ 319

Table A.38: Leading U.S. general imports from Japan, by HTS provision, 2012–14 ................. 321

Table A.39: U.S. merchandise trade with Korea, by ITC digest sectors, 2012–14 .................... 323

Table A.40: Leading U.S. total exports to Korea, by Schedule B subheading, 2012–14 ........... 324

Table A.41: Leading U.S. general imports from Korea, by HTS provision, 2012–14 ................. 326

Table A.42: U.S. merchandise trade with Brazil, by USITC digest sector, 2012–14 .................. 328

Table A.43: Leading U.S. total exports to Brazil, by Schedule B subheading, 2012–14 ............ 329

Table A.44: Leading U.S. general imports from Brazil, by HTS provision, 2012–14.................. 331

Table A.45: U.S. merchandise trade with Taiwan, by USITC digest sector, 2012–14 ............... 333

Table A.46: Leading U.S. total exports to Taiwan, by Schedule B subheading, 2012–14 ......... 334

Table A.47: Leading U.S. general imports from Taiwan, by HTS provision, 2012–14 ............... 336

Table A.48: U.S. merchandise trade with India, by USITC digest sector, 2012–14 ................... 338

Table A.49: Leading U.S. total exports to India, by Schedule B subheading, 2012–14............. 339

Table A.50: Leading U.S. general imports from India, by HTS provision, 2012–14................... 341

Table B.1: U.S. trade balance in goods and services, 1995–2014 ............................................. 345

Table B.2: U.S. merchandise trade with major trading partners, 2010–14 .............................. 346

Table B.3: U.S. private services trade with major trading partners, 2010–14 .......................... 347

Table B.4: U.S. real gross domestic product, percent change, 2005–2014............................... 348

Table B.5: U.S. merchandise trade with selected major trading partners and the world, 

2014 ............................................................................................................................................ 348

Table B.6: U.S. private services trade with major trading partners and the world, 2014 ........ 349
Year in Trade

U.S. International Trade Commission | 11

Abbreviations and Acronyms 

Acronyms Term

AB Appellate Body (WTO)

AGOA African Growth and Opportunity Act

APEC Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation

APHIS Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (USDA)

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

BLS Bureau of Labor Statistics

BOP balance of payments

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

CARICOM Caribbean Community and Common Market

CBERA Caribbean Basin Economic Recovery Act

CBTPA Caribbean Basin Trade Partnership Act

CEC Commission for Environmental Cooperation (NAFTA)

CFDA China Food and Drug Administration

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

CLC Commission for Labor Cooperation (NAFTA)

CNL competitive need limitation

COMESA Common Market for Eastern and Southern Africa

COOL country of origin labeling

CRS Congressional Research Service

CSQ country-specific quota

CTI Committee on Trade and Investment (APEC)

CTMO Commission Tripartite pour la Mise en Œuvre de la loi Hope (HOPE Act)

DDA Doha Development Agenda (WTO)

DFAT Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade (Australia)

DSB Dispute Settlement Body (WTO)

DSU Dispute Settlement Understanding (WTO)

EAC Environmental Affairs Council

EC European Communities

ECOWAS Economic Community of West African States

EDA Economic Development Administration (USDOC)

EGA Environmental Goods Agreement

EIAP Earned Import Allowance Program

EIU Economist Intelligence Unit

ETA Employment and Training Administration (USDOL)
Abbreviations and Acronyms

12 | www.usitc.gov

Acronyms Term

EU European Union

FAO Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations

FAS Foreign Agricultural Service (USDA)

Fed. Reg. Federal Register

FMCSA Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration

FSIS Food Safety and Inspection Service (USDA)

FSSA Food Safety and Sanitation Act

FTA free trade agreement

FTAAP Free Trade Area of the Asia-Pacific

FTZ foreign trade zone

FY fiscal year

FYROM Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia

G20 Group of 20 

GATT General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade

GC General Council

GCC Cooperation Council for the Arab States of the Gulf

GDP gross domestic product

GE genetically engineered

GI geographic indicator

GPA Agreement on Government Procurement (WTO)

GSP Generalized System of Preferences

GTIS Global Trade Information Services

GVC global value chain

GW gigawatt

HELP Haiti Economic Lift Program

HLED High Level Economic Dialogue (U.S.-Mexico)

HOPE Haitian Hemispheric Opportunity through Partnership Encouragement Act

HS Harmonized Commodity Description and Coding System (international)

HTS Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States

ICTSD International Center for Trade and Sustainable Development

ICT information and communications technology

ILAB Bureau of International Labor Affairs (U.S. Department of Labor)

IMF International Monetary Fund

IMPS U.S. Institutional Meat Purchase Specifications

IPEC Office of the Intellectual Property Enforcement Coordinator

IP intellectual property

IPO initial public offering

IPR intellectual property rights

IT information technology

ITA Information Technology Agreement (WTO)

ITA International Trade Administration (USDOC)
Year in Trade

U.S. International Trade Commission | 13

Acronyms Term

JCCT Joint Commission on Commerce and Trade

JCEC Joint Commission for Environmental Cooperation

JECFA Joint FAO/WHO Expert Committee on Food Additives

JFP Joint Forward Plan

JNNSM Jawaharlal Nehru National Solar Mission (India)

JP Japan Post

KORUS U.S.-Korea Free Trade Agreement

LAC Labor Affairs Council

LCIA London Court of International Arbitration

LCR local content requirements

LDBDC least-developed beneficiary developing country

LDC least-developed country

LTFV less than fair value

MFAT Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade

MFN most-favored nation

MOFCOM Ministry of Commerce (China)

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)

NADB North American Development Bank (NAFTA)

NAFTA North American Free Trade Agreement

NAO National Administrative Office (NAFTA)

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

NGFA National Grain and Feed Association (U.S.)

NTM nontariff measure

NTR normal trade relations

OCR Out-of-Cycle Review

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)

Pub. L. Public Law

PV photovoltaic (solar energy)

RCC Regulatory Cooperation Council

RPS Regulatory Partnership Statement

RTA Regional Trade Agreement

S&ED Strategic and Economic Dialogue (U.S.-China)

SBS simultaneous buy-sell

SCM Subsidies and Countervailing Measures (Agreement)
Abbreviations and Acronyms

14 | www.usitc.gov

Acronyms Term

SEM Submissions on Environmental Measures (NAFTA)

SLA Softwood Lumber Agreement

SMEs small and medium-sized enterprises

SPS sanitary and phytosanitary (standards)

SSA sub-Saharan Africa

TAA Trade Adjustment Assistance

TAD Trade and Agriculture Directorate (OECD)

TAAF TAA for Firms

TAAEA Trade Adjustment Assistance Extension Act

TBT technical barriers to trade

TC Trade Committee (OECD)

TFA Agreement on Trade Facilitation

TICFA Trade and Investment Cooperation Forum Agreement

TIFA Trade and Investment Framework Agreement

TISA Trade in Services Agreement

TIVA Trade in Value-Added 

TNC Trade Negotiations Committee

TPA Trade Promotion Agreement

TPF U.S.-India Trade Policy Forum

TPP Trans-Pacific Partnership

TRAI Telecom Regulatory Authority of India

TRIMs Agreement on Trade-Related Investment Measures

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

USD United States dollar

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

USDOS United States Department of State

USDOT United States Department of Transportation

USITC United States International Trade Commission

USTR United States Trade Representative

WAEMU West African Economic and Monetary Union

WHO World Health Organization (UN)

WIPO World Intellectual Property Organization

WSJ Wall Street Journal

WTO World Trade Organization
Year in Trade

U.S. International Trade Commission | 15

Executive Summary

This report is the 66th in a series of annual 

reports on the operation of the United States' 

trade agreements program. Key trade 

developments involving the United States in 

2014 are covered in this report, and a 

summary of them can be accessed using the 

links in the column on the right. 

The U.S. trade deficit for goods and services increased from 

$476.4 billion in 2013 to $504.7 billion in 2014 on a balanceof-payments basis. The deficit on goods rose from $701.7 

billion in 2013 to $735.8 billion in 2014, well below the $835.7 

billion record set in 2006. At the same time, the U.S. surplus 

on services rose from $225.3 billion in 2013 to a new record of 

$231.1 billion in 2014 (figure ES.1).

Key Trade Development 1

Administration of U.S. Trade 

Laws and Regulations 

Key Trade Development 2

Trade Preference Programs

Key Trade Development 3

World Trade Organization

Key Trade Development 4

OECD, APEC, TISA, and TIFAs

Key Trade Development 5

U.S. Free Trade Agreements 

Key Trade Development 6

Trade Activities with Major 

Trading Partners

Key Trade Development 7

Timeline of 2014 Trade 

Activities

Figure ES.1: U.S. trade balance in goods and services, 1996–2014

Source: USDOC, BEA, “U.S. International Transactions,” various issues, 1996–2014. 

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
Executive Summary

16 | www.usitc.gov

U.S. trade in goods and services grew at a significantly faster rate in 2014 than in 2013. 

Increased economic growth and recovering demand in major advanced economies led to an 

expansion in U.S. exports in 2014. Overall, U.S. imports, particularly of electronic goods and 

transportation equipment, also increased in 2014, despite a decline in imports of petroleum 

and petroleum-related products.

The U.S. economic recovery that began in the summer of 2009 continued as real gross domestic 

product (GDP) grew by 2.4 percent in 2014, a rate of growth that exceeded the 2.2 percent 

realized in 2013. The pace of global economic growth remained the same in 2014 as in 2013, at 

3.3 percent. 

The U.S. dollar appreciated 9.0 percent during 2014 against a broad trade-weighted index of 

foreign currencies. Most of this increase occurred in the latter part of the year as the dollar rose 

8.1 percent against the broad dollar index from July to December in 2014. The dollar began to 

rise in mid-2014 following revised forecasts for the U.S. economy that reflected higher-thanexpected economic growth. By yearend, the dollar had appreciated against a number of major 

currencies: 14.3 percent against the Japanese yen, 13.0 percent against the euro, 12.5 percent 

against the Mexican peso, 9.1 percent against the Canadian dollar, 5.5 percent against the U.K. 

pound, and 2.5 percent against the Chinese yuan.

Key Trade Developments in 2014

Administration of U.S. Trade Laws and Regulations

Safeguard actions: The U.S. International Trade Commission (the Commission) conducted no 

new safeguard investigations during 2014, and no U.S. safeguard measures under these 

provisions were in effect during any part of 2014.

Section 301: The U.S. Trade Representative (USTR) completed one section 301 investigation in 

2014. This investigation concerned protection of intellectual property rights (IPR) in Ukraine. In 

February 2014, the USTR determined that in light of the political situation in Ukraine, no action 

under section 301 was appropriate.

Special 301: In the 2014 Special 301 Report, USTR examined the adequacy and effectiveness of 

IPR protection in 82 countries. The 2014 Special 301 Report identified 10 countries on the 

priority watch list (Algeria, Argentina, Chile, China, India, Indonesia, Pakistan, Russia, Thailand, 

and Venezuela) and 27 countries on the watch list. Italy, the Philippines, and Israel were 

removed from the watch list in 2014. An Out-of-Cycle Review of Kuwait was initiated in October 

2014, and Kuwait was elevated to the priority watch list. In February 2014, USTR issued the 
Year in Trade

U.S. International Trade Commission | 17

2013 Out-of-Cycle Review of Notorious Markets and identified over 60 online and physical 

marketplaces that engaged in or facilitated intellectual property infringement. 

Antidumping duty investigations: The Commission instituted 16 new antidumping 

investigations and made 36 final determinations during calendar year 2014. The U.S. 

Department of Commerce (USDOC) issued 20 antidumping duty orders on seven products from 

13 countries.

Countervailing duty investigations: The Commission instituted 16 new countervailing duty 

investigations and made 9 final determinations during calendar year 2014. The USDOC issued 

six countervailing duty orders on four products from four economies. 

Sunset reviews: During calendar year 2014, the Commission instituted 40 sunset reviews of 

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

Commission completed 55 reviews, resulting in 50 antidumping duty and countervailing duty 

orders being continued for up to five additional years.

Section 337 investigations: During calendar year 2014, there were 110 active section 337 

investigations and ancillary proceedings, 55 of which were instituted that year. Of these 55 new 

proceedings, 39 were new section 337 investigations and 16 were new ancillary proceedings 

relating to previously concluded investigations. The Commission completed a total of 64 

investigations and ancillary proceedings in 2014, and issued 7 exclusion orders and 14 cease 

and desist orders. The main types of products at issue in proceedings active in 2014 were 

computer and telecommunications products; small consumer items; integrated circuits and 

memory products; automotive/manufacturing/transportation products; and pharmaceuticals 

and medical devices. At the close of 2014, 46 section 337 investigations and ancillary 

proceedings were pending at the Commission.

Trade Adjustment Assistance: In fiscal year (FY) 2014, the U.S. Department of Labor (USDOL) 

received 972 petitions for Trade Adjustment Assistance (TAA) for workers claiming harm from 

imports, down from 1,532 petitions received in FY 2013. USDOL certified 646 petitions covering 

67,738 workers as eligible for TAA, and denied 331 petitions covering 26,162 workers. In 

FY 2014, USDOC received 110 petitions for TAA for firms claiming harm from imports, with 105 

petitions certified as eligible for assistance and one denied or withdrawn during the year. Since 

January 1, 2014, service sector workers who are not party to a manufacturing worker group are 

no longer eligible for the TAA for Workers program; service sector firms also are no longer 

eligible for the TAA for Firms program.
Executive Summary

18 | www.usitc.gov

Trade Preference Programs 

Generalized System of Preferences (GSP): The President’s authority to provide duty-free 

treatment under the GSP program expired on July 31, 2013, and had not been renewed by 

yearend 2014. Imports claiming GSP preferences totaled $18.7 billion in 2014, accounting for 

7.2 percent of total U.S. imports from GSP beneficiary countries and 0.8 percent of total U.S. 

imports. 1 India was the leading country claiming GSP benefits in 2014, followed by Thailand and 

Brazil. On October 3, 2014, Russia lost its GSP beneficiary status as a result of having become 

sufficiently advanced in economic development and improved in trade competitiveness.

African Growth and Opportunity Act (AGOA): In 2014, 41 sub-Saharan African (SSA) countries 

were designated as eligible for AGOA benefits, and 30 SSA countries were designated eligible 

for AGOA textile and apparel benefits. Mali became eligible for AGOA benefits on January 1, 

2014, and Madagascar became eligible on June 26, 2014. In December 2014, the President 

announced that three countries (The Gambia, South Sudan, and Swaziland) would lose their 

AGOA eligibility starting January 1, 2015, and one country—Guinea-Bissau—would be 

reinstated as AGOA eligible in 2015. Duty-free U.S. imports under AGOA were valued at

$14.2 billion in 2014, a 47.0 percent decrease from 2013. The decline in duty-free U.S. imports 

under AGOA was driven primarily by a decline in the value and quantity of U.S. imports of 

petroleum-related products, mainly crude petroleum, which made up 77.6 percent of the value 

of imports under AGOA in 2014. The decrease in the value of U.S. imports of passenger motor 

vehicles also contributed to the overall decline. Angola and Nigeria were the largest suppliers 

of U.S. imports under AGOA in 2014. 

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

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

(ATPDEA), expired on July 31, 2013, and had not been renewed by yearend 2014. 

Caribbean Basin Economic Recovery Act (CBERA): At yearend 2014, 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). 

U.S. imports under CBERA (including CBTPA) fell by 16.8 percent to $2.0 billion in 2014, mainly 

reflecting a decline in the value and quantity of U.S. imports of methanol and crude petroleum, 

which are major imports from CBERA countries. Trinidad and Tobago continued to be the 

leading supplier of U.S. imports under CBERA in 2014, accounting for 62.6 percent of the total 

1 Except for imports from AGOA countries, imports after July 31, 2013, did not actually enter duty-free, but 

importers still claimed GSP status (meaning they asserted that shipments met program rules) to facilitate receiving 

refunds in case GSP is renewed retroactively, as has been done in the past. GSP-eligible imports from AGOAeligible countries continue to enter the United States free-of-duty. 
Year in Trade

U.S. International Trade Commission | 19

value. Haiti and The Bahamas were also leading suppliers, accounting for 20.6 and 8.0 percent 

of the total, respectively.

Haiti initiatives: U.S. imports of apparel from Haiti rose 10 percent to $843.1 million in 2014, 

accounting for 99.4 percent of U.S. imports of apparel under CBTPA. Virtually all U.S. imports of 

apparel from Haiti received duty-free treatment under trade preference programs established 

by the CBTPA, the Haitian Hemisphere Opportunity through Partnership Encouragement Acts of 

2006 and of 2008 (the HOPE Acts), and the Haitian Economic Lift Program of 2010 (HELP Act). 

WTO 

World Trade Organization (WTO) developments: During 2014, members of the WTO pursued 

the Doha Development Agenda and related mandates arising from the December 2013 Ninth 

Ministerial Conference. Differences among members slowed talks on the expansion of goods 

covered under the WTO Information Technology Agreement as well as the adoption of the WTO 

Agreement on Trade Facilitation (TFA). A special session of the General Council held in 

November helped break the stalemate on the TFA so that its implementation could move 

forward in 2015. The revised WTO Agreement on Government Procurement entered into force 

on April 6, 2014, after the necessary two-thirds majority of signatories formally accepted the 

agreement. In July 2014, the United States and 13 other WTO members opened negotiations on 

an agreement to eliminate tariffs on environmental goods, holding three rounds of discussions 

during the year aimed largely at nominating specific categories of environmental goods for 

negotiation.

WTO dispute settlement: During 2014, WTO members filed 14 requests for WTO dispute 

settlement consultations in new disputes, compared with 20 in 2013. The United States was the 

complainant in 1 of the 14 requests filed during 2014, and the named respondent in 2. The new 

request filed by the United States during 2014 concerned modifications made by Indonesia to 

its licensing restrictions on the importation of horticultural products, animals, and animal 

products.

The United States was the named respondent in 2 new disputes filed during 2014, 1 filed by the 

European Union and the other filed by the Republic of Korea (South Korea). Thirteen new 

dispute settlement panels were established during 2014. The United States was the 

complaining party in 1 of these panel proceedings, and the responding party in 2.

OECD, APEC, TISA, and TIFAs

Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) developments: The 34 

OECD members held their OECD ministerial council meeting in Paris, France, on May 6–7, 2014. 
Executive Summary

20 | www.usitc.gov

Ministers touched on a range of issues, including (1) how to promote resilient economies and 

inclusive societies, (2) new approaches to economic challenges, (3) environmentally sustainable 

growth, (4) how to strengthen the multilateral trade system, (5) promotion of a better business 

climate, (6) strengthening outreach to global economic partners, (7) economic development as 

empowerment, and (8) improvements in the efficiency and productivity of the OECD itself. In 

2014, the OECD Trade Committee made progress on trade issues that support economic 

growth, in particular global value chains, and joint OECD-WTO work on the Trade in Value 

Added (TIVA) database. The Services Trade Restrictiveness Index, developed as part of 

committee work to help improve analysis of trade in services, was launched publicly at the 

ministerial meeting in May.

Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) developments: Under China's chairmanship of APEC 

in 2014, cooperation among APEC member economies focused on “regional economic 

integration; promoting innovative development, economic reform and growth; and 

strengthening comprehensive connectivity and infrastructure development.” In 2014, some 

progress was made in advancing APEC's objectives, including reducing applied tariffs on the 

54 products in the 2012 APEC list of environmental goods; establishing a model E-Port network; 

agreeing to extend the validity period of the APEC Business Travel Card; and taking actions to 

facilitate trade in electric vehicles. APEC economies continued to make progress toward the 

Bogor Goals of creating a free and open trade and investment area in the Asia-Pacific, though 

actions for further improvement are still needed. In 2014, there was also progress made on the 

Free Trade Area of the Asia-Pacific (FTAAP), as APEC economies endorsed the Beijing Roadmap, 

which lists actions that must be taken to realize the FTAAP. In 2014, APEC economies continued 

initiatives to advance global value chain development and supply chain connectivity by 

developing an APEC strategic blueprint and carrying out related actions.

Trade in Services Agreement (TISA): During 2014, the 23 participants held five rounds of talks 

aimed at developing a new plurilateral agreement to promote international trade in services. 

Discussions in 2014 continued to focus on the six major topics agreed on in the previous year:

domestic regulation and transparency; financial services; information and communications 

technology services, including electronic commerce; movement of natural persons (the 

temporary entry of business persons into countries); professional services, including computer 

services; and transportation services.

Trade and Investment Framework Agreements (TIFAs): As of yearend 2014, the United States 

had entered into 50 TIFAs. In 2014, the United States signed a TIFA with the Economic 

Community of West African States (ECOWAS). In addition, a number of TIFA Council meetings 

took place during the year, including those with Angola, Central Asia, Iraq, Nigeria, Pakistan, 

Philippines, Taiwan, and Tunisia.
Year in Trade

U.S. International Trade Commission | 21

U.S. Free Trade Agreements 

U.S. FTAs in force in 2014: The United States was a party to 14 FTAs with 20 countries as of 

December 31, 2014. These include the U.S.-Panama Trade Promotion Agreement (TPA)

(entered into force in 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); the Central America-Dominican Republic FTA with 

the Dominican Republic, El Salvador, Guatemala, Honduras, 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); the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) with Canada and 

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

FTA negotiations: In 2014, the United States continued to participate in Trans-Pacific 

Partnership (TPP) negotiations with 11 TPP partners and in Transatlantic Trade and Investment 

Partnership (TTIP) negotiations with the EU. Four ministerial meetings and numerous chief 

negotiator and working group meetings were held in 2014 to close remaining gaps on specific 

issues in the proposed TPP agreement. The United States and Japan engaged in numerous 

rounds of bilateral negotiations in parallel to the formal TPP negotiations to address issues 

related to market access (including for agricultural products), motor vehicles, insurance, 

investment, express delivery, government procurement, competition policy, and sanitary and 

phytosanitary (SPS) measures.

The United States and the EU concluded four formal rounds of TTIP negotiations in 2014. 

Discussions in the four rounds addressed a broad range of topics, including market access in 

goods, services, and public procurement; regulatory cooperation; and rules issues, such as 

environmental protection, customs and trade facilitation, sustainable development, labor 

rights, energy and raw materials, IPR, competition, opportunities for small and medium-sized 

enterprises (SMEs), and state-to-state dispute settlement. In the regulatory area, technical 

barriers to trade and SPS measures were discussed, as well as regulatory cooperation and 

regulatory compatibility in certain key industries (e.g., pharmaceuticals, cosmetics, medical 

devices, automotive, engineering, and chemicals). The negotiators also met with stakeholders 

during each round. 

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

imports) between the United States and its 20 FTA partners amounted to $1.6 trillion, or 

40.1 percent of total U.S. merchandise trade in 2014. The NAFTA countries—Canada and 

Mexico—dominated U.S. trade with FTA partners in 2014, accounting for 74.9 percent of total 

U.S. merchandise trade with U.S. FTA partners, or $1.2 trillion. Two-way trade with Canada and 

Mexico increased by 4.5 percent in 2014 from 2013, with exports expanding by 4.7 percent and 
Executive Summary

22 | www.usitc.gov

imports by 4.4 percent. The U.S. merchandise trade deficit with NAFTA partners increased by 

2.8 percent to $87.8 billion in 2014. 

Total two-way trade with FTA partners other than the NAFTA countries amounted to 

$399.4 billion in 2014, representing a decrease of 1.8 percent from 2013. U.S. imports from 

these FTA partners slipped by 0.1 percent to $186.7 billion, while U.S. exports increased by 

3.5 percent to $212.8 billion. The United States registered a merchandise trade surplus of 

$26.1 billion in 2014 with these partners.

NAFTA developments: All of NAFTA’s provisions were implemented by the United States, 

Canada, and Mexico as of January 1, 2008, with the exception of the NAFTA cross-border 

trucking provisions, for which the Pilot Program of 2011–14 was created. (Developments 

relating to the trucking provisions in 2014 are described in the Mexico section below.) The 

NAFTA Free Trade Commission typically meets annually, but did not meet in 2013 or 2014. At 

the end of 2014, three complaints remained active under Articles 14 and 15 of the North 

American Agreement on Environmental Cooperation (NAAEC), none of which was submitted in 

2014. Also under the NAAEC, the Border Environment Cooperation Commission and the North 

American Development Bank (NADB) are providing financial support to environmental 

infrastructure throughout the U.S.-Mexico border region. As of December 31, 2014, the NADB 

had contracted a cumulative total of approximately $2.4 billion in loans and grants, of which a

total of $2.2 billion had already been disbursed.

NAFTA dispute settlement: In 2014, there were four active Chapter 11 (investor-state disputes) 

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

Mexican investors. Six were filed by U.S. investors against Canada, and one by U.S. investors

against Mexico. At the end of 2014, the NAFTA Secretariat listed four binational panels active 

under Chapter 19 (Review and Dispute Settlement in Anti-dumping and Countervailing Duty 

Matters); 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, and two challenged U.S. 

agencies’ determinations on products from Mexico.

Trade Activities with Major Trading Partners

European Union

In 2014, the EU as a unit continued to be the United States' largest merchandise trading 

partner. Two-way U.S. merchandise trade (exports plus imports) with the EU was valued at 

$694.5 billion, accounting for 17.5 percent of total U.S. merchandise trade. U.S. exports to the 

EU were $276.7 billion, ranking the EU second to Canada, while U.S. merchandise imports from 
Year in Trade

U.S. International Trade Commission | 23

the EU were $417.8 billion, second to China. As a result, the U.S. merchandise trade deficit with 

the EU was $141.1 billion in 2014. Leading U.S. exports to the EU included aircraft and parts, 

petroleum-related products, medicaments (medicines), medical instruments, passenger motor 

vehicles, and blood fractions (e.g., antiserum) and vaccines. Leading U.S. imports were 

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

blood fractions and vaccines, and airplanes and parts. The EU was also the United States' 

largest trading partner in terms of services in 2014, accounting for 33.1 percent of total trade in 

private services. The United States registered a trade surplus in services with the EU of 

$57.5 billion in 2014, up from $50.5 billion in 2013. 

A primary focus of the U.S.-EU trade relationship in 2014 was negotiations to conclude a 

comprehensive trade and investment agreement, the Transatlantic Trade and Investment 

Partnership. Substantial progress was also made on lifting U.S. restrictions on imports of beef 

from the EU.

Canada

In 2014, Canada continued to be the United States’ largest single-country two-way merchandise 

trading partner. Total two-way merchandise trade was valued at $658.2 billion, accounting for 

16.6 percent of U.S. trade with the world. U.S. exports to Canada amounted to $312.1 billion in 

2014, and U.S. imports from Canada totaled $346.1 billion. As a result, the U.S. merchandise 

trade deficit with Canada was $33.9 billion, about 10 percent greater than in 2013 

($30.9 billion). Leading U.S. merchandise exports to Canada included motor vehicles and parts, 

energy products, control valve and data processing appliances, and aircraft/spacecraft and 

related parts. Major U.S. imports from Canada were raw material and energy products, as well 

as motor vehicle, aircraft, and related parts. Canada was also the United States’ second-largest 

single-country partner for services in 2014 after the United Kingdom; two-way services trade 

was valued at $92.8 billion, which accounted for 8.1 percent of U.S. trade in services with the 

world. The United States ran a services trade surplus with Canada of $32.3 billion in 2014.

In February 2014, Canada and the United States agreed to harmonize terminology used to 

classify cuts of meat as a result of initiatives launched under the 2011 Joint Action Plan by the 

Canada-United States Regulatory Cooperation Council. In March 2014, an arbitral tribunal 

under the Canada-United States Softwood Lumber Agreement determined that Canada had no 

obligation past the agreement's original expiration date (October 12, 2013) to keep applying 

the compensatory adjustments awarded by the tribunal to the United States in January 2011. 

(In September 2013, the two parties to the agreement had submitted a joint request to the 

tribunal to clarify whether Canada must continue to collect these adjustments aimed at 

offsetting certain provincial subsidies for softwood lumber exports, following the parties’ 

extension of the agreement to October 12, 2015.) 
Executive Summary

24 | www.usitc.gov

China

In 2014, China remained the United States’ second-largest single-country merchandise trading 

partner after Canada. Two-way U.S. merchandise trade with China was valued at $590.7 billion, 

accounting for 14.9 percent of total U.S. merchandise trade. U.S. merchandise exports to China 

were $124.0 billion, and U.S. merchandise imports from China were $466.7 billion, resulting in a 

merchandise trade deficit of $342.6 billion in 2014, higher than the U.S. deficit with any other 

trading partner. Leading U.S. exports were soybeans, aircraft and parts, motor vehicles, metal 

waste and scrap, processors or controllers, and grain sorghum. Leading U.S. imports were 

computers and computer parts, cellphones, telecommunications equipment, toys, video games, 

and electrical static converters. China was the United States' fourth-largest single-country 

partner for services trade. The United States ran a services trade surplus of $26.5 billion with 

China in 2014.

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

in 2014. Top bilateral trade issues included China’s IPR enforcement, and market access for U.S. 

agricultural products, medical devices, and pharmaceuticals.

Mexico 

In 2014, Mexico was the United States’ third-largest single-country merchandise trading

partner. Two-way U.S. merchandise trade with Mexico was valued at $534.5 billion, accounting 

for 13.5 percent of total U.S. merchandise trade. U.S. merchandise exports to Mexico were 

$240.3 billion, and U.S. merchandise imports from Mexico were $294.2 billion, for a 

merchandise trade deficit of $53.8 billion in 2014. Leading U.S. exports to Mexico included 

processed petroleum products; electronic products, particularly computer parts; and 

transportation equipment, particularly automotive parts. Leading U.S. imports from Mexico 

included crude petroleum, passenger motor vehicles, trucks, and reception apparatus for 

televisions. The United States had a services trade surplus of $9.2 billion with Mexico in 2014.

U.S.-Mexico trade relations in 2014 focused on NAFTA's cross-border trucking provisions and 

the sugar agreements suspending U.S. antidumping and countervailing duty investigations 

affecting U.S. sugar imports from Mexico. On October 14, 2014, the U.S. government 

authorized 13 Mexican carriers that had been participating in a trucking pilot program to 

continue long-haul operations in the United States.

Japan 

In 2014, Japan was the United States’ fourth-largest single-country merchandise trading 

partner. Two-way U.S. merchandise trade with Japan was valued at $200.9 billion, accounting 

for 5.1 percent of total U.S. merchandise trade. U.S. merchandise exports to Japan were 
Year in Trade

U.S. International Trade Commission | 25

$67.0 billion and U.S. merchandise imports from Japan were $133.9 billion, resulting in a 

merchandise trade deficit of $67.0 billion in 2014, an 8.7 percent decline from $73.4 billion in 

2013. Leading U.S. merchandise exports to Japan included aircraft and parts, corn, and certain 

medicaments. Leading U.S. imports from Japan included passenger motor vehicles, parts of 

airplanes and helicopters, gear boxes and parts for motor vehicles, and parts for printers and 

copying machines. Japan was the United States' third-largest single-country partner for services 

trade. The United States ran a services trade surplus of $18.0 billion with Japan in 2014, down 

from $18.4 billion in 2013.

Economic dialogue between the United States and Japan in 2014 centered on trying to make 

progress in the TPP negotiations, which Japan officially joined in July 2013. In particular, the 

two sides held bilateral negotiations in parallel to TPP negotiations on issues related to market 

access to the Japanese passenger motor vehicle market and its agricultural market. 

Korea

In 2014, the Republic of Korea (South Korea) was the United States' sixth-largest single-country 

merchandise trading partner. Two-way U.S. merchandise trade with South Korea was valued at 

$114.2 billion, accounting for 2.9 percent of total U.S. merchandise trade. U.S. merchandise 

exports to South Korea were $44.5 billion, and U.S. merchandise imports from South Korea 

were $69.6 billion, resulting in a trade deficit of $25.1 billion in 2014, a 21.2 percent increase 

from $20.7 billion in 2013. Leading U.S. merchandise exports to South Korea included 

processors or controllers; machines for the production of semiconductor devices or electronic 

integrated circuits; aircraft, spacecraft, and parts; corn; and medicaments. Leading U.S. 

merchandise imports from South Korea included passenger motor vehicles, cell phones, 

petroleum oil and oils from bituminous minerals, and parts for automatic data processing 

machines. The United States ran a services trade surplus with South Korea of $12.3 billion in 

2014.

U.S.-South Korea trade relations in 2014 focused on the U.S.-Korea FTA (KORUS FTA), in 

particular issues related to the automobile and financial services sectors; South Korea's interest 

in joining TPP negotiations; and the newly signed Organic Labeling Agreement, which 

streamlines certification of organic processed products between the two countries.

Brazil 

In 2014, Brazil was the United States' ninth-largest single-country merchandise trading partner. 

Two-way merchandise trade with Brazil increased by 1.4 percent to $72.8 billion, accounting for 

1.8 percent of total U.S. merchandise trade with the world. U.S. exports to Brazil in 2014 were

$42.4 billion, while U.S. imports from Brazil were $30.3 billion. As a result, the United States 
Executive Summary

26 | www.usitc.gov

recorded a $12.1 billion merchandise trade surplus with Brazil in 2014. Leading U.S. exports to 

Brazil included aircraft and parts, refined petroleum oils, light oils and preparations, liquefied 

propane, medicaments, telecommunication equipment, coal, processors or controllers, and 

wheat and meslin. Leading U.S. imports from Brazil included crude petroleum, aircraft, 

semifinished iron or nonalloy steel products, coffee, refined petroleum, and chemical wood 

pulp, soda, or sulfate. In 2014, the U.S. trade surplus in services with Brazil reached 

$19.1 billion. 

On October 1, 2014, Brazil and the United States reached an agreement that ended the longrunning WTO dispute over U.S. subsidies on upland cotton. Under the agreement, Brazil agreed 

to terminate the WTO dispute and the United States agreed to make a one-time final 

contribution of $300 million to the Brazilian Cotton Institute. 

Taiwan

In 2014, Taiwan was the United States’ 10th-largest single-economy merchandise trading 

partner. Two-way U.S. merchandise trade with Taiwan was valued at $67.4 billion, accounting 

for 1.7 percent of total U.S. trade. U.S. merchandise exports to Taiwan were $26.8 billion, and 

U.S. merchandise imports from Taiwan were $40.6 billion, resulting in a merchandise trade 

deficit of $13.7 billion in 2014, a 10.2 percent increase from $12.5 billion in 2013. Leading U.S. 

exports were manufacturing-related semiconductor machines and instruments, aircraft and 

parts, memory chips, ferrous waste and scrap, soybeans, light oils, and electronic integrated 

circuits. Leading U.S. imports were cellphones, memory chips, computer parts and accessories, 

electronic integrated circuits, processors or controllers, and telecommunications equipment. 

The United States ran a services trade surplus with Taiwan in 2014, which amounted to 

$4.5 billion, compared to $4.2 billion the year before.

In 2014, U.S.-Taiwan trade relations focused on Taiwan's agricultural market access issues. 

These included Taiwan's slow process in establishing maximum residue limits (MRLs) for 

ractopamine, pesticides, and other agrochemicals; Taiwan’s tariff-rate quota system for rice 

imports; and the tightening of Taiwan's agricultural biotechnology regulations.

India

In 2014, India was the United States’ 11th-largest single-country merchandise trading partner. 

Two-way U.S. merchandise trade with India was valued at $66.9 billion, accounting for 

1.7 percent of total U.S. merchandise trade. U.S. merchandise exports to India were 

$21.6 billion, and U.S. merchandise imports from India were $45.2 billion, resulting in a 

merchandise trade deficit of $23.6 billion in 2014. Top U.S. exports to India included diamonds, 

aircraft and parts, airplanes, nonmonetary gold, coal, and almonds. Top U.S. imports from India 
Year in Trade

U.S. International Trade Commission | 27

included nonindustrial diamonds, certain medicaments, light oils and preparations, petroleum, 

and frozen shrimp. India was the United States' ninth-largest single-country partner for services 

trade and continued to be the only top U.S. trading partner with which the United States had a 

services trade deficit in 2014. The U.S. services trade deficit with India grew 3.3 percent to 

reach $6.0 billion in 2014.

In 2014, the United States and India continued an ongoing dialogue to improve trade relations,

including through a meeting of the U.S.-India Trade Policy Forum and other bilateral meetings.

This continued engagement contributed to the conclusion of negotiations for the WTO Trade 

Facilitation Agreement in 2014. The United States continues to be concerned about India's IPR 

protection, including patent and copyright protections, as well as Indian policies that impose

local-content and testing requirements.
Executive Summary

28 | www.usitc.gov

Summary of 2014 trade agreement activities

January

6: China circulates its fourth offer to accede 

to the plurilateral World Trade Organization 

(WTO) Agreement on Government 

Procurement (GPA). 

9: The House of Representatives introduces 

the Bipartisan Congressional Trade 

Priorities Act of 2014, which includes Trade 

Promotion Authority.

13: The United States and South Korea 

discuss South Korea’s interest in joining the 

Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) and other 

bilateral issues.

14–21: The U.S.-Afghanistan Trade and 

Investment Framework Agreement (TIFA) 

Council Meeting is held in Afghanistan. 

During the visit the two sides sign a bilateral 

market access agreement meant to move 

Afghanistan towards WTO accession. 

22: The WTO Dispute Settlement Body 

(DSB) establishes a dispute settlement

panel at the request of South Korea 

concerning U.S. antidumping and 

countervailing duty measures that the 

United States imposes on large residential 

washers from South Korea (DS464).

24: At the World Economic Forum in Davos, 

Switzerland, United States Trade 

Representative (USTR) Michael Froman 

announces an initiative by 14 WTO 

members to negotiate a plurilateral 

Environmental Goods Agreement (EGA), 

aimed at eliminating tariffs on 

environmental goods such as solar water 

heaters, wind turbines, and catalytic 

converters. 

27: The WTO DSB composes a compliance 

panel to consider Mexico’s claim that the 

United States has not brought its dolphinsafe tuna labeling regime into compliance 

with the ruling by the DSB Appellate Body 

(AB) (DS381).

27–28: The inaugural meeting of the Labor 

Affairs Council of the United States-Panama 

Trade Promotion Agreement is held in 

Panama City, Panama.

February

11: The White House launches the National 

Strategy for Combating Wildlife Trafficking, 

which is meant to be a core part of a final 

TPP agreement. 

12: USTR announces the findings of the 

Special 301 2013 Out-of-Cycle Review on 

Notorious Markets, a report that identifies 

online and physical marketplaces worldwide 

that infringe U.S. intellectual property rights 

(IPR). 

13: The United States requests 

establishment of a WTO compliance panel 

to consider China’s actions concerning its 

antidumping and countervailing duty 

measures on imports of grain-oriented flatrolled electrical steel from the United States 

(DS414). 
Year in Trade

U.S. International Trade Commission | 29

February–continued

15: USTR Froman meets with Japan’s 

Minister of State for Economic and Fiscal 

Policy Akira Amari in Washington, DC, to 

discuss outstanding issues between the two 

countries in the TPP negotiations.

17–24: The fifth round of the Trade in 

Services Agreement (TISA) negotiations is 

held in Geneva, Switzerland.

19: The ninth annual North American 

Leaders' Summit is held in Toluca, Mexico. 

19: The President signs executive orders 

“Streamlining the Export/Import Process for 

America's Businesses,” which mandate the 

completion of an International Trade Data 

System by December 2016.

22–25: Following a meeting of chief TPP 

negotiators (February 17–21), a TPP 

ministerial meeting is held in Singapore. 

28: USTR announces that it has removed 

Israel from the Special 301 watch list, which 

lists countries found to have particular 

problems with respect to IPR protection.

March

3: USTR Froman meets with Guatemalan 

officials in Washington, DC, to discuss the 

implementation of the Labor Enforcement 

Plan signed by the two countries in 2013 

under the Dominican Republic-Central 

America-United States Free Trade 

Agreement.

4: USTR suspends preliminary discussions 

on a bilateral investment treaty with Russia, 

and a scheduled discussion with Russian 

officials regarding Kazakhstan's accession to 

the WTO, in response to Russian military 

presence in Ukraine. 

4: The United States ends restrictions 

related to bovine spongiform 

encephalopathy (BSE) on imports of beef 

from the European Union (EU), although EU 

member states' meat inspection systems 

must still be approved by USDA before U.S. 

imports can begin. 

4: USTR submits the Administration's 2014 

Trade Policy Agenda and the 2013 Annual 

Report to Congress. In it the Administration 

announces its intent to negotiate mutual 

recognition agreements on 

telecommunications with selected 

countries, as well as develop a strategy to 

address the upcoming expiration of the 

U.S.-Canada Softwood Lumber Agreement 

in 2015.

5: The inaugural meeting of the United 

States-Iraq Council on Trade and 

Investment (TIFA Council) is held in 

Washington, DC.

10: President Obama meets with WTO 

Director-General Roberto Azevêdo 

regarding implementation of the WTO 

Agreement on Trade Facilitation (TFA). 

10–14: The fourth round of TTIP

negotiations is held in Brussels, Belgium. 
Executive Summary

30 | www.usitc.gov

March–continued

11: The eighth meeting of the U.S.-Nigeria 

TIFA Council is held in Washington, DC.

19–20: During two days of TIFA meetings, 

the United States and the Philippines agree 

to a program of expanded engagement on 

bilateral, regional, and multilateral issues. 

21: USTR notifies Congress of the 

Administration's intent to enter into 

negotiation with 13 other WTO members 

on a plurilateral EGA, aimed at eliminating 

tariffs on environmental goods. 

26: During the U.S.-EU summit, leaders 

reconfirm their commitment to TTIP and 

address a variety of other trade, economic, 

political, and security issues.

26: The WTO DSB establishes a dispute 

settlement panel to consider a complaint by 

China concerning the use of certain 

methodologies applied by the United States 

in antidumping proceedings involving China 

(DS471).

31: USTR releases three reports on foreign 

trade measures: 2014 National Trade 

Estimate Report (NTE), the 2014 Report on

Sanitary and Phytosanitary (SPS) Measures, 

and 2014 Report on Technical Barriers to 

Trade (TBT).

April

1: The second meeting of the U.S.-Angola 

TIFA Council is held. It focuses on the two 

countries' investment relationship, small 

and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs), 

utilization preferences under the African 

Growth and Opportunity Act (AGOA), IPR 

protection, and other bilateral issues.

4–6: The eighth meeting of the CAFTA-DR 

Environmental Affairs Council occurs in New 

Orleans, LA. 

4: USTR releases its 2014 Section 1377 

Review, which highlights barriers to U.S. 

telecommunication services and equipment 

exports. 

5: The eighth meeting of the U.S.-Taiwan 

TIFA Council is held. It focuses on various 

Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) 

forum initiatives as well as efforts to adopt 

the WTO TFA, expand the WTO Agreement 

on Information Technology, and advance 

the TISA negotiations. 

6: The revised WTO GPA enters into force, 

following its formal acceptance by twothirds of the signatories (10 governments) 

to the agreement. 

11: USTR Froman and U.S. Agency for 

International Development (USAID) 

Administrator Shah meet in Washington, 

DC, with foreign ministers, development 

banks, and other representatives to discuss 

implementation of the WTO TFA.

18: USTR Froman and Japan’s Minister 

Akira Amari meet in Washington, DC, where 

they reported making progress in narrowing 

the gaps in outstanding issues in TPP 

negotiations.
Year in Trade

U.S. International Trade Commission | 31

April–continued

27–28: USTR and African trade ministers 

discuss AGOA at the African Union 

Ministerial Meeting in Addis Ababa, 

Ethiopa. 

28: The United States announces a new 

round of sanctions on Russia, including visa 

bans and asset freezes on various 

individuals and companies. 

28–2: The sixth round of TISA negotiations 

is held in Geneva, Switzerland. 

29: The United States and Bangladesh hold 

the inaugural meeting of the U.S.-

Bangladesh Forum on Trade and Investment 

under the Trade and Investment 

Cooperation Forum Agreement in Dhaka, 

Bangladesh. The two sides outline barriers 

to increasing bilateral trade and 

investment. 

30: USTR releases its 2014 Special 301 

Report, which examines IPR protection and 

enforcement among U.S. trading partners. 

The report removes Italy and the 

Philippines from the Special 301 watch list.

May

6–7: The Ministerial Council Meeting of the 

Organisation for Economic Co-operation 

and Development is held in Paris, France.

8: USTR Froman attends the World 

Economic Forum on Africa conference in 

Abuja, Nigeria. His aim is to meet with 

African heads of state as well as private 

sector leaders to advance U.S. trade and 

investment-related issues in Africa, and, in 

particular, to consult on the future of 

AGOA.

8: The United States requests WTO dispute 

settlement consultations with Indonesia 

concerning certain measures Indonesia 

imposes on the importation of horticultural 

products, animals, and animal products 

(DS478).

12–15: Chief negotiators and key experts 

from TPP countries meet in Ho Chi Minh 

City, Vietnam, to discuss market access, 

legal and institutional issues, IPR, 

environmental issues, textiles (including 

rules of origin), and services. 

14: The seventh meeting of the U.S.-

Pakistan TIFA Council is held in Washington, 

DC, and the two sides agree to a Joint 

Action Plan to expand bilateral trade and 

investment flows over the next five years.

17–18: The APEC Ministers Responsible for 

Trade Meeting is held in Qingdao, China.

19–20: TPP ministers meet in Singapore to 

discuss the remaining steps needed to bring 

TPP negotiations to a close.

19-23: The fifth round of TTIP negotiations 

takes place in Arlington, Virginia.
Executive Summary

32 | www.usitc.gov

May–continued

23: The WTO DSB establishes a dispute 

settlement panel at the request of the 

United States concerning certain domestic 

content requirements maintained by India 

relating to solar cells and solar modules 

(DS456).

28: The first meeting of the U.S.-Panama 

Free Trade Commission is held in Panama 

City, Panama. It oversees the 

implementation of the U.S.-Panama Trade 

Promotion Agreement (TPA).

June

11: The ninth meeting of the U.S.-Central 

Asia TIFA Council is held in Washington, DC. 

Discussions center on WTO membership, 

customs, investment, standards and 

sanitary measures, and procurement. 

16: The U.S.-Tunisia TIFA Council meets in 

Tunis, Tunisia, to discuss continued steps 

towards increasing trade and investment.

18: The WTO DSB adopts the panel report 

concerning the complaint by the United 

States regarding antidumping and 

countervailing duties imposed by China on 

certain U.S. automobiles (DS440). 

23–27: The seventh round of TISA 

negotiations is held in Geneva, Switzerland. 

24: The 10th anniversary of the U.S.-

Singapore FTA is observed.

26: President Obama reinstates 

Madagascar's eligibility for AGOA benefits, 

effective immediately, and withdraws 

Swaziland's eligibility effective January 1, 

2015.

July

1: The United States and South Korea sign a 

U.S.-Republic of Korea Organic Equivalence 

Agreement to allow organically processed 

products in either country to be labeled as 

such in both countries.

3: USTR announces country-specific 

reallocations of unused FY 2014 in-quota 

quantities of the WTO tariff-rate quota 

(TRQ) for imported raw cane sugar. 

3–13: TPP chief negotiators and key 

experts meet in Ottawa, Canada, to discuss 

issues related to labor, services, 

investment, and all areas of market access.

8: The United States and 13 other WTO 

members open negotiations on an EGA 

aimed at eliminating tariffs on 

environmental goods. 

9–10: The sixth annual U.S.-China Strategic 

and Economic Dialogue (S&ED) is held in 

Beijing, China.

14: The WTO DSB circulates the dispute 

settlement panel report concerning 

countervailing duty measures imposed by 

the United States on imports of certain hotrolled carbon steel flat products from India 

(DS436).

14–18: The sixth round of TTIP negotiations 

takes place in Brussels, Belgium.
Year in Trade

U.S. International Trade Commission | 33

July–continued

22: The WTO DSB adopts the AB report and 

the panel report concerning the complaint 

by China regarding certain countervailing 

and antidumping duty measures imposed 

by the United States on certain products 

from China (DS449).

29: The United States expands its sanctions 

against Russia, tightening restrictions on 

exports of energy-related technologies and 

suspending exports of certain credit 

financing, as well as targeting new Russian 

companies and financial institutions.

31–01: USTR Froman travels to Guatemala 

City, Guatemala, to ensure full 

implementation of the labor provisions 

under the CAFTA-DR agreement.

August

1–6: The 13th AGOA Forum takes place in 

Washington, DC.

5: The United States signs a TIFA with the 

Economic Community of West African

States (ECOWAS). 

22: The WTO DSB circulates the dispute 

settlement panel report concerning the 

complaint by the United States regarding 

certain measures by Argentina affecting the 

importation of goods (DS444). 

28: USTR Froman holds consultations with

economic ministers of the Association of 

Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) in Nay Pyi 

Taw, Burma. 

28: The United States and Burma announce 

their intent to develop an Initiative to 

Promote Fundamental Labor Rights and 

Practices in Burma, intending to build upon 

existing reform efforts supported by the 

International Labor Organization. 

29: The WTO DSB adopts the AB and 

dispute settlement panel reports 

concerning the complaint by the United 

States regarding China’s measures related 

to the exportation of rare earths, tungsten, 

and molybdenum (DS431). 

September

1–10: TPP chief negotiators meet for 10 

days in Hanoi, Vietnam.

3: The United States announces FY 2015 

WTO TRQ allocations for raw cane sugar, 

refined and specialty sugar, and sugarcontaining products.

17–18: Acting Deputy USTR Cutler meets 

with various Indian government ministries 

to discuss IPR, industrial policies, services 

and investment, and agricultural trade in 

Delhi, India. 

18: The United States announces that it will 

proceed with its 2011 labor enforcement 

case under CAFTA-DR against Guatemala.

21–25: The eighth round of TISA 

negotiations is held in Geneva, Switzerland.

22–26: The second round of EGA 

negotiations is held in Geneva, Switzerland.
Executive Summary

34 | www.usitc.gov

September–continued

24: USTR Froman meets with Minister Akira 

Amari of Japan in Washington, DC, to 

discuss outstanding TPP issues, focusing on 

agriculture and autos.

25–26: The second meeting of the Labor 

Subcommittee of the U.S.-Morocco FTA 

convenes in Rabat, Morocco.

26: Argentina notifies the WTO DSB that it 

will appeal the dispute settlement panel 

report concerning the complaint by the 

United States regarding certain measures 

by Argentina affecting the importation of 

goods (DS444). 

29–03: The seventh round of TTIP 

negotiations is held in Washington, DC.

October

1: The United States and Brazil reach an 

agreement to end the WTO cotton dispute, 

which concerned a complaint brought by 

Brazil regarding subsidies by the United 

States on upland cotton (DS267).

3: The United States and Indonesia notify 

the WTO DSB that they have reached a

mutually agreed solution concerning the 

complaint by Indonesia regarding measures 

imposed by the United States affecting the 

production and sale of clove cigarettes 

(DS406).

3: The President announces that Russia is 

removed from its status as a beneficiary of 

the GSP program.

10. The U.S. Federal Motor Carrier Safety 

Administration authorizes the 13 Mexican 

carriers that were participating in the U.S. 

Pilot Program at its completion to continue 

long-haul operations in the United States.

14: The WTO DSB circulates the dispute 

settlement panel report concerning the 

complaint by the United States regarding 

measures imposed by India on the 

importation of certain agricultural products 

from the United States due to concerns 

related to avian influenza (DS430). 

14: USTR begins its Out-of-Cycle Review of 

India, as announced in the April 2014 

Special 301 Report. 

17: The second meeting of the Labor Affairs 

Council of the U.S.-Peru TPA occurs in Lima, 

Peru.

25–27: A TPP ministerial meeting is held in 

Sydney, Australia, following a TPP meeting 

of chief negotiators in Canberra (October 

19–24). 

November

3: The United States and EU commit to 

working on a “fresh start” in the TTIP 

negotiations.

7–8: The APEC Ministerial Meeting is held 

in Beijing, China. 

8–10: TPP countries meet in Beijing, China, 

on the margins of the APEC Leaders' 

Meeting.
Year in Trade

U.S. International Trade Commission | 35

November–continued

10: The United States announces that it is 

moving Kuwait from the Special 301 watch 

list to the priority watch list, signaling 

additional concerns with Kuwait's 

protection of IPR. 

10-11: The APEC Economic Leaders' 

Meeting is held in Beijing, China.

13: The United States and India announce 

an agreement on various issues aimed at 

full implementation of the WTO TFA in the 

future. 

17: The WTO DSB circulates the dispute 

settlement panel report concerning the 

complaint by Vietnam regarding 

antidumping duty measures imposed by the 

United States on certain frozen warm-water 

shrimp from Vietnam (DS429). 

25: The eighth ministerial-level meeting of 

the U.S.-India Trade Policy Forum convenes 

in Delhi, India, to discuss progress on trade 

and investment issues between the two 

countries. 

27: WTO members adopt a Protocol of 

Amendment to insert the TFA into the 1995

Agreement Establishing the World Trade 

Organization. The TFA will enter into force 

once two-thirds of WTO members have 

completed their domestic ratification 

process.

28: The United States notifies the WTO DSB 

that it will appeal certain issues with regard 

to the compliance panel report about 

concerns by Canada over certain mandatory 

country-of-origin labeling (COOL) provisions 

in the 2008 U.S. Farm Bill (DS384). 

December

1–5: The ninth round of TISA negotiations 

is held in Geneva, Switzerland.

7–12: TPP officials meet in Washington, DC, 

where progress is reported across several 

areas of the text.

8: The WTO DSB circulates the AB report 

concerning the complaint by India regarding 

countervailing duty measures imposed by 

the United States on certain hot-rolled 

carbon steel flat products from India 

(DS436).

8: USTR Froman and EU Trade 

Commissioner Cecilia Malmström meet in 

Washington, DC, to discuss the TTIP 

negotiations.

15: The third meeting of the U.S.-Korea FTA 

Joint Committee convenes in Washington,

DC, with discussions focusing on the 

automotive and financial services sectors.

16–18: The 12th WTO Trade Policy Review 

of the United States takes place in Geneva, 

Switzerland. 

16–18: The 25th U.S.-China Joint 

Commission on Commerce and Trade (JCCT) 

is held in Chicago.
Executive Summary

36 | www.usitc.gov

December–continued 

18: The WTO DSB circulates the AB report 

concerning the complaint by China 

regarding countervailing duty measures 

imposed by the United States on certain 

products from China (DS437).

19. The U.S. Department of Commerce and 

the government of Mexico sign agreements 

suspending the countervailing duty and 

antidumping duty investigations on sugar 

from Mexico.

19: The EU requests WTO dispute 

settlement consultations with the United 

States concerning tax incentives established 

by the state of Washington in relation to 

the development, manufacture, and sale of 

large civil aircraft (DS487).

22: South Korea requests WTO 

consultations with the United States 

concerning certain U.S. antidumping 

measures on oil country tubular goods from 

South Korea and the investigation 

methodology underlying such measures 

(DS488).

23: The President reinstated Guinea-Bissau 

as AGOA eligible in 2015, and terminated 

the designations of The Gambia and South 

Sudan as AGOA beneficiaries effective 

January 1, 2015.

30: USTR publishes its 2014 Report to 

Congress on China's WTO Compliance.

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, Australian Government Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade, Inside U.S. 

Trade, and Washington Trade Daily.
Year in Trade

U.S. International Trade Commission | 37

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 2014. Trade agreement activities during 2014 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 trade and investment framework agreements (TIFAs); and 

trade-related 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, 

Federal Register notices, and news releases, including publications and news releases by the 

U.S. International Trade Commission (USITC or the Commission) and the Office of the United 

States Trade Representative (USTR). 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.

Trade Data

The Year in Trade 2014 report, as with past reports, relies on U.S. Census Bureau (Census) data 

for the U.S. merchandise trade statistics presented throughout the report. Most tables in the 

report present U.S. merchandise trade statistics using “total exports” and “general imports” as 

measures,2 except for data on U.S. imports entered with a claim of eligibility under trade 

preference programs and free trade agreements. Such data require an analysis of U.S. “imports 

 

2 “Total exports” measures the total physical movement of goods out of the United States to foreign countries,

whether such goods are exported from the U.S. customs territory or from a Customs bonded warehouse or a U.S. 

Foreign Trade Zone (FTZ). Total exports is the sum of domestic exports and foreign exports (also known as reexports). “General imports” measures the total physical arrivals of merchandise from foreign countries, whether 

such merchandise enters the U.S. customs territory immediately or is entered into bonded warehouses or FTZs 

under Customs custody.
Chapter 1: Overview of U.S. Trade

38 | www.usitc.gov

for consumption”—goods that have been cleared by U.S. Customs and Border Protection to 

enter the customs territory of the United States with required duties paid. 3

Chapters 1 and 6 also offer data on services trade. The services trade data are based on figures 

for cross-border trade in private services, which exclude government sales and purchases of 

services. The Commission compiled these data primarily from figures provided by the Bureau of 

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

Digitally delivered products and services represent an increasingly important component of 

global services trade, but they are not explicitly identified in this report. Cross-border digital 

trade––i.e., cross-border trade in products and services delivered via the Internet––is difficult 

to measure because available business and economic data do not capture all of the economic 

activities that are facilitated by or occur via the Internet.4 Moreover, official U.S. trade data do 

not distinguish between digital and non-digital products and services (box 1.1). 

To complement the release of the Year in Trade 2014 report, the Commission has developed a 

series of dashboards in MS Excel that present U.S. merchandise trade data in an interactive 

format. The dashboards are a companion piece to the traditional report. They offer Year in 

Trade readers a different way to look at, visualize, and understand the U.S. merchandise trade 

data used in this report. Using the dashboards, readers may conduct further analysis of U.S. 

merchandise trade focusing on specific trading partners, specific FTAs, or specific trade 

preference programs. The dashboards can be found at 

http://www.usitc.gov/research_and_analysis/data_analysis_tools.htm. All dashboards present 

data covering at least the period presented in this report (2012–14), while some allow the user 

to review data ranging from 1997 through 2014.

Overview of the U.S. Economy in 2014

In 2014, the U.S. economy continued to rebound from the economic recession of 2008 and 

2009 at a stronger rate than in 2013. U.S. real gross domestic product (GDP) increased 

2.4 percent in 2014, compared to 2.2 percent the previous year (figure 1.1). 5

 

3 For more information about measures of U.S. merchandise exports and imports, see "Trade Metrics" section of 

USITC, Shifts in U.S. Merchandise Trade, 2014, June 2015; USITC, “A Note on U.S. Trade Statistics,” August 22, 2014, 

http://www.usitc.gov/publications/research/tradestatsnote.pdf. 4 There is no standard or generally accepted definition for “digital trade.” For more information, see USITC, Digital 

Trade in the U.S. and Global Economies, Part 2, August 2014. 5 USDOC, BEA, “Gross Domestic Product: Fourth Quarter and Annual (Second Estimate),” February 27, 2015, 3. 
Year in Trade

U.S. International Trade Commission | 39

Box 1.1: International digital trade

International trade in digital products and services is difficult to measure. U.S. trade data do not 

distinguish between digital and non-digital products and services. Moreover, official U.S. services trade 

statistics are organized according to the sector of a traded service (financial services, professional 

services, information services, and so on), rather than by how the service is delivered (online vs. in 

person). Official services trade data describe the value of cross-border exports and imports of all types 

of services, as well as the value of services provided by foreign affiliates who have established a 

commercial presence in a given country market. Official statistics describe the global activities of 

multinational services firms in terms of the geographic incidence of sales. Using these data, one way to 

track international “digital services trade” is to look at cross-border trade flows in digitally enabled 

industry sectors, such as financial services, computer and information services, audiovisual services, 

professional services, and other business services. While these industries also provide services in person, 

it is likely that many of their services exports are delivered over the Internet. Therefore, the sum of 

cross-border trade flows in these sectors is a useful proxy for estimating total cross-border digital 

services trade. In 2013, U.S. exports of digitally enabled services totaled $379.5 billion, while U.S. 

imports of such services totaled $226.5 billion.a

Another way to estimate international digital trade is to look at the direction and volumes of crossborder data flows. These continue to rise quickly as individual consumers and businesses around the 

world use more and more services delivered over the Internet (from both mobile and fixed-line 

connections). According to Cisco’s projections, global Internet traffic in 2018 will be close to triple its 

level in 2013 and equivalent to 64 times the volume of the entire global Internet in 2005.b While data 

flows are not comparable to trade statistics, as they are often not linked to a monetary transaction, they 

are an indicator of cross-border economic activity occurring via the Internet. Multinational companies 

necessarily transfer many types of data across borders—personal information of employees and 

customers, financial transaction data, production and process performance figures––to conduct 

business, communicate internally, handle customer relationships, and manage a global workforce. 

However, such statistics can give only a rough idea of global business activity, given that they cannot 

capture the purpose of the data flows—only their volume, source, and destination.

The USITC’s recent reports on Digital Trade in the U.S. and Global Economies (2013 and 2014) describe 

in detail the exponential growth in various types of business activity conducted via the Internet. They 

also discuss the way digital technologies are changing business models in traditional goods and services 

sectors and examine the Internet's effects on productivity, output, and employment, as well as the 

Internet's future implications for international trade.c

a USITC estimates; USDOC, BEA, U.S. Trade in Services by Type of Service, table 2.1, October 24, 2014. For a fuller explanation 

of the issues involved in estimating digital trade, see USITC, Digital Trade in the U.S. and Global Economies, Part 1, 2013, 

chapter 4. Issues related to identifying digitally enabled services are discussed in Borga and Koncz-Bruner, “Trends in DigitallyEnabled Trade in Services,” USDOC, BEA, 2012. b Cisco, The Zettabyte Era—Trends and Analysis, June 10, 2014. c USITC, Digital Trade in the U.S. and Global Economies, Part 1, July 2013; USITC, Digital Trade in the U.S. and Global 

Economies, Part 2, August 2014.

The increase in real GDP in 2014 mostly reflected positive contributions from personal 

consumption expenditures (1.72 percentage points) and gross private domestic investment 

(0.93 percentage points), slightly offset by a negative contribution from federal and state 

government spending (–0.03 percentage points). Additionally, the contribution of net exports 
Chapter 1: Overview of U.S. Trade

40 | www.usitc.gov

of goods and services to growth in real GDP was -0.23 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 2014. 7 The 

seasonally adjusted U.S. unemployment rate fell from 6.7 percent in December 2013 to 

5.6 percent in December 2014. 8

Figure 1.1: U.S. real gross domestic product, percentage change, 2005–14

Source: USDOC, BEA, “Gross Domestic Product, Percent Change from Previous Period,”

http://www.bea.gov/national/xls/gdpchg.xls (accessed March 19, 2015).

The global economy grew at the same rate as the previous year—3.3 percent.9 Economic 

growth in major advanced economies picked up in 2014, rising to 1.8 percent in 2014 from 

1.3 percent in 2013. On the other hand, while growth has been more robust in many emerging 

and developing economies in recent years, it decreased on average in 2014, falling to 

4.4 percent from 4.7 percent in 2013. The decline in the real GDP growth rate among these 

countries was led by lower growth in China. Lower oil and other commodity prices also affected 

the terms of trade and real income, and thus dampened growth in commodity exporting 

developing countries.

10

 

6 USDOC, BEA, “Gross Domestic Product: Fourth Quarter and Annual (Second Estimate),” February 27, 2015, table 

2.

7 Federal Reserve, “Federal Reserve Issues FOMC Statement,” September 17, 2014. 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, 2015). 8 USDOL, BLS, Current Population Survey (CPS) database (accessed March 5, 2015).

9 IMF, World Economic Outlook Update, January 2015. This document is the source for the data in this paragraph. 

Economic growth is measured as the percentage change in GDP at constant prices. 10 Ibid.

-4.0

-3.0

-2.0

-1.0

0.0

1.0

2.0

3.0

4.0

2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014

Percent
Year in Trade

U.S. International Trade Commission | 41

Exchange-Rate Trends

The U.S. dollar largely maintained its value in the first part of 2014, depreciating mildly against 

the broad dollar index.11 However, the dollar rose 8.1 percent against the broad dollar index 

from July to December in 2014, resulting in an overall appreciation of 9.0 percent in 2014. By 

yearend, the dollar had appreciated against a number of major currencies: 14.3 percent against 

the Japanese yen, 13.0 percent against the euro, 12.5 percent against the Mexican peso, 

9.1 percent against the Canadian dollar, 5.5 percent against the UK pound, and 2.5 percent 

against the Chinese yuan (figure 1.2). The dollar began to rise in mid-2014 following revised 

forecasts for the U.S. economy that reflected higher than expected economic growth. 12 

Additionally, in September 2014, the European Central Bank announced that it would cut 

interest rates and institute a bond-buying program to stimulate euro-area economies, which 

further contributed to the rise in the dollar.13

Balance of Payments14

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

income, and net unilateral current transfers—increased to $410.6 billion (preliminary) in 2014 

from $400.3 billion in 2013. 15 This deficit amounted to 2.4 percent of current-dollar GDP in 

both 2014 and 2013. The increase in the current-account deficit was due to a rise in both the 

merchandise trade deficit and government transfers abroad. These trends offset increased 

surpluses in services trade and primary income (investment income, income payments to 

foreigners, and compensation of employees) in 2014.

 

11 The broad dollar index is a weighted average of the foreign exchange values of the U.S. dollar against 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, 2014, to December 31, 2014. Federal Reserve, Foreign Exchange Rates—H.10 

(accessed March 5, 2015).

12 Irwin, “What the Dollar's Rise Tells Us,” October 8, 2014. 13 Wearden, “ECB Cuts Interest Rates,” September 4, 2014. 14 This section of the report relies on trade data reported by the BEA. The trade deficit reported by the BEA is 

derived from Census data on U.S. total exports minus U.S. general imports. The BEA adjusts these flows to bring 

the data in line with the concepts and definitions used to prepare the international and national accounts. For a 

more detailed discussion of the differences between balance of payments-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. 15 Unless otherwise indicated, information in this section is from USDOC, BEA, “U.S. International Transactions: 

Fourth Quarter and Year 2014,” March 19, 2015, 5–7.
Chapter 1: Overview of U.S. Trade

42 | www.usitc.gov

Figure 1.2: Indices of U.S. dollar exchange rates for selected major foreign currencies, daily, 2014a

Source: U.S. Federal Reserve Board (accessed March 20, 2015). 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.

90

95

100

105

110

115

120

Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec

Depreciation $ Appreciation

Euro Pound Yen Peso Canadian dollar Yuan

January 2, 2014 = 100
Year in Trade

U.S. International Trade Commission | 43

The U.S. trade deficit for goods and services increased from $476.4 billion in 2013 to 

$504.7 billion in 2014. The deficit on goods increased to $735.8 billion in 2014 from 

$701.7 billion in 2013, though it remained well below the record goods deficit of $835.7 billion 

in 2006. U.S. exports of goods rose from $1,592.8 billion in 2013 to $1,635.1 billion in 2014, 

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

and petroleum products. Imports of goods increased to $2,370.9 billion in 2014 from 

$2,294.5 billion in 2013, reflecting increases in all major sectors despite a decline in imports of 

petroleum and petroleum products (see the U.S. Merchandise Trade section later in this 

chapter).

The U.S. trade surplus for services grew to $231.1 billion in 2014 from $225.3 billion in 2013, a 

new annual record. Services exports rose from $687.4 billion to $709.4 billion in this period.16

The largest increases in services exports occurred in the category “other business services”—

particularly professional and management consulting services and research and development 

services—and in financial services. At the same time, services imports also increased, rising 

from $462.1 billion in 2013 to $478.3 billion in 2014. The largest increase in services imports 

occurred in travel, particularly personal travel abroad. 17

U.S. Trade in Goods in 201418

The value of U.S. exports grew 2.8 percent while the value of imports rose 3.4 percent in 2014, 

compared to an increase of 2.2 percent for exports and a slight decrease of less than 0.5 

percent for imports in 2013 (appendix table A.1). U.S. merchandise imports continued to 

exceed merchandise exports in 2014. U.S. merchandise exports increased from $1,579.6 billion 

in 2013 to $1,623.4 billion in 2014, boosted by recovering demand in major advanced 

economies. U.S. merchandise imports rose from $2,268.3 billion in 2013 to $2,345.2 billion in 

2014, driven by the stronger U.S. economy and the corresponding upturn in personal spending 

and business investment. 19 As a result, the merchandise trade deficit increased in 2014 to 

$721.7 billion from $688.7 billion in 2013 (figure 1.3).

 

16 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.

17 Services trade is discussed in more detail later in this chapter. 18 This section of the report uses total exports and general imports as reported by Census. For further information 

on these terms, please select “View data field descriptions” at USITC DataWeb http://dataweb.usitc.gov. 19 USITC, Shifts in U.S. Merchandise Trade, 2014, June 2015.
Chapter 1: Overview of U.S. Trade

44 | www.usitc.gov

Figure 1.3: U.S. merchandise trade with the world, 2012–14

Source: USITC DataWeb (accessed February 12, 2015); data compiled from the official statistics of the U.S. Department of 

Commerce.

U.S. Merchandise Trade by Product Category

Exports

In 2014, U.S. exports increased in 11 of the 12 broad merchandise sectors defined by the USITC

by a total of $52.4 billion, but fell in the minerals and metals sector by $8.5 billion (appendix 

table A.1). Transport equipment, which consistently ranks as the largest U.S. export sector, 

accounted for 20.7 percent of merchandise exports in 2014. U.S. exports of transport 

equipment were valued at $335.6 billion in 2014, up 4.2 percent from $322.1 billion in 2013. 

Top products exported in all merchandise sector categories in 2014 included aircraft, 

spacecraft, and parts; petroleum oils; passenger motor vehicles; soybeans; and nonmonetary 

gold (see appendix table A.2 for details at the Schedule B subheading level).

Imports

In 2014, U.S. imports expanded in 11 of the 12 merchandise sectors by a total of $111.1 billion, 

but fell in the energy-related products sector by $34.2 billion (appendix table A.1). The decline 

in energy-related imports reflects increased U.S. production of petroleum and related products,

such as shale oil gas, as well as lower petroleum prices during the year. The electronic products 

sector, which has ranked as the largest import sector since 2012, accounted for 18.7 percent of 

the value of total merchandise imports in 2014, followed by transportation equipment, at 

-1,000

-500

0

500

1,000

1,500

2,000

2,500

2012 2013 2014

General imports Total exports Trade balance

Billion $
Year in Trade

U.S. International Trade Commission | 45

17.2 percent. U.S. imports of electronic products were valued at $438.2 billion in 2014, up 

3.9 percent from $421.7 billion in 2013, while imports of transportation equipment were valued 

at $403.0 billion in 2014, up 7.3 percent from $375.4 billion in 2013. Top products imported in 

2014 in all merchandise sectors included petroleum oils, motor vehicles, cellphones, 

computers, and pharmaceuticals (see appendix table A.3 for details at the Harmonized Tariff 

Schedule of the United States [HTS] subheading level).

U.S. Imports under Preferential Programs and Free 

Trade Agreements

The value of U.S. imports for which eligibility was claimed under the United States’ four major 

preferential trade programs with developing countries fell from $48.3 billion in 2013 to 

$32.5 billion in 2014; they accounted for 1.4 percent of total U.S. imports during 2014. 20 

Imports that claimed eligibility under the U.S. Generalized System of Preferences (GSP) program 

(appendix table A.14) totaled $18.7 billion in 2014, including $2.4 billion that entered free of 

duty from AGOA beneficiary countries.21 Imports under the African Growth and Opportunity 

Act (AGOA) totaled $11.9 billion, excluding imports valued at $2.4 billion that claimed GSP 

benefits (appendix table A.17); imports under the Caribbean Basin Economic Recovery Act 

(CBERA), including the Caribbean Basin Trade Partnership Act (CBTPA), totaled $2.0 billion 

(appendix table A.20). No imports entered under the Andean Trade Preference Act (ATPA) in 

2014 (appendix table A.19), as the President's authority to provide ATPA benefits expired on 

July 31, 2013. Most of the imports claiming eligibility under AGOA and CBERA are free of duty. 

A much larger share of U.S. imports claim benefits under free trade or trade promotion 

agreement provisions than under preferential trade programs. The value of these imports 

increased 0.9 percent in 2014 and totaled $414.6 billion, or 17.9 percent of total U.S. imports in 

2014. 22

 

20 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 2015, January 2015, gen. note 3a (iv) 

and gen. note 10. U.S. insular possessions are defined in 19 C.F.R. § 7.2 (a).

21 Following the expiration of the President’s authority to provide duty-free treatment under the GSP program on 

July 31, 2013, importers still claimed GSP status to facilitate receiving refunds if GSP were to be renewed 

retroactively, as has been done in the past. Note that imports claiming GSP benefits after July 31, 2013, have not 

actually entered free of duty, except for imports from AGOA beneficiary countries ($2.4 billion in 2014). 22 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 5.
Chapter 1: Overview of U.S. Trade

46 | www.usitc.gov

U.S. Merchandise Trade with Leading Partners23

Table 1.1 shows U.S. trade with selected major trading partners, ranked by total trade (exports 

and imports) in 2014. In 2014, the European Union (EU) remained the United States’ top trading 

partner in terms of two-way merchandise trade. Canada was the leading market for U.S. 

exports. China continued as the leading source of U.S. imports through 2014. 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 single-country 

trading partners). The leading U.S. export markets and import suppliers by share in 2014 are 

shown in figures 1.4 and 1.5. 24

Table 1.1: U.S. merchandise trade with selected major trading partners and the world, 2014

Source: USITC DataWeb (accessed February 12, 2015); data compiled from the official statistics of the U.S. Department of 

Commerce.

Note: Because of rounding, figures may not add to totals shown. a Republic of Korea (South Korea).

 

23 See chapter 6 for further information on U.S. merchandise trade with major trading partners, including the EU, 

Canada, China, Mexico, and other economies. 

24 Leading U.S. exports to and imports from these major trading partners are presented in appendix tables A.24–

A.50.

Major trading partner U.S. total exports

U.S. general 

imports Trade balance

Two-way trade 

(exports plus 

imports)

Million $

EU 276,698 417,837 -141,138 694,535

Canada 312,125 346,063 -33,937 658,188

China 124,024 466,656 -342,633 590,680

Mexico 240,326 294,157 -53,831 534,484

Japan 66,964 133,939 -66,975 200,903

Koreaa 44,544 69,606 -25,062 114,150

Brazil 42,418 30,337 12,081 72,755

Taiwan 26,836 40,572 -13,736 67,407

India 21,628 45,228 -23,601 66,856

All others 467,880 500,793 -32,913 968,673

All partners 1,623,443 2,345,187 -721,744 3,968,630
Year in Trade

U.S. International Trade Commission | 47

Figure 1.4: Leading U.S. merchandise export markets, by share, 2014

Source: USITC DataWeb (accessed February 12, 2015); data compiled from the official statistics of the U.S. Department of 

Commerce.

Note: Because of rounding, figures may not add up to 100 percent. 

Figure 1.5: Leading U.S. merchandise import sources, by share, 2014

Source: USITC DataWeb (accessed February 12, 2015); data compiled from the official statistics of the U.S. Department of 

Commerce.

Note: Because of rounding, figures may not add up to 100 percent.

Canada

19%

EU

17%

Mexico

15%

China

8%

Japan

4%

Korea

3%

Brazil

2%

Taiwan

2%

India

1%

All others

29%

China

20%

EU

18%

Canada

15%

Mexico

13%

Japan

6%

Korea

3%

India

2%

Taiwan

2%

Brazil

1%

All others

21%
Chapter 1: Overview of U.S. Trade

48 | www.usitc.gov

U.S. Trade in Services in 201425

The U.S. surplus in cross-border private services trade increased 2.2 percent in 2014 to 

$231.1 billion (figure 1.6).26 U.S. cross-border exports of private services increased by 

3.4 percent ($22.7 billion) in that year to $685.6 billion, slightly slower than the 4.1 percent 

($17.7 billion) increase in U.S. imports, which reached $454.5 billion. Growth occurred in 9 of 

the top 10 services export categories in 2014, including travel services, charges for the use of 

intellectual property n.i.e., 27 and financial services (the three largest categories). U.S. imports of 

private services increased in 8 of the top 10 import categories, most significantly in professional 

and management consulting services (12.0 percent) and passenger fares (8.9 percent). 

Appendix table A.6 provides data on U.S. trade in private services by product category.

U.S. Services Trade by Product Category 

Exports

Travel services28 led U.S. cross-border services exports in 2014, accounting for 25.8 percent of 

the total, followed by charges for the use of intellectual property n.i.e. (19.3 percent), and 

financial services (12.9 percent). Among the top 10 export categories, maintenance and repair 

services n.i.e. experienced the fastest year-on-year growth in exports (14.8 percent) in 2014. 

Although exports grew in most services sectors in 2014, growth rates for some sectors fell 

below 2013 levels. 

 

25 This section uses BEA data on U.S. cross-border trade in private services. It excludes BEA data on government 

sales and purchases. Under the BEA's national accounts data, cross-border services trade occurs when firms in one 

country provide services to consumers in another country, with people, information, or money crossing U.S. 

boundaries in the process. U.S. firms also provide services to foreign consumers through affiliated companies 

abroad. Cross-border services trade is recorded as exports or imports in international balance of payments data, 

whereas the income generated through affiliate transactions is recorded as investment income.

26 USDOC, BEA, “U.S. International Transactions Accounts Data: Table 3.1,” March 19, 2015. In 2014, the BEA 

updated its services trade statistics under its U.S. International Transaction Accounts to conform more closely to 

international standards. For more information about how BEA has revised its data, see USDOC, BEA, “The 

Comprehensive Restructuring,” March 2014, and “Comprehensive Restructuring and Annual Revision,” July 2014. 27 U.S. exports of charges for the use of intellectual property “not included elsewhere” (n.i.e.), which the BEA 

previously labeled as “royalties and license fees,” include payments by foreigners to U.S. owners of intellectual 

property, such as trademarks and franchise fees, computer software, industrial processes, and audiovisual 

products. 28 Travel services comprise purchases of goods and services made 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. The trade numbers for travel services were revised in 2014 to reflect new 

procedures for electronic data collection carried out by the U.S. Department of Homeland Security. These changes 

allowed more accurate accounting of passengers' destination countries and improved methods of estimating their 

travel-related expenditures. 
Year in Trade

U.S. International Trade Commission | 49

Figure 1.6: U.S. private cross-border services trade with the world, 2012–14a

Source: USDOC, BEA, International Transactions Accounts Data, March 19, 2015, table 1.2. a Data for 2014 are preliminary.

For instance, U.S. exports of air transport services 29 grew by only 0.8 percent in 2014, 

compared to growth of 7.0 percent in 2013. Growth in U.S. exports of financial services was 

also slower in 2014 (5.2 percent) than in 2013 (9.7 percent). 

On the other hand, U.S. exports of maintenance and repair services n.i.e. and of sea transport 

services30 had much higher growth rates in 2014 compared to 2013. In particular, U.S. exports 

of sea transport services increased by 5.4 percent in 2014, far exceeding the 0.7 percent 

increase posted in 2013. Faster growth in U.S. exports of sea transport services in 2014 was 

partly due to higher demand for maritime freight transport vis-à-vis more expensive air 

transport services, as manufacturers continued to focus on reducing costs during the postrecession period. 31 

Imports 

Travel services (24.6 percent of total imports) and insurance services (10.9 percent) led U.S. 

cross-border services imports in 2014. Overall, 2014 witnessed broad growth in U.S. services 

imports, with increases in 8 of the top 10 import categories. As mentioned, U.S. imports of 

 

29 Air transport services include airport and air freight services. 30 Sea transport services include seaport and sea freight services. 31 Knowler, “Changing Air Cargo Landscapes Threatens Recovery,” October 7, 2014.

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

800

2012 2013 2014

Billion $

Exports Imports Trade balance
Chapter 1: Overview of U.S. Trade

50 | www.usitc.gov

professional and management consulting services in 2014 grew the fastest at 12.0 percent (a 

sharp increase over 3.6 percent in 2013), followed by passenger fares at 8.9 percent. By 

contrast, U.S. imports of insurance services fell by 2.3 percent; U.S. imports of technical, traderelated, and other business services, by 7.2 percent.32 

U.S. Services Trade with Leading Partners 

In 2014 the EU was the United States’ largest export market for services, as well as its largest 

foreign supplier of services (table 1.2). Canada and Japan were the second- and third-largest 

U.S. services trading partners in 2014. The EU accounted for $217.6 billion (31.7 percent) of 

total U.S. services exports and $160.0 billion (35.2 percent) of total U.S. services imports in that 

year (figures 1.7 and 1.8). 33 The U.S. trade surplus in services with the EU increased to 

$57.5 billion in 2014, up from $50.5 billion in 2013. 

The United States also maintained large trade surpluses in services with most of its other 

leading trade partners, including Canada ($32.3 billion), China ($26.5 billion), Brazil 

($19.1 billion), Japan ($18.0 billion), the Republic of Korea (South Korea) ($12.3 billion), 

Australia ($12.1 billion), and Mexico ($9.2 billion). India was the only leading services trade 

partner with which the United States recorded a trade deficit, $6.0 billion (compared to 

$5.8 billion in 2013). The U.S. services trade deficit with India has been driven largely by an 

increase in U.S. imports of computer services from that country.34

 

32 Technical, trade-related, and other business services include construction, architectural and engineering 

services, waste treatment, operational leasing, trade-related, and other business services. 33 In terms of single countries, the United Kingdom (an EU member) was the largest exporter and importer of U.S. 

private services in 2014.

34 For example, in 2013, U.S exports of computer services to India were $554 million, whereas U.S. imports of 

computer services from India were nearly $9.5 billion. USDOC, BEA, Survey of Current Business, October 2014, 15–

16.
Year in Trade

U.S. International Trade Commission | 51

Table 1.2: U.S. private services trade with major trading partners and the world, 2014 

Major trading partners U.S. exports U.S. imports Trade balance

Two-way trade (exports 

plus imports)

Million $

EU 217,557 160,014 57,543 377,571

Canada 62,537 30,284 32,253 92,821

Japan 46,280 28,262 18,018 74,542

China 41,139 14,629 26,510 55,768

Mexico 29,291 20,061 9,230 49,352

Brazil 27,610 8,537 19,073 36,147

South Korea 20,259 7,941 12,318 28,200

Australia 18,756 6,679 12,077 25,435

India 14,283 20,272 -5,989 34,555

Singapore 12,161 5,385 6,776 17,546

Taiwan 11,806 7,307 4,499 19,113

All other 183,901 145,126 38,775 329,027

World 685,580 454,497 231,083 1,140,077

Source: USDOC, BEA, “U.S. International Transaction Accounts Data: Table 1.3,” March 19, 2015.

Figure 1.7: Leading U.S. export markets for private services, by share, 2014a

Source: USDOC, BEA, International Transactions Accounts Data, March 19, 2015, table 1.2.

Note: Because of rounding, figures may not add up to 100 percent. a

Data for 2014 are preliminary.

EU 32%

Canada 9%

Japan 7% China 6% Mexico 4%

Brazil 4%

Australia 3%

Korea 3%

India 2%

Singapore 2%

Taiwan 1%

All other 27%

Total = $685.6 billion
Chapter 1: Overview of U.S. Trade

52 | www.usitc.gov

Figure 1.8: Leading U.S. import sources for private services, by share, 2014a

Source: USDOC, BEA, International Transactions Accounts Data, March 19, 2015, table 1.2.

Note: Because of rounding, figures may not add up to 100 percent. a Data for 2014 are preliminary.

EU 35%

Canada 7%

Japan 6% India 4%

Mexico 4%

Brazil 2% China 3%

Korea 2%

Taiwan 2%

Australia 2%

Singapore 1%

All other 32%

Total = $454.5 billion
Year in Trade

U.S. International Trade Commission | 53

Chapter 2

Administration of U.S. Trade Laws and 

Regulations

This chapter surveys activities related to the administration of U.S. trade laws during 2014, 

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 2014 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, 35 and 

the safeguards provided for in various bilateral free trade agreements (FTAs) involving the 

United States.

The Commission conducted no new safeguard investigations during 2014, and no U.S. 

safeguard measures under these provisions were in effect during any part of 2014. 

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. exports of goods or services.36 Section 301 may be used to enforce U.S. 

rights under bilateral and multilateral trade agreements and to respond to unjustifiable, 

unreasonable, or discriminatory foreign government practices that burden or restrict U.S. 

commerce. Interested persons may petition the United States Trade Representative (USTR) to 

 

35 19 U.S.C. §§ 2251–2254. 36 Section 301 refers to sections 301–310 of the Trade Act of 1974, as amended (19 U.S.C. §§ 2411–2420).
Chapter 2: Administration of U.S. Trade Laws and Regulations

54 | www.usitc.gov

investigate foreign government policies or practices, or the 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 the 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 

the 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, the USTR must take action.37 

If the practices fulfill the third condition—that is, if they are unreasonable or discriminatory, 

and they burden or restrict U.S. commerce—the USTR must determine whether action is 

appropriate and, if so, what type of action to take.38 The time period for making these 

determinations varies according to the type of practices alleged.

Section 301 Investigations

Two section 301 investigations were considered by USTR in 2014. One 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 in retaliation. 39

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). 40 Under the 

MOU, the EU agreed to open a tariff-rate quota (TRQ) with an in-quota tariff rate of zero for 

beef produced without growth-promoting hormones (i.e., “high-quality beef”)

41 in the amount 

 

37 Section 301(a) of the Trade Act of 1974, as amended (19 U.S.C. § 2411(a)). 38 Section 301(b) of the Trade Act of 1974, as amended (19 U.S.C. § 2411(b)). 39 64 Fed. Reg. 40638 (July 27, 1999); WTO, European Communities—Measures Concerning Meat and Meat 

Products (DS26, DS48) (accessed March 5, 2015). 40 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. 41 A TRQ is a method of trade protection that imposes a relatively low “in-quota” tariff rate on imports until an 

annual allocation is met. Any imports beyond the TRQ allocation are subject to higher over-quota tariff rates. 

Article VI of the U.S.-EU Beef MOU defines “high quality beef.”
Year in Trade

U.S. International Trade Commission | 55

of 20,000 metric tons, 42 and the United States agreed to reduce the scope of the retaliation 

list. 43

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 

would lift the remaining additional duties.44 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.45 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 at 45,000 metric tons during 2014. 46

According to USTR, it is continuing to monitor EU implementation of the MOU and other 

developments affecting market access for U.S. beef products. USTR states that it will consider 

additional actions under section 301 of the Trade Act “if EU implementation and other 

developments do not proceed as contemplated.” 47

The other section 301 case in 2014 concerned intellectual property rights protection (IPR) in 

Ukraine. In May 2013, Ukraine was identified as a priority foreign country48 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.49 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.50 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 nontransparent and unfair administration and operation of 

certain Ukrainian copyright-collecting societies. On February 28, 2014, the USTR determined, 

based on information obtained during the 301 investigation, that the acts, policies, and 

practices subject to the investigation are unreasonable and burden or restrict U.S. commerce, 

 

42 U.S.-EU Beef MOU, Art. II(1). 43 U.S.-EU Beef MOU, Art. II(3); 74 Fed. Reg. 40864 (August 13, 2009). 44 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. 45 Regulation (EU) No. 464/2012 of the European Parliament and of the Council, OJ L 149, June 8, 2012, 1. 46 USTR, “U.S. Trade Representative Froman, Secretary of Agriculture Vilsack,” August 1, 2013. 47 USTR, 2015 Trade Policy Agenda and 2014 Annual Report, March 2015, 185. 48 For an explanation of a “priority foreign country,” see the next section on Special 301. 49 USTR, 2013 Special 301 Report, May 2013; USTR, “USTR Releases Annual Special 301 Report,” May 1, 2013. 50 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).
Chapter 2: Administration of U.S. Trade Laws and Regulations

56 | www.usitc.gov

and thus are actionable under section 301. 51 The USTR further determined that, in light of the 

political situation in Ukraine at the time, no action under section 301 was appropriate.52

Special 301

The Special 301 law53 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. 54 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.” 55

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.56 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).57

In addition, the Special 301 law directs the USTR to identify and list so-called priority foreign 

countries.58 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. 59 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. 60 The identification of a country 

 

51 79 Fed. Reg. 14326 (March 13, 2014). 52 Ibid. 53 The Special 301 law is set forth in section 182 of the Trade Act of 1974, as amended (19 U.S.C. § 2242). 54 “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)). 55 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.” 56 Section 182(d)(3) of the Trade Act of 1974, as amended (19 U.S.C. § 2242(d)(3)). 57 Section 182(d)(4) of the Trade Act of 1974, as amended (19 U.S.C. § 2242(d)(4)). 58 Section 182(a)(2) of the Trade Act of 1974, as amended (19 U.S.C. § 2242(a)(2)). 59 Section 182(b)(1) of the Trade Act of 1974, as amended (19 U.S.C. § 2242(b)(1)). 60 Ibid.
Year in Trade

U.S. International Trade Commission | 57

as a priority foreign country triggers a section 301 investigation, 61 unless the USTR determines 

that the investigation would be detrimental to U.S. economic interests.62

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.63 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 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 the 2014 Special 301 review, the USTR examined the adequacy and effectiveness of IPR 

protection in 82 countries.64 In conducting the review, the USTR focused on a wide range of 

issues and policy objectives relating to 

• adequate and effective IPR protection and enforcement, including market access for 

persons relying on IPR; 

• inadequate trade secret protection in China, India, and elsewhere; 

• “indigenous innovation” policies that may unfairly disadvantage U.S. rights holders in China;

• copyright piracy over the Internet in Brazil, China, India, and Russia; 

• market access barriers that appear to impede access to healthcare; 

• the protection and enforcement of trade secrets, as well as concerns about trade secret 

theft, particularly in China, and forced technology transfer; 

• compulsory licensing of patented technologies in India; 

• trademark counterfeiting and copyright piracy; 

• effective criminal and border enforcement of pirated and counterfeit goods; 

• the manufacture and distribution of counterfeit pharmaceuticals in countries such as Brazil, 

China, Indonesia, Lebanon, Peru, Russia, and especially India; 

• digital, Internet, and broadcast piracy; 

• the unauthorized use of unlicensed software by foreign governments; 

• the securing and enforcing of trademark rights; 

 

61 Section 182(f)(2) of the Trade Act of 1974, as amended (19 U.S.C. § 2242(f)(2)). 62 Section 302(b)(2)(B) of the Trade Act of 1974, as amended (19 U.S.C. § 2412(b)(2)(B)). 63 79 Fed. Reg. 420 (January 3, 2014). 64 USTR, 2014 Special 301 Report, April 30, 2014; USTR, “USTR Releases Annual Special 301 Report,” April 30, 2014.
Chapter 2: Administration of U.S. Trade Laws and Regulations

58 | www.usitc.gov

• adequate implementation of the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) Internet 

treaties;65 and 

• proper implementation of the TRIPS Agreement by developed and developing countries.66

No country was identified as a priority foreign country in the 2014 Special 301 Report. The 

report identified 10 countries on the priority watch list: Algeria, Argentina, Chile, China, India, 

Indonesia, Pakistan, Russia, Thailand, and Venezuela.67 These countries were also on the 2013 

priority watch list.68

In keeping China on the priority watch list, the report highlighted the need for greater 

protection and enforcement of all forms of IPR in that country, including patents, trademarks, 

copyrights, trade secrets, and the protection of pharmaceutical test data. It noted U.S. concerns 

about trade secret theft, cyber theft, compulsory licensing, copyright piracy over the Internet, 

the widespread availability of counterfeit goods, and “indigenous innovation” policies and 

related industrial policies in China that may disadvantage U.S. rights holders.69

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 2014 Special 301 Report noted 

that “serious difficulties in attaining constructive engagement on issues of concern to U.S. and 

other stakeholders have contributed to India's challenging environment for IPR protection and 

enforcement.” 70 The report noted growing challenges from copyright piracy, particularly over 

the Internet; patent protection, particularly in the pharmaceutical, agrochemical, and green 

technology sectors; compulsory licensing of patents; unauthorized disclosure of test and other 

data; the protection of trademarks and trade secrets; and market access measures that appear 

to discriminate in favor of the indigenous development of IPR.71

To provide an opportunity for heightened engagement with India to address and remedy these 

difficulties, USTR announced that it would launch an Out-of-Cycle Review (OCR) of India in the 

fall of 2014. 72 The OCR was initiated on October 14, 2014, to engage the Indian government on 

 

65 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, 2014 

Special 301 Report, April 30, 2014, Annex 3. 66 USTR, 2014 Special 301 Report, April 30, 2014. 67 Ibid., 8. 68 USTR, 2013 Special 301 Report, May 2013. 69 USTR, 2014 Special 301 Report, April 30, 2014, 30–37. 70 Ibid., 37. 71 USTR, 2014 Special 301 Report, April 30, 2014, 37. 72 Ibid. An OCR is a tool that USTR uses to facilitate engagement and encourage progress on IPR issues. Successful 

resolution of specific IPR issues can lead to a change in a country's Special 301 status outside of the typical time 

frame for the annual Special 301 Report.
Year in Trade

U.S. International Trade Commission | 59

a wide range of IPR issues.73 At the eighth India-United States Trade Policy Forum, held in New 

Delhi in November 2014, India agreed to a 2015 work plan on issues it would address through 

the High Level Working Group on Intellectual Property.74

Russia remained on the priority watch list because of continued significant challenges in IPR 

protection and enforcement. Examples included substantially weakened protection for 

industrial designs, decreasing IPR enforcement, copyright piracy over the Internet, and the 

manufacture and sale of counterfeit goods, such as pharmaceuticals, agricultural chemicals, 

electronics, and information technology. 75

The 2014 Special 301 Report identified 27 countries on the watch list as well.76 It also noted 

that Italy 77 and the Philippines78 had made progress and were therefore removed from the 

watch list. Israel was removed in February 2014 following the passage of patent legislation 

aimed at making Israel's patent system more transparent, efficient, and effective.79 On the 

other hand, in the 2014 Special 301 Report, USTR announced that it would initiate an OCR of 

Kuwait to address deficiencies in its copyright law and inadequate enforcement against both 

copyright piracy and trademark infringement. The OCR of Kuwait was initiated in October 

2014. 80 Kuwait was elevated to the Priority Watch List because it did not introduce legislation 

that would establish a copyright law consistent with international standards, nor did it resume 

effective enforcement against copyright and trademark infringements.81

From 2006 through 2010, the USTR also identified so-called notorious markets in the annual 

Special 301 report. USTR defines notorious markets as online or physical marketplaces that are 

reported to engage in commercial-scale piracy and counterfeiting.82 In 2010, the USTR

announced that the agency would begin issuing a list of these markets separately.83 In 

 

73 USTR, “USTR Begins Special 301 Report Out-of-Cycle Review of India,” Octpber 14, 2014; 79 Fed. Reg. 61685 

(October 14, 2014).

74 USTR, “Statement by the Office of the U.S. Trade Representative on the Out-of-Cycle Review of India,” 

December 12, 2014. 75 USTR, 2014 Special 301 Report, April 30, 2014, 43. 76 The countries on the 2014 watch list are Barbados, Belarus, Bolivia, Brazil, Bulgaria, Canada, Colombia, Costa 

Rica, the Dominican Republic, Ecuador, Egypt, Finland, Greece, Guatemala, Jamaica, Kuwait, Lebanon, Mexico, 

Paraguay, Peru, Romania, Tajikistan, Trinidad and Tobago, Turkey, Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan, and Vietnam. USTR, 

2014 Special 301 Report, April 30, 2014. 77 USTR, “USTR Removes Italy from the Special 301 Watch List,” April 30, 2014. 78 USTR, “U.S. Removes the Philippines from the Special 301 Watch List,” April 28, 2014. 79 USTR, “Israel Removed from Special 301 Report,” February 28, 2014. 80 79 Fed. Reg. 60229 (October 6, 2014). 81 USTR, “Kuwait Elevated to Special 301 'Priority Watch List,'“ November 10, 2014. 82 USTR, 2013 Out-of-Cycle Review of Notorious Markets, February 12, 2014, 2. 83 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.
Chapter 2: Administration of U.S. Trade Laws and Regulations

60 | www.usitc.gov

February 2011, the USTR published the first separate Notorious Markets List, which includes 

examples of both Internet and physical marketplaces that deal in infringing goods and help to 

sustain global piracy and counterfeiting. 84 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,

85 which was issued on February 12, 2014. 86 The report 

listed over 20 online markets and 11 countries with physical marketplaces, including China, 

India, and Thailand. The Notorious Market Report notes that:

“Trademark counterfeiting and copyright piracy on a commercial scale cause significant 

financial losses for rights holders and legitimate businesses, undermine critical U.S. comparative 

advantages in innovation and creativity to the detriment of American workers, and can pose 

significant risks to consumer health and safety.”87

The report further notes that:

“Owners and operators of the notorious markets included in the 2013 List who are willing to 

address piracy and counterfeiting could do so by adopting business models that rely on the 

licensed distribution of legitimate content and products and by working with rights holders and 

enforcement officials to address infringement. In the absence of such willingness, responsible 

government authorities should intensify efforts to investigate reports of piracy and 

counterfeiting in these and similar markets, and to pursue appropriate action against such 

markets.”88

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.89 This law 

offers relief to U.S. industries that are materially injured by imports that are dumped, or sold, at 

84 USTR, “USTR Announces Results of Special 301 Review,” February 28, 2011; USTR, “Out-of-Cycle Review of 

Notorious Markets,” February 28, 2011. 85 78 Fed. Reg. 57924 (September 20, 2013). 86 USTR, “Notorious Markets List Focuses Fight against Global Piracy,” February 12, 2014; USTR, 2013 Out-of-Cycle 

Review of Notorious Markets, February 12, 2014. 87 USTR, 2013 Out-of-Cycle Review of Notorious Markets, February 12, 2014, 2. 88 Ibid., 5. 89 19 U.S.C. § 1673 et seq.
Year in Trade

U.S. International Trade Commission | 61

less than their “fair value” (LTFV). The U.S. government provides a remedy by imposing a special 

additional duty on LTFV imports. 

Antidumping duties are imposed when (1) the U.S. Department of Commerce (USDOC) 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.”) Investigations are generally initiated 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 make preliminary and final determinations during the investigation process.

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.90 

Generally, normal value is the price the foreign firm charges for a comparable product sold in 

its home market.91 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.92 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).93 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.94 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.95

90 19 U.S.C. § 1677(35)(A); see also 19 U.S.C. § 1677a(a) (defining export price), § 1677a(b) (defining constructed 

export price).

91 19 U.S.C. § 1677b. 92 19 U.S.C. § 1677b(a)(4), § 1677b(e). 93 19 U.S.C. § 1677b(c). 94 19 U.S.C. § 1677(35)(B); 19 U.S.C. § 1673d(c). 95 19 U.S.C. § 1675(a).
Chapter 2: Administration of U.S. Trade Laws and Regulations

62 | www.usitc.gov

The Commission instituted 16 new antidumping investigations and made 36 final 

determinations in 2014. 96 As a result of affirmative final USDOC and Commission 

determinations, in 2014, the USDOC issued 20 antidumping duty orders on seven products from 

13 countries (table 2.1).

Table 2.1: Antidumping duty orders that became effective during 2014a

Trade partner Product Range of dumping margins (percent)

China Monosodium glutamate 21.28–40.41b

China Non-oriented electrical steel 407.52

China Prestressed steel tie wire 31.40–35.31

Germany Non-oriented electrical steel 86.29–98.84

India Oil country tubular goods 2.05–9.91

Indonesia Monosodium glutamate 6.19–6.19

Japan Diffusion-annealed, nickel-plated flatrolled steel products 45.42–77.70

Japan Non-oriented electrical steel 135.59–204.79

Korea, South Non-oriented electrical steel 6.88–6.88

Korea, South Oil country tubular goods 9.89–12.82

Malaysia Welded stainless steel pressure pipe 22.70–167.11

Mexico Prestressed steel tie wire 9.99–9.99

Mexico Steel concrete rebar 20.58–66.70

Sweden Non-oriented electrical steel 98.46–126.72

Taiwan Non-oriented electrical steel 27.54–52.23

Taiwan Oil country tubular goods 0.00–2.34

Thailand Welded stainless steel pressure pipe 23.89–24.01

Turkey Oil country tubular goods 0.00–35.86

Vietnam Oil country tubular goods 25.18–111.47

Vietnam Welded stainless steel pressure pipe 16.25–16.25

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. b The antidumping duty range was amended on January 6, 2015.

The status of all antidumping investigations active at the Commission during 2014, including, if 

applicable, the date of final action, is presented in appendix table A.7. A list of all antidumping 

96 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.
Year in Trade

U.S. International Trade Commission | 63

duty orders and suspension agreements (agreements to suspend investigations) 97 in effect as of 

the end of 2014 appears in appendix table A.8.

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. 98 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, because of the subsidized imports.

The Commission instituted 16 new countervailing duty investigations and made 9 final 

determinations during 2014. USDOC issued six countervailing duty orders in 2014 as a result of

affirmative USDOC and Commission determinations (table 2.2). The status of all countervailing 

duty investigations active at the Commission during 2014, and, if applicable, the date of final 

action, is presented in appendix table A.9. A list of all countervailing duty orders and suspension 

agreements99 in effect at the end of 2014 appears in appendix table A.10.

 

97 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.

98 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). 99 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 

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

64 | www.usitc.gov

Table 2.2: Countervailing duty orders that became effective during 2014a

Trade partner Product Range of countervailable subsidy rates (percent)

China Chlorinated isocyanurates 1.55–20.06

China Non-oriented electrical steel 158.88–158.88

India Oil country tubular goods 5.67–9.57

Taiwan Non-oriented electrical steel 8.80–17.12

Turkey Oil country tubular goods 2.53–15.89

Turkey Steel concrete rebar 1.25–1.25

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.100 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.101 Where a 

changed-circumstances review is directed to the Commission, the party that is asking to have

an antidumping duty order, countervailing duty order, or suspension agreement revoked has 

the burden of persuading the Commission that circumstances have changed enough to warrant 

revocation.102 On the basis of either the USDOC’s or the 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 2014. The Commission declined to institute a changed 

circumstances review investigation of the antidumping duty order on diamond sawblades and 

parts thereof from China. 103

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. These reviews are intended 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 

100 19 U.S.C. § 1675(a). 101 19 U.S.C. § 1675(b). 102 19 U.S.C. § 1675 (b)(3). 103 79 Fed. Reg. 35568 (June 23, 2014).
Year in Trade

U.S. International Trade Commission | 65

material injury.104 During 2014, the USDOC and the Commission instituted 40 sunset reviews, 

and the Commission completed 55 reviews. As a result of affirmative determinations by the 

USDOC and the Commission, 50 antidumping duty and countervailing duty orders were 

continued. Appendix table A.11 lists, by date and action, the reviews of antidumping duty and 

countervailing duty orders and suspension agreements completed in 2014. 105

Section 337 Investigations

Section 337 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended, 106 prohibits certain unfair practices in the 

import trade. The unfair practice most frequently investigated by the Commission is patent 

infringement. In this context, section 337 prohibits the importation into the United States, the 

sale for importation, and the sale within the United States after importation of articles that 

infringe a valid and enforceable United States patent, provided that an industry in the United 

States, relating to articles protected by the patent concerned, exists or is in the process of being 

established.107 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.108 The Commission may 

institute an investigation on the basis of a complaint or on its own initiative.109

If the Commission determines that a violation exists, it can issue an exclusion order directing 

U.S. Customs and Border Protection (Customs) to block the subject imports from entry into the 

United States, in addition to cease and desist orders directing the violating parties to stop 

 

104 19 U.S.C. § 1675(c). 105 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. 106 19 U.S.C. § 1337. 107 Section 337 also covers articles that are made, produced, processed, or mined under, or by means of, a process 

covered by the claims of a valid and enforceable United States patent. 19 U.S.C. § 1337(a)(1)(B)(ii). 

108 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.

109 19 U.S.C. § 1337(b)(1).
Chapter 2: Administration of U.S. Trade Laws and Regulations

66 | www.usitc.gov

engaging in the unlawful practices. The orders enter into force unless disapproved for policy 

reasons by the USTR110 within 60 days of issuance. 111

During calendar year 2014, there were 110 active section 337 investigations and ancillary 

proceedings, 55 of which were instituted that year. Of these 55 new proceedings, 39 were new 

section 337 investigations and 16 were new ancillary proceedings relating to previously 

concluded investigations. In 34 of the new section 337 investigations instituted in 2014, patent 

infringement was the only type of unfair act alleged. Of the remaining 5 investigations, 1 

involved allegations of patent infringement and trademark infringement; 1 involved allegations 

of patent infringement, trademark infringement, and false advertising; 1 involved allegations of 

trade secret misappropriation; 1 involved allegations of patent infringement and copyright 

infringement; and 1 involved allegations of trademark infringement, trademark dilution, and 

false designation of origin.

The Commission completed a total of 64 investigations and ancillary proceedings under section 

337 in 2014, including 5 remand proceedings, 2 rescission proceedings, 5 bond-related 

proceedings, 5 advisory proceedings, 2 enforcement proceedings, and 1 modification 

proceeding. In addition, 7 exclusion orders, including 1 general exclusion order, and 14 cease 

and desist orders were issued during 2014. The Commission terminated 30 investigations 

without determining whether there had been a violation. Twenty-five 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 2014 involved a broad spectrum of 

products. Approximately 32 percent of the active proceedings involved computer and 

telecommunications products. Small consumer items were involved in approximately 

13 percent of proceedings, and integrated circuits and memory products, 

automotive/manufacturing/transportation products, and pharmaceuticals and medical devices 

were each involved in approximately 10 percent of proceedings. The remaining approximately 

25 percent of the active proceedings involved a wide variety of other types of articles, including 

lighting products, archery products, soft-edged trampolines, chemical compositions, toner 

cartridges, three-dimensional cinema systems, footwear products, and laser-abraded denim 

garments. 

 

110 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).

111 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.
Year in Trade

U.S. International Trade Commission | 67

At the close of 2014, 46 section 337 investigations and related proceedings were pending at the 

Commission. Commission activities involving section 337 proceedings in 2014 are presented in 

appendix table A.12. As of December 31, 2014, there were 97 exclusion orders based on 

violations of section 337 in effect. Appendix table A.13 lists the investigations in which these 

exclusion orders were issued. For additional detailed information concerning 337 investigations 

instituted since October 1, 2008, see the Commission's 337info database created in 2014, found 

at http://pubapps2.usitc.gov/337external. 

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.112

The main TAA programs in effect in 2014 were TAA for Workers, administered by the U.S. 

Department of Labor (USDOL) under the sunset provisions, commonly known as “Reversion 

2014,” and TAA for Firms, administered by the U.S. Department of Commerce (USDOC).113 A 

third program, TAA for Farmers, was authorized by the Trade Adjustment Assistance Extension 

Act (TAAEA) of October 2011 through December 31, 2014. 114 However, the U.S. Congress did 

not appropriate funding for new participants for fiscal year (FY) 2014 or the first quarter of 

112 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.” The TAA program was operated under sunset provisions throughout calendar year 2014. 113 “Reversion 2014” is a modified version of the 2002 TAA 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” (accessed March 8, 2015).

Meanwhile, 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. On September 29, 2014, Vice President Biden 

announced the program's round 4 award of $450 million, which covers the period October 1, 2014, to 

September 30, 2018. USDOL, “Vice President Biden Announces Recipients of $450M,” September 29, 2014. 114 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 reauthorized most recently as part of the TAAEA in October 2011, through 

December 31, 2014. USTR, 2015 Trade Policy Agenda and 2014 Annual Report, March 2015, 191. 
Chapter 2: Administration of U.S. Trade Laws and Regulations

68 | www.usitc.gov

FY 2015. 115 As a result, the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) did not accept any new 

petitions or applications for benefits in FY 2014 or the first quarter of FY 2015. 116 

Selected developments in the TAA programs for workers and firms during FY 2014 are 

summarized below. 117 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 import competition. The TAA program offers a variety of benefits and 

services to eligible workers, including training, out-of-area job search and relocation 

allowances, weekly income support, and wage insurance for older workers (age 50 or older).118 

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.

For FY 2014, the TAA for workers program was operated under the Trade Adjustment 

Assistance Extension Act (TAAEA) of 2011 from October 1, 2013, to December 31, 2013. 

Starting from January 1, 2014, the program began to be operated under the sunset provisions, 

commonly known as “Reversion 2014.” 119 The major differences between the 2011 program 

and the Reversion 2014 program are as follows: 120

1. According to the 2011 program, both manufacturing and service workers whose jobs were

adversely affected by foreign trade were eligible for the TAA for Workers program, while

115 USTR, 2015 Trade Policy Agenda and 2014 Annual Report, March 2015, 191–92. 116 Ibid. 117 FY 2014 ran from October 1, 2013, to September 30, 2014. 118 USDOL, “TAA Program Benefits and Services under Reversion 2014,” December 31, 2013. 119 The TAA program was operated under Reversion 2014 throughout calendar year 2014, which is January 1, 

2014, to December 31, 2014. 120 USDOL, “Trade Adjustment Assistance for Workers: Comparison by Petition Number,” n.d. (accessed March 8, 

2015); U.S. Treasury, IRS, “Background and History of the HTIC,” n.d. (accessed March 9, 2015).
Year in Trade

U.S. International Trade Commission | 69

under the Reversion 2014 program, only service workers who are party to a worker group 

that supports the production of an article (e.g., the human resource department at a Ford 

car plant) may still be covered under the TAA for Workers program. Other service workers 

are no longer eligible for the TAA program.

2. Under the Reversion 2014 program, workers who lost their jobs due to outsourcing are

considered eligible for TAA only if their firm shifts its production or outsources its jobs to a

country with which the United States has a Free Trade Agreement (FTA).

3. The 2011 program offered a tax credit for participating workers to pay for their health

insurance premium. The health care tax credit expired on January 1, 2014, mainly due to its

phaseout via the Affordable Care Act, and is therefore no longer available under the

Reversion 2014 program.121

The FY 2015 Omnibus Appropriations Act passed by the U.S. Congress and signed by the 

President in December 2014 appropriates $710.6 million to carry out the TAA for workers 

program in FY 2015 (ending September 30, 2015).122 USDOL therefore announced that it will 

continue to process petitions, including petitions filed after December 31, 2014, and issue 

determinations of worker eligibility based on the Reversion 2014 program.123

Groups of workers submitted 972 petitions for TAA in FY 2014, down from 1,532 petitions (a 

decline of 36.5 percent) filed in FY 2013. The reduction was likely mainly due to the fact that 

under the Reversion 2014 program, service workers who are not party to a worker group that 

supports the production of an article are no longer eligible to apply for TAA.124 The ETA 

certified 646 petitions covering 67,738 workers as eligible for TAA, and denied 331 petitions 

covering 26,162 workers. 125 The largest number of petitions certified in FY 2014 were in the 

Northeast census region, followed by the West, the South, and the Midwest (table 2.3).

126 By 

121 USDOL, “Trade Adjustment Assistance for Workers: Comparison by Petition Number,” n.d. (accessed March 8, 

2015); Internal Revenue Service, “Background and History of the HTIC,” n.d. (accessed March 9, 2015). 122 USDOL, “Training and Employment Guidance Letter No. 16-14,” December 23, 2014. 123 USDOL, “TAA Program Extended through Fiscal Year 2015,” n.d. (accessed March 9, 2015).

The TAA for Workers program will continue to be operated under Reversion 2014 until and unless the program 

either (1) is reauthorized under the 2011 or 2009 statute, or (2) expires at the end of FY 2015. 124 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 2014 in TAA’s Trade Act Participant Report (TAPR) data 

management system. Please note that the number of petitions filed as shown in the database for FY 2014 is 1,125. 

The difference is because the 1,125 includes suffixed decisions that represent different worker group outcomes 

flowing from the same initial filing or petition.

125 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 9, 2015). 126 The regional classification is based on definitions from the U.S. Census Bureau. See

https://www.census.gov/geo/maps-data/maps/pdfs/reference/us_regdiv.pdf. 
Chapter 2: Administration of U.S. Trade Laws and Regulations

70 | www.usitc.gov

Table 2.3: TAA certifications, FY 2014

Census Region No. of petitions certified No. of workers covered

Northeast 189 17,961

West 160 15,069

South 147 18,393

Midwest 147 16,178

Other 3 137

Total 646 67,738

Source: USDOL, ETA, email message to commission staff, March 3, 2015. 

state, California had the most workers certified (9,281 workers), followed by Texas (6,157 

workers), Pennsylvania (5,760 workers), New York (5,407 workers), and Kansas (2,478 workers).

The majority (66.6 percent) of the TAA petitions certified during FY 2014 were in the 

manufacturing sector, covering 48,374 workers. The share of TAA petitions certified during FY 

2014 for the manufacturing sector was 8.8 percent higher than the share of petitions certified 

for the manufacturing sector during FY 2013, mainly because service sector workers who were 

not party to a manufacturing worker group were no longer eligible for TAA starting January 1, 

2014.

Assistance for Firms

The TAA for Firms (TAAF) program provided technical and financial assistance to U.S. 

manufacturing and production firms adversely affected by import competition in 2014. 127 The 

TAA for Firms program helps eligible firms that have been certified for benefits to develop a 

business recovery plan, commonly referred to as an “Adjustment Proposal.” 128 TAA also 

provides matching funds to help certified firms expand markets, strengthen operations, and 

increase competitiveness. 129 The Consolidated and Further Continuing Appropriations Act of 

2015 extended TAAF appropriations through December 31, 2015. 130 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/. 

127 In October 2011, the President signed into Law the Trade Adjustment Assistance Extension Act (TAAEA) of 

2011. Under the TAAEA, service sector firms were also eligible for the TAA for firms program. However, TAAEA 

expired on December 31, 2013. This means that as of January 1, 2014, service sector firms are no longer eligible 

for assistance under TAA for Firms. 

128 USDOC, EDA, Fiscal Year 2014 Annual Report to Congress: Trade Adjustment Assistance, 8, n.d. (accessed 

March 9, 2015). 129 Ibid., 8–9. 130 CRS, Trade Adjustment Assistance for Firms: Economic, Program, and Policy Issues, January 30, 2015.
Year in Trade

U.S. International Trade Commission | 71

To be eligible for TAA, firms must demonstrate that like or directly competitive imports have 

“contributed importantly” to declines in employment and sales or production. 131 Assistance is 

in the form of matching funds that can be applied toward the cost of hiring third-party 

consultants to help firms, and developing and implementing adjustment proposals to improve a 

firm's market position and competitiveness. Proposals may involve engineering, information 

technology, management, new product development, quality improvement, and sales, among 

others.132 Under the program, the firm’s management receives help in assessing the firm’s 

strengths and weaknesses and developing an adjustment proposal to foster recovery and 

growth. Firms generally have up to five years to implement an approved adjustment 

proposal. 133

EDA reported that in FY 2014 it received 110 petitions for TAA, with 105 petitions certified as 

eligible for assistance and 1 denied or withdrawn during the year. This is quite close to FY 2013: 

EDA received 104 petitions, with 105 certified and 1 denied or withdrawn. 134 Firms located in 

Illinois submitted the most petitions in FY 2014 (12 petitions, or 11 percent of the total), 

followed by firms in Colorado (10 petitions, or 9 percent).135 The majority (96 percent) of the 

petitions certified under the TAA for firms program were submitted by firms in the 

manufacturing sector, compared to 89 percent in FY 2013. 136 This share increase is mainly due 

to the fact that service sector firms were no longer eligible for TAA after December 31, 2013. 137

EDA approved 107 adjustment proposals in FY 2014, a decrease of 6 percent compared to FY 

2013. Total government funding approved for the adjustment proposals was valued at 

$5.3 million, a decrease of 13.5 percent from FY 2013. 138 

131 USDOC, EDA, Fiscal Year 2014 Annual Report to Congress: Trade Adjustment Assistance, 10, n.d. (accessed 

March 9, 2015).

132 Ibid., 8–10. 133 Ibid., 11. 134 Petitions are certified on a rolling basis throughout the year. Petitions certified in FY 2014 maybe the result of 

those received or filed (accepted) in FY 2014, while petitions received or filed (accepted) in FY 2014 may not result 

in certification in FY 2014. USDOC, EDA, Fiscal Year 2014 Annual Report to Congress: Trade Adjustment Assistance,

13, n.d. (accessed March 9, 2015). 135 USDOC, EDA, Fiscal Year 2014 Annual Report to Congress: Trade Adjustment Assistance, 15–16, n.d. (accessed 

March 9, 2015).

136 Ibid., 17. 137 Ibid. 138 Ibid., 24–25.
Chapter 2: Administration of U.S. Trade Laws and Regulations

72 | www.usitc.gov

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 designated 

developing countries and territories.139 Certain additional products are allowed duty-free 

treatment when imported only from countries designated as least-developed beneficiary 

developing countries. The President’s authority to provide duty-free treatment under the GSP 

program expired on July 31, 2013, and had not been renewed by yearend 2014. 140 

The GSP program aims to accelerate economic growth in developing countries by offering 

unilateral tariff preferences. An underlying principle of the GSP program is that the creation of 

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 (inputs) from beneficiary countries on 

generally the same terms that are available to competitors in other developed countries that 

grant similar trade preferences.141 

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 internationally recognized worker rights.142

The President also designates the articles that are eligible for duty-free treatment, but may not 

designate articles 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 “importsensitive” 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 

139 The program is authorized by title V of the Trade Act of 1974, as amended, 19 U.S.C. § 2461 et seq. 140 Public Law 114-27, The Trade Preferences Extension Act of 2015, was signed into law on June 29, 2015. This law 

extends GSP through December 31, 2017, and provides retroactive refunds of duties paid during the lapse for all 

countries that are eligible for GSP as of the date of enactment.

141 USTR, 2014 Trade Policy Agenda and 2013 Annual Report, March 2014, 27. 142 The list of current GSP beneficiaries can be found in HTS general note 4(a) and on USTR’s website at 

https://ustr.gov/issue-areas/trade-development/preference-programs/generalized-system-preference-gsp/gspprogram-inf. 
Year in Trade

U.S. International Trade Commission | 73

country. 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. There are two different CNLs that may apply to U.S. imports of a 

particular product from a beneficiary developing country during any calendar year. One CNL 

applies to imports that account for 50 percent or more of the value of total U.S. imports of that 

product; the other, to imports of a product that exceed a certain dollar value ($165 million in 

2014). 143 The act extending 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. 144 

The following developments involving the U.S. GSP program occurred in 2014:

• On October 3, 2014, the President proclaimed that Russia was removed from status as a

beneficiary developing country for purposes of the GSP program as a result of having

become “sufficiently advanced in economic development and improved in trade

competitiveness.” 145

• The GSP subcommittee has continued to consult with Bangladesh on implementation of the

GSP Action Plan the country developed after the President suspended its GSP benefits in

June 2013. Progress reviews have been conducted every six months. 146

Imports claiming GSP preferences totaled $18.7 billion in 2014, accounting for 7.2 percent of 

total U.S. imports from GSP beneficiary countries and 0.8 percent of total U.S. imports (table

2.4). Note that, except for imports from AGOA beneficiary countries, imports after July 31, 

2013, have not actually entered free of duty, but importers still claimed GSP status for eligible 

goods to facilitate receiving refunds in case GSP is renewed retroactively, as has been done in 

the past. India was the leading country claiming GSP benefits in 2014, followed by Thailand and 

Brazil (appendix table A.14). Appendix table A.15 shows the overall sectoral distribution of GSP 

benefits, and appendix table A.16 shows the top 25 products imported under the GSP in 2014.

143 USTR, U.S. Generalized System of Preferences (GSP) Guidebook, July 2013, 12. 144 19 U.S.C. § 2463(d)(4)(B)(ii). 145 79 Fed. Reg. 60945 (October 3, 2014). 146 USTR, 2015 Trade Policy Agenda and 2014 Annual Report, March 2015, 161. 
Chapter 2: Administration of U.S. Trade Laws and Regulations

74 | www.usitc.gov

Table 2.4: U.S. imports for consumption from GSP beneficiaries, 2012–14

Item 2012 2013 2014

Total imports from GSP beneficiaries (million $) 337,873 277,325 260,987

Total imports under GSP (million $)a 20,042 18,510 18,681

Imports under LDBDC provisions (million $) b 923 740 627

Imports under non-LDBDC provisions (million $)c 19,120 17,770 18,054

Share of total imports under GSP (percent of total) 5.9 6.7 7.2

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

Note: LDBDC = least-developed beneficiary developing country. The President’s authority to provide duty-free treatment under 

the GSP program expired on July 31, 2013, and has yet to be renewed. Data for 2013 and 2014 since the expiration include 

imports that have GSP petitions on file in anticipation of renewal of the program. a There were 124 GSP beneficiary countries for which U.S. importers could claim GSP duty preferences in 2014. However, U.S. 

importers claimed such preferences for imports from only 96 beneficiaries. b 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 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 HTS 

followed by the symbols “A” or “A*” in parentheses. The symbol “A” indicates that all beneficiary countries are eligible for dutyfree 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 listed in 

the designated provision.

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,” “reducing tariff and 

nontariff barriers and other obstacles to sub-Saharan African and United States trade,” and 

“expanding United States assistance to sub-Saharan Africa’s regional integration efforts.” 147 By 

providing unilateral preferential 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 enhance commercial and political ties 

between the United States and SSA, as well as facilitate the development of civil societies, rule 

of law, and political freedom in SSA countries.148 Authority to provide the principal trade 

preferences under AGOA is scheduled to expire on September 30, 2015. 149 

147 Trade and Development Act of 2000, 19 U.S.C. § 3701, Title I, sec. 103 (Pub. L. 106-200), 19 U.S.C. § 3702; 

USDOC, ITA, “Trade and Development Act of 2000,” n.d. (accessed March 11, 2015). 148 Trade and Development Act of 2000, 19 U.S.C. § 3701, Title I, sec. 103 (Pub. L. 106-200), 19 U.S.C. § 3702; 

USDOC, ITA, “Trade and Development Act of 2000,” n.d. (accessed March 11, 2015). 149 On June 29, 2015, the President signed into law the Trade Preferences Extension Act of 2015 (Pub. L. 114-27), 

which renewed AGOA until September 30, 2025. 
Year in Trade

U.S. International Trade Commission | 75

AGOA expands upon the U.S. GSP program by offering duty-free access to the U.S. market for 

all GSP-eligible products150 and for an additional 1,800 qualifying tariff line-item products from 

designated SSA countries.151 In addition, AGOA authorizes duty-free treatment to certain textile 

and apparel articles made in qualifying beneficiary SSA countries.152 In 2014, approximately 

7,000 tariff lines were designated as covering products eligible for duty-free treatment under 

AGOA. 153

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.154 The Act also requires the President to review annually whether SSA 

countries, are, or remain, eligible for AGOA benefits based on the eligibility criteria.155 In 2014, 

41 sub-Saharan African countries were designated as eligible for AGOA benefits.156 Of these 

countries, 30 countries were eligible for AGOA textile and apparel benefits for the whole or part 

of 2014. 157 Of the countries in the latter group, all but one (South Africa) were also eligible for 

additional textile and apparel benefits for lesser-developed beneficiary countries (LDBCs) for 

 

150 The eligibility criteria for GSP and AGOA designation substantially overlap, and countries must be GSP-eligible in 

order to receive tariff benefits under AGOA. USDOC, ITA, “AGOA: General Country Eligibility Provisions,” n.d. 

(accessed March 10, 2015). Countries are designated separately for the two programs (see HTS, general notes 4 

and 16).

151 Although the GSP program expired on July 31, 2013, GSP-eligible imports from AGOA-eligible countries continue 

to qualify for entry into the United States free of duty, because AGOA is still in effect. USDHS, Customs, “Making 

AGOA Claims during the GSP Lapse,” November 18, 2014. 152 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).

153 This includes around 5,000 tariff lines currently covered by the U.S. Generalized System of Preferences (GSP),

plus a further 1,800 tariff line items added under the AGOA legislation. In addition, imports could also qualify for 

benefits under the AGOA apparel and textile provisions. AGOA.info, “AGOA Product Eligibility,” n.d. (accessed

March 10, 2015).

154 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. Thirty-one of these are LDBDCs under the GSP. See general note 4(b) to the HTS. 155 19 U.S.C. § 2466a(a)(2). 156 The following 40 countries were listed in general note 16 of the HTS as designated AGOA beneficiaries during 

2014: 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, Mali, 

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) 2014, January 2014, 186. Madagascar, the 41st country, was reinstated as 

AGOA eligible effective June 26, 2014, under Proclamation No. 9145 (June 26, 2014).

157 Twenty-eight countries were listed in the HTS as eligible to receive AGOA apparel benefits as of January 1, 2014. 

The 28 countries in 2014 included Benin, Botswana, Burkina Faso, Cameroon, Cabo Verde, Chad, Côte d’Ivoire, 

Ethiopia, The Gambia, Ghana, Kenya, Lesotho, Liberia, Malawi, Mali, 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, chapter 98, subchapter XIX, U.S. note 1. 

Effective December 15, 2014, U.S. imports from two additional countries—Guinea and Madagascar—also qualified 

for AGOA textile and apparel benefits. 79 Fed. Reg. 74156 (December 15, 2014).
Chapter 2: Administration of U.S. Trade Laws and Regulations

76 | www.usitc.gov

the whole or part of 2014. 158 Notable among these extra benefits is the third-country fabric 

provision for LDBCs, which allows beneficiary countries to use non-U.S., non-AGOA fabrics in 

apparel exports under AGOA. 159

Two countries—Mali and Madagascar—regained their AGOA eligibility in 2014. Mali was 

reinstated as AGOA eligible on January 1, 2014, after the inauguration of a democratically 

elected president in July 2013. 160 Madagascar was reinstated effective June 26, 2014, following 

a special midterm review that found that the country had installed a democratically elected 

president following a coup that occurred in 2009. 161

In 2014, the President also announced that three countries would lose their AGOA eligibility 

starting January 1, 2015, while one country—Guinea-Bissau—would be reinstated as AGOA 

eligible in 2015. 162 In June 2014, the President terminated the designation of Swaziland as an 

AGOA beneficiary, effective January 1, 2015, mainly because of its lack of progress on eligibility 

criteria relevant to worker rights.163 In December 2014, the President terminated the 

designations of The Gambia and South Sudan as AGOA beneficiaries effective January 1, 2015, 

mainly for human rights, governance, and rule of law issues. 164

In 2014, the value of U.S. imports that entered free of duty from AGOA beneficiary countries 

under AGOA (including GSP) was $14.2 billion, which represented a 47.0 percent decrease in 

value from 2013. (Although GSP expired in 2013, GSP-eligible imports from AGOA-eligible 

countries continued to qualify for duty-free treatment under AGOA in 2014.) These imports 

accounted for 55.7 percent of total imports from AGOA countries in 2014. In 2014, imports 

entering the United States exclusively under AGOA (excluding GSP) were $11.9 billion, 

accounting for 46.5 percent of U.S. imports from AGOA countries (table 2.5). The decline in U.S. 

imports under AGOA in 2014 mainly reflected a decline in the value and quantity of imports of 

crude and other petroleum-related products, which dropped by $12.3 billion from 2013 to 

2014. 165 Major petroleum-producing countries in Africa—Nigeria, Angola, Gabon, Chad, and 

Cameroon—all experienced significant declines in the value of their exports of petroleumrelated products to the United States (appendix tables A.17 and A.18). Meanwhile, U.S. imports 

 

158 USDOC, ITA, “AGOA Preferences: Country Eligibility, Apparel Eligibility, and Textile Eligibility (Category 0 and 

Category 9),” December 30, 2014. 159 U.S. note 2(d), subchapter XIX, chapter 98 of the HTS. 160 USTR, “Mali Now Eligible for Trade Benefits,” December 2013; 78 Fed. Reg. 80417 (December 31, 2013). 161 U.S. Trade Representative Office, 2015 Trade Policy Agenda and 2014 Annual Report, March 2015, 195; 

Proclamation No. 9145 (June 26, 2014). 162 Proclamation No. 9223 (December 23, 2014). 163 Proclamation No. 9145 (June 26, 2014). 164 USTR, 2015 Trade Policy Agenda and 2014 Annual Report, March, 2015, 195; Proclamation No. 9223 

(December 23, 2014). 165 This calculation includes crude petroleum (HTS 2709.00), light oils (HTS 2710.12), and petroleum oil from 

bituminous minerals (HTS 2710.19).
Year in Trade

U.S. International Trade Commission | 77

Table 2.5: U.S. imports for consumption from AGOA beneficiaries, 2012–14

Item 2012 2013 2014

Total imports from AGOA countries (million $) 47,458 38,205 25,545

Imports under AGOA, including GSP (million $)a 34,679 26,872 14,236

Imports under AGOA, excluding GSP (million $) 32,538 24,854 11,873

Imports under AGOA (as a share of all imports from AGOA countries) 73.1 70.3 55.7

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 for AGOA-eligible goods by U.S. 

importers under GSP, for HTS rate lines with special duty symbols “A” or “A+.” 

of passenger motor vehicles under AGOA declined by $0.8 billion (38.2 percent) from 2013 to 

2014, which also contributed to the overall decline of U.S. imports under AGOA in 2014 

(appendix tables A.17 and A.18). 166

The major suppliers of duty-free U.S. imports under AGOA in 2014 were Angola (29.8 percent of 

total AGOA imports), Nigeria (23.6 percent), South Africa (14.7 percent), Chad (13.8 percent), 

Gabon (5.1 percent), and Kenya (3.5 percent). These six countries accounted for 90.5 percent of 

total imports by value under AGOA, a decrease of 5.3 percentage points from 2013 (appendix 

table A.17). 

Petroleum-related products, mainly crude petroleum, continued to be the leading imports 

under AGOA. These products accounted for 77.6 percent of the total value of AGOA imports in 

2014, though that share was down by 8.9 percentage points from 86.5 percent in 2013. The 

value of U.S. imports of petroleum-related products under AGOA dropped by 57.6 percent from 

2013 to 2014, from $21.3 billion in 2013 to $9.0 billion in 2014 (appendix table A.18). 167 The

decline was driven primarily by a drop in the value and quantity of U.S. imports due to 

increased U.S. production of petroleum and related products, declining oil prices, and civil 

166 Here the phrase “U.S. imports of passenger motor vehicles” refers to passenger motor vehicles with sparkignition engines from 1.5L to 3L (HTS 8703.23). U.S. imports of such products under AGOA came exclusively from 

South Africa from 2012 to 2014. USITC DataWeb (accessed March 10, 2015); data compiled from official statistics 

of the U.S. Department of Commerce. 167 Here, petroleum-related products include crude petroleum (HTS 2709.00), light oils (HTS 2710.12), and 

petroleum oil from bituminous minerals (HTS 2710.19).
Chapter 2: Administration of U.S. Trade Laws and Regulations

78 | www.usitc.gov

unrest in Nigeria, one of the major petroleum-producing countries in Africa.168 The decline in 

U.S. imports of petroleum-related products under AGOA also reflected the overall decline of 

U.S. imports in the petroleum sector from 2013 to 2014.

Passenger motor vehicles and textile and apparel products are two other major U.S. imports 

under AGOA, accounting for 11.2 percent and 7.3 percent of the value of total AGOA imports in 

2014, respectively (appendix table A.18). U.S. passenger motor vehicle imports under AGOA 

came exclusively from South Africa, and declined in value from $2.1 billion in 2013 to 

$1.3 billion in 2014 (appendix table A.18). The decrease was principally driven by (1) the 2014 

opening of production for the North American market of the U.S. Mercedes-Benz Tuscaloosa 

plant in Alabama, which produces similar car types to those produced by Mercedes' South 

African plant; 169 (2) prolonged strikes in the metal and engineering industry in South Africa that 

led automobile companies such as Toyota Motor Corporation and Ford Motor Company to stop 

production in South African plants in July 2014; 170 and (3) rising interest rates in South Africa 

and the slowdown of the South African economy.171 All these factors have reduced South 

African manufacturing of passenger motor vehicles as well as exports of such products to the 

United States.

Section 105 of AGOA required the President to establish the U.S.-SSA Trade and Economic 

Cooperation Forum (also known as the AGOA Forum)172 to discuss trade, investment, and 

development at an annual ministerial-level meeting with AGOA-eligible countries.173 The 13th 

AGOA Forum was held in August 2014 in Washington, DC. 174 Ambassador Michael Froman and 

senior officials from other U.S. government agencies met with African trade ministers and 

leaders of African regional economic organizations to discuss issues and strategies for 

advancing trade and investment between Africa and the United States.175 During the forum, 

Ambassador Froman shared the results of a comprehensive review of the AGOA program 

168 U.S. consumption of crude petroleum remained relatively stable while U.S. production increased, particularly 

from two sources—North Dakota’s Bakken formation and Eagle Ford in Texas. Foreso, “U.S. Becoming a Leading 

Exporter of Petroleum Products,” December 2014. Meanwhile, civil unrest in Nigeria in recent years has prompted 

international oil companies to shut down parts of their production, triggering a steep decline in Nigerian crude 

petroleum production and exports. The average unit price (dollar/barrel) of U.S. imports of crude petroleum (HTS 

2709) from several major petroleum-producing AGOA countries declined. For example, the average unit price of 

U.S. imports of crude petroleum from Nigeria declined from $108.2 in 2013 to $103.5 in 2014; from Angola, from 

$109.1 in 2013 to $104.0 in 2014; and from Chad, from $102.0 in 2013 to $94.5 in 2014. GTIS, Global Trade Atlas 

(accessed March 5, 2015).

169 Daimler, “Mercedes-Benz Tuscaloosa Plant (Mercedes-Benz U.S. International Inc.),” n.d. (accessed March 30, 

2015).

170 Bloomberg, “Toyota, Ford Halt Production,” July 14, 2014. 171 EIU, “Vehicle Sales Decline in the First Four Months,” May 8, 2014. 172 19 U.S.C. § 3704. 173 USTR, 2015 Trade Policy Agenda and 2014 Annual Report, March 2015, 195. 174 Ibid. 175 Ibid. 
Year in Trade

U.S. International Trade Commission | 79

launched in 2013. 176 He stated that the key finding was that in order to make AGOA more 

effective, AGOA needs to be linked to a broader and more comprehensive trade and 

development strategy.177 

To address this finding, the United States established a Trade and Investment Capacity Building 

Steering Group based on an August 4, 2014, Presidential Memorandum.178 The stated task of 

the Steering Group was to identify priority countries, regions, and sectors for targeted and 

coordinated assistance by U.S. Government agencies. The goal of this assistance was to 

increase African exports regionally as well as to the United States, including under AGOA. 179

The Steering Group was to provide recommendations to the President no more than 180 days 

after the issuance of the memorandum.180

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.181 The President’s authority to provide preferential treatment was initially 

provided for a 10-year period, and this authority was extended several times, sometimes 

retroactively, through July 31, 2013, when Ecuador was the only remaining ATPA beneficiary 

country. However, Ecuador stopped receiving benefits under ATPA, as amended by the Andean 

Trade Promotion and Drug Eradication Act (ATPDEA), when the President’s authority to provide 

duty-free treatment under the Act expired on July 31, 2013. In addition, on June 27, 2013, the 

Ecuadorian government announced that it would withdraw from the ATPA program. 182 Because 

of the expiration of the President's authority, there were no U.S. imports under the program in 

2014 (table 2.6). 183 As of April 2015, the President’s authority to provide preferential treatment 

had not been renewed.

176 One of the important components of this review was a series of USITC reports written in response to a request 

by USTR. USITC, “Sub-Saharan African Trade and Investment under AGOA,” November 13, 2013; USITC, AGOA: 

Trade and Investment Performance Overview, 2014. 177 USTR, 2015 Trade Policy Agenda and 2014 Annual Report, March 2015, 195. 178 White House, “Establishing a Comprehensive Approach,” August 4, 2014. 179 USTR, 2015 Trade Policy Agenda and 2014 Annual Report, March 2015, 195. 180 White House, “Establishing a Comprehensive Approach,” August 4, 2014. As of April 2015, the 

recommendations had not been made public.

181 For a more detailed description of ATPA, including country and product eligibility, see USITC, Andean Trade 

Preference Act, Sixteenth Report, September 2014. 182 Government of Ecuador, Secretaría Nacional de Comunicación, “En defensa de su soberanía,” June 27, 2013. 183 All provisions related to ATPA and ATPDEA were removed from the HTS effective January 1, 2014. Proclamation 

No. 9072 (December 23, 2013); 78 Fed. Reg. 80417 (December 31, 2013). See also, USTR, 2015 Trade Policy 

Agenda and 2014 Annual Report, March 2015, 192. 
Chapter 2: Administration of U.S. Trade Laws and Regulations

80 | www.usitc.gov

Table 2.6: U.S. imports for consumption from ATPA countries, 2012–14

Item 2012 2013 2014

Total imports from ATPA countries (million $)a 20,221 11,455 0

Total imports under ATPA/ATPDEA (million $)b 11,183 2,575 0

Imports under ATPDEA (million $)c 10,383 2,363 0

Imports under ATPA excluding ATPDEA (million $)d 800 212 0

Imports under ATPA (as a share of all imports from ATPA countries) 55.3 22.5 0.0

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

Note: The President’s authority to provide duty-free treatment under ATPA expired on July 31, 2013. a Total imports from Colombia are included through May 2012 and for Ecuador, the last remaining beneficiary, through 2013. b Data for 2012 includes U.S. imports from Colombia only for the period during which Colombia was eligible for ATPA benefits 

before the U.S.-Colombia Trade Promotion Agreement entered into force in May of 2012. Data for 2013 includes U.S. imports 

from Ecuador until imports from Ecuador under ATPA/ATPDEA ceased after October 2013. c ATPDEA-eligible products were those for which a rate of duty of “free” appeared in the special rate column of the HTS 

followed by the symbol “J+” in parentheses. The symbol “J+” indicated that all ATPDEA beneficiary countries were eligible for 

duty-free treatment with respect to all articles listed in the designated provisions. d ATPA-eligible products (excluding ATPDEA-eligible products) were those for which a special duty rate appeared in the special 

rate column of the HTS, followed by the symbols “J” or “J*” in parentheses. The symbol “J” indicated that all beneficiary 

countries were eligible for special duty rate treatment with respect to all articles listed in the designated provisions. The symbol 

“J*” indicated that certain articles, specified in general note 11(d) of the HTS, were not eligible for special duty rate treatment 

with respect to any article listed in the designated provision. In addition, subchapter XXI of chapter 98 had set forth provisions 

covering specific products given duty-free eligibility under the ATPDEA, under the terms of separate country designations 

enumerated in that subchapter.

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. 184 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.185 The CBTPA also extended “NAFTA-equivalent treatment”—that is, rates of 

duty equivalent to those accorded to goods complying with 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 

184 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. 185 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. Those textile and apparel goods of cotton, wool, or manmade 

fibers (“original MFA goods”) are not eligible under CBERA. “MFA” stands for the Multifiber Arrangement.
Year in Trade

U.S. International Trade Commission | 81

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.186 In the section that follows, the term CBERA refers to CBERA as 

amended by the CBTPA.

At the end of 2014, 17 countries and dependent territories were designated eligible for CBERA 

preferences187 and 8 were designated eligible for CBTPA preferences.188 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 2014. 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; 189 and Curaçao and Sint Maarten, under CBERA and 

CBTPA.190 (Until 2010, Curaçao and Sint Maarten were members of the now-dissolved 

Netherlands Antilles.) On December 31, 2013, the President designated Curaçao as a 

beneficiary country for purposes of CBERA and CBTPA, but that action with respect to CBTPA 

awaits an effective date to be issued by USTR. 191

In 2014, the value of U.S. imports under CBERA fell by 16.8 percent, from $2.4 billion in 2013 to 

$2.0 billion in 2014 (table 2.7). 192 This decrease reflected a decline mostly in the value of U.S. 

imports of methanol and crude petroleum, which are major imports from CBERA countries. U.S. 

imports under CBERA accounted for 23.1 percent of all U.S. imports from CBERA countries in 

2014. Trinidad and Tobago continued to be the leading supplier of U.S. imports under CBERA in 

2014, accounting for 62.6 percent of the total value. Haiti and The Bahamas were also leading 

suppliers, accounting for 20.6 and 8.0 percent of the total, respectively (appendix table A.20). 

Methanol, apparel products, mineral fuels, and polystyrene dominated the list of imports under 

CBERA in 2014 (appendix table A.21). Of the 25 leading products under CBERA in 2014, 11 were 

agricultural and food products, which entered under CBERA preferences (accounting for 

5.6 percent of total U.S. imports under CBERA in 2014); 4 were knitted apparel entered under 

 

186 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. 187 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. Countries party to CAFTA-DR are not eligible. 188 Barbados, Belize, Curaçao, Guyana, Haiti, Jamaica, St. Lucia, and Trinidad and Tobago. 189 77 Fed. Reg. 61816 (October 11, 2012). 190 Ibid. 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).

191 78 Fed. Reg. 80417 (December 31, 2013). 192 Although Sint Maarten was not a designated CBERA beneficiary in 2014, official statistics on U.S. imports under 

CBERA include imports from Sint Maarten, and are included in this report.
Chapter 2: Administration of U.S. Trade Laws and Regulations

82 | www.usitc.gov

Table 2.7: U.S. imports for consumption from CBERA/CBTPA countries, 2012–14

Item 2012 2013 2014

Total imports from CBERA/CBTPA countries (million $)a 11,892 8,937 8,549

Total imports under CBERA/CBTPA (million $) 3,137 2,370 1,972

Imports under CBTPA (million $)b 1,633 852 589

Imports under CBERA, excluding CBTPA (million $)c 1,504 1,518 1,383

Imports under CBERA (as a share of all imports from CBERA countries) 26.4 26.5 23.1

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. Data for 2014 include U.S. imports from Curaçao and Sint 

Maarten. b 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). c 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, under 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.

CBTPA (19.5 percent); 2 were petroleum and fuel products entered under CBTPA 

(10.1 percent); 2 were organic chemicals entered under CBERA (52.8 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 2014.

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.193 The 

Haitian Hemisphere Opportunity through Partnership Encouragement Act of 2006 (HOPE 

Act)194 and of 2008 (HOPE II Act) (collectively referred to as HOPE or the HOPE Acts) 195

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.196 The HOPE 

Acts also provided additional trade preferences to attract new jobs in Haiti while offering 

193 Apparel manufacturing is considered a key to Haiti's economic growth and currently accounts for 50 percent of 

Haiti's formal employment. Every 10,000 square meter equivalents in apparel production reportedly creates 1,500 

jobs. Representative of Haitian CTMO-HOPE Secretariat, telephone interview by USITC staff, January 9, 2015. 194 Pub. L. 109-432, § 5001 et seq., the Haitian Hemispheric Opportunity through Partnership Encouragement Act 

of 2006.

195 See HTS headings 9820.42.05 through 9820.85.44 for the provisions proclaimed under these statutes. 196 There were no U.S. imports of wire harness automotive components from Haiti during 2007–14. Nevertheless, 

there are plans to bring the manufacturing of wire harness automotive components back to Haiti (Haiti produced 

these components in the mid-1980s). Haitian representative of CTMO-HOPE Secretariat, telephone interview by 

USITC staff, January 9, 2015.
Year in Trade

U.S. International Trade Commission | 83

incentives to encourage the use of U.S. inputs. 197 Finally, the Haitian Economic Lift Program of 

2010 (HELP Act)198 extended and expanded existing U.S. trade preferences (especially duty-free 

treatment for certain qualifying apparel regardless of the origin of inputs) for Haiti that were 

established under the CBTPA and HOPE Acts through September 30, 2020. 199

U.S. imports of apparel from Haiti totaled $843.1 million in 2014, up 10 percent from 

$765.9 million in 2013 (table 2.8). 200 Virtually all (99.3 percent) of U.S. imports of apparel from 

Haiti entered duty-free under trade preference programs in 2014. Much of the continued 

growth of U.S. imports of apparel from Haiti since the devastating earthquake in January 2010 

is 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). 201 Industry sources in Haiti have stated 

that without the HOPE/HELP trade preferences, there would be no apparel industry in Haiti.202

Indeed, the trade preferences were the principal incentive behind a U.S. apparel firm's decision 

in 2014 to construct a new apparel manufacturing facility in Port-au-Prince that employs 500 

sewing operators, who produce high-performance wear and other value-added clothing. 203

Nevertheless, industry sources in Haiti report that the Haitian apparel industry's growth and 

capacity to take full advantage of these preferences face ongoing constraints. Although 

improvements are planned for Haiti's ports, 204 at present shipping goods out of Haiti's newly 

established industrial park Caracol is difficult because Haiti lacks a large local port. 205 Most 

 

197 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. 198 Pub. L. 111-171, § 2, Haiti Economic Lift Program Act of 2010. 199 Ibid. 200 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 48 percent, 12 percent, and 12 

percent, respectively, of total U.S. imports of apparel from Haiti in 2014. 201 Aided by the trade preferences under the HOPE Acts, one U.S. apparel firm's production in Haiti has returned to 

pre-earthquake levels. U.S. apparel industry representative, email message to USITC staff, January 14, 2015. 202 Haitian apparel industry representative, email message to USITC staff, January 13, 2015. On February 12, 2015, 

Senator Bill Nelson of Florida introduced legislation to the Senate Committee on Finance to extend the trade 

preferences under the HOPE/HELP Acts until 2030. The legislation was called A Bill to Amend the Caribbean Basin 

Economic Recovery Act to Extend Trade Preferences for Certain Articles Imported from Haiti and for Other 

Purposes, S.503. 114th Cong., 1st sess., Cong. Rec. 161, no. 24, daily ed. (February 12, 2015): S983. 203 U.S. apparel industry representative, telephone interview with USITC staff, February 20, 2015. 204 Efforts are being made to add port capacity to Haiti. In 2014, the government of Haiti announced a joint 

initiative by the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) and the World Bank/International Finance 

Corporation to renovate and upgrade the port of Cap-Haïtien over a two and one-half year period. Work is also 

underway to improve the port in Port-au-Prince. Sonapi, Parc Industriel de Caracol, “2014 Year End Report,” 2014, 

12; Haitian apparel industry representative, email message to USITC staff, January 13, 2015. 205 González, “Five Years after Quake, Emerging Northern Haiti,” January 12, 2015.
Chapter 2: Administration of U.S. Trade Laws and Regulations

84 | www.usitc.gov

Table 2.8: U.S. imports for consumption of apparel from Haiti, 2012–14

Item 2012 2013 2014

Total apparel imports from Haiti (million $) 730.0 765.9 843.1

Apparel imports under a trade preference program (million $) 727.0 763.6 837.5

CBERA/CBTPA (million $) 423.6 341.7 386.0

HOPE and HELP Acts (million $) 303.4 421.9 451.5

Share of total apparel imports from Haiti: (Percent)

Apparel imports under a trade preference program 99.6 99.7 99.3

CBERA/CBTPA 58.0 44.6 45.8

HOPE and HELP Acts 41.6 55.1 53.6

Source: USITC DataWeb (accessed February 12, 2015); data compiled from official statistics of the U.S. Department of 

Commerce.

Note: Because of rounding, figures may not add up to totals shown.

goods move through ports in the Dominican Republic that are preferred by U.S. retailers and 

brands and where sailings are more frequent.206 

Haiti's continued shortage of building space and facilities also hampers the Haitian apparel 

industry's ability to substantially increase production. 207 Finally, although Haiti's labor costs are 

competitive with those of other countries,208 the productivity and output of Haitian apparel 

workers remain lower than that of apparel workers in such countries as Vietnam and 

Nicaragua.209

In 2014, Haiti accounted for nearly all (99.4 percent) of U.S. imports of apparel entering under 

the CBTPA. Just under half (45.8 percent) of total U.S. imports of apparel from Haiti entered 

under CBTPA provisions in 2014. The value of U.S. imports of apparel entering under the HOPE 

Acts rose 7.0 percent, from $421.9 million in 2013 to $451.5 million in 2014, and represented 

over half (53.6 percent) of total U.S. apparel imports that entered free of duty from Haiti. Most 

of the apparel—87.5 percent ($395.1 million)—imported into the United States under the HOPE 

Acts entered under tariff preference levels that allow duty-free treatment for certain apparel 

206 Sonapi, Parc Industriel de Caracol, “2014 Year End Report,” 2014, 12. 207 Haitian industry representative, email message to USITC staff, January 13, 2015; Haitian representative of 

CTMO-HOPE Secretariat, telephone interview by USITC staff, January 9, 2015. However, at the end of 2014, the 

Inter-American Development Bank approved a grant of $55 million and $15 million in co-financing from the U.S. 

government to construct buildings and expand facilities for businesses at the Caracol Industrial Park. IDB, “Haiti to 

Expand Business Facilities at Caracol,” December 12, 2014.

208 In May 2014, Haitian President Michel Martelly issued an executive order raising Haiti's minimum wage by 

12.5 percent—an increase that the director of Haiti's CTME-HOPE Commission stated would meet worker demands 

and be sustained by Haiti's apparel industry. Charles, “Haiti Raises Minimum Wage for Factory Workers,” May 9, 

2014; Haitian Representative of CTMO-HOPE Secretariat, telephone interview by USITC staff, January 9, 2015. 209 U.S. apparel industry representative, email message to USITC staff, January 14, 2015; Charles, “Haiti Raises 

Minimum Wage for Factory Workers,” May 9, 2014. 
Year in Trade

U.S. International Trade Commission | 85

up to established annual TRQs (“restraint limits”). 210 About one-third ($143.2 million) of these 

U.S. imports of apparel from Haiti entered under the woven apparel restraint limit in 2014.

Over half ($251.9 million) of the imports of apparel from Haiti entered under the knit apparel 

and value-added restraint limits the same year.211

Most of the remaining U.S. imports ($58.3 million) under the HOPE Acts in 2014 entered under 

the Earned Import Allowance Program (EIAP), a special trade program created under HOPE II in 

2008 that allows the duty-free entry into the United States of certain apparel manufactured in 

Haiti.212 The fall in U.S. imports of apparel from Haiti under the EIAP—from $90.0 million in 

2013 to $58.3 million in 2014—may be attributed to a shift in usage to other trade preferences 

under the HOPE Acts. 213 As in previous years, no U.S. imports entered in 2014 under two other 

HELP provisions added in 2010: HTS 9820.61.45 (certain knit apparel—unlimited quantities) and 

HTS 9820.63.05 (home goods).

 

210 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. 

211 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 

49.7 percent, 26.7 percent, and 8.0 percent, respectively, for the preferential treatment period October 1, 2013, to 

September 30, 2014.

212 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. 213 U.S. government representative, email message to USITC staff, January 14, 2015.

Year in Trade

U.S. International Trade Commission | 87

Chapter 3

The World Trade Organization

This chapter covers developments in 2014 in the World Trade Organization (WTO). These 

include multilateral trade negotiations under the Doha Development Agenda (DDA, or Doha 

Round); work programs and related items under the WTO General Council; and plurilateral 

agreements hosted under the auspices of the WTO. The chapter also summarizes 

developments in major WTO dispute settlement cases during the year.

In 2014, WTO members spent much of the year attempting to move forward on two 

agreements, the Agreement on Trade Facilitation and the Information Technology Agreement 

(ITA). Efforts to carry out the Agreement on Trade Facilitation, which had been agreed to in Bali 

at the end of 2013, came to a standstill in July 2014. At this point, further action on this 

agreement became linked to differing views on another ministerial decision on public 

stockholding for food security purposes, an impasse not overcome until November 2014. 

Negotiations to expand the ITA––suspended since November 2013––finally resumed in 

December 2014, only to deadlock again a week later.

DDA and General Council Work under the Bali 

Package

Issues under the DDA and regular work in the General Council overlapped in 2014 as WTO 

members tried to carry out the so-called Bali Package––the informal name given to the 

ministerial declaration and related decisions arising from the Ninth WTO Ministerial Conference 

held in December 2013, in Bali, Indonesia.214 The Bali ministerial decisions addressing the Doha 

Round focused on agriculture, trade facilitation, and development issues affecting developing 

and least-developed country members of the WTO. The Bali ministerial decisions addressing 

the General Council's regular work program focused on certain intellectual property rights 

complaints, the work program on electronic commerce, the work program on small economies, 

aid for trade, and trade as a means to transfer technology to developing countries.

The General Council held five regular sessions in 2014––March 14, May 12, July 24–25, 

October 21, and December 10–11––as well as one special session on November 27. In May, 

July, and December, the council reviewed progress on the Work Program on Global Electronic 

 

214 The results of the ministerial conference have been dubbed variously the “Bali Package,” “Bali Decisions,” “Bali 

Outcomes,” etc. For further details, see USITC, The Year in Trade 2013: Operation of the Trade Agreements 

Program, 65th Report, July 2014, 73–80.
Chapter 3: The World Trade Organization

88 | www.usitc.gov

Commerce.215 Throughout the year, the council heard reports from the Committee on Trade

and Development in Special Session about progress under the Work Program on Small 

Economies.216 At its May and October sessions, the council reviewed progress under the 

Decision on Aid-for-Trade.217 In addition, the Director-General reported to members in October 

about the Fifth Global Review of Aid for Trade slated for 2015. He also reported to the council 

in December on progress concerning the development assistance aspects of cotton.

WTO Director-General Roberto Azevêdo, as chairman of the Trade Negotiations Committee 

(TNC) overseeing the Doha Round negotiations, reported to the General Council both formally 

and informally during the year on progress implementing the Bali ministerial decisions specific 

to the DDA. The TNC met formally on April 7 and October 16, and informally on February 6, 

June 25, July 31, October 31, and December 10. Much of 2014 was consumed in General 

Council efforts to move forward with two elements in the Bali package of agreements: (1) the 

Agreement on Trade Facilitation218 and (2) the ministerial decision on public stockholding for 

food security purposes. 219 Beyond these two items, the council also discussed other Bali DDA 

subjects involving agricultural and economic development issues. Agricultural issues included in 

particular the administration of tariff-rate quotas, export competition, and development 

assistance for least-developed countries focused specifically on the cotton sector. 

Development-related issues included the monitoring mechanism on special and differential 

treatment, preferential rules of origin for least-developed countries, the decision on duty-free 

and quota-free market access for least-developed countries, and operationalizing the leastdeveloped countries services waiver.

Agreement on Trade Facilitation and Food 

Security Stockholdings

At the start of 2014, the General Council set out to finalize the text and amendment protocol of 

the Agreement on Trade Facilitation concluded at the Bali conference.220 The ministers at Bali 

established the Preparatory Committee on Trade Facilitation, which was tasked with developing 

both the agreement's final legal text as well as a protocol of amendment for WTO members to 

 

215 WTO, “General Council––Annual Report (2014),” WT/GC/167, January 19, 2015, par. 6.1–6.6. 216 WTO, “General Council––Annual Report (2014),” WT/GC/167, January 19, 2015, par. 5.1–5.11. 217 WTO, “General Council––Annual Report (2014),” WT/GC/167, January 19, 2015, par. 7.1–7.4. 218 WTO, “Agreement on Trade Facilitation––Ministerial Decision of 7 December 2013,” WT/MIN(13)/36––

WT/L/911, December 11, 2013.

219 WTO, “Public Stockholding for Food Security Purposes––Ministerial Decision of 7 December 2013,”

WT/MIN(13)/38––WT/L/913, December 11, 2013. 220 For further details on the WTO Agreement on Trade Facilitation, see USITC, The Year in Trade 2013: Operation 

of the Trade Agreements Program, 65th Report, July 2014, 74–77.
Year in Trade

U.S. International Trade Commission | 89

sign that would amend the WTO Agreement221 to allow the Agreement on Trade Facilitation 

and its commitments to be merged into the WTO Agreement's multilateral commitments in 

Annex A1. Ministers at Bali set July 31, 2014, as the deadline to adopt this protocol of 

amendment, which would then remain open for one year (through July 31, 2015) for members

to sign. 222 Although both the protocol and legal text of the agreement were finalized in time, 

India's announcement that it would not agree to implement another Bali ministerial decision––

the Decision on Public Stockholding for Food Security Purposes––had become linked to the 

finalized text and protocol of the Agreement on Trade Facilitation. The resulting stalemate 

caused WTO members to miss the July 31, 2014, deadline to adopt the Agreement on Trade 

Facilitation protocol of amendment. 223 Subsequent consultations between India and the United 

States yielded an understanding between the two countries on November 13, 2014, that helped 

break the impasse. This advance set the stage for adoption of the protocol of amendment for 

the agreement at a special session of the General Council later in November.

November Special General Council Session

The General Council met in special session on November 27, 2014, with the primary aim of 

resolving the impasse over the Agreement on Trade Facilitation and the food security stockpiles 

decision, detailed below. In addition, the special session sought to provide greater assurances 

to a number of developing-country members that key issues important to them would be given 

priority in the post-Bali work program that was currently being developed, with a deadline of 

July 2015. 224

At the special November council meeting, the Director-General proposed three council 

decisions: (1) a food security decision that sought to resolve the food stockholding decision by 

the end of 2015, two years earlier than agreed at the 2013 Bali ministerial conference; (2) a 

decision on the protocol of amendment to the Agreement on Trade Facilitation that removed 

from the protocol the previous deadline of July 31, 2015, but did not set a new deadline, 

leaving as a result an open-ended adoption process for the agreement; and (3) a decision to 

 

221 WTO, “Marrakesh Agreement Establishing the World Trade Organization,” The Results of the Uruguay Round of 

Multilateral Trade Negotiations: The Legal Texts, 1995. 222 WTO, “Trade Facilitation,” Web page, n.d. https://www.wto.org/english/tratop_e/tradfa_e/tradfa_e.htm 

(accessed March 30, 2015).

223 WTO, “WTO: 2014 News Items––31 July 2014––Trade Negotiations Committee: Informal Meeting––Azevêdo: 

Members Unable to Bridge the Gap on Trade Facilitation,” July 31, 2014; WTO, “WTO News: Speeches––DG 

Roberto Azevêdo––15 September 2014––Azevêdo Launches Intensive Consultations on Taking the Bali Package 

Forward,” September 15, 2014; USTR, “Statement by Ambassador Froman on U.S.-India WTO Trade Facilitation 

Agreement,” November 27, 2014; USTR, “Fact Sheet: U.S.-India Agreement on Trade Facilitation,” November 13, 

2014. For further details, see USITC, The Year in Trade 2013: Operation of the Trade Agreements Program, 65th 

Report, July 2014, 75. 224 Inside U.S. Trade, “WTO Poised To Break TFA Impasse This Week,” November 28, 2014.
Chapter 3: The World Trade Organization

90 | www.usitc.gov

extend the deadline for formulating a work plan to conclude the Doha Round from December 

2014 until July 2015. 225

In the first decision, the council agreed that members would not challenge public food security 

stockholding programs in developing countries through the WTO Dispute Settlement 

Agreement until a permanent solution was reached in the DDA that clarified the status of public 

food stockpiles under current agriculture rules. A target date was set for reaching such a 

solution by the end of 2015. For the second decision, the original timeframe for entry into force 

of the Agreement on Trade Facilitation––the year spanning July 31, 2014, to July 31, 2015––was 

changed to entry into force once two-thirds of WTO members had signed. Lastly, the council 

agreed under the third decision to formulate a post-Bali work program by July 2015 that would 

ensure that all ministerial decisions from the Bali conference that were not yet legally binding, 

would indeed be implemented. Moreover, the council agreed to complete a work program 

aimed at advancing the stalled Doha negotiations by July 2015.

Work Programs, Decisions, and Reviews

Waivers

During the year, the council reviewed waivers addressing several areas: (1) a waiver request 

from the Philippines for special treatment for rice; (2) waiver requests from Argentina, China, 

the EU, Iceland, and Malaysia to enable them to implement domestically the recommended 

changes in the international Harmonized System (HS) nomenclature for traded goods 

introduced under HS2002, HS2007, and HS2012; and (3) reviews of waivers under the WTO 

Agreement. In the first category, the council adopted a decision to grant a waiver to the 

Philippines from July 1, 2014, through June 30, 2017, that allows the Philippines to spread its 

minimum market access commitment for 2016 over the 2016–17 period.

226 In the second 

category, the council extended the waivers through December 31, 2015, for the requesting

 

225 Washington Trade Daily, “Today's GC Meeting,” November 27, 2014; WTO, “Agreement on Trade Facilitation––

Ministerial Decision of 7 December 2013,” WT/MIN(13)/36––WT/L/911, December 11, 2013; WTO, “Public 

Stockholding for Food Security Purposes––Ministerial Decision of 7 December 2013,” WT/MIN(13)/38––WT/L/913, 

December 11, 2013; WTO, General Council, “27 November 2014––Minutes of the Meeting Held in the Centre 

William Rappard on 27 November 2014––1 Public Stockholding for Food Security Purposes, Preparatory 

Committee on Trade Facilitation––Protocol of Amendment, and Post-Bali Work,” WT/GC/M/154, January 15, 2015. 226 WTO, General Council, “Decision on Waiver Relating to Special Treatment for Rice of the Philippines––Waiver 

Decision of 24 July 2014,” WT/L/932, July 25, 2014.
Year in Trade

U.S. International Trade Commission | 91

members adopting the updated HS nomenclatures.227 Under the third category, the council 

took note of reports on the implementation of multiyear waivers.228

Accessions

Yemen acceded to the WTO on June 26, 2014, bringing the number of members to 160 

(table 3.1). There remained 24 observers to the WTO in 2014 (table 3.2).

Table 3.1: WTO membership in 2014

Albania Ghana Oman

Angola Greece Pakistan

Antigua and Barbuda Grenada Panama

Argentina Guatemala Papua New Guinea

Armenia Guinea Paraguay

Australia Guinea-Bissau Peru

Austria Guyana Philippines

Bahrain Haiti Poland

Bangladesh Honduras Portugal

Barbados Hong Kong, China Qatar

Belgium Hungary Romania

Belize Iceland Russia

Benin India Rwanda

Bolivia Indonesia Saint Kitts and Nevis

Botswana Ireland Saint Lucia

Brazil Israel Saint Vincent and the Grenadines

Brunei Darussalam Italy Samoa

Bulgaria Jamaica Saudi Arabia

Burkina Faso Japan Senegal

Burmaa Jordan Sierra Leone

Burundi Kenya Singapore

Cabo Verde Korea, Republic of Slovakia 

Cambodia Kuwait Slovenia

Cameroon Kyrgyzstan Solomon Islands

Canada Laos South Africa

Central African Republic Latvia Spain

 

227 WTO, General Council, “Introduction of Harmonized System 2002 Changes into WTO Schedules of Tariff 

Concessions––Waiver Decision of 11 December 2014,” WT/L/945, December 12, 2014; WTO, General Council, 

“Introduction of Harmonized System 2007 Changes into WTO Schedules of Tariff Concessions––Waiver Decision of 

11 December 2014,” WT/L/946, December 12, 2014; WTO, General Council, “Introduction of Harmonized System 

2012 Changes into WTO Schedules of Tariff Concessions––Waiver Decision of 11 December 2014,” WT/L/947, 

December 12, 2014.

228 The latter category covers multiyear waivers such as those that provide for duty-free treatment into the United 

States of eligible products under legislation concerning the Former Trust Territory of the Pacific Islands, the 

Caribbean Basin Economic Recovery Act, the African Growth and Opportunity Act, and the Andean Trade 

Preference Act.
Chapter 3: The World Trade Organization

92 | www.usitc.gov

Chad Lesotho Sri Lanka

Chile Liechtenstein Suriname

China Lithuania Swaziland

Colombia Luxembourg Sweden

Congo, Democratic Republic of the Macao, China Switzerland

Congo, Republic of the Macedoniab Taiwanc

Costa Rica Madagascar Tajikistan

Côte d’Ivoire Malawi Tanzania

Croatia Malaysia Thailand

Cuba Maldives Togo

Cyprus Mali Tonga

Czech Republic Malta Trinidad and Tobago

Denmark Mauritania Tunisia

Djibouti Mauritius Turkey

Dominica Mexico Uganda

Dominican Republic Moldova Ukraine

Ecuador Mongolia United Arab Emirates

Egypt Montenegro United Kingdom

El Salvador Morocco United States

Estonia Mozambique Uruguay

European Union Namibia Vanuatu

Fiji Nepal Venezuela

Finland Netherlands Vietnam

France New Zealand Yemen

Gabon Nicaragua Zambia

Gambia Niger Zimbabwe

Georgia Nigeria

Germany Norway

Source: WTO, “Understanding the WTO: The Organization: Members and Observers,” n.d. (accessed January 14, 2015). 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.”
Year in Trade

U.S. International Trade Commission | 93

Table 3.2: WTO observers in 2014

Afghanistan Equatorial Guinea Serbia

Algeria Ethiopia Seychelles

Andorra Iran Sudan

Azerbaijan Iraq Syria

Bahamas, The Kazakhstan Uzbekistan

Belarus Lebanon Vatican (Holy See)

Bhutan Liberia

Bosnia and Herzegovina Libya

Comoros São Tomé and Príncipe

Source: WTO, “Understanding the WTO: The Organization; Members and Observers,” n.d. (accessed January 14, 2015).

Selected Plurilateral Agreements229

Information Technology Agreement (ITA)

During 2014, the WTO committee230 overseeing the WTO Information Technology Agreement 

(ITA) held formal meetings on March 17, June 26, and October 31. The total number of 

participating members rose to 80, with Afghanistan joining the committee on March 17 and the 

Seychelles joining on October 17. The committee continued with its Non-Tariff Measures Work 

Program in 2014, focusing under a pilot project on aspects of electromagnetic compatibility and 

electromagnetic interference (EMC/EMI) on trade in information technology products. 231

In 2014, participants sought to restart negotiations to expand coverage under the ITA, following 

the suspension of talks in November 2013. At the March 2014 committee meeting, the United 

States pointed out that negotiations were suspended largely because of China's position, which 

called for excluding 59 tariff lines of information technology products as well as for including 

longer phaseout periods for tariffs on roughly 70 more products. China said that, as a large 

developing country, it was reasonable that it should be allowed to exclude some sensitive 

products or to be given longer implementation periods.232

 

229 Whereas multilateral rules and commitments by members of the WTO apply to all WTO members, rules and 

commitments negotiated by WTO members under plurilateral agreements apply only to those members signing 

the plurilateral agreement.

230 Formally, the Committee of Participants on the Expansion of Trade in Information Technology Products. 231 WTO, “Report (2014) of the Committee of Participants on the Expansion of Trade in Information Technology 

Products,” G/L/1088, November 5, 2014. 232 USTR, “Statement by Ambassador Michael Punke on the Information Technology Agreement (ITA) Expansion 

Meeting Of the World Trade Organization ITA Committee,” March 17, 2014; Inside U.S. Trade, “Chinese WTO 

Ambassador Says ITA Deal Has Serious 'Imbalance,' Cannot Show More Flexibility,” March 18, 2014.
Chapter 3: The World Trade Organization

94 | www.usitc.gov

In November 2014, on the margins of the annual conference for the Asia-Pacific Economic 

Cooperation (APEC) forum, 233 China and the United States engaged in consultations that 

resulted in a substantial reduction of China's 59 sensitive tariff lines to less than 20 lines.234 The 

United States announced at the APEC plenary meeting on November 11, 2014, that China and 

the United States had reached “an understanding on a bilateral agreement” on the scope of the 

goods that they would submit to the ITA negotiations. 235 Among the products included were 

medical devices, such as computed tomography scanners and magnetic resonance imaging 

machines; global positioning system devices; loudspeakers; “next generation” semiconductors, 

static converters, inductors, and other components and instruments often used in advanced 

manufacturing; printer ink cartridges; printed matter/cards to download software and games; 

software media, such as solid-state drives; and video game consoles. 236

Following these consultations at the APEC summit, ITA talks resumed in Geneva, Switzerland. 

But negotiations reached another impasse when China and other participants were unable to 

bridge differences over the approximately 12 remaining products, including liquid-crystal 

display panels and several hardware items used in mobile phones. As a result, negotiations 

were suspended again on December 12, 2014. 237 At the end of 2014, the so-called core group 

of negotiating participants considering how to move forward with ITA discussions were Albania; 

Australia; Bahrain; China; Colombia; Costa Rica; Croatia; the EU; Guatemala; Hong Kong, China; 

Iceland; Israel; Japan; Korea; Malaysia; Montenegro; New Zealand; Norway; the Philippines; 

Singapore; Switzerland; Taiwan; Thailand; Turkey; and the United States.238

Agreement on Government Procurement (GPA)

Parties to the plurilateral WTO Agreement on Government Procurement (GPA) concluded 

multiyear negotiations on revisions to the agreement in December 2011. The revised 

agreement entered into force in April 2014, once the required two-thirds majority (10) of the 

GPA parties formally accepted it. Following acceptance by these 10 governments, 2 additional 

parties joined, making a total of 12 signatories to the revised GPA by yearend 2014.

The negotiations concluded in December 2011 both revised the original text of the agreement 

and expanded the parties’ market-access commitments under the GPA by an estimated $80–

 

233 Washington Trade Daily, “China and the ITA,” March 18, 2014, 2. 234 Washington Trade Daily, “Intensive ITA Consultations With China,” November 5, 2014, 1. 235 White House, “Fact Sheet: Supporting Economic Growth at Home and Abroad by Eliminating Trade Barriers on 

Information Technology Products,” November 10, 2014. 236 Ibid.; Washington Trade Daily, “An ITA Breakthrough,” November 12, 2014, 1. 237 ICTSD, “ITA Expansion Talks Hit Roadblock,” December 18, 2014. 238 Washington Trade Daily, “One More Day on ITA,” December 15, 2014, 1.
Year in Trade

U.S. International Trade Commission | 95

$100 billion annually, according to the WTO. 239 By the end of 2013, seven parties had formally 

accepted the revised agreement: Canada; the EU; Hong Kong, China; Liechtenstein; Norway; 

Taiwan; and the United States.240

In early 2014, Iceland, Israel, and Singapore deposited their formal instruments of acceptance 

of the revised agreement. In doing so, they brought the number of parties accepting the 

agreement to the two-thirds majority (10 of 15) needed to bring the revised GPA into effect. As 

a consequence, the revised GPA entered into force on April 6, 2014, for these 10 governments. 

The new GPA entered into force shortly afterwards for Japan and Aruba—on April 16, 2014, and 

July 4, 2014, respectively, after they accepted the agreement. At the end of 2014, formal 

acceptance was pending for the 3 remaining GPA parties: Armenia, South Korea, and

Switzerland. The 12 parties to the revised GPA at yearend 2014 were Aruba; Canada; the 

European Union; Hong Kong, China; Iceland; Israel; Japan; Liechtenstein; Norway; Singapore; 

Taiwan; and the United States.

In the WTO Committee on Government Procurement, there were 15 members at the end of 

2014: Armenia; Aruba; Canada; the EU, representing 28 member states; Hong Kong, China; 

Iceland; Israel; Japan; Korea; Liechtenstein; Norway; Singapore; Switzerland; Taiwan; and the 

United States. The number of observers to the committee rose to 28 when Tajikistan became 

an observer in September 2014. 241 In October 2014, the committee invited both Montenegro 

and New Zealand to accede to the revised GPA, based on their final market-access offers 

presented over the past two years of negotiations. 242

Negotiations on an Environmental Goods 

Agreement (EGA)

On July 8, 2014, the United States and a number of other WTO members opened negotiations 

on an agreement to eliminate tariffs on environmental goods. The 14 participants in these 

negotiations are Australia; Canada; China; Costa Rica; the EU; Hong Kong, China; Japan; Korea; 

 

239 WTO, “Revised WTO Agreement on Government Procurement enters into force,” April 7, 2014. 240 WTO, “Ministers greet progress on ratification of revised Agreement on Government Procurement,” 

December 4, 2013. 241 In 2014, the 28 observers to the committee were Albania, Argentina, Australia, Bahrain, Cameroon, Chile, China,

Colombia, Georgia, India, Indonesia, Jordan, Kyrgyzstan, Macedonia, Malaysia, Moldova, Mongolia, Montenegro,

New Zealand, Oman, Panama, Russia, Saudi Arabia, Sri Lanka, Tajikistan, Turkey, Ukraine, and Vietnam. 242 WTO, “WTO: 2014 News Items––29 October 2014––Government Procurement––Montenegro and New Zealand 

to join the WTO's Agreement on Government Procurement,” October 29, 2014.
Chapter 3: The World Trade Organization

96 | www.usitc.gov

New Zealand; Norway; Singapore; Switzerland; Taiwan; and the United States.243 Negotiations 

are modeled broadly on the WTO Agreement on Information Technology mentioned earlier in 

this chapter. The Environmental Goods Agreement (EGA) is a plurilateral agreement in which 

participants eliminate tariffs on a most-favored-nation basis once a critical mass of WTO 

members agree to implement the agreement.244 The participants involved in negotiating the 

agreement account for 86 percent of global trade in environmental goods, according to the U.S. 

State Department.245

At the first negotiating round In July, participants settled various procedural matters, and

agreed on how products would be nominated for negotiations. Participants agreed to dedicate 

a negotiating round to one or more of the specific product categories of environmental goods.

They also agreed that nominations for specific categories would be made in advance of each 

negotiating round until all categories of environmental products are covered.246

At the second round, held September 22–26, 2014, participants nominated two product 

categories: air pollution control, and solid and hazardous-waste management technologies. 

Participants also agreed on eight additional product categories to be covered: wastewater 

management and water treatment; environmental remediation and cleanup; noise and 

vibration abatement; cleaner and renewable energy; energy efficiency; environmental 

monitoring, analysis, and assessment; resource efficiency; and environmentally preferable 

products. 247

At the third round, held December 1–4, 2014, negotiations focused on technologies related to 

wastewater management and water treatment, environmental remediation and cleanup, and 

 

243 USDOS, “WTO Environmental Goods Agreement Negotiations Progressing,” January 14, 2015, par. 2. Iceland,

Israel, and Turkey joined the negotiations in early 2015, bringing the total number of participants to 17. Israel first 

attended at the fourth round, held January 26–30, 2015; Iceland and Turkey attended for the first time at the fifth 

round, held March 16–20, 2015. ICTSD, “Environmental Goods Agreement Trade Talks on Track,” March 26, 2015. 244 USDOS, “WTO Environmental Goods Agreement Negotiations Progressing,” January 14, 2015, par. 2.

Negotiations initially started based on a list of 54 goods first adopted by Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) 

members. The EGA list under negotiation is based on 10 broad product categories covering air pollution control; 

cleaner and renewable energy; energy efficiency; environmental monitoring, analysis, and assessment; 

environmental remediation and clean-up; environmentally preferable products; noise and vibration abatement; 

resource efficiency; solid and hazardous waste management technologies; and wastewater management and 

water. Washington Trade Daily, “Environmental Goods Agreement,” July 9, 2014. 245 The 86 percent of global trade is based on the 14 initial WTO members involved in the negotiations, and does 

not include the three WTO members that joined in 2015. USDOS, Washington, DC, “WTO Environmental Goods 

Agreement Negotiations Progressing,” January 14, 2015, par. 2. 246 USDOS, “WTO Environmental Goods Agreement Negotiations Progressing,” January 14, 2015, par. 3. 247 USDOS, “WTO Environmental Goods Agreement Negotiations Progressing,” January 14, 2015, par. 4.
Year in Trade

U.S. International Trade Commission | 97

noise and vibration abatement. Participants further agreed to dates and themes for two 

additional category-focused rounds. 248

As of yearend 2014, most participants had nominated products for negotiation in one or more 

product categories, and had also agreed to submit all product nominations by April 2015 so that 

a full list of environmental product nominations could be compiled for circulation. The compiled 

list will serve as the basis for negotiations to reach a final agreement.249

Dispute Settlement Body

This section (1) provides a tally of new requests for consultations filed by WTO members during 

calendar year 2014 under the WTO Dispute Settlement Understanding (DSU); (2) provides a 

table that lists the new panels established during calendar year 2014 (involving all WTO 

members) to review matters raised in complaints under the DSU; and (3) provides short 

summaries of the procedural and substantive issues in disputes involving the United States that 

moved to the panel stage during 2014, along with summaries of panel and Appellate Body 

reports involving the United States that were issued or adopted during 2014. 250

Box 3.1 provides an overview of the WTO dispute settlement process, and table 3.3 lists the 

disputes (involving all WTO members) that moved from the consultation stage to the more 

formal panel litigation stage during 2014. 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 2014.

The summaries of issues in disputes are based entirely on information in publicly available 

documents, including summaries published online by the WTO and summaries included in 

USTR's 2015 Trade Policy Agenda report and in USTR press releases. They should not be 

regarded as comprehensive or as reflecting a U.S. government or Commission interpretation of 

the issues raised or addressed in the disputes or in panel or Appellate Body reports. A table 

showing procedural developments during 2014 in disputes in which the United States was the 

complainant or respondent appears in appendix table A.22.

 

248 USDOS, “WTO Environmental Goods Agreement Negotiations Progressing,” January 14, 2015, par. 5. 249 Ibid. 250 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.
Chapter 3: The World Trade Organization

98 | www.usitc.gov

Box 3.1: 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.

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 3.1, 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 that party to 

comply with the findings and recommendations, and about possible compensation and

retaliation. Matters may be referred to the original panel or to a new panel for further findings 

and recommendations on compliance and other matters, and in appropriate cases the parties 

may seek the assistance of an arbitrator to resolve matters.
Year in Trade

U.S. International Trade Commission | 99

Table 3.3: WTO dispute settlement panels established during 2014

Case 

no. Complainant Respondent Case name Panel established

DS441 Dominican 

Republic

Australia Australia—Certain Measures Concerning Trademarks, 

Geographical Indications and Other Plain Packaging 

Requirements Applicable to Tobacco Products and 

Packaging

April 25, 2014

DS456 United 

States

India India—Certain Measures Relating to Solar Cells and 

Solar Modules

May 24, 2014

DS458 Cuba Australia Australia—Certain Measures Concerning Trademarks, 

Geographical Indications and Other Plain Packaging 

Requirements Applicable to Tobacco Products and 

Packaging

April 4. 2014

DS464 Korea United 

States

United States—Anti-Dumping and Countervailing 

Measures on Large Residential Washers from Korea

January 22, 2014

DS467 Indonesia Australia Australia—Certain Measures Concerning Trademarks, 

Geographical Indications and Other Plain Packaging 

Requirements Applicable to Tobacco Products and 

Packaging

March 26, 2014

DS468 Japan Ukraine Ukraine—Definitive Safeguard Measures on Certain 

Passenger Cars

March 26, 2014

DS469 Denmark European 

Union

European Union—Measures on Atlanto-Scandian 

Herring

February 26, 2014

DS471 China United 

States

United States—Certain Methodologies and Their 

Application to Anti-Dumping Proceedings Involving 

China 

March 26, 2014

DS472 European 

Union

Brazil Brazil—Certain Measures Concerning Taxation and 

Charges

December 17, 2014

DS473 Argentina European 

Union

European Union—Anti-Dumping Measures on Biodiesel 

from Argentina

April 25, 2014

DS474 Russia European 

Union

European Union—Cost Adjustment Methodologies and 

Certain Anti-Dumping Measures on Imports from Russia

July 22, 2014

DS475 European 

Union

Russia Russian Federation—Measures on the Importation of 

Live Pigs, Pork and Other Pig Products from the 

European Union

July 22, 2014

DS479 European 

Union

Russia Russian Federation—Anti-Dumping Duties on Light 

Commercial Vehicles from Germany and Italy

December 18, 2014

Source: Derived from WTO, “Dispute Settlement: The Disputes—Chronological List of Disputes” (accessed March 19, 2014).

There were a number of disputes still active during 2014, 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),251 respectively, against each other’s large civilian aircraft 

 

251 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.”
Chapter 3: The World Trade Organization

100 | www.usitc.gov

measures.252 Other proceedings of note that were underway during 2014 after adoption of 

panel and Appellate Body reports involved two disputes relating to U.S. country of origin 

labeling requirements (COOL), 253 a dispute relating to U.S. measures relating to the 

importation, marketing, and sale of tuna and tuna products, 254 and a dispute relating to China's 

antidumping and countervailing duties on grain-oriented flat-rolled electrical steel from the 

United States. 255

 

252 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) in 2015, and in DS353 (brought by the EU 

against the United States) not before the first half of 2015. 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 

March 23, 2015); and USTR, 2015 Trade Policy Agenda, 2015, 72, 87. 253 WTO, “Dispute Settlement: DS384; United States—Certain Country of Origin Labelling (COOL) Requirements” 

(accessed March 8, 2015); WTO, “Dispute Settlement: DS386; United States—Certain Country of Origin Labelling 

Requirements” (accessed March 8, 2015). The disputes involved challenges by Canada and Mexico, respectively, of 

mandatory U.S. country of origin labeling (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 requested the establishment of a compliance panel to consider whether the measure taken by the 

United States in 2013, including the 2013 “final rule,” complies with the DSB recommendations and rulings. The 

compliance panel was composed on September 27, 2013, and its report was circulated to members on October 20, 

2014. The compliance panel found that the amended COOL measure violates Article 2.1 of the TBT Agreement 

because it accords to Canadian and Mexican livestock less favorable treatment than that accorded to U.S. 

livestock. On November 28, 2014, the United States notified the DSB of its decision to appeal to the Appellate 

Body certain issues of law covered in the compliance panel report and certain legal interpretations developed by 

the panel. On December 12, 2014, Canada and Mexico filed appeals in the same dispute. An Appellate Body report 

is expected in 2015. See also USTR, 2015 Trade Policy Agenda, 2015, 90, 92. 254 WTO, “Dispute Settlement: DS381; United States—Measures Concerning the Importation, Marketing and Sale 

of Tuna and Tuna Products” (accessed March 8, 2015). 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 

stated 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, and the panel was composed on January 27, 2014. The report of the compliance panel is 

expected sometime in 2015. See also USTR, “U.S. Announces Compliance,” July 12, 2013; and USTR, 2015 Trade 

Policy Agenda, 2015 88. 255 WTO, “Dispute Settlement: DS414; China—Countervailing and Anti-Dumping Duties on Grain Oriented Flatrolled Electrical Steel from the United States” (accessed March 8, 2015). On February 13, 2014, the United States 

requested establishment of a compliance panel, and a panel was composed on March 17, 2014. On September 22, 

2014, the chair of the compliance panel informed the DSB that the panel expected to issue its final report to the 

parties in the second quarter of 2015. Ibid. The United States stated that it was concerned that China failed to (1) 

objectively examine evidence; (2) base its finding on positive evidence; (3) disclose the “essential facts” underlying 

its conclusions; and (4) provide an adequate explanation of its re-determination. See USTR, 2015 Trade Policy 

Agenda, 2015, 65.
Year in Trade

U.S. International Trade Commission | 101

Another long-standing dispute with Brazil, dating back to 2002 and involving U.S. subsidies on 

upland cotton, was officially terminated on October 16, 2014, when the United States and 

Brazil submitted to the DSB a notification under Article 3.6 of the DSB terminating the 

dispute.256 The termination was based on a memorandum of understanding signed on 

October 1, 2014, which included, among other things, provisions on payment to and use of 

funds by the Brazilian Cotton Institute.257

New Requests for Consultations and New Panels 

Established

During 2014, WTO members filed 14 requests for WTO dispute settlement consultations in new 

disputes, compared with 20 in 2013, 27 in 2012, and 8 in 2011. 258 Of the 14 new requests 

during 2014, the United States was involved in 3 (as complainant in 1 and as respondent in 2) as 

compared with 5 of the 20 requests filed during 2013. During 2014, the EU was involved in the 

largest number of new requests for consultations, at 8 (as complainant in 5 and as respondent 

in 3). Other WTO members involved in multiple new disputes included Indonesia, 5 (as 

complainant in 1 and as respondent in 4); Russia, 4 (as complainant in 1 and as respondent in 

3); and Canada, 2 (as complainant in 1 and as respondent in 1). Only 1 new dispute involved 

China in 2014 (as respondent), in contrast to 10 new disputes as recently as 2012, when China 

was the complainant in 3 and the respondent in 7.

Thirteen new dispute settlement panels were established during 2014 (table 3.3). The United 

States was the complaining party in one of these panel proceedings, and the responding party 

in two. The 13 new panels established in 2014 represent an increase from the 12 panels 

established in 2013 and the 11 panels established in 2012.

Requests for Consultations Filed during 2014 in which the United 

States was the Complaining Party or Named Respondent

The one U.S. request for dispute settlement consultations in a new dispute, filed on May 8, 

2014, concerned modifications made by Indonesia to its licensing restrictions on importation of 

horticultural products, animals, and animal products.259 In the view of the United States, the 

 

256 For more information, see the chapter 6 section on Brazil. 257 WTO, “Dispute Settlement: DS267; United States—Subsidies on Upland Cotton” (accessed March 23, 2015). 

See also USTR, “The United States and Brazil Reach Agreement,” October 1, 2014; and USTR, 2015 Trade Policy 

Agenda, 2015, 82. 258 The number of requests for WTO dispute settlement consultations referred to in this section includes only 

requests made in connection with new disputes and does not include requests for consultations filed in connection 

with compliance proceedings after the adoption by the DSB of panel and/or Appellate Body reports.

259 WTO, “Dispute Settlement: DS478; Indonesia—Importation of Horticultural Products, Animals and Animal 

Products” (accessed March 6, 2015).
Chapter 3: The World Trade Organization

102 | www.usitc.gov

modifications, made by Indonesia in response to earlier disputes brought by the United States 

(DS455 and DS465 in January and August 2013, respectively), still appeared to breach WTO 

rules and restrict U.S. agricultural exports. The affected U.S. products include fruits, vegetables, 

flowers, dried fruits and vegetables, juices, cattle, beef, poultry, and other animal products.

Consultations in Jakarta on June 19, 2014, did not resolve the concerns raised by the dispute.260

New Zealand filed similar requests for dispute settlement consultations (DS466 and DS477 in 

August 2013 and May 2014, respectively).

The United States was the named respondent in two new disputes filed during 2014, one filed 

by the EU and one filed by Korea. The dispute filed by the EU concerned conditional tax 

incentives for large civil aircraft that the EU claims constitute subsidies prohibited under the 

Agreement on Subsidies and Countervailing Measures (SCM Agreement),261 and the dispute 

filed by Korea concerned U.S. antidumping measures on certain oil country tubular goods from 

Korea that Korea alleged are inconsistent with the Anti-Dumping Agreement and the General 

Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT) 1994. 262 Both disputes were in consultation at the end 

of 2014.

Panels Established during 2014 at the Request of the United

States

As shown in table 3.3, the DSB established one new panel in 2014 at the request of the United 

States, involving certain measures taken by India relating to domestic-content requirements for 

solar cells and solar modules. The issues raised and procedural history are summarized below.

India—Certain Measures Relating to Solar Cells and Solar Modules (DS456) 

In this dispute, the United States challenged certain measures of India relating to domesticcontent requirements under the Jawaharlal Nehru National Solar Mission (JNNSM) for solar 

cells and solar modules. The United States claimed that the measures appear to be inconsistent 

with Article III:4 of the GATT 1994; Article 2.1 of the Agreement on Trade-Related Investment 

 

260 WTO, “Dispute Settlement: DS478; Indonesia—Importation of Horticultural Products, Animals and Animal 

Products” (accessed March 6, 2015). See also USTR, “United States Challenges Indonesia's Ongoing Import 

Restrictions on Horticultural Products, Animals, and Animal Products,” May 8, 2014; USTR, 2015 Trade Policy 

Agenda, 2015, 75; and USTR, “United States Requests WTO Panel to Examine Indonesia's Import Restrictions on 

U.S. Agriculture,” March 18, 2015. 261 The European Union alleged that the U.S. measures constitute specific subsidies within the meaning of Articles 

1 and 2 of the SCM Agreement and are prohibited subsidies because they are inconsistent with Articles 3.1(b) and 

3.2 of the SCM Agreement. A panel was established on February 23, 2015. WTO, “Dispute Settlement: DS487; 

United States—Conditional Tax Incentives for Large Civil Aircraft” (accessed March 16, 2015). 262 Korea alleged that the U.S. measures are inconsistent with certain provisions of Articles 2, 6, and 12 of the AntiDumping Agreement and with Articles I and X:3 of the GATT 1994. WTO, “Dispute Settlement: DS488; United 

States—Anti-Dumping Measures on Certain Oil Country Tubular Goods from Korea” (accessed March 16, 2015).
Year in Trade

U.S. International Trade Commission | 103

Measures (TRIMs); and Articles 3.1(b), 3.2, 5(c), 6.3(a) and (c), and 25 of the SCM Agreement.

The United States requested consultations on February 6, 2013, and after consultations failed 

to resolve the dispute, on April 14, 2014, the United States requested the establishment of a 

panel. The DSB established a panel on May 23, 2014, and, following the agreement of the 

parties, the panel was composed on September 24, 2014. 263

Panels Established during 2014 in which the United States was 

the Named Respondent

The DSB established two panels during 2014 in which the United States was the named 

respondent, one at the request of Korea and the second at the request of China. As of the end 

of 2014, both of the panels had been composed, with a panel report in the case brought by 

Korea expected by the end of 2015. The issues raised and the procedural histories of the two 

disputes are summarized below.

United States—Anti-dumping and Countervailing Measures on Large 

Residential Washers from Korea (DS464) 

In this dispute Korea alleged that U.S. antidumping and countervailing measures relating to 

large residential washers from Korea are inconsistent with certain articles of the Anti-Dumping 

Agreement, certain articles of the SCM Agreement, certain provisions of Article VI of the GATT 

1994, and Article XVI:4 of the WTO Agreement. Korea requested consultations on August 29, 

2013, and after consultations failed to resolve the dispute, on December 5, 2013, Korea 

requested that a panel be established. The DSB established a panel on January 22, 2014, and 

the Director-General composed the panel on June 20, 2014. On December 15, 2014, the panel 

chair informed the DSB that the panel expects to issue its final report by the end of 2015. 264

United States—Certain Methodologies and Their Application to Anti-Dumping 

Proceedings Involving China (DS471) 

In this dispute China alleged that U.S. use of certain methodologies in antidumping 

investigations involving Chinese products are inconsistent with certain provisions of Articles 2, 

6, and 9 and Annex II of the Anti-Dumping Agreement and Article VI:2 of the GATT 1994. China 

requested consultations on December 3, 2013, and after consultations failed to resolve the 

dispute, on February 13, 2014, China requested the establishment of a panel. The DSB 

established a panel on March 26, 2014, and the Director-General composed the panel on 

 

263 WTO, “Dispute Settlement: DS456; India—Certain Measures Relating to Solar Cells and Solar Modules”

(accessed March 16, 2015). See also USTR, 2015 Trade Policy Agenda, 2015, 74–75. 264 WTO, “Dispute Settlement: DS464; United States—Anti-dumping and Countervailing Measures on Large 

Residential Washers from Korea” (accessed March 16, 2015). See also USTR, 2015 Trade Policy Agenda, 2015, 98.
Chapter 3: The World Trade Organization

104 | www.usitc.gov

August 28, 2014. 265 No projected date for issuance of a report had been announced as of the 

end of 2014.

Panel and Appellate Body Reports Issued and/or 

Adopted during 2014 That Involve the United 

States

During 2014, the DSB adopted panel and/or Appellate Body reports in original disputes266 in six 

cases in which the United States was the complainant or a respondent (table 3.4). The reports 

in those disputes are summarized below.

Reports in which the United States was the Complainant

India—Measures Concerning the Importation of Certain Agricultural Products 

from the United States (DS430) 

In this dispute the United States challenged prohibitions imposed by India on the importation of 

various agricultural products from the United States, purportedly because of concerns about 

avian influenza. The measures were imposed under the Indian Livestock Importation Act, 1898, 

and a statutory order issued by India's Department of Animal Husbandry, Dairying, and 

Fisheries under the Livestock Act. The United States claimed that the measures amounted to an 

import prohibition that was not based on the relevant international standard (the World 

Organisation for Animal Health [OIE] Terrestrial Code) or on a scientific risk assessment. It also 

claimed that India's measures appear to be inconsistent with certain articles of the WTO 

Agreement on the Application of Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures and with Articles I and XI 

of the GATT 1994. The United States requested consultations in this matter on March 6, 2012. 

On May 11, 2012, after consultations failed to resolve the dispute, the United States requested 

establishment of a panel. The DSB established a panel on June 25, 2012, and the DirectorGeneral composed the panel on February 18, 2013.

 

265 WTO, “Dispute Settlement: DS471; United States—Certain Methodologies and Their Application to AntiDumping Proceedings Involving China” (accessed March 16, 2015). See also USTR, 2015 Trade Policy Agenda, 2015, 

98.

266 As opposed to panel and Appellate Body reports issued in subsequent compliance and other proceedings.
Year in Trade

U.S. International Trade Commission | 105

Table 3.4: WTO dispute settlement panel and Appellate Body (AB) reports circulated or adopted in 2014 

in which the United States was a party

Case no. Complainant Respondent Case name

Date of report circulation 

or adoption

DS429 Vietnam United States United States—Anti-Dumping Measures on 

Certain Frozen Warmwater Shrimp from 

Viet Nam

Panel report issued 

(November 17, 2014) 

Appealed to AB

DS430 United States India India—Measures Concerning the 

Importation of Certain Agricultural Products 

from the United States

Panel report issued 

(October 14, 2014) 

Appealed to AB

DS431 United States China China—Measures Relating to the 

Exportation of Rare Earths, Tungsten and 

Molybdenum

AB and panel reports 

adopted (August 29, 2014)

DS436 India United States United States—Countervailing Measures on 

Certain Hot-Rolled Carbon Steel Flat 

Products from India

AB and panel reports 

adopted (December 19, 

2014)

DS437 China United States United States—Countervailing Duty 

Measures on Certain Products from China

AB report issued (Dec. 18, 

2014) (adopted Jan. 16, 

2015)

DS440 United States China China—Anti-Dumping and Countervailing 

Duties on Certain Automobiles from the 

United States

Panel report adopted 

(June 18, 2014)

DS444 United States Argentina Argentina—Measures Affecting the 

Importation of Goods

Panel report issued 

(August 22, 2014) 

Appealed to AB

DS449 China United States United States—Countervailing and Antidumping Measures on Certain Products 

from China

AB and panel reports 

adopted (July 22, 2014)

Source: Derived from WTO, “Dispute Settlement: The Disputes—Chronological List of Disputes” (accessed March 19, 2014). 

The panel issued its report on October 14, 2014. In its report the panel found in favor of the 

United States. The panel found that India's measures breach its WTO obligations because (1) 

they are not based on international standards or a risk assessment that takes into account 

available scientific evidence; (2) they arbitrarily discriminate against U.S. products because India 

blocks imports while not similarly blocking domestic products; (3) they constitute a disguised 

restriction on international trade; (4) they are more trade restrictive than necessary, since India 

could reasonably adopt international standards for the control of avian influenza instead of 

imposing an import ban; (5) they fail to recognize the concept of disease-free areas and are not 

adapted to the characteristics of the areas from which products originate and to which they are 

destined; and (6) they were not properly notified in a manner that would allow the United 

States and other WTO members to comment on India's restrictions before they went into 

effect. 
Chapter 3: The World Trade Organization

106 | www.usitc.gov

On January 26, 2015, India notified the DSB that it would appeal to the Appellate Body certain 

issues of law and legal interpretation in the panel report. 267

China—Measures Relating to the Exportation of Rare Earths, Tungsten and 

Molybdenum (DS431) 

In this dispute, the United States challenged China’s restrictions on the export of various forms 

of rare earths, tungsten, and molybdenum. The restrictions included export duties, export 

quotas, minimum export price requirements, export licensing requirements, and additional 

requirements and procedures in connection with the administration of the quantitative 

restrictions. The United States claimed that these measures were inconsistent with Articles VII, 

VIII, X, and XI of the GATT 1994 and certain paragraphs of China's Protocol of Accession. The 

United States requested consultations on March 13, 2012. When consultations failed to resolve 

the dispute, on June 27, 2012, the United States requested establishment of a panel. On July 

23, 2012, the DSB established a single panel to examine this dispute and disputes brought by 

the EU (DS432) and Japan (DS433). The Director-General composed the panel on September 24, 

2012.

The panel issued its report on March 26, 2014. The panel found that the export quotas and 

export duties that China maintains on various forms of rare earths, tungsten, and molybdenum 

constitute a breach of WTO rules and that China failed to justify those measures as legitimate 

conservation measures or environmental protection measures. The panel also found that 

China's imposition of prior export performance and minimum capital requirements is 

inconsistent with WTO rules.

On April 8, 2014, the United States notified the DSB of its decision to appeal to the Appellate 

Body certain issues of law covered in the panel report and certain legal interpretations 

developed by the panel. On April 17, 2014, China filed an appeal that was limited only to certain 

aspects of the panel's reasoning and certain intermediate findings (the relationship between 

specific provisions in China's Accession Protocol and other WTO agreements, and the rights of 

WTO members to protect and conserve their exhaustible natural resources). China did not 

appeal any of the final conclusions of the panel.

The Appellate Body issued a report on August 7, 2014, upholding the panel's findings on all 

significant claims. In particular, the Appellate Body confirmed that China may not seek to justify 

its imposition of export duties as environmental measures. The Appellate Body also confirmed, 

while modifying some of the panel's original reasoning, that China had failed to demonstrate 

that its export quotas were justified as measures for conserving exhaustible natural resources.

 

267 WTO, “Dispute Settlement: DS430; India—Measures Concerning the Importation of Certain Agricultural 

Products from the United States” (accessed March 19, 2015). See also USTR, 2015 Trade Policy Agenda, 2015, 74.
Year in Trade

U.S. International Trade Commission | 107

On August 29, 2014, the DSB adopted the panel and Appellate Body reports. At the DSB 

meeting on September 26, 2014, China stated that it intended to implement the DSB's 

recommendations and ruling, and, with the agreement of the United States, agreed to do so by 

December 8, 2014. 268

China—Anti-Dumping and Countervailing Duties on Certain Automobiles from 

the United States (DS440) 

In this dispute the United States alleged that certain antidumping and countervailing duties 

imposed by China on certain automobiles from the United States appear to breach numerous 

articles in the Anti-Dumping Agreement and the SCM Agreement as well as Article VI of the 

GATT 1994. Specifically, the United States claimed that China failed to objectively examine the 

evidence, and made unsupported findings of injury to China's domestic industry. In addition, 

the United States claimed that China failed to disclose “essential facts” underlying its 

conclusions, failed to provide an adequate explanation of its conclusions, improperly used 

investigative procedures, and failed to provide non-confidential summaries of Chinese 

submissions. The United States requested consultations on July 5, 2012, and after consultations 

failed to resolve the dispute, on September 17, 2012, the United States requested the 

establishment of a panel. The DSB established a panel on October 23, 2012, and the DirectorGeneral composed the panel on February 11, 2013.

The panel issued its report on May 23, 2014. The panel found in favor of the United States on 

nearly all U.S. claims. With regard to substantive errors committed by China's Ministry of 

Commerce, the panel found that China breached its WTO obligations by improperly 

determining that U.S. exports were causing injury to the domestic Chinese industry, improperly 

analyzing the effects of U.S. exports on prices in the Chinese market, and calculating the “all 

others” dumping margin and subsidy rates for unknown U.S. exporters without a factual basis. 

In terms of procedural failings, the panel found that China breached its WTO obligations by 

failing to disclose essential facts to U.S. companies, including how their dumping margins were 

calculated, and by failing to provide non-confidential summaries of Chinese submissions 

containing confidential information.

Neither China nor the United States appealed the panel's findings. The DSB adopted the panel 

report at its meeting on June 18, 2014. In December 2013, after the parties had filed their 

submissions and the hearings had taken place, but before the panel had issued its report, the 

 

268 WTO, “Dispute Settlement: DS431; China—Measures on Related to the Exportation of Rare Earths, Tungsten 

and Molybdenum” (accessed March 8, 2015). See also USTR, “United States Wins Victory in Rare Earths Dispute,”

March 26, 2014; USTR, “U.S. Trade Representative Michael Froman Announces U.S. Victory,” August 7, 2014; and 

USTR, 2015 Trade Policy Agenda, 2015, 65.
Chapter 3: The World Trade Organization

108 | www.usitc.gov

Ministry of Commerce announced the termination of the antidumping and countervailing 

duties on American-made cars and sport utility vehicles. 269

Argentina—Measures Affecting the Importation of Goods (DS444) 

In this dispute the United States challenged certain measures imposed by Argentina, including 

various licensing requirements that have the effect of restricting U.S. exports, as well as 

burdensome trade-balancing commitments that Argentina required as a condition for 

authorization to import goods. The United States claimed that the measures appear to be 

inconsistent with portions of Articles III:4, X, and XI:1 of the GATT 1994; Article 2 of the TRIMs 

Agreement; portions of Articles 1, 3, and 5 of the Agreement on Import Licensing Procedures; 

and Article 11 of the Safeguards Agreement. Argentina repealed its product-specific nonautomatic import licenses, which had been the subject of consultations and the U.S. panel 

request on January 25, 2013. But it continued to maintain a discretionary non-automatic import 

licensing requirement applicable to all goods imported into Argentina, as well as informal tradebalancing and similar requirements. The United States requested consultations on August 21, 

2012, and after consultations failed to resolve the dispute, on December 6, 2012, the United 

States requested the establishment of a panel. On January 28, 2013, the DSB established a 

single panel to examine this dispute and similar disputes brought by the EU and Japan (DS438 

and DS445, respectively), and the Director-General composed the panel on May 27, 2013.

The panel circulated its report to members on August 22, 2014. The panel found Argentina's 

import licensing requirement and its imposition of trade-balancing requirements to be 

inconsistent with Article XI of the GATT 1994.

On September 26, 2014, Argentina notified the DSB of its decision to appeal to the Appellate 

Body certain issues of law and legal interpretation in the panel report. On January 15, 2015, the 

Appellate Body issued its reports in DS438, DS444, and DS445. The Appellate Body upheld the 

panel's principal findings, including the panel's finding that Argentina's measure is inconsistent 

with Article XI:1 of the GATT 1994. 270

 

269 WTO, “Dispute Settlement: DS440; China—Anti-Dumping and Countervailing Duties on Certain Automobiles 

from the United States” (accessed March 17, 2015). See also USTR, “United States Wins Trade Enforcement Case 

against China,” May 23, 2014; USTR, “Fact Sheet: WTO Case Challenging Chinese Antidumping and Countervailing 

Duties,” May 23, 2014; and USTR, 2015 Trade Policy Agenda, 2015, 65. 270 WTO, “Dispute Settlement: DS444; Argentina—Measures Affecting the Importation of Goods” (accessed 

March 17, 2015). See also USTR, “United States Prevails in WTO Trade Enforcement Dispute against Argentina's 

Import Licensing Restrictions,” August 22, 2014; USTR, “WTO Appellate Body Affirms U.S. Victory in Trade 

Enforcement Dispute Against Argentina's Import Licensing Restrictions,” January 15, 2015; and USTR, 2015 Trade 

Policy Agenda, 2015, 59.
Year in Trade

U.S. International Trade Commission | 109

Reports in which the United States was the Respondent

United States—Anti-Dumping Measures on Certain Frozen Warmwater 

Shrimp from Viet Nam (DS429) 

In this dispute Vietnam claimed that various U.S. laws, regulations, administrative proceedings, 

and practices relating to zeroing271 are inconsistent with U.S. obligations under Articles I: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 

request for consultations was filed on February 20, 2012. After consultations failed to resolve 

the dispute, on December 17, 2012, Vietnam requested the establishment of a panel. The DSB 

established a panel on February 27, 2013, and the panel was composed on July 12, 2013. 

On November 17, 2014, the report of the panel was circulated to members. The panel found 

that certain of the U.S. Department of Commerce (USDOC) practices challenged by Vietnam are 

inconsistent with the GATT 1994 and the Antidumping Agreement, but also concluded that 

Vietnam had failed to establish its factual allegations with respect to a number of claims, 

including its claims with respect to section 129(c)(1) of the U.S. Uruguay Round Agreements Act 

(that the U.S. legislation is inconsistent with Articles 1, 9.2, 9.3, 11.1, and 18.1 of the 

Antidumping Agreement). 

On January 6, 2015, Vietnam notified the DSB of its decision to appeal to the Appellate Body 

certain issues of law and legal interpretation in the panel report. 272

United States—Countervailing Measures on Certain Hot-Rolled Carbon Steel 

Flat Products from India (DS436) 

In this dispute India claimed that the imposition of countervailing duties by the United States on 

certain hot-rolled carbon steel flat products from India was inconsistent with Articles I and VI of 

the GATT 1994 and with Articles 1, 2, 10–15, 19, 21, and 22 of the SCM Agreement. India 

requested consultations on April 12, 2012, and after consultations failed to resolve the dispute, 

on April 24, 2012, India requested establishment of a panel. The DSB established a panel on 

August 31, 2012, and the Director-General composed the panel on February 18, 2013.

 

271 Before 2006, the U.S. Department of Commerce engaged in a practice called “zeroing,” in which it treated nondumped transactions as having a zero margin for purposes of computing a weighted average dumping margin for a 

class or kind of subject merchandise. 272 WTO, “Dispute Settlement: DS429; United States—Anti-Dumping Measures on Certain Frozen Warmwater 

Shrimp from Viet Nam” (accessed March 19, 2015). See also USTR, 2015 Trade Policy Agenda, 2015, 93–94.
Chapter 3: The World Trade Organization

110 | www.usitc.gov

The panel report was circulated to members on July 14, 2014. The panel rejected India's claims 

against U.S. laws and regulations concerning facts available and benchmarks under Articles 12.7 

and 14(d) of the SCM Agreement. However, it found that the U.S. statute governing cumulation 

was inconsistent “as such” with Article 15 of the SCM Agreement because it required the 

cumulation of both dumped and subsidized imports in the context of countervailing-duty 

investigations. Consequently, the panel also found the U.S. International Trade Commission's 

injury determination breached U.S. obligations under Article 15. The panel rejected India's 

challenges under Article 1.1(a)(1) of the SCM Agreement to USDOC's “public body” findings in 

two instances, and also rejected most of India's claims concerning USDOC's application of facts 

available under Article 12.7 in the determination at issue. The panel also rejected most of 

India's claims against USDOC's specificity determinations under Article 2.1, and its calculation of 

certain benchmarks used in the proceedings under Article 14(d). The panel found that USDOC's 

determination that certain low-interest loans constituted “direct transfers” of funds was 

consistent with Article 1.1(a)(1), but that USDOC's determination that a captive mining program 

constituted a financial contribution was not consistent with Article 1.1(a). The panel also found 

that USDOC did not act inconsistently with Articles 11, 13, 21, and 22 of the SCM Agreement 

when it analyzed new subsidy allegations in the context of review proceedings. 

On August 8, 2014, India notified the DSB of its decision to appeal to the Appellate Body certain 

issues of law and legal interpretation, and the United States filed an appeal on August 13, 2014.

The Appellate Body circulated its report to members on December 8, 2014. The Appellate Body 

upheld the panel's findings regarding the U.S. benchmarks regulation, but found that certain 

instances of USDOC's application of these regulations was inconsistent with Article 14(d). The 

Appellate Body also upheld the panel's findings on cumulation, finding that the application of 

the U.S. statute in the injury determination at issue was inconsistent with Article 15 of the SCM 

Agreement, and that the U.S. statute was inconsistent with that provision, although on 

different grounds than those found by the panel. The Appellate Body rejected India's 

interpretation of “public body” under Article 1.1(a)(1), but reversed the panel's finding that 

USDOC acted consistently in making the public body determination at issue on appeal. With 

respect to specificity, the Appellate Body rejected each of India's appeals under Article 2.1(c), as 

it did with respect to India's challenge to the panel's finding under Article 1.1(a)(i) relating to 

“direct transfers of funds.” The Appellate Body also reversed the panel's finding that USDOC 

had acted inconsistently with Article 1.1(a)(1)(iii) in finding that a captive mining program 

constituted a provision of goods. Finally, the Appellate Body upheld the panel's rejection of 

India's claims under Articles 11, 13, and 21 regarding new subsidy allegations. The Appellate 

Body reversed the panel's findings under Article 22 of the SCM Agreement, but was unable to 

complete the analysis.
Year in Trade

U.S. International Trade Commission | 111

The DSB adopted the Appellate Body report and the panel report, as modified, at its meeting on 

December 19, 2014. 273

United States—Countervailing Duty Measures on Certain Products from China 

(DS437) 

In this dispute China challenged various aspects of 17 U.S. countervailing-duty investigations on 

certain products from China, including USDOC's calculation of benchmarks, initiation standard, 

determination of specificity of the subsidies, use of facts available, and finding that export 

restraints were a countervailable subsidy. China also challenged USDOC's determination that 

various Chinese state-owned enterprises were a “public body.” China claimed that the U.S. 

measures were inconsistent with U.S. obligations under Article VI of the GATT 1994; Articles 

1.1, 2, 11.2, 11.3, 12.7, and 14(d) of the SCM Agreement; and Article 15 of China's Accession 

Protocol. China requested consultations on May 25, 2012, and when consultations failed to 

resolve the dispute, on August 20, 2012, China requested establishment of a panel. A panel was 

established on September 28, 2012, and composed on November 26, 2012. The Chinese 

products covered by these investigations consisted of solar panels, wind towers, thermal paper, 

coated paper, tow-behind lawn groomers, kitchen shelving, steel sinks, citric acid, magnesia 

carbon bricks, pressure pipe, line pipe, seamless pipe, steel cylinders, drill pipe, oil country 

tubular goods, wire strand, and aluminum extrusions.

The panel report was circulated to members on July 14, 2014. The panel found that USDOC's 

determinations in 12 investigations that certain state-owned enterprises were “public bodies”

were inconsistent with Article 1.1(a)(1) of the SCM Agreement, based on the Appellate Body's 

analysis in DS379. However, the panel found in favor of the United States with respect to 

China's claims regarding USDOC's calculation of benchmarks, initiation of investigations, and 

use of facts available, and the panel upheld most of USDOC's specificity determinations. The 

panel also found that China established that USDOC acted inconsistently with Article 11.3 of the 

SCM Agreement by initiating countervailing-duty investigations of export restraints. 

On August 22, 2014, China appealed the panel's finding regarding USDOC's calculation of 

benchmarks, specificity determinations, and use of facts available, and on August 27, 2014, the 

United States appealed the panel's findings that a section of China's panel request setting forth 

claims related to USDOC's use of facts available was within the panel's terms of reference.

On December 18, 2014, the Appellate Body circulated its report. On benchmarks, the Appellate 

Body reversed the panel and found that USDOC's determination to use out-of-country 

 

273 WTO, “Dispute Settlement: DS436; United States—Countervailing Measures on Certain Hot-Rolled Carbon Steel 

Flat Products from India” (accessed March 8, 2015). See also USTR, “WTO Rejects the Majority of India's Challenges 

to U.S. Countervailing Duties,” July 14, 2014; and USTR, 2015 Trade Policy Agenda, 2015, 94–96.
Chapter 3: The World Trade Organization

112 | www.usitc.gov

benchmarks in four countervailing-duty investigations was inconsistent with Articles 1.1(b) and 

14(d) of the SCM Agreement. On specificity, the Appellate Body rejected one of China's claims 

with respect to the order of analysis in de facto specificity determinations. However, the 

Appellate Body reversed the panel's findings that USDOC did not act inconsistently with Article 

2.1 when it failed to identify the “jurisdiction of the granting authority” and “subsidy 

programme” before finding the subsidy specific. On facts available, the Appellate Body 

accepted China's claim that the panel's findings regarding facts available are inconsistent with 

Article 11 of the DSU, and reversed the panel's finding that USDOC's application of facts 

available was not inconsistent with Article 12.7 of the SCM Agreement. Finally, the Appellate 

Body rejected the U.S. appeal of the panel's finding that China's panel request failed to meet 

the requirement of Article 6.2 of the DSU to present an adequate summary of the legal basis to 

make its claim sufficient to present the problem clearly. 274

United States—Countervailing and Anti-dumping Measures on Certain 

Products from China (DS449) 

In this dispute China challenged (1) new U.S. legislation in P.L. 112-99 that allows the 

application of countervailing measures to non-market economy countries; (2) U.S. 

countervailing-duty determinations or actions made between November 20, 2006, and March 

13, 2012, with respect to Chinese products; (3) U.S. antidumping measures associated with the 

concerned countervailing-duty measures as well as the combined effect of these antidumping 

measures and the parallel countervailing-duty measures; and (4) the U.S. failure to provide 

USDOC with legal authority to identify and avoid the double remedies in investigations or 

reviews initiated between November 2006 and March 2012. China alleged that these measures 

are inconsistent with Articles 10, 15, 19, 21, and 32 of the SCM Agreement; Articles VI, X:1, X:2, 

and X:3 of the GATT 1994; and Articles 9 and 11 of the Antidumping Agreement. China filed its 

request for consultations on September 17, 2012, and after consultations failed to resolve the 

dispute, on November 30, 2012, China asked for the establishment of a panel. The DSB 

established a panel on December 17, 2012, and the Director-General composed the panel on 

March 4, 2013.

The panel issued its report on March 27, 2014. The panel rejected all of China's claims 

concerning the consistency of P.L. 112-99. However, the panel found that U.S. authorities failed 

to “investigate and avoid double remedies.” Therefore, the panel found that 25 countervailingduty proceedings involving imports from China initiated between November 20, 2006, and 

March 13, 2012, were inconsistent with U.S. WTO obligations.

 

274 WTO, “Dispute Settlement: DS437; United States—Countervailing Duty Measures on Certain Products from 

China” (accessed March 8, 2015). See also USTR, “WTO Panel Issues a Mixed Result in China's Challenge to U.S. 

Countervailing Duties,” July 14, 2014; and USTR, 2015 Trade Policy Agenda, 2015, 96.
Year in Trade

U.S. International Trade Commission | 113

On April 8, 2014, China appealed the panel's interpretation of Article X:2 of the GATT 1994. On 

April 17, 2014, the United States filed its own appeal, challenging the sufficiency of China's 

panel request under Article 6.2 of the DSU, and requesting reversal of the panel's findings 

relating to the 25 CVD proceedings involving imports from China. 

The Appellate Body issued its report on July 7, 2014. The Appellate Body found that the panel 

erred in its legal interpretation of Article X:2 of the GATT, and reversed the panel's findings with 

respect to P.L. 112-99. The Appellate Body was unable to complete the analysis to determine 

the consistency of P.L. 112-99 with Article X:2 due to the lack of undisputed facts on the record.

The Appellate Body found that China's panel request complied with Article 6.2 of the DSU.

On July 22, 2014, the DSB adopted the Appellate Body's recommendations and rulings in the 

dispute. On August 21, 2014, the United States stated its intention to comply with the DSB's 

findings. 275

 

275 WTO, “Dispute Settlement: DS449; China—Countervailing and Anti-Dumping Measures on Certain Products 

from China” (accessed March 17, 2015). See also USTR, “United States Welcomes WTO's Rejection of China's 

Challenge to U.S. Countervailing Duty Law, Regrets Findings on Challenge to Specific Proceedings,” March 27, 2014; 

USTR, “China Fails a Second Time in Its Challenge to U.S. Countervailing Duty Law,” July 7, 2014; and USTR, 2015 

Trade Policy Agenda, 2015, 97–98.

Year in Trade

U.S. International Trade Commission | 115

Chapter 4

Other Trade Agreements and Regional 

Activities

This chapter summarizes trade-related activities during 2014 in two major multilateral 

organizations—the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) and the 

Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) forum. It also covers developments during the year in 

the negotiation of a Trade in Services Agreement (TISA) and activities conducted under trade 

and investment framework agreements (TIFAs).

Organisation for Economic Co-operation and 

Development

Ministerial Council Meeting

The 2014 OECD Ministerial Council met May 6–7, 2014, focusing on broad themes pertaining to 

economic progress in the major advanced economies, as well as in the major emerging market 

economies. These themes touched on a range of issues, including how to promote resilient 

economies and inclusive societies, new approaches to economic challenges, environmentally 

sustainable growth, how to strengthen the multilateral trade system, promotion of a better 

business climate, outreach to global economic partners, economic development, and improving 

the efficiency and productivity of the OECD itself.276

On the subject of trade, ministers expressed concern that the 2008–09 global economic 

downturn has given way to weak trade and investment flows. This weak recovery, in turn, has 

economic and social implications for the functioning of global value chains, job creation, 

innovation, and economic growth. Among other points, ministers reiterated strong support for 

OECD's work on global value chains and for joint OECD-WTO work on the Trade in Value Added 

(TIVA) database. During the ministerial meeting, the OECD also launched its Services Trade 

Restrictiveness Index to help further trade analysis. Ministers stressed the need for continued 

government efforts to remove barriers both at the border and behind the border. They agreed 

 

276 OECD, Council, “Meeting of the Council at Ministerial Level, 6–7 May 2014––2014 Ministerial Council Statement 

(Adopted at the Council Meeting at Ministerial Level on 7 May 2014),” C/MIN(2014)15/FINAL, May 7, 2014.
Chapter 4: Other Trade Agreements and Regional Activities

116 | www.usitc.gov

that domestic regulatory reform and policies to liberalize trade in services are vital to 

generating further economic benefits available through global value chains. 277

Trade Committee

The Trade Committee held three meetings in 2014: February 12, May 27–28, and November 5. 

At the 163rd session of the Trade Committee in February, the committee heard reports that 

included plans for completing the Services Trade Restrictiveness Index. The committee also 

heard an update on the status of the OECD Southeast Asia regional program, a global outreach 

strategy designed to engage countries in the region more systematically on trade as well as on 

other topics of mutual interest.278

At the committee’s 164th session in May, the OECD Secretariat reported further on outreach 

efforts to Southeast Asian countries, particularly in the areas of global value chains, trade 

facilitation, and the Services Trade Restrictiveness Index with the APEC countries. The 

committee also discussed upcoming events under the auspices of the Trade Committee, 

notably the Global Forum on Trade, and planned activities with the Group of 20 (G20) 279 trade 

ministers. The secretariat also updated the committee on progress in the Market Openness 

Review of Colombia. 280

In November, the Trade Committee held its 165th session. It gauged progress made on its 

2013–14 work and budget program, and considered upcoming topics under its 2015–16 work 

program, notably on global value chains, the economics of the Internet, and aligning 

government policies toward transition to lower-carbon energy emissions. 281 In addition, on 

 

277 OECD, Council, “Meeting of the Council at Ministerial Level, 6–7 May 2014––Chair’s Summary,” C/MIN(2014)16, 

May 7, 2014.

278 OECD, TAD, TC, “Summary Record: 163rd Session of the Trade Committee––Confidential––12 February 2014,”

TAD/TC/M(2014)1, May 13, 2014. 279 The Group of Twenty represents the 20 major advanced and emerging world economies. See G20, G20 

Members, http://g20.org/ (accessed March 12, 2014). 280 OECD, TAD, TC, “Summary Record: 164th Session of the Trade Committee––Plenary Session, 27–28 May 2014,”

TAD/TC/M(2014)2, September 15, 2014; OECD, TAD, TC, “Summary Record: 164th Session of the Trade 

Committee––Confidential Session, 27–28 May 2014,” TAD/TC/M(2014)2/ANN, September 15, 2014. Market 

Openness Reviews are conducted by the OECD Trade Committee as part of the OECD accession process. The 

process involves a review of the country's trade policy and identification of best practices. For example, in 2011, 

the OECD completed four country reviews (Chile, Estonia, Israel, and Slovenia), which examined domestic 

regulations and their direct or indirect effects on international competition. As a result of these reviews, the OECD 

recommended policy options for improving the domestic regulatory framework of international trade and 

investment liberalization. See OECD, "Reviews of Market Openness: Chile, Estonia, Israel and Slovenia" 

http://www.oecd.org/tad/tradedev/reviewsofmarketopennesschileestoniaisraelandslovenia.htm (accessed July 2, 

2015). 281 OECD, TAD, TC, “Summary Record: 165th Session of the Trade Committee––Plenary Session––6 November 

2014,” TAD/TC/M(2014)3, December 18, 2014.
Year in Trade

U.S. International Trade Commission | 117

November 5, 2014, the Trade Committee convened to discuss ongoing efforts to support the 

G20 trade policy agenda, including work undertaken jointly by the OECD and International 

Monetary Fund to assess the potential contribution of trade-related structural reform on 

boosting economic growth and employment.282 The committee also discussed ongoing OECD

work on the impact of fossil fuel subsidies, related policy reforms, and the trade implications of 

such subsidies.

Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation

Background

Established in 1989 and composed of 21 member economies, the Asia-Pacific Economic 

Cooperation (APEC) is a regional economic forum.283 Since its inception, APEC has aimed to 

increase prosperity in the region by accelerating regional economic integration and promoting 

inclusive and sustainable growth. 284 APEC decisions are made by consensus and commitments 

are undertaken voluntarily.285

The operational structure of APEC is divided into the policy level and the working level. At the 

policy level, the annual APEC Economic Leaders' Meeting sets overarching policy direction; an 

annual APEC ministerial meeting, sectoral ministerial meetings, and an APEC Business Advisory 

Council meeting provide strategic policy recommendations. At the working level, four core 

committees, including the Committee on Trade and Investment (CTI), carry out activities and 

projects. Subcommittees, experts' groups, working groups, and task forces support the 

activities and projects led by these four core committees.286 The APEC Secretariat, based in 

Singapore, supports the APEC process by providing coordination, technical and advisory 

support, information management, communications, and public outreach services.287

In 1994, at a meeting in Bogor, Indonesia, member economies adopted the Bogor Goals of 

creating a free and open trade and investment area in the Asia-Pacific by 2010 for industrialized 

member economies and by 2020 for developing member economies. APEC works in three key 

areas toward the Bogor Goals: (1) trade and investment liberalization that reduces and 

 

282 OECD, TAD, TC, “Summary Record: 165th Session of the Trade Committee––G20 Session––5 November 2014,”

TAD/TC/M(2014)4/ADD, December 18, 2014. 283 In 2014, the 21 APEC member economies were Australia; Brunei Darussalam (Brunei); Canada; Chile; China; 

Hong Kong, China; Indonesia; Japan; South 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 “About APEC,” http://www.apec.org/About-Us/About-APEC.aspx (accessed on February 24, 2015). 284 APEC, APEC at a Glance, 2015. 285 Ibid. 286 APEC, “About Us: How APEC Operates” (accessed on February 24, 2015). 287 APEC, APEC at a Glance, 2015.
Chapter 4: Other Trade Agreements and Regional Activities

118 | www.usitc.gov

eventually eliminates tariff and nontariff barriers to trade and investment; (2) business 

facilitation, which focuses on reducing business transaction costs, improving access to trade 

information, and aligning policy and business strategies to facilitate growth and free, open 

trade; and (3) economic and technical cooperation that provides training in all APEC member 

economies to build their capacities to take advantage of global trade. 288

In order to make progress on achieving the Bogor Goals, APEC member economies follow the 

strategic roadmap agreed upon in Osaka, Japan, in 1995, also known as the Osaka Action 

Agenda. This agenda provides a framework and sets up these general principles: 

comprehensiveness; WTO-consistency; comparability; nondiscrimination; transparency; 

standstill (i.e., taking no measures that increase levels of protection); simultaneous start, 

continuous process, and differentiated timetables; flexibility; and cooperation. 289

APEC member economies report progress towards achieving free and open trade and 

investment goals through Individual Action Plans, which each must submit to APEC annually. As 

specified in the Osaka Action Agenda, APEC member economies report progress in the 

following areas: tariffs, nontariff measures, services, investment, standards and conformance, 

customs procedures, intellectual property rights, competition policy, government procurement, 

deregulation/regulatory review, WTO obligations, dispute mediation, mobility of business 

people, information gathering and analysis, transparency, and regional trade agreements 

(RTAs) or free trade agreements (FTAs). APEC also issues Collective Action Plans, which detail 

the collective actions and progress in the above areas for all APEC member economies. 290

Part of APEC's work toward the Bogor Goals is the Regional Economic Integration agenda. This 

multi-year program includes analysis of existing RTAs and FTAs, the establishment of model 

measures for FTAs, and an examination of the prospect for a single, region-wide FTA, commonly 

known as the Free Trade Area of the Asia-Pacific (FTAAP).291

2014 APEC Developments

In 2014, under the chairmanship of China, APEC focused on “advancing regional economic 

integration, promoting innovative development, economic reform and growth, and 

strengthening comprehensive connectivity and infrastructure development.” 292 At the 2014 

APEC meetings, a variety of issues were addressed, including cross-border infrastructure 

 

288 APEC, “About Us: Scope of Work” (accessed on February 24, 2015). 289 APEC, “About Us: Action Plans” (accessed on February 25, 2015). 290 Ibid. 291 APEC, “Regional Economic Integration Agenda” (accessed on January 14, 2014). 292 APEC, “APEC China 2014 Commences in Ningbo,” February 22, 2014. 
Year in Trade

U.S. International Trade Commission | 119

investment; support for small, medium, and micro-enterprises; promoting a more active role 

for women in the economy; food security and trade; and green growth. 293

The CTI reported substantial progress in the following areas in 2014: (1) building capacity to 

support member economies in implementing their commitments to reduce applied tariffs on 

the 54 products on the 2012 APEC List of Environmental Goods to 5 percent or less by the end 

of 2015; (2) establishing a model E-Port network to share best practices in applying information 

technology to improve maritime port efficiency; (3) agreeing in principle to extend the validity 

period of the APEC Business Travel Card from three to five years, with a target implementation 

date of August 2015; and (4) taking actions to support the adoption and maintenance of 

technical standards that will facilitate more trade in electric vehicles. 294 Progress in 2014 on the 

Bogor Goals, FTAAP, and global value chain (GVC) cooperation are described separately in the 

sections below.

The Bogor Goals

In August 2014, APEC published the 2014 Bogor Goals Progress Report, which assessed progress 

made by its 21 member economies toward achieving the Bogor Goals in recent years. The 

report cited the following major achievements as well as areas for improvement:

• Tariffs: the overall reduction of the APEC average MFN tariff rate since 2010 has been 

marginal. Average MFN tariff rates in non-agricultural products declined, while average 

MFN tariff rates for agricultural products increased; 

• Nontariff measures (NTMs): while there was progress in eliminating some NTMs, new NTMs 

were also imposed (e.g., export restrictions and taxes). The number of NTM measures 

affecting trade in APEC economies increased during the period mid-October 2012/midNovember 2013 compared to the similar period a year earlier; 

• Services: APEC economies have eased some market access requirements for foreign firms 

and thus experienced increasing participation of foreign firms in a number of services 

sectors. However, restrictions in terms of market access, national treatment, local presence, 

and local content remain common in some services sectors; 

• Investment: APEC economies have been implementing policies to improve investment 

conditions. Examples include relaxing conditions for foreign ownership in particular sectors; 

reducing restrictions on repatriation of capital, profits, or royalties; lowering taxes or 

avoiding double taxation; and simplifying administrative procedures. However, investment 

 

293 APEC, “Events,” http://www.apec.org/Events-Calendar.aspx (accessed on February 25, 2014). 294 APEC, APEC Committee on Trade and Investment 2014 Annual Report, November 2014.
Chapter 4: Other Trade Agreements and Regional Activities

120 | www.usitc.gov

restrictions, such as the use of a negative list 295 and/or investment thresholds in certain 

sectors, remain persistent, undermining the overall investment environment.

• Customs procedures: APEC economies have reported progress in simplifying customs 

procedures and reducing time to export/import by implementing and expanding the Single 

Window, Authorized Economic Operator (AEO) programs, and non-intrusive inspection 

systems through modern scanners. As a result, in 2013, the average time to export/import a 

container in APEC economies was reduced by 0.5 day in comparison to 2011 and by 1.5 days 

in comparison to 2008. 296

At the APEC Economic Leaders’ Meeting in Beijing on November 10–11, participants noted the 

significant progress made towards achieving the Bogor Goals, reaffirmed their commitment to 

fully achieve the Bogor Goals by 2020, and urged all member economies, particularly developed 

ones, to take more concrete actions toward attaining the Bogor Goals. 297

Free Trade Area of the Asia-Pacific (FTAAP)

In 2006, APEC economies agreed to examine the long-term prospect of a FTAAP. 298 In 2010, 

APEC leaders instructed APEC members to take concrete steps toward the realization of 

FTAAP, 299 and that FTAAP should be pursued as a comprehensive free trade agreement. 300

At the 2014 APEC Economic Leaders' Meeting, APEC leaders announced that “APEC should 

make more important and meaningful contributions as an incubator to translate the FTAAP 

from vision to reality,” and endorsed the Beijing Roadmap for APEC's Contribution to the 

Realization of the FTAAP. This roadmap lists the following steps to achieving the FTAAP: 

(1) Launching a collective strategic study on the issues related to realizing the FTAAP; 

(2) Increasing transparency of existing and recently concluded RTAs/FTAs by advancing work 

under the APEC Information Sharing Mechanism on RTAs/FTAs; 

(3) Continuing capacity-building activities in pursuit of the FTAAP under the Action Plan 

Framework of the second Capacity Building Needs Initiative; 

(4) Accelerating “at the border” trade liberalization and facilitation efforts, improving the 

business environment “behind the border,” and enhancing regional connectivity “across the 

border”; and 

 

295 A “negative list” lists those sectors where investments are explicitly excluded from the terms of the agreement. 296 APEC, APEC's Bogor Goals Progress Report (as of 8 August 2014), August 2014. 297 APEC, “2014 APEC Ministerial Meeting Joint Ministerial Statement,” November 8, 2014; 2014 Leaders' 

Declaration, November 11, 2014. 298 APEC, “Pathways to FTAAP,” November 14, 2010. 299 APEC, “APEC Ministers Renew Commitment to Resist Protectionism,” November 11, 2010. 300 APEC, “Pathways to FTAAP,” November 14, 2010. 
Year in Trade

U.S. International Trade Commission | 121

(5) Strengthening engagement with the business sector via the APEC Business Advisory Council 

and other direct routes.301

Advancing Global Value Chain Development and Supply Chain 

Connectivity

In 2014, APEC member economies endorsed the APEC Strategic Blueprint for Promoting Global 

Value Chains Development and Cooperation as the mechanism they would use to strengthen 

economic cooperation within the global and regional value chain network.302 The blueprint 

responded to the agreement of APEC leaders in 2013 to promote global value chain (GVC) 

development and cooperation in the APEC region on the basis of previous work on 

connectivity. 303 The blueprint listed the actions that APEC economies agreed to take, including 

addressing trade and investment issues that impact GVCs, cooperating on improving statistics 

related to GVCs, maximizing the contribution of services and services trade to GVCs in the 

region, enabling developing economies to better participate in GVCs, helping small and 

medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) to benefit from GVCs, improving the investment climate for 

GVC development, adopting effective trade facilitation measures, enhancing GVCs' resiliency, 

encouraging private-public partnerships for GVCs, and strengthening collaboration with other 

stakeholders on GVCs. 304

The CTI noted progress in several areas related to GVC initiatives in 2014. These included 

continuing the initiative on manufacturing services in supply chains/value chains; starting the 

initiative on developing the APEC Trade in Value Added database; making progress on 

integrating SMEs into GVCs in major industries such as IT/electronics, textiles, automotive, and 

agribusiness; finalizing the diagnostic reports on regional supply chain 

weaknesses/chokepoints; and beginning capacity-building activities to improve regional supply 

chain performance in the areas of pre-arrival processing, expediting shipments, release of 

goods, advance rulings, and electronic payments. 305

 

301 APEC, “2014 Leaders' Declaration: Annex A: The Beijing Roadmap,” November 11, 2014. 302 The term global value chains (GVCs) refers to the phenomenon that different stages of production processes 

are located across different countries. For more information, see OECD, “Global Value Chains,” n.d. 

303 APEC, “2014 Leaders' Declarations: Annex B: APEC Strategic Blueprint,” November 11, 2014. 304 Ibid. 305 APEC, APEC Committee on Trade and Investment 2014: Annual Report to Ministers, November 2014.
Chapter 4: Other Trade Agreements and Regional Activities

122 | www.usitc.gov

Negotiations on a Trade in Services 

Agreement

In April 2013, negotiations were launched on a Trade in Services Agreement (TISA) among a 

group of WTO members.306 Taken together, this group represented roughly two-thirds of world 

services trade with a combined services market of over $30 trillion, according to the U.S. State 

Department. 307 At the end of 2014, the 23 TISA participants were Australia; Canada; Chile; 

Colombia; Costa Rica; the EU; Hong Kong, China; Iceland; Israel; Japan; Korea; Liechtenstein; 

Mexico; New Zealand; Norway; Pakistan; Panama; Paraguay; Peru; Switzerland; Taiwan; Turkey; 

and the United States.308

After four negotiating rounds in 2013, participants had agreed on six major topics to be 

attached as annexes to a completed agreement. These six major areas initially covered 

domestic regulation and transparency; financial services; information and communications 

technology (ICT) services, including electronic commerce; movement of natural persons 

(temporary entry of business persons); professional services, including computer services; and

transportation services, covering maritime transport. 

The fifth round of TISA negotiations was held February 17–24, 2014, and was chaired by the EU. 

During this round, market-access negotiations were opened with 21 of 23 participants 

submitting initial offers.309 In addition, participants continued discussions on the annexes, 

agreeing to draw up negotiating texts in these areas from proposals submitted to date.

The sixth round was held April 28–May 2, 2014, and was chaired by Australia. Market-access 

negotiations continued, with discussions focused on the six annexes. The participants agreed to 

add air transport to the transportation annex.

 

306 In early 2012, a group of WTO members opened exploratory talks on the possibility of a trade in services 

agreement to help advance the liberalization of services trade. Although active participation in the group has 

varied since these first discussions, the initial 16 participants included Australia; Canada; Chile; Colombia; the 

European Union; Hong Kong, China; Japan; South Korea; Mexico; New Zealand; Norway; Pakistan; Singapore (later 

left the group); Switzerland; Taiwan; and the United States. For further details, see USITC, The Year in Trade 2013: 

Operation of the Trade Agreements Program, 65th Report, July 2014, 100–101. 307 USDOS, “Encouraging Active Participation in the Trade in Services Agreement (TISA) Negotiations (State 

091920),” July 28, 2014, par. 3. 308 Pakistan and Paraguay have attended TISA talks since 2013, although irregularly. USDOS, “Encouraging Active 

Participation in the Trade in Services Agreement (TISA) Negotiations (State 091920),” July 28, 2014, par. 4–6. 

USDOS, “Trade in Services Agreement (TISA) Negotiations Proceed While Substantive Issues Are Discussed in Ninth 

Round (State 000546),” January 5, 2015, par. 3. Uruguay joined the negotiations for the first time in February 2015, 

becoming the 24th participant.

309 Government of Australia, DFAT, “Trade in Services Agreement,” n.d. (accessed February 26, 2015).
Year in Trade

U.S. International Trade Commission | 123

The seventh negotiating round was held June 23–27, 2014, and was chaired by the United 

States. Negotiations continued on the six annexes. Talks on the transportation sector covered 

air and maritime transport services, and new proposals covering road transport and 

competitive delivery services were considered.310

The eighth negotiating round was held September 21–25, 2014, and was chaired by the EU. 

Negotiators continued to make progress on the six annexes.311 The participants agreed to 

expand the transportation service sector once again to now cover air, maritime, and road 

transport and competitive delivery services.

312 They also discussed possible new proposals that 

would address direct selling services, environmental services, and government procurement.313

The participants further agreed to expand discussions on market access to include talks 

between negotiating sessions.

The ninth negotiating round was held December 1–5, 2014, and was chaired by Australia. 

Discussions continued on the six annexes. Participants considered proposals upcoming in 2015, 

notably those involving environmental and energy services, services facilitating patient 

mobility, and government procurement. Parties also reported on progress in bilateral marketaccess discussions, held since the eighth TISA round in September.314

Trade and Investment Framework 

Agreements

At yearend 2014, the United States had entered into 50 trade and investment framework 

agreements (table 4.1). TIFAs provide a strategic framework and principles for dialogues on 

trade and investment issues between the United States and various trading partners. These 

TIFAs cover a range of issues, including market access, labor, the environment, IPR protection, 

 

310 Government of Australia, DFAT, “Trade in Services Agreement,” n.d. (accessed February 26, 2015). 311 Ibid. 312 USDOS, “Trade in Services Agreement (TISA) Negotiations Make Slow Progress in Eighth Round (State 123984),”

October 20, 2014, par. 2.

313 Government of Australia, DFAT, “Trade in Services Agreement,” n.d. (accessed February 26, 2015). 314 Ibid. The 10th round was held February 9–13, 2015, chaired by the United States, and was attended by Uruguay 

for the first time. Parties focused on the six annexes and also considered proposals put forward in new areas—

environmental and energy services, services facilitating patient mobility, and government procurement. The 11th 

round was held April 13–17, 2015. Government of Australia, DFAT, “Trade in Services Agreement,” n.d. (accessed 

March 25, 2015); USDOS, “Trade in Services Agreement (TISA) Negotiations Make Slow Progress in Eighth Round 

(State 123984),” October 20, 2014, par. 1.
Chapter 4: Other Trade Agreements and Regional Activities

124 | www.usitc.gov

Table 4.1: United States Trade and Investment Framework Agreements in 2014

Type and name Date signed

Bilateral

U.S.-Afghanistan TIFA September 21, 2004

U.S.-Algeria TIFA July 13, 2001

U.S.-Angola TIFA May, 2009

U.S.-Bahrain TIFAa June 18, 2002

U.S.- Bangladesh TICFA November 25, 2013

U.S.-Brunei TIFA December 16, 2002

U.S.-Burma TIFA May 21, 2013

U.S.-Cambodia TIFA July 14, 2006

U.S.-Egypt TIFA July 1, 1999

U.S.-Georgia TIFA June 20, 2007

U.S.-Ghana TIFA February 26, 1999

U.S.-Iceland TICF January 15, 2009

U.S.-Indonesia TIFA July 16, 1996

U.S.-Iraq TIFA July 11, 2005

U.S.-Kuwait TIFA February 6, 2004

U.S.-Lebanon TIFA November 30, 2006

U.S.-Liberia TIFA February 15, 2007

U.S.-Libya TIFA May 20, 2010

U.S.-Malaysia TIFA May 10, 2004

U.S.-Maldives TIFA October 17, 2009

U.S.-Mauritius TIFA September 18, 2006

U.S.-Mongolia TIFA July 15, 2004

U.S.-Mozambique TIFA June 21, 2005

U.S.-Nepal TIFA April 15, 2011

U.S.-New Zealand TIFA October 2, 1992

U.S.-Nigeria TIFA February 16, 2000

U.S.-Oman TIFAa July 7, 2004

U.S.-Pakistan TIFA June 25, 2003

U.S.-Philippines TIFA November 9, 1989

U.S.-Qatar TIFA March 19, 2004

U.S.-Rwanda TIFA June 7, 2006

U.S.-Saudi Arabia TIFA July 31, 2003

U.S.-South Africa TIFA February 18, 1999

U.S.-Sri Lanka TIFA July 25, 2002

U.S.-Switzerland TICF May 25, 2006

U.S.-Thailand TIFA October 23, 2002

U.S.-Tunisia TIFA October 2, 2002

U.S.-Turkey TIFA September 29, 1999

U.S.-Ukraine TICA April 1, 2008

U.S.-United Arab Emirates TIFA March 15, 2004
Year in Trade

U.S. International Trade Commission | 125

Type and name Date signed

U.S.-Uruguay TIFAb January 25, 2007

U.S.-Vietnam TIFA June 21, 2007

U.S.-Yemen TIFA February 6, 2004

Regional

U.S.-Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) TIFAc August 25, 2006

U.S.-Caribbean Community (CARICOM) TIFAd May 28, 2013

U.S.-Central Asian TIFA (Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, Turkmenistan, and 

Uzbekistan) 

June 1, 2004

U.S.-Common Market for Eastern and Southern Africa (COMESA) TIFAe October 29, 2001

U.S.-East African Community TIFA (Burundi, Kenya, Rwanda, Tanzania, and Uganda) July 16, 2008

U.S-Economic Community of West African States (ECOWAS)f August 5, 2014

U.S.-GCC Framework Agreement for Trade, Economic, Investment, and Technical 

Cooperation (Bahrain, Kuwait, Oman, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, United Arab Emirates)

September 25, 2012

U.S.-West African Economic and Monetary Union (WAEMU) TIFAg April 24, 2002

Source: USTR, “Trade and Investment Framework Agreements,” n.d. (accessed March 5, 2015); USTR, “United States and West 

African Nations Sign Agreement Promoting Trade,” April 24, 2002; USTR, “East African Community,” n.d. (accessed April 8, 

2015). 

Note: TICF stands for Trade and Investment Cooperation Forum, TICA stands for Trade and Investment Cooperation Agreement, 

and TICFA stands for Trade and Investment Cooperation Forum Agreement. All are still considered TIFAs by USTR. For more 

information, see USTR, https://ustr.gov/trade-agreements/trade-investment-framework-agreements. a Bahrain and Oman have both FTAs and TIFAs in effect with the United States. bOn October 2, 2008, the United States and Uruguay signed a TIFA protocol on Trade and Environment, and a TIFA protocol 

on Trade Facilitation. c

The 10 countries of ASEAN are Brunei, Burma, Cambodia, Indonesia, Laos, Malaysia, the Philippines, Singapore, Thailand, 

and Vietnam. d The 15 members of CARICOM are Antigua and Barbuda, The Bahamas, Barbados, Belize, Dominica, Grenada, Guyana, Haiti, 

Jamaica, Montserrat, Saint Lucia, St. Kitts and Nevis, St. Vincent and the Grenadines, Suriname, and Trinidad and Tobago. It also 

has 5 associate members: Anguilla, Bermuda, British Virgin Islands, Cayman Islands, and Turks and Caicos Islands. e

The 19 members of COMESA are Burundi, Comoros, Democratic Republic of the Congo, Djibouti, Egypt, Eritrea, Ethiopia, 

Kenya, Libya, Madagascar, Malawi, Mauritius, Rwanda, Seychelles, Sudan, Swaziland, Uganda, Zambia, and Zimbabwe. f

The 15 members of ECOWAS are Benin, Burkina Faso, Cabo Verde, Côte d'Ivoire, The Gambia, Ghana, Guinea, Guinea-Bissau, 

Liberia, Mali, Niger, Nigeria, Senegal, Sierra Leone, and Togo. g

The 8 members of WAEMU are Benin, Burkina Faso, Côte d'Ivoire, Guinea-Bissau, Mali, Niger, Senegal, and Togo. 

and capacity building. 315 TIFA councils meet to discuss these issues on a regular basis (generally 

annually).316 In 2014, one new TIFA was signed, and various TIFA councils met. 

Developments in New TIFAs during 2014

During the August 2014 U.S.-Africa Leaders' Summit, the United States announced that it had 

signed a TIFA with the Economic Community of West African States (ECOWAS). The aim of the 

TIFA is to provide a mechanism for expanding trade not only between the United States and the 

15 members of ECOWAS, but also within the ECOWAS region.317 U.S. imports from ECOWAS 

 

315 USTR, “Trade and Investment Framework Agreements,” n.d. (accessed March 5, 2015). 316 Ibid. 317 USTR, “The United States and the Economic Community of West African States,” August 5, 2015.
Chapter 4: Other Trade Agreements and Regional Activities

126 | www.usitc.gov

were valued at $5.57 billion in 2014, and exports to the region totaled $9.78 billion. 318 The top 

three imports were crude petroleum ($2.7 billion), cocoa beans ($966 million), and light oils 

($696 million), which made up over 77 percent of all U.S. imports from ECOWAS in 2014. 319 The 

top three U.S. exports to ECOWAS were crude petroleum ($1.8 billion), light oils ($1.5 billion), 

and passenger motor vehicles with cylinder capacity between 1,500 and 3,000 cc ($887 million). 

These accounted for just over 42 percent of all U.S. exports to ECOWAS in 2014. 320

Developments in Existing TIFAs during 2014

During 2014, the following TIFA councils met:

• On March 5, the inaugural meeting of the U.S.-Iraq TIFA Council took place. The parties 

discussed various trade and investment issues, including the investment climate, business 

development, government procurement, import policies, labor, agricultural trade, and 

service sector issues. 321

• On March 11, at the eighth meeting of the U.S.-Nigeria TIFA Council, discussions centered 

on improving market access, utilization of AGOA, IPR protection, implementation of the 

WTO Trade Facilitation Agreement, and improving the bilateral investment climate between 

the two countries.322

• On March 19–20, during the U.S.-Philippines TIFA Council meeting, the two countries 

agreed to a program of expanded engagement on bilateral, regional, and multilateral 

issues. 323 Specifically, agriculture, IPR, workers' rights, and the proposed Trans-Pacific 

Partnership agreement were discussed.

• On April 1, the United States hosted the second meeting of the U.S.-Angola TIFA Council. 

Trade and investment between the two countries, SMEs, AGOA utilization, IPR protection, 

agriculture, and bilateral investment opportunities were discussed. 324

• On April 5, the eighth round of the U.S.-Taiwan TIFA Council meetings was held in 

Washington DC. The United States welcomed recent Taiwanese progress on improving 

 

318 USITC, DataWeb (accessed March 13, 2015); data compiled from official statistics of the U.S. Department of 

Commerce for the 2010–14 period, reflecting all official revisions of previously published data up to June 2014. 319 Ibid. 320 Ibid. 321 USTR, “United States and Iraq Hold Inaugural Trade and Investment Framework Agreement Meeting,” March 5, 

2014.

322 USTR, “United States and Nigeria Hold 8th Trade and Investment Framework Agreement Meeting,” March 11, 

2014.

323 USTR, “United States and Philippines Commit to Intensified Engagement on Trade,” March 20, 2014. 324 USTR, “United States and Angola Hold Second Trade and Investment Framework Agreement Meeting,” April 1, 

2014.
Year in Trade

U.S. International Trade Commission | 127

trade secrets protection and addressing various pharmaceutical issues. In addition, the two 

sides discussed various outstanding agricultural trade issues.325

• On May 14, at a U.S.-Pakistan TIFA Council meeting, the two sides agreed to a joint action 

plan to expand bilateral trade and investment flows over the next five years.326 The plan's

goals include (1) diversifying agricultural production; (2) enhancing intellectual property

protection; (3) implementing the WTO Trade Facilitation Agreement; (4) engaging on 

Pakistan’s accession to the WTO Government Procurement Agreement; (5) increasing trade 

in services; (6) outreach to U.S. state and local governments; (7) promoting 

entrepreneurship; and (8) increasing dialogue between the countries' respective private 

sectors.327

• On June 11, the ninth meeting of the U.S.-Central Asia TIFA Council met in Washington, DC, 

to discuss WTO membership, customs, investment, standards and sanitary measures, and 

procurement. 328

• Lastly, on June 16, the U.S.-Tunisia TIFA Council met to discuss various key areas of trade 

and investment. Topics included market access, services, investment, IPR, product 

standards, export and investment promotion, SMEs, and female labor force participation. 329

 

325 USTR, “United States and Taiwan Enhance Trade Ties,” April 5, 2014. 326 USTR, “Joint Statement from the Seventh Meeting of the U.S.-Pakistan TIFA Council,” May 14, 2014. 327 Ibid. 328 USTR, “Joint Statement from the United States-Central Asia Trade and Investment Framework Agreement (TIFA) 

Council Meeting,” June 19, 2014. 329 USTR, “Joint Statement of the U.S.-Tunisia Council on Trade and Investment,” June 15, 2014. 

Year in Trade

U.S. International Trade Commission | 129

Chapter 5

U.S. Free Trade Agreements

This chapter summarizes developments related to U.S. free trade agreements (FTAs) during 

2014. It describes trends in U.S. merchandise trade with FTA partners, the status of U.S. FTA 

negotiations during the year, and developments in FTAs already in force, including major 

activities and dispute settlement developments involving the North American Free Trade 

Agreement (NAFTA). The online interactive merchandise trade dashboards that accompany the 

Year in Trade 2014 report can be used for further analysis of U.S. trade under various FTAs. 

U.S. Trade with FTA Partners in 2014

The United States was party to 14 FTAs as of December 31, 2014. 330 FTAs in force during 2014 

were the U.S.-Panama Trade Promotion Agreement (TPA) (which entered into force in 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).331

U.S. Total Merchandise Trade with FTA Partners

In 2014, two-way total merchandise trade between the United States and its 20 FTA partners 

amounted to $1.6 trillion, accounting for 40.1 percent of total U.S. merchandise trade with the 

world. U.S. exports to FTA partners were valued at $765.2 billion, a 4.3 percent increase from 

$733.3 billion in 2013. U.S. imports from FTA partners were valued at $826.9 billion, a 

3.4 percent increase from $799.9 billion in 2013 (table 5.1). 

U.S. trade with FTA partners is dominated by trade with NAFTA countries (Canada and Mexico). 

In 2014, NAFTA countries accounted for 74.9 percent of total U.S. trade with its FTA partners, or 

$1.2 trillion. Two-way trade with NAFTA countries increased by 4.5 percent from 2013, and the 

 

330 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 Affairs, Modifications to the Harmonized Tariff 

Schedule, http://www.usitc.gov/tariff_affairs/modifications_hts.htm. 331 USTR, “Free Trade Agreements” (accessed April 8, 2015). 
Chapter 5: U.S. Free Trade Agreements

130 | www.usitc.gov

U.S. merchandise trade deficit with its NAFTA partners increased by 2.8 percent to $87.8 billion 

in 2014 (table 5.1).

Table 5.1: U.S. merchandise trade with FTA partners, by FTA partner, 2012–14

FTA partner 2012 2013 2014

% change 

2013–14

Million $

U.S. total exports

NAFTA 508,558 527,689 552,451 4.7

Canada 292,651 301,610 312,125 3.5

Mexico 215,907 226,079 240,326 6.3

Non-NAFTA 189,050 205,636 212,757 3.5

Israel 14,271 13,747 15,074 9.6

Jordan 1,766 2,084 2,052 -1.5

Chile 18,772 17,515 16,630 -5.0

Singapore 30,526 30,672 30,532 -0.5

Australia 31,160 26,130 26,668 2.1

Morocco 2,175 2,482 2,068 -16.7

Bahrain 1,176 1,018 1,060 4.2

CAFTA-DR 29,899 29,644 31,330 5.7

Oman 1,747 1,571 2,014 28.2

Peru 9,349 10,102 10,070 -0.3

South Koreaa 35,100 41,715 44,544 6.8

Colombiab 11,344 18,392 20,317 10.5

Panamac 1,764 10,564 10,398 -1.6

FTA partner total 697,608 733,323 765,208 4.3

World total 1,545,703 1,579,593 1,623,443 2.8

FTA partner share of world (percent) 45.1 46.4 47.1 1.5

U.S. general imports

NAFTA 601,858 613,082 640,220 4.4

Canada 324,264 332,553 346,063 4.1

Mexico 277,594 280,529 294,157 4.9

Non-NAFTA 168,822 186,854 186,669 -0.1

Israel 22,131 22,809 23,051 1.1

Jordan 1,156 1,197 1,357 13.4

Chile 9,367 10,384 9,491 -8.6

Singapore 20,232 17,843 16,463 -7.7

Australia 9,567 9,272 10,670 15.1

Morocco 932 977 991 1.4

Bahrain 701 636 965 51.9

CAFTA-DR 30,891 30,130 28,387 -5.8

Oman 1,354 1,023 975 -4.6

Peru 6,418 8,122 6,079 -25.1

South Koreaa 49,948 62,386 69,606 11.6

Colombiab 16,060 21,626 18,234 -15.7

Panamac 65 449 400 -10.8

FTA partner total 770,680 799,935 826,890 3.4

World total 2,276,302 2,268,321 2,345,187 3.4

FTA partner share of world (percent) 33.9 35.3 35.3 0.0
Year in Trade

U.S. International Trade Commission | 131

FTA partner 2012 2013 2014

% change 

2013–14

Million $

Merchandise trade balance

NAFTA -93,300 -85,393 -87,768 2.8

Canada -31,613 -30,943 -33,937 9.7

Mexico -61,687 -54,450 -53,831 -1.1

Non-NAFTA 20,227 18,780 26,086 38.9

Israel -7,860 -9,062 -7,977 -12.0

Jordan 611 886 695 -21.6

Chile 9,405 7,130 7,139 0.1

Singapore 10,294 12,829 14,068 9.7

Australia 21,593 16,858 15,998 -5.1

Morocco 1,243 1,505 1,077 -28.4

Bahrain 475 382 95 -75.1

CAFTA-DR -992 -486 2,944 -705.8

Oman 392 549 1,039 89.3

Peru 2,931 1,980 3,991 101.6

South Koreaa -14,848 -20,672 -25,062 21.2

Colombiab -4,716 -3,234 2,082 -164.4

Panamac 1,699 10,115 9,997 -1.2

FTA partner total -73,073 -66,612 -61,682 -7.4

World total -730,599 -688,728 -721,744 4.8

Source: USITC DataWeb (accessed February 12, 2015); data compiled from official statistics of the U.S. Department of 

Commerce. a U.S-Korea FTA entered into force March 15, 2012 (data reported for March 2012 forward). b U.S.-Colombia TPA entered into force on May 15, 2012 (data reported for May 2012 forward). c

U.S.-Panama TPA entered into force October 31, 2012 (data reported for November 2012 forward).

U.S. trade with non-NAFTA FTA partners amounted to $399.4 billion in 2014, representing an 

increase of 1.8 percent from 2013. 332 U.S. exports to non-NAFTA FTA partners increased by 

3.5 percent to $212.8 billion, while U.S. imports from these FTA partners decreased by 

0.1 percent to $186.7 billion. The United States registered a merchandise trade surplus of 

$26.1 billion with all non-NAFTA FTA partners combined in 2014, compared to a trade surplus 

of $18.8 billion in 2013 (table 5.1). 

U.S. Imports Entered under FTAs

The value of U.S. imports entered under FTAs increased 0.9 percent from $410.8 billion in 2013 

to $414.6 billion in 2014. These imports accounted for 17.7 percent of total U.S. imports from 

the world and 50.1 percent of total imports from FTA partners in 2014. Among the United 

States' 20 FTA partners, high shares of total imports from Jordan (89.6 percent), Mexico 

 

332 Outside of NAFTA, the United States had 18 FTA partners with 13 FTAs in place during 2014, including FTAs with 

Australia, Bahrain, Chile, Colombia, Israel, Jordan, South Korea, Morocco, Oman, Panama, Peru, and Singapore, as 

well as CAFTA-DR (with six FTA partners). 
Chapter 5: U.S. Free Trade Agreements

132 | www.usitc.gov

(61.7 percent), and Oman (61.5 percent) entered under FTAs. By contrast, low shares of total 

imports from Panama (8.2 percent), Singapore (9.5 percent), and Israel (12.8 percent) entered 

under FTAs (table 5.2), as a large share (over 60 percent) of the imports from these U.S. FTA 

partners entered the United States free of duty under normal trade relations or column 1-

general duty rates.

Developments in FTA Negotiations during 

2014

In 2014, the United States continued to participate in the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) 

negotiations with 11 TPP partners, and in the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership 

(TTIP) negotiations with the EU. 

Negotiations and Consultations toward the TransPacific Partnership (TPP) Agreement 

The TPP is a proposed regional FTA. Between March 2010 and yearend 2013, there were 19 

rounds of formal TPP negotiations. In 2014, TPP negotiations were mainly carried out through 

ministerial and chief negotiator meetings. In 2014, 12 TPP countries participated in the TPP 

negotiations: Australia, Brunei, Canada, Chile, Japan, Malaysia, Mexico, New Zealand, Peru, 

Singapore, the United States, and Vietnam. The evolution of TPP is shown in table 5.3.

South Korea expressed interest in joining the TPP negotiations in 2013, but as of May 2015 had 

not yet made a formal request.333 Other countries expressing interest in joining the TPP include 

Colombia and Costa Rica. 334

In 2014, the United States and its 11 TPP partners held four ministerial meetings, as well as 

numerous meetings at the chief negotiator level, working group meetings, and bilateral and 

small group meetings, to close gaps on specific issues in the proposed chapters of the 

agreement (table 5.4). 335

 

333 CRS, The Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) Negotiations and Partnership Issues for Congress, January 30, 2015, 3. 

For more information, see chapter 6 section on South Korea. 334 Ibid., 4. 335 USTR, 2015 Trade Policy Agenda and 2014 Annual Report, March 2015, 150; Government of Malaysia, Ministry 

of International Trade and Industry, “Brief on the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP),” n.d. 

http://www.miti.gov.my/storage/documents/c94/com.tms.cms.document.Document_62357eea-c0a8156f2c11008e-9a1ecbed/1/TPP%20-%20Briefing%20Notes.pdf (accessed May 7, 2015).
Year in Trade

U.S. International Trade Commission | 133

Table 5.2: U.S. imports for consumption entered under FTAs, by FTA partner, 2012–14

2012 2013 2014

% change 

2013–14

Imports Million $

NAFTA 343,670 349,614 355,877 1.8

Canada 175,230 178,010 174,362 -2.0

Mexico 168,440 171,605 181,515 5.8

Non-NAFTA 50,130 61,186 58,751 -4.0

Israel 2,953 2,976 2,951 -0.8

Jordan 1,012 1,075 1,216 13.1

Chile 5,666 6,165 4,949 -19.7

Singapore 1,066 1,744 1,569 -10.1

Australia 3,420 3,521 4,699 33.5

Morocco 165 188 242 28.9

Bahrain 425 418 540 29.2

CAFTA-DR 12,598 12,039 12,862 6.8

Oman 655 582 600 3.0

Peru 2,637 2,871 3,415 19.0

South Koreaa 11,664 16,402 17,061 4.0

Colombiab 7,865 13,175 8,614 -34.6

Panamac 4 30 33 8.2

FTA partner total 393,800 410,801 414,628 0.9

Ratio to U.S. general imports by partner Percent

NAFTA 57.1 57.0 55.6

Canada 54.0 53.5 50.4

Mexico 60.7 61.2 61.7

Non-NAFTA 29.7 32.7 31.5

Israel 13.3 13.0 12.8

Jordan 87.5 89.8 89.6

Chile 60.5 59.4 52.1

Singapore 5.3 9.8 9.5

Australia 35.7 38.0 44.0

Morocco 17.7 19.2 24.4

Bahrain 60.6 65.8 56.0

CAFTA-DR 40.8 40.0 45.3

Oman 48.4 56.9 61.5

Peru 41.1 35.3 56.2

South Koreaa 23.4 26.3 24.5

Colombiab 49.0 60.9 47.2

Panamac 6.2 6.7 8.3

FTA partner total 51.1 51.4 50.1

Source: USITC DataWeb (accessed February 12, 2015); data compiled from official statistics of the U.S. Department of 

Commerce. a U.S-Korea FTA entered into force March 15, 2012 (data reported for March 2012 forward). b U.S.-Colombia FTA entered into force on May 15, 2012 (data reported for May 2012 forward). c

U.S.-Panama FTA entered into force October 31, 2012 (data reported for November 2012 forward).
Chapter 5: U.S. Free Trade Agreements

134 | www.usitc.gov

Table 5.3: The evolution of the TPP

Year Major Events

2002 Chile, New Zealand, and Singapore launch the Pacific Three Closer Economic Partnership 

negotiations.

2005 Brunei joins the negotiations; the agreement is concluded and subsequently renamed the TransPacific Strategic Economic Partnership Agreement.

2008 The United States, Australia, Peru, and Vietnam join the negotiations, and the name of the 

agreement is shortened to the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP).

2010 The first round of TPP negotiations is launched; Malaysia joins the TPP negotiations.

2012 Canada and Mexico join the TPP negotiations.

2013 Japan joins the TPP negotiations. Nineteen rounds of TPP negotiations have been completed.

Source: Government of New Zealand, MFAT, “Trans-Pacific Strategic Economic Partnership Agreement National Interest 

Analysis,” July 2005; Government of New Zealand, MFAT, “Trans-Pacific Strategic Economic Partnership (P4) Agreement”

(accessed April 13, 2015); USTR, “Trans-Pacific Partners and United States Launch FTA Negotiations,” September 2008;

Government of Australia, DFAT, “Trans-Pacific Partnership Agreement: About the TPP Negotiations” (accessed April 13, 2015).

Table 5.4: Timetable of major TPP negotiation meetings, 2014

Date TPP Negotiations

February 17–21 TPP meeting of chief negotiators, Singapore.

February 22–25 Ministerial meeting, Singapore. 

May 12–15 TPP meeting of chief negotiators, Ho Chi Minh City, Vietnam.

May 19–20 Ministerial meeting, Singapore.

July 4–12 TPP meeting of chief negotiators, Ottawa, Canada.

September 1–10 TPP meeting of chief negotiators, Hanoi, Vietnam.

October 19–24 TPP meeting of chief negotiators, Canberra, Australia.

October 25–27 Ministerial meeting, Sydney, Australia.

November 8 Ministerial meeting, Beijing, China.

November 10 TPP leaders' meeting, Beijing, China.

December 7–12 TPP meeting of chief negotiators, Washington, DC.

Source: USTR, press releases, February 20, May 14, May 20, September 10, October 27, and November 10, 2014; Government 

of Australia, DFAT, “Trans-Pacific Partnership Agreement: News,” n.d. 

http://dfat.gov.au/trade/agreements/tpp/news/Pages/news.aspx (accessed April 14, 2014).

Following a meeting at the level of chief negotiators on February 17–21, 2014, in Singapore, 

TPP ministers and heads of delegations held plenary and bilateral meetings from February 22–

25, 2014. TPP delegations intensified their drive to find mutually acceptable paths to resolve 

remaining issues and achieve a comprehensive and balanced agreement as soon as possible. 336

Reportedly, significant progress was made, but outstanding issues remain, particularly in 

market access, government procurement, environmental protection, and IPR. 337

TPP ministers met again in Singapore on May 19–20, 2014, with a particular focus on making 

progress on market access and outstanding issues concerning rules to narrow the remaining 

differences. The meeting decided a pathway to intensify engagement on market access and 

 

336 USTR, “Statement of the Ministers and Heads of Delegations,” February 25, 2014. 337 Washington Trade Daily, “Still Gaps in TPP,” February 26, 2014.
Year in Trade

U.S. International Trade Commission | 135

rules in the following weeks.338 Before this meeting, chief negotiators and subject experts had 

met in Ho Chi Minh City on May 12–15, 2014. 339 Topics such as legal and institutional matters, 

intellectual property, medical and pharmaceutical transparency, investment, environment, 

textiles, financial services, services, and investment were discussed at the meetings.340

On July 3–12, 2014, chief negotiators met in Ottawa, Canada. According to the government of 

Canada, discussions centered on labor, state-owned enterprises, services, investment, and 

market access. Concurrently, a number of working-level technical group sessions were held, 

which covered intellectual property, investment, state-owned enterprises, and rules of origin 

for textiles.341

In September 2014, chief negotiators and working groups held meetings in Hanoi for 10 days.

They reported progress made on issues related to state-owned enterprises, intellectual 

property, investment, rules of origin, transparency and anticorruption, and labor. They also 

moved forward with the work of constructing packages for preferential access to each other's 

markets for goods, services and investment, financial services, and government 

procurement. 342

Following a week of chief negotiator and technical expert meetings in Canberra, ministers and 

heads of delegation met in Sydney on October 25–27, 2014. They reported progress on 

negotiations concerning both market access and trade and investment rules.343 In a press 

conference at the end of the meeting, Ambassador Froman and other TPP leaders reported 

progress in some of the most difficult areas, such as IPR, environmental protection, and stateowned enterprises.344

Following a TPP ministers meeting on November 8, President Obama and the leaders from the 

other 11 TPP countries met in Beijing on November 10, 2014, at the margins of the APEC 

economic leaders' meeting. 345 Trade ministers submitted a report to leaders, outlining the 

progress made in the negotiations in the past year, as well as the remaining contentious

issues. 346 TPP leaders welcomed progress made by ministers and negotiators toward the 

 

338 USTR, “Joint Statement at the TPP Ministers' Meeting in Singapore,” May 20, 2014. 339 USTR, “TPP Meetings in Vietnam,” May 2014; Government of Australia, DFTA, “TPP Chief Negotiators' Meeting, 

Ho Chi Minh City, Vietnam 12–15 May 2014.” 340 USTR, “TPP Meetings in Vietnam,” May 2014. 341 Government of Canada, DFATD, “TPP Officials Meeting (July 2014),” n.d. (accessed April 13, 2015). 342 USTR, “TPP Negotiators Make Important Progress on Agreement,” September 2014. 343 USTR, “Joint Statement of the Ministers and Heads of Delegation for the Trans-Pacific Partnership Countries,” 

October 27, 2014.

344 A transcript of the press conference can be found at Government of Australia, DFAT, “Trans-Pacific Partnership 

(TPP) Agreement Ministerial Meeting—Concluding Press Conference,” October 27, 2014. 345 USTR, “Trans-Pacific Partnership Leaders' Statement,” November 10, 2014. 346 USTR, “Trans-Pacific Partnership, Trade Ministers' Report to Leaders,” November 10, 2014. 
Chapter 5: U.S. Free Trade Agreements

136 | www.usitc.gov

conclusion of an agreement, and noted that the end of the negotiation was coming into 

focus. 347

TPP chief negotiators conducted meetings in Washington, DC, on December 7–12, 2014, where 

progress was reported in several areas of the text. According to the government of Canada, 

topics discussed included legal and institutional issues, textiles, rules of origin, state-owned 

enterprises, environment, goods market access, technical barriers to trade, and e-commerce.348

The United States conducted numerous rounds of bilateral negotiations with Japan in 2014, in 

addition to the plenary and bilateral engagement through formal TPP negotiations. 349 U.S.-

Japan bilateral TPP negotiations focused on (1) agricultural market access issues and the 

treatment of agricultural products; and (2) nontariff measures (e.g., regulatory transparency, 

standards, certification, financial incentives, and distribution), as well as the dispute settlement 

procedure in the automotive sector. Other areas of interest included nontariff measures in 

insurance, transparency, investment, IPR, standards, government procurement, competition 

policy, express delivery, and sanitary and phytosanitary (SPS) measures. 350

U.S. Trade with TPP Partners

In 2014, U.S. exports to its 11 TPP partners were valued at $727.0 billion, accounting for 

44.8 percent of total U.S. exports to the world. U.S. imports from these partners were valued at 

$881.9 billion, accounting for 37.6 percent of total U.S. imports from the world. The United 

States ran a merchandise trade deficit of $154.9 billion in 2014 with TPP countries (table 5.5). 

Six TPP countries (Canada, Mexico, Australia, Chile, Peru, and Singapore) have FTAs with the 

United States. Together they accounted for 87.5 percent of total U.S. exports to TPP countries 

and 77.4 percent of total U.S. imports from TPP countries in 2014. The United States ran a 

merchandise trade deficit of $46.6 billion with these TPP partners with existing FTAs in 2014. 

NAFTA countries dominated U.S. trade with these TPP partners that already have FTAs with the 

United States (table 5.5). 

 

347 USTR, “Trans-Pacific Partnership Leaders' Statement,” November 10, 2014. 348 Government of Canada, DFATD, “TPP Official's Meeting: Washington, D.C. (December 2014),” n.d. (accessed 

April 13, 2015). 

349 Various USTR press releases, including “Ambassador Froman Meets with Japan's Minister of State and Economic 

and Fiscal Policy Akira Amari,” February 14, 2014; “Readout of Meeting between Acting Deputy USTR Wendy 

Cutler and Ambassador Hiroshi Oe on TPP,” March 12, 2014; “Acting Deputy USTR Wendy Cutler to Host U.S.-Japan 

Bilateral Meeting on the Trans-Pacific Partnership,” March 24, 2014; and “Readout of Meeting between United 

States and Japanese Trade Negotiators Regarding TPP and Agriculture,” August 2014. 350 USTR, “U.S.-Japan Bilateral Negotiations on Motor Vehicle Trade,” n.d. (accessed April 8, 2015). For more 

information, see chapter 6 section on Japan.
Year in Trade

U.S. International Trade Commission | 137

Table 5.5: U.S. merchandise trade with TPP partners, 2012–14

2012 2013 2014

% change

2013–14

Million $

Trade with TPP partners:

U.S. total exports 689,155 699,140 726,988 4.0

U.S. general imports 843,604 852,726 881,906 3.4

Trade balance -154,449 -153,586 -154,918 0.9

U.S. total exports:

TPP partners with FTAs with U.S. 598,365 612,108 636,351 4.0

NAFTA only 508,558 527,689 552,451 4.7

TPP partners without FTAs with U.S. 90,791 87,032 90,636 4.1

Japan only 69,964 65,206 66,964 2.7

Share with FTAs (percent) 86.8 87.6 87.5

U.S. general imports:

TPP partners with FTAs with U.S. 647,442 658,703 682,923 3.7

NAFTA only 601,858 613,082 640,220 4.4

TPP partners without FTAs with U.S. 196,164 194,023 198,983 2.6

Japan only 146,438 138,573 133,939 -3.3

Share with FTAs (percent) 76.7 77.2 77.4

Merchandise trade balance:

TPP partners with FTAs with U.S. -49,077 -46,596 -46,572

NAFTA only -93,300 -85,393 -87,768

TPP partners without FTAs with U.S. -105,373 -106,990 -108,346

Japan only -76,474 -73,368 -66,975

Source: USITC DataWeb (accessed February 12, 2014); data compiled from official statistics of the U.S. Department of 

Commerce.

Five TPP countries (Brunei, Japan, Malaysia, New Zealand, and Vietnam) currently do not have 

FTAs with the United States. In 2014, the United States ran a merchandise trade deficit of 

$108.3 billion with them. Japan dominated U.S. trade with these five TPP partners that do not 

have FTAs with the United States (table 5.5). 

Negotiations and Consultations toward the 

Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership 

(TTIP) Agreement

Launched in June 2013, the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP) is a proposed 

FTA currently under negotiation between the United States and the European Union (EU).351

Three rounds of TTIP negotiations were held in 2013. In 2014, the United States and the EU 

 

351 For more background information, see the EU section in chapter 6. 
Chapter 5: U.S. Free Trade Agreements

138 | www.usitc.gov

concluded four rounds of TTIP negotiations alongside several high-level official meetings 

(table 5.6).

Table 5.6: Timetable of major TTIP negotiations, 2014

Date TTIP Negotiations

February 17–18 Meeting between USTR and the EU Trade Commissioner, Washington, DC.

March 10–14 Fourth round of TTIP negotiations, Brussels.

May 19–23 Fifth round of TTIP negotiations, Arlington, Virginia.

July 14–18 Sixth round of TTIP negotiations, Brussels.

September 29– October 3 Seventh round of TTIP negotiations, Chevy Chase, Maryland.

November 16 TTIP leaders' meeting, G-20 Summit, Brisbane, Australia.

Source: USTR, press releases, February 18, March 10, May 23, July 18, September 26, and November 16, 2014; EC, Documents 

and Events, Negotiation Rounds - Press Material, n.d. http://ec.europa.eu/trade/policy/in-focus/ttip/documents-andevents/index_en.htm#negotiation-rounds.

U.S. Trade Representative Michael Froman and the EU Trade Commissioner Karel de Gucht met 

in Washington, DC, on February 17–18, 2014. They assessed progress made through the first 

three rounds of the negotiations, reviewed the most difficult issues, and gave the negotiators 

guidance on how to move forward with the negotiations. 352

The fourth round of TTIP negotiations took place in Brussels on March 10–14, 2014. 353

According to the press conference following the fourth round, negotiators held discussions on 

three broad areas of the agreement: market access, regulatory cooperation, and rules 

issues. 354 In the market access area, negotiators discussed tariffs, trade in services, and public 

procurement. In the regulatory area, negotiators discussed technical barriers to trade, SPS 

measures, and regulatory coherence and compatibility (especially in certain key industries—

e.g., pharmaceuticals, cosmetics, medical devices, automotive, and chemicals). In the rules 

area, negotiators discussed sustainable development, trade in energy and raw materials, and 

customs and trade facilitation. 355 In this fourth round, negotiators decided to create a separate 

chapter in the agreement on SMEs, which will include provisions intended to make it easier for 

SMEs to take advantage of TTIP. 356 Chief negotiators and their negotiating teams also hosted a 

 

352 USTR, “Statement by U.S. Trade Representative Michael Froman Following Meetings with EU Commissioner,” 

February 2014; European Parliament, Policy Department, “Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP) 

Negotiations: State of Play,” August 2014.

353 USTR, “Readouts from T-TIP Negotiating Rounds” (accessed May 7, 2015); European Commission, “Negotiators 

Meet for the Fourth Round of Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP) Talks,” March 10, 2014. 354 USTR, “Transcript: Chief Negotiators Dan Mullaney and Ignacio Garcia Bercero,” March 14, 2014. 355 Ibid. 356 USTR, “Transcript: Chief Negotiators Dan Mullaney and Ignacio Garcia Bercero,” March 14, 2014; “Transcript 

from the Closing Press Conference on the Fifth Round,” May 23, 2014. 
Year in Trade

U.S. International Trade Commission | 139

series of meetings for stakeholders, including academia, business, labor, and environmental 

and consumer groups. 357

The United States hosted the fifth round of TTIP negotiations in Arlington, Virginia, on May 19–

23, 2014. 358 Negotiators and working groups continued to discuss and address a broad range of 

issues—for instance, tariffs, services, and government procurement; regulatory compatibility in 

a range of sectors, including medical devices, pharmaceuticals, cosmetics, information 

communication technologies, automobiles, pesticides, and chemicals; financial services 

regulation; regulatory issues in the textiles sector; and a horizontal framework for regulatory 

cooperation. Progress was reported on a number of topics, including technical barriers to trade, 

competition, and state-to-state dispute settlement.359 As in previous rounds, chief negotiators 

held meetings with over 300 stakeholders during the round. 360

The United States and EU held two additional rounds of TTIP negotiations in 2014. The sixth 

round was hosted by the EU in Brussels on July 14–18, 2014, and the seventh round was hosted 

by the United States on September 29–October 3, 2014, in Chevy Chase, Maryland.361 During 

these rounds, nearly all of the negotiating groups met.

362 As in previous rounds, chief 

negotiators held meetings with stakeholder representatives during both of these rounds. 363

According to the U.S. chief negotiator, the sixth and seventh negotiating rounds were at the 

phase “in which our teams have progressed from discussing general approaches in the 

agreement to the spade work of reviewing the many proposals and text language that each side 

has put on the table.”364

On November 16, 2014, TTIP leaders met at the margins of the G20 summit and reaffirmed 

their commitment to “comprehensive and ambitious negotiations, in the spirit of mutual 

benefit, leading to a high standard TTIP agreement.” They also reiterated their commitment to 

build upon the strong foundation of six decades of economic partnership to promote stronger, 

 

357 USTR, “Round Four: Brussels, Belgium,” n.d. (accessed May 7, 2015); USTR, “Transcript: Chief Negotiators Dan 

Mullaney and Ignacio Garcia Bercero,” March 14, 2014; EC, “EU, U.S. Trade Talks—Negotiators Hear from 90 

Representatives,” March 11, 2014. 358 USTR, “Readouts from T-TIP Negotiating Rounds” (accessed May 7, 2015); EC, “EU and US Negotiators Kick Off a 

Fifth Round,” May 20, 2014.

359 USTR, “Transcript from the Closing Press Conference on the Fifth Round,” May 23, 2014. 360 USTR, “Round Five: Arlington, Virginia,” n.d. (accessed April 15, 2015). 361 USTR, “Readouts from T-TIP Negotiating Rounds” (accessed May 7, 2015). 362 EC, “Sixth Round of Negotiations for the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP): Extract from the 

Joint Press Conference,” July 18, 2014; USTR, “Opening Remarks by U.S. and EU Chief Negotiators for T-TIP Round 

Seven Press Conference,” October 3, 2015.

363 Ibid. 364 USTR, “Opening Remarks by U.S. and EU Chief Negotiators for T-TIP Round Seven Press Conference,” October 3, 

2015.
Chapter 5: U.S. Free Trade Agreements

140 | www.usitc.gov

sustainable, and balanced growth; to support the creation of more jobs on both sides of the 

Atlantic; and to increase international competitiveness.365

The United States and the EU are each other's largest trading partners. U.S. merchandise 

exports to the EU were $276.7 billion in 2014, accounting for 17.0 percent of total U.S. exports. 

U.S. merchandise imports from the EU were $417.8 billion in 2014, accounting for 17.8 percent 

of total U.S. imports (table 5.7). 366 If the TTIP and TPP agreements are both concluded, U.S. 

trade with these partners would likely account for 61.8 percent of total U.S. exports and 

55.4 percent of total U.S. imports. 

Table 5.7: U.S. merchandise trade with the EU, 2012–14

Trade flow 2012 2013 2014

% change 

2013–14

Million $

U.S. total exports 265,686 262,151 276,698 5.5

U.S. general imports 382,197 387,591 417,837 7.8

Merchandise trade balance -116,512 -125,441 -141,138 12.5

Source: USITC, DataWeb (accessed February 12, 2015); data compiled from official statistics of the U.S. Department of 

Commerce.

Developments in the North American Free 

Trade Agreement367

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 the three parties by January 1, 2008, with the exception of the NAFTA crossborder trucking provisions. 368 In 2014, total two-way (exports plus imports) U.S. merchandise 

trade with its NAFTA partners increased by 4.5 percent over 2013, with U.S.-Canada 

merchandise trade amounting to $658.2 billion and U.S.-Mexico merchandise trade totaling 

$534.5 billion (table 5.1). In 2014, imports valued at $355.9 billion entered the United States 

duty free under NAFTA provisions.

NAFTA’s central oversight body is the Free Trade Commission, established under Article 2001 of 

the agreement. It is chaired jointly by ministerial-level representatives or their designees from 

 

365 USTR, “Statement on the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership,” November 16, 2014. 366 U.S. trade with the EU is described in more detail in chapter 6. 367 U.S. bilateral trade relations with Canada and Mexico are described in chapter 6 of this report. 368 The section on Mexico in chapter 6 provides an update on recent developments relating to NAFTA’s crossborder trucking provisions. Additional information on the last remaining restrictions on U.S.-Mexico trade, which 

were removed on January 1, 2008, can be found in USITC, The Year in Trade 2008, 2009, 5-16. All product 

categories offer duty-free entry to originating goods from Mexico, and all shipments of goods from Canada are 

likewise eligible except those exceeding a TRQ.
Year in Trade

U.S. International Trade Commission | 141

the three member countries.369 The commission is responsible for overseeing NAFTA’s 

implementation and elaboration, as well as activities under its dispute settlement provisions. 370

In past years, the Free Trade Commission met annually, but it did not meet in 2013 and 2014. 

At the commission's most recent meeting in April 2012 in Washington, DC, the parties agreed to 

further their work to liberalize the NAFTA rules of origin. 371

On February 19, 2014, the Presidents of the United States and Mexico and the Prime Minister 

of Canada held the trilateral North American Leaders Summit in Toluca, Mexico. At the summit, 

the leaders of North America committed to promote inclusive broad-based economic growth, 

so that the 21st-century North America sets new global standards for trade, education, 

sustainable growth, and innovation. They also committed to develop a North American 

Competitiveness work plan and a North American Transportation Plan, and to streamline 

procedures and harmonize customs data requirements for traders and visitors. 372 On October 

17, 2014, U.S. Customs and Border Protection (Customs) and Mexico's Tax Administration 

Service (SAT) signed a mutual recognition arrangement that allows stronger collaboration 

between Customs' Customs-Trade Partnership Against Terrorism (C-TPAT) and SAT's New 

Certified Companies Scheme (NEEC).373 The arrangement aims to facilitate secure trade 

between the two countries and allows fewer examinations when shipping cargo, a faster 

validation process, common standards, efficiency for customs and business, transparency 

between customs administrations, front-of-the-line processing, and marketability.

The following sections describe the major activities of NAFTA’s Commission for Labor 

Cooperation (CLC) and Commission for Environmental Cooperation (CEC) during 2014, as well 

as dispute settlement activities under NAFTA chapters 11 and 19 for the year.

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 

 

369 The representatives are the U.S. Trade Representative, the Canadian Minister for International Trade, and the 

Mexican Secretary of the Economy.

370 USTR, 2015 Trade Policy Agenda and 2014 Annual Report, March 2015, 133. 371 For additional information see USITC, The Year in Trade 2012, 2013, 4-15; USTR, “Joint Statement from 2012 

NAFTA,” April 3, 2012. 372 White House, “Joint Statement by North American Leaders—21st Century North America,” February 19, 2014. 373 USDHS, Customs, “U.S., Mexico Sign Mutual Recognition Arrangement,” October 17, 2014. 
Chapter 5: U.S. Free Trade Agreements

142 | www.usitc.gov

(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).374 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.375

In 2014, representatives of each country’s NAO met to discuss ways to strengthen coordination 

and communications among them and to update information on pending public submissions. 376

In 2014, consultation on a set of submissions regarding certain U.S. visas began.377 In 2013, the 

Mexican NAO requested ministerial consultations with the U.S. Department of Labor on issues 

raised in three public submissions filed with the Mexican Secretariat under the NAALC. The 

submissions concerned the rights of Mexican migrants working in the United States on H-2A 

and H-2B visas in sectors such as agriculture, forestry, food packing, fairs, and carnivals. In 

response to the Mexican NAO request, Mexico and the United States agreed to undertake 

educational activities in both countries to inform Mexican workers about their labor rights 

under U.S. laws.378 In June 2014, the USDOL and the Mexican Secretariat of Labor and Social 

Welfare published the work plan for their agreement.379 Educational activities under the plan 

have taken place in the United States and Mexico and are scheduled to conclude in 2015. 380

In July 2014, at a meeting of the NAOs, the U.S. and Canadian NAOs updated their reviews of 

submissions accepted for review in 2012. The public submissions of January 2012, filed by the 

Mexican Union of Electrical Workers (Sindicato Mexicano de Electricistas), were filed on behalf 

of 93 other organizations concerning the Mexican government’s obligations on workers' rights 

under the NAALC.381 At the July 2014 meeting, the U.S. and Canadian NAOs reported that the 

Mexican Union of Electrical Workers is currently in negotiations with the government of Mexico 

 

374 USDOL, ILAB, OTLA, “Division of Monitoring and Enforcement of Trade Agreements (META)” (accessed 

March 12, 2015). 375 CLC, “The National Administrative Offices” (accessed March 18, 2014). 376 USTR, 2015 Trade Policy Agenda and 2014 Annual Report, March 2015, 133. 377 USDOL, ILAB, OTLA, “U.S. Response to Mexico's Request for Migrant Worker Outreach” (accessed March 12, 

2015).

378 USDOL, ILAB, OTLA, “Ministerial Consultations Joint Declaration between the Department of Labor of the 

United States of America and the Secretariat of Labor and Social Welfare of the United Mexican States” (accessed 

March 12, 2015).

379 USDOL, ILAB, OTLA, “U.S. Response to Mexico's Request for Migrant Worker Outreach” (accessed March 12, 

2015). 380 USTR, 2015 Trade Policy Agenda and 2014 Annual Report, March 2015, 134. 381 77 Fed. Reg. 4366 (January 27, 2012). See also USDOL, OTLA, “Submissions under the Labor Provisions of Free 

Trade Agreements, Current Status, Review of Submissions: Mexico” (accessed March 12, 2015).
Year in Trade

U.S. International Trade Commission | 143

regarding these issues and that the NAOs were monitoring the negotiations before issuing a 

final report.382

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 

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;383

(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.384

Articles 14 and 15 of the NAAEC provide citizens and nongovernmental organizations with a 

mechanism to help enforce environmental laws in the NAFTA countries.385 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. 386 At the end of 

2014, three complaint files remained active under Articles 14 and 15, none of which was 

submitted in 2014. In 2014, all of the three active files involved Mexico (table 5.8).

At the 21st regular session of the CEC Council on July 17, 2014, in Yellowknife, Northwest 

Territories, Canada, the Council agreed to a 2015–20 strategic plan. The plan focuses on 

collaborative actions in three priority areas: climate change mitigation and adaptation, green 

growth, and sustainable communities and ecosystems.387 These priorities are in line with the 

commitments made at the North American Leaders' Summit meeting in Toluca, Mexico, in 

February 2014. 388

 

382 USTR, 2015 Trade Policy Agenda and 2014 Annual Report, March 2015, 134. 383 The CEC Council consists of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Administrator, Canadian Environment 

Minister, and Mexican Secretary for Environment and Natural Resources. 384 CEC, Secretariat, “Three Countries Working Together” (accessed March 12, 2015). 385 CEC, “Submissions on Enforcement Matters” (accessed March 12, 2015). 386 CEC, “Part Three, Article 14 and Article 15” (accessed March 12, 2015). 387 CEC, “CEC Ministerial Statement: Twenty-first Regular Session” (accessed March 13, 2015); USTR, 2015 Trade 

Policy Agenda and 2014 Annual Report, March 2015, 134. 388 CEC, “CEC Ministerial Statement: Twenty-first Regular Session” (accessed March 13, 2015).
Chapter 5: U.S. Free Trade Agreements

144 | www.usitc.gov

Table 5.8: Active files as of yearend 2014 under Articles 14 and 15 of the North American Agreement on 

Environmental Cooperation

Name Case First filed Countrya Status

Wetlands in 

Manzanillo

SEM-09-002 Feb. 4, 2009 Mexico The Secretariat posted a request for 

information relevant to the factual record on 

its website on August 15, 2014.

Sumidero Canyon II SEM-11-002 Nov. 29, 2011 Mexico The Secretariat posted a request for 

information relevant to the factual record on 

its website on November 29, 2014.

Tourism Development 

in the Gulf of 

California

SEM-13-001 Apr. 11, 2013 Mexico The Secretariat informed the Council that the 

Secretariat considers that the submission 

warrants development of a factual record on 

September 5, 2014.

Source: CEC, “Submission on Enforcement Matters: Active Submissions” (accessed March 12, 2015). a Refers to the country against which an allegation was filed.

Also at the 2014 CEC Council meeting, the Council implemented a new reporting approach for 

Submissions on Enforcement Matters (SEM) as part of the CEC's continued commitment to 

transparency and to the SEM modernization process.389

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.390 As of December 31, 2014, the 

NADB had contracted a cumulative total of $2.4 billion in loans and grants, of which $2.2 billion 

had already been disbursed. These funds helped finance 204 projects certified by the BECC, 

with an estimated total cost of $6.9 billion. 391 Types of projects under way include renewable 

energy development and water and wastewater improvements. 392

Dispute Settlement

The dispute settlement provisions of NAFTA Chapters 11 (Investment) and 19 (Review and 

Dispute Settlement in Antidumping/Countervailing Duty Matters) cover a variety of areas.393

The sections below describe developments during 2014 in NAFTA Chapter 11 investor-state 

disputes and Chapter 19 binational reviews of final determinations of antidumping and 

 

389 CEC, “CEC Ministerial Statement: Twenty-first Regular Session” (accessed March 13, 2015). 390 USTR, 2015 Trade Policy Agenda and 2014 Annual Report, March 2015, 134. 391 BECC and NADB, Quarterly Status Report, December 31, 2014; NADB, “Summary of Project Implementation 

Activities: Active Projects,” December 31, 2014. 392 NADB, “Summary of Project Implementation Activities: Active Projects,” December 31, 2014. 393 NAFTA Secretariat, “Overview of the Dispute Settlement Provisions” (accessed March 13, 2015).
Year in Trade

U.S. International Trade Commission | 145

countervailing cases. Appendix table A.23 presents an overview of developments in NAFTA 

Chapter 19 dispute settlement cases to which the United States was a party in 2014.

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.394 A key feature of the Chapter 11 arbitral provisions is the 

enforceability in domestic courts of final awards made by arbitration tribunals. 395 In 2014, there 

were four active Chapter 11 cases filed against the United States, three of them filed by 

Canadian investors and one filed by Mexican investors; 396 six filed by U.S. investors against 

Canada;397 and one filed against Mexico by U.S. investors. 398

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. 399 At the end of 2014, the NAFTA 

Secretariat listed four binational panels active under Chapter 19 (table 5.9). Two of the four 

active cases challenged the Mexican agency’s determinations on products from the United 

States, and two challenged U.S. agencies’ determinations on products from Mexico.400

 

394 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 13, 2015). 395 Ibid. 396 USDOS, “NAFTA Investor-State Arbitrations: Cases Filed against the United States” (accessed March 13, 2015). 397 USDOS, “NAFTA Investor-State Arbitrations: Cases Filed against the Government of Canada” (accessed 

March 13, 2015). 398 USDOS, “NAFTA Investor-State Arbitrations: Cases Filed against the United Mexican States” (accessed March 13, 

2015). 399 NAFTA Secretariat, “Overview of the Dispute Settlement Provisions” (accessed March 13, 2015). Such reviews 

involve the parties and designated agencies, rather than individuals or firms.

400 NAFTA Secretariat, “NAFTA—Chapter 19 Active Cases” (accessed March 13, 2015).
Chapter 5: U.S. Free Trade Agreements

146 | www.usitc.gov

Table 5.9: NAFTA Chapter 19 binational panels, active reviews as of yearend 2014

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-MEX-2014-1904-01c USDOC Antidumping 

Administrative Review

Steel Concrete Reinforcing Bar 

USA-MEX-2014-1904-02 USITC Injury Determination Steel Concrete Reinforcing Bar

Source: NAFTA Secretariat, “Status Report of Dispute Settlements Proceedings” (accessed March 13, 2015). a The United States filed the first two cases contesting Mexico’s determinations, and Mexico filed the remaining two cases 

contesting U.S. determinations. b In Canada, final dumping and subsidy determinations are made by the Canada Border Services Agency (CBSA), and injury 

determinations are made by the Canadian International Trade Tribunal (CITT). In Mexico, all determinations are made by the

Secretariat of the 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 U.S. International Trade Commission. NAFTA Secretariat, 

“Overview of the Dispute Settlement Provisions” (accessed March 13, 2015). c The request for panel review was subsequently withdrawn and the status of the case changed to "terminated." See notice of 

the U.S. NAFTA Secretariat published in the Federal Register on May 29, 2015, 80 Fed. Reg. 30661.

Developments in Other FTAs Already in Force 

during 2014

In 2014, 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. 401 In 2014, the U.S. Department of 

Labor (USDOL) and other agencies acted on labor complaints made by interested parties from 

six FTA partners: the Dominican Republic, Honduras, Guatemala, Bahrain, Peru, and Mexico.402

Of the 14 FTAs entered into by the United States, 12 contain investment provisions designed to 

protect foreign investors and their investments and to facilitate the settlement of investment 

disputes. 403 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, 404 the 

 

401 USDOL, ILAB, “Free Trade Agreement Administration” (accessed April 6, 2015). 402 For more information on Mexico, see the previous section on NAFTA in this chapter. 403 CRS, U.S. International Investment Agreements: Issues for Congress, April 29, 2013, “Summary.” 404 For more information on dispute settlement under NAFTA, see the section on NAFTA earlier in the chapter.
Year in Trade

U.S. International Trade Commission | 147

U.S.-Chile FTA, CAFTA-DR, and the U.S.-Peru TPA. 405 Highlights of some of these actions are 

included below.

CAFTA-DR

Dispute Settlement 

Investor-State Disputes 

USTR and the U.S. Department of State engaged with the CAFTA-DR country coordinators on

issues related to the administration of investor-state dispute settlement on December 2, 2014, 

with a follow-on discussion being planned for 2015. 406 Investment cases under CAFTA-DR have 

been filed against Costa Rica, Dominican Republic, Guatemala, El Salvador, and the United 

States.407

Labor Rights Disputes 

On July 30, 2010, the United States requested cooperative labor consultations with Guatemala 

under Article 16.6.1 of CAFTA-DR concerning Guatemala's failure to meet its obligations to 

effectively enforce Guatemalan labor laws.408 On August 9, 2011, the United States requested 

the establishment of an arbitral panel under the CAFTA-DR dispute settlement chapter to 

address the issue.409 The United States engaged with Guatemala extensively in an effort to 

improve labor enforcement, including the signing of an 18-point Labor Enforcement Plan (the 

Enforcement Plan) between the two parties in April 2013. 410 As a result of the agreement on 

the Enforcement Plan, the work of the arbitral panel handling the dispute was suspended. In 

2014, the United States monitored Guatemala's implementation of the Enforcement Plan, and 

conducted two interagency technical monitoring trips and a high-level trip. To support 

Guatemala's effort, in 2014, the U.S. State Department also provided additional funding to 

assist capacity building, personnel training, and tripartite (government, employers, and 

workers) engagement support. 411 After Guatemala failed to implement the Enforcement Plan 

 

405 For more information, see U.S. Department of State, International Claims and Investment Disputes, 

http://www.state.gov/s/l/c3433.htm. 406 USTR, 2015 Trade Policy Agenda and 2014 Annual Report, March 2015, 124. 407 USDOS, “CAFTA-DR Investor-State Arbitrations,” n.d. (accessed April 14, 2015). 408 USTR, 2015 Trade Policy Agenda and 2014 Annual Report, March 2015, 180. 409 USTR, “United States Proceeds with Labor Enforcement Case against Guatemala,” September 18, 2014. 410 USTR, “Ambassador Froman Travels to Guatemala to Continue to Push,” August 1, 2014. 411 USTR, 2015 Trade Policy Agenda and 2014 Annual Report, March 2015, 121.
Chapter 5: U.S. Free Trade Agreements

148 | www.usitc.gov

fully, USTR moved ahead with the dispute settlement proceedings, reconvened the arbitral 

panel,412 and filed its first written submission in the case on November 3, 2014. 413

In addition, the United States also continued to evaluate submissions concerning the Honduran 

government's failure to effectively enforce its labor law and meet its obligation under the 

CAFTA-DR labor chapter in 2014. 414

Dehydrated Ethyl Alcohol Dispute

On April 1, 2014, Costa Rica requested formal consultations under the dispute settlement 

provisions of the CAFTA-DR regarding the tariff treatment by the United States of ethyl alcohol 

(ethanol) dehydrated in Costa Rica from non-originating feedstock. On April 8, 2014, El Salvador 

notified the United States that it had a substantial trade interest in the matter and would 

therefore participate in the consultations. Formal consultations were held on June 11, 2014. On 

September 29, 2014, Costa Rica requested a meeting of the Free Trade Commission, which took 

place on November 6, 2014. The United States continued to engage with these countries on the 

matter.415

Environment

The officials responsible for trade and the environment under CAFTA-DR met twice in 2014 to 

discuss priorities for environmental capacity building programming, the implementation of 

obligations under the environment chapter, and the preparation for senior-level meetings of 

the Environmental Affairs Council (the Council) in 2014 and 2015. 416 In April 2014, the Council 

met in New Orleans, and Council members reported progress made in their countries to 

implement core commitments of the CAFTA-DR environment chapter, including efforts to 

improve levels of environmental protection, strengthen environmental laws and enforcement, 

and promote public participation in environmental decision making.417

Rules of Origin

In 2014, CAFTA-DR partners continued to work on updating the agreement's product-specific 

rules of origin to maintain existing tariff treatment following changes to the International 

Convention on the Harmonized Commodity Description and Coding System in 2012. The parties 

 

412 USDOL, ILAB, “Guatemala Submission under CAFTA-DR,” n.d. (accessed on April 6, 2015). 413 USTR, “In the Matter of Guatemala,” n.d. (accessed on April 6, 2014). 414 USDOL released a public report that raised concerns regarding the effective enforcement of labor laws in 

Honduras under the labor chapter of CAFTA-DR on February 27, 2015. USDOL, ILAB, “Honduras Submission under 

CAFTA-DR” (accessed April 6, 2014). 415 USTR, 2015 Trade Policy Agenda and 2014 Annual Report, March 2015, 181. 416 Ibid., 122. 417 Ibid., 122–123.
Year in Trade

U.S. International Trade Commission | 149

also discussed modifications of certain rules of origin for textiles and apparel goods that had 

been agreed to by the CAFTA-DR Free Trade Commission in 2011. The amendments were aimed 

at enhancing the competitiveness of the region's textile sector through regional sourcing and 

integration. During 2014, technical level staff also discussed countries' respective domestic 

processes and proposed rules of origin modifications under Article 4.14 in order to create 

additional opportunities for trade under the agreement.418

U.S.-Colombia TPA 

In 2014, the United States and Colombia continued to work together to carry out initiatives 

launched at the November 2012 meeting of the U.S.-Colombia Free Trade Commission, such as 

consideration of accelerating tariff elimination, establishment of certain dispute settlement 

mechanisms, and possible updates of rules of origin.419 The two governments also continued 

intensive engagement to support Colombia's efforts to improve the protection of workers' 

rights, prevent violence against trade unionists, and ensure the persecution of the perpetrators 

of such violence.420

U.S.-Jordan FTA

Labor Rights

The Labor Subcommittee under the U.S.-Jordan FTA convened in June 25, 2014. 421 The 

Subcommittee works to promote labor rights and enhance technical cooperation on labor 

matters, such as improving working conditions for foreign workers in Jordan's growing garment 

sector. At the subcommittee meeting, the parties reviewed implementation of the labor 

obligations under the agreement and discussed areas of technical cooperation and capacity 

building. A key objective of the meeting was to support and advance the Labor Implementation 

Plan, which was signed in 2013 by the two governments to address concerns in Jordan's 

garment factories, including anti-union discrimination against foreign workers, poor living 

conditions, and gender discrimination and harassment. The parties also discussed a 

memorandum of understanding signed by the U.S. Department of Labor and the government of 

Jordan in December 2013 that set up a labor cooperation mechanism with priorities for 

cooperative activities on labor matters. The meetings concluded with a public session and 

 

418 USTR, 2015 Trade Policy Agenda and 2014 Annual Report, March 2015, 124. 419 Ibid, 126. 420 Ibid, 127. 421 USTR, “Joint Statement Labor Subcommittee of the United States-Jordan Free Trade Agreement,” June 26, 

2014.
Chapter 5: U.S. Free Trade Agreements

150 | www.usitc.gov

roundtable discussion with stakeholders from Jordan's worker organizations and businesses, as 

well as international buyers and other interested parties.422

Environment

In 2014, the United States and Jordan signed the 2014–2017 Work Program for Environmental 

Technical Cooperation. They also continued their cooperation on strengthening institutions for 

the effective enforcement of environmental laws, conserving biodiversity, improving cleaner 

production processes, and increasing public participation and transparency in environmental 

decision making and enforcement. In 2014, the U.S. Forest Service launched a nursery and 

watershed management improvement program with Jordan's Forestry Ministry.423

U.S.-Korea FTA (KORUS)

On December 15, 2014, the United States and Korea convened the third Joint Committee 

meeting in Washington, DC, and discussed issues important to both parties, including the 

automotive industry and financial services.424 The Joint Committee is the central oversight 

committee under the FTA, responsible for supervising its implementation, coordinating the 

work of its other committees, and resolving issues that may arise.425 In 2014, other KORUSrelated issues that were discussed at various meetings and through inter-sessional 

consultations included the operation of investor-state dispute settlement and Korea's 

implementation of its obligations with regard to legal services, origin verification, financial 

services data transfer, automotive trade, and medical devices.426

U.S.-Morocco FTA

Labor Rights

The Labor Subcommittee of the U.S.-Morocco FTA convened its second meeting in September 

2014 in Morocco. 427 At the meeting, officials from both countries reviewed implementation of 

the obligations each side had undertaken under the FTA's labor chapter, and clarified the 

domestic mechanisms, institutions, and procedures that each party had established to advance 

 

422 USTR, “The United States and the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan,” July 2, 2014. 423 USTR, 2015 Trade Policy Agenda and 2014 Annual Report, March 2015, 130. 424 USTR, “Statement on Meeting of the U.S.-Korea Free Trade Agreement (KORUS) Joint Committee,”

December 15, 2014; USTR, 2015 Trade Policy Agenda and 2014 Annual Report, March 2015, 131. 425 USTR, “Statement on Meeting of the U.S.-Korea Free Trade Agreement (KORUS) Joint Committee,” 

December 15, 2014. 426 USTR, 2015 Trade Policy Agenda and 2014 Annual Report, March 2015, 130, 131. For more information on the 

KORUS FTA, see the Korea section of chapter 6.

427 USTR, “Joint Statement of the Labor Subcommittee of the United States-Morocco Free Trade Agreement,” 

September 26, 2014.
Year in Trade

U.S. International Trade Commission | 151

implementation. The subcommittee also discussed issues related to labor laws and 

implementation, such as institutional capacity, labor law enforcement and compliance, child 

labor prevention, youth employment promotion, protections against gender discrimination and 

sexual harassment in the workplace, and the promotion of tripartite social dialogue. Further 

technical cooperation was also considered.428

Environment 

On October 28, 2014, the United States and Morocco held a meeting of the Subcommittee on 

Environmental Affairs to discuss implementation of their commitments under the environment 

chapter of the agreement, as well as a meeting of the Working Group on Environmental 

Cooperation to review ongoing cooperation projects.429 At the Working Group meeting, the 

two governments finalized and subsequently signed a 2014–2017 Plan of Action that 

established specific priority areas and objectives for cooperation that reflect national priorities 

for each government.430

U.S.-Panama TPA

The first meeting of the United States-Panama Free Trade Commission was held in Panama City 

on May 28, 2014. 431 The commission was established by the TPA to supervise the 

implementation and further elaboration of the TPA. 432 At the commission's meeting, the parties 

reviewed the trade and economic impact of the agreement on both countries,433 and 

acknowledged the trade and investment opportunities that have resulted from its 

implementation. 434 Recognizing the importance of an effective dispute settlement procedure to 

ensure both countries' rights and benefits under the TPA, the Free Trade Commission adopted 

model rules of procedures for the settlement of disputes, as well as a code of conduct and 

expense payments for the panelists.435

 

428 Ibid. 429 USDOS, “Joint Communiqué of United States-Morocco Environmental Meetings,” October 28, 2014. 430 USDOS, “U.S.-Morocco 2014–2017 Plan of Action for Environmental Cooperation,” October 28, 2014. 431 USTR, “United States and Panama Hold Inaugural Meeting,” January 28, 2014. 432 United States-Panama Trade Promotion Agreement: Chapter Nineteen, Administration of the Agreement and 

Trade Capacity Building, Article 19.1.

433 USTR, “Joint Statement from the First Meeting of the United States-Panama Free Trade Commission,” May 29, 

2014. 434 USTR, 2015 Trade Policy Agenda and 2014 Annual Report, March 2015, 136. 435 USTR, “Joint Statement from the First Meeting of the United States-Panama Free Trade Commission,” May 29, 

2014. 
Chapter 5: U.S. Free Trade Agreements

152 | www.usitc.gov

Labor Rights

On January 27–28, 2014, the United States and Panama convened the inaugural meeting of the 

Labor Affairs Council (LAC) under the U.S.-Panama TPA. The LAC is responsible for overseeing 

the implementation of the labor chapter of the TPA, 436 and works to promote labor rights and 

enhance technical cooperation on labor matters. 437 At the meeting, the officials reviewed and 

clarified the domestic mechanisms, institutions, and procedures that each party had created to 

advance the implementation of the labor chapter’s provisions. 438 They also discussed the labor 

obligations of the agreement, as well as areas of technical cooperation and capacity building, 

including promoting fundamental labor rights, reducing child labor, improving labor 

inspections, and monitoring temporary work contracts and subcontracting arrangements.439

Environment

The United States and Panama held inaugural meetings of the U.S.-Panama Environmental 

Affairs Council (EAC) and the Environmental Cooperation Commission (ECC) in Panama City on 

January 29, 2014. 440 At the EAC meeting, the two governments reviewed progress in meeting 

obligations in the TPA's Environment Chapter. These included actions taken by both countries 

to increase levels of environmental protection, effectively enforce environmental laws, and 

provide opportunities for public participation in environmental governance and the trade 

policy-setting processes. The two governments also set concrete next steps to establish the 

U.S.-Panama Secretariat for Environmental Matters, an independent secretariat intended to 

receive submissions from the public asserting that one or both parties are not effectively 

enforcing their environmental laws. 441

At the ECC meeting, the two governments highlighted achievements from ongoing 

environmental cooperative activities. 442 They also approved and signed the U.S.-Panama 

Environmental Cooperation Work Plan, which establishes priorities for cooperative activities 

and provides a framework for advancing environmental cooperation in the coming years.443

 

436 USTR, “Joint Statement of the Labor Affairs Council of the United States-Panama Trade Promotion Agreement,” 

January 28, 2014. 

437USTR, “United States and Panama Hold Inaugural Meeting,” January 28, 2014. 438 USTR, “Joint Statement of the Labor Affairs Council of the United States-Panama Trade Promotion Agreement,” 

January 28, 2014. 439 USTR, “United States and Panama Hold Inaugural Meeting,” January 28, 2014. 440 USTR, “USTR Participates in Inaugural Environment Meetings with Panama,” February 2014. 441 USTR, “Joint Communiqué of the U.S.-Panama Environmental Affairs Council and Environmental Cooperation 

Commission,” January 29, 2014. 442 Ibid. 443 USTR, “USTR Participates in Inaugural Environment Meetings with Panama,” February 2014.
Year in Trade

U.S. International Trade Commission | 153

U.S.-Peru TPA

In 2014, the United State continued to engage extensively with the government of Peru about 

progress on the implementation of the labor chapter of the TPA. In August 2014, U.S. officials 

held two meetings on labor issues with the Peruvian government as well as a wide range of 

labor stakeholders.444 In October, the Labor Affairs Council of the Peru-United States TPA held 

its second meeting in Peru. Participants exchanged information on the implementation of the 

labor chapter of the TPA, including such matters as institutional capacity for labor law 

enforcement and labor administration. They also discussed ongoing cooperation on labor 

matters (e.g., the prevention and abolition of child labor, combating forced labor, and capacity 

building for labor inspections). 445 In December, the U.S. government awarded funding to a 

project that would help build the labor law enforcement capacity of the Peruvian labor 

inspectorate. 446

 

444 USTR, 2015 Trade Policy Agenda and 2014 Annual Report, March 2015, 139. 445 USTR, “Joint Statement of the Labor Affairs Council Peru-United States Trade Promotion Agreement (TPA),” 

October 17, 2014. 

446 USTR, 2015 Trade Policy Agenda and 2014 Annual Report, March 2015, 139.

Year in Trade

U.S. International Trade Commission | 155

Chapter 6

U.S. Relations with Selected Major 

Trading Partners

This chapter reviews U.S. bilateral trade relations with nine 

selected trading partners during 2014: the EU, Canada, China, 

Mexico, Japan, South Korea, Brazil, Taiwan, and India (ordered 

by value of two-way merchandise trade) (figure 6.1). For each 

trading partner, U.S. bilateral trade is described, including 

total two-way trade, the U.S. trade balance, U.S. exports, and 

U.S. imports. This section is followed by descriptions of the 

major bilateral trade-related developments during 2014. The 

links to each trading partner are provided in the column on 

the right. The online interactive merchandise trade 

dashboards that accompany this report can be used for 

further analysis of U.S. trade with all of its trading partners. 

European Union

Canada

China

Mexico

Japan

South Korea

Brazil

Taiwan

India

Figure 6.1: Map of selected major U.S. trading partners

Source: USITC staff.
Chapter 6: U.S. Relations with Selected Major Trading Partners

156| www.usitc.gov

European Union

The EU as a single entity447 is the largest two-way (exports plus 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 6.9 percent in 2014 to $694.5 billion, accounting for 17.5 percent of total 

U.S. trade. The U.S. merchandise trade deficit with the EU grew by $15.7 billion in 2014 to 

$141.1 billion as the growth in U.S. imports continued to outpace U.S. export growth (figure 

6.2). On the other hand, the U.S. trade surplus in private services increased $7.1 billion in 2014 

to $57.5 billion (figure 6.3). The EU accounted for 33.1 percent of U.S. two-way trade in services 

in 2014, with the United Kingdom as the EU's largest services trader (with 29.5 percent of the 

EU total), followed by Germany and France.448

The EU continued to be the second-largest market (after Canada) for U.S. exports in 2014. U.S. 

exports to the EU rose 5.5 percent to $276.7 billion, surpassing the previous record set in 2008. 

Leading U.S. exports included aircraft and parts, petroleum-related products, medicaments 

(medicines), medical instruments, passenger motor vehicles, and blood fractions (e.g., 

antiserum) and vaccines. All of the top 25 leading U.S. exports to the EU increased in value in 

2014 except energy-related products.

The EU was also the second-largest source of U.S. imports, following China. U.S. imports from 

the EU increased 7.8 percent in 2014 to $417.8 billion, also a new record. Leading U.S. imports 

were passenger motor vehicles, medicaments, petroleum-related products, turbojets and parts, 

blood fractions and vaccines, and airplanes and parts. Like U.S. exports, U.S. imports in 2014

increased in value in all major product categories except energy-related products. Among the 

top imports, the most notable increase in value was in medicaments, which rose by over 

$6 billion. U.S.-EU merchandise trade data are shown in appendix tables A.24 through A.26.

The major focus of the U.S.-EU trade relationship in 2014 was negotiations to conclude the 

Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership agreement.449 Progress was also made on 

lifting U.S. restrictions on imports of beef from the EU. Additional information on these topics is 

presented below. 

 

447 The 28 member states of the EU in 2014 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.

448 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.

449 For more detailed information on TTIP, see chapter 5.
Year in Trade

U.S. International Trade Commission | 157

Figure 6.2: U.S. merchandise trade with the EU, 2010–14

Source: USITC DataWeb (accessed February 12, 2015); data compiled from official statistics of the U.S. Department of 

Commerce.

Figure 6.3: U.S. private services trade with the EU, 2010–14a

Source: USDOC, BEA, U.S. International Transactions Accounts Data, March 19, 2015, tables 1.2 and 1.3. a Data for 2014 are preliminary.

-200

-100

0

100

200

300

400

500

2010 2011 2012 2013 2014

(Billion $)

Total exports General imports Merchandise trade balance

0

50

100

150

200

250

2010 2011 2012 2013 2014

Exports Imports Trade balance

(Billion $)
Chapter 6: U.S. Relations with Selected Major Trading Partners

158| www.usitc.gov

There were also developments in WTO dispute settlement cases involving the United States 

and the EU in 2014. On December 19, 2014, the EU requested consultations with the United 

States regarding conditional tax incentives established by the state of Washington in relation to 

the development, manufacture, and sale of large civil aircraft. 450 The two WTO cases involving 

long-running U.S. and EU complaints about each other's measures affecting trade in large civil 

aircraft remained in the compliance panel phase in 2014. For more information about 

developments in WTO dispute settlement, see chapter 3 and appendix table A.22.

Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership 

(TTIP)

In June 2013, the United States and EU launched negotiations to conclude a TTIP agreement.451

The major U.S. goals for the negotiations included: 452

• eliminate tariffs on trade in goods;

• improve market access for trade in services;

• strengthen rules-based investment;

• reduce nontariff barriers, including sanitary and phytosanitary (SPS) barriers and technical 

barriers to trade (TBT); 

• reduce the cost of regulatory differences;

• develop globally relevant rules, principles, and new modes of cooperation in areas such as 

intellectual property, state-owned enterprises, and localization barriers to trade;453 and

• promote the global competitiveness of small and medium-sized enterprises. 

Four rounds of negotiations were held in 2014, for a total of seven rounds since the launch of 

negotiations in 2013. 454 According to USTR, in 2014 negotiations moved beyond discussion of 

general approaches in the agreement to reviewing the many complex proposals and draft text 

language provided by both sides, including some consolidated texts.455

 

450 WTO, “Dispute Settlement: DS487; United States—Conditional Tax Incentives for Large Civil Aircraft” (accessed 

February 24, 2014).

451 For background on the launch of the negotiations, see USITC, Year in Trade 2013, July 2014, 129–31. Also, for

more detailed information on TTIP, see chapter 5.

452 White House, “Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (T-TIP),” June 2013. 453 Localization barriers to trade are measures designed to protect, favor, or stimulate domestic industries, service 

providers, and/or intellectual property at the expense of goods, services, or intellectual property from other 

countries. For more information, see USTR, “Localization Barriers to Trade,” http://www.ustr.gov/tradetopics/localization-barriers. 454 For more information on the negotiating rounds, see chapter 5. 455 USTR, “Opening Remarks by U.S. and EU Chief Negotiators for T-Tip Round Seven,” October 3, 2014. 
Year in Trade

U.S. International Trade Commission | 159

U.S. and EU leaders met several times during the year and reaffirmed their commitment to 

“comprehensive and ambitious negotiations, leading to a high standard Transatlantic Trade and 

Investment Partnership agreement.” 456 In November 2014, USTR Michael Froman and new EU 

Trade Commissioner Cecilia Malmström committed to working on a “fresh start” in the TTIP

negotiations. 457 In December, the two leaders met to review the state of negotiations and 

agreed to have regular stocktaking exercises as negotiations progress. 458

Beef

In March 2014, new U.S. import regulations on bovine spongiform encephalitis (BSE) entered 

into effect, ending restrictions on U.S. imports of EU beef that have been in place since the late 

1990s. 459 The new regulations permit imports from a particular country based on the same 

criteria and risk categories that the World Organization for Animal Health (OIE) 460 uses to rate a 

country’s BSE risk status. 461 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.462

Several EU member states applied for an equivalency determination in 2014, including Ireland, 

the Netherlands, and Great Britain. Ireland was the first EU member state to receive an 

equivalency determination. 463 According to a letter dated December 30, 2014, from USDA’s 

Food Safety and Inspection Service (FSIS), Ireland’s beef slaughter inspection system was 

determined to be equivalent with the U.S. system. 464 However, before Ireland can actually ship 

beef carcasses, it must provide notification of the establishments certified to export beef 

carcasses to the United States.465

Canada

Canada was the United States' largest single-country merchandise trading partner in 2014, and 

the second-largest U.S. partner for trade in services, after the United Kingdom. Total U.S. two-

 

456 White House, “Statement on the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership,” November 16, 2014. 457 USTR, “Readout of Ambassador Froman’s Call with EU Commissioner for Trade,” November 3, 2014. 458 USTR, “Transcript of Press Gaggle,” Washington, D.C., December 8, 2014. 459 78 Fed. Reg. 72980–73008 (December 4, 2013). 460 The OIE is an international body that sets standards related to animal health. 461 USDA, APHIS, “APHIS Finalizes Bovine Import Regulations,” November 1, 2013. 462 USDA, FSIS, Ireland Beef Equivalence Reinstatement Audit, December 2014, 2. 463 Irish Government News Service, “Coveney Secures Access for Irish Beef in US,” January 5, 2015. 464 USDA, FSIS, letter to Mr. Martin Blake, Chief Veterinary Officer, Department of Food, Agriculture, and the 

Marine, Government of Ireland, December 30, 2014. 465 USDA, FSIS, letter to Mr. Martin Blake, Chief Veterinary Officer, Department of Food, Agriculture, and the 

Marine, Government of Ireland, December 30, 2014; USDA, FSIS, Ireland Beef Equivalence Reinstatement Audit,

December 2014. 
Chapter 6: U.S. Relations with Selected Major Trading Partners

160| www.usitc.gov

way merchandise trade with Canada was valued at $658.2 billion in 2014, representing 

16.6 percent of U.S. merchandise trade with the world. The merchandise trade deficit with 

Canada was $33.9 billion, approximately 10 percent greater than in 2013 ($30.9 billion), as

imports grew faster than exports (figure 6.4).

U.S. two-way trade in private services with Canada was valued at $92.8 billion in 2014, 

accounting for 8.1 percent of U.S. trade in services with the world. The U.S. surplus on services 

trade with Canada was $32.3 billion in 2014, down 1.2 percent from 2013, but still the largest 

U.S. surplus among the United States' single-country trading partners (figure 6.5).

Canada was the foremost single-country market for U.S. goods in 2014. The value of goods 

exports to Canada was nearly 30 percent greater than that of goods exports to Mexico, the 

United States' second-largest single-country export market. In 2014, U.S. exports to Canada 

amounted to $312.1 billion, an increase of 3.5 percent from 2013. Leading U.S. exports to 

Canada in 2014 were crude petroleum ($11.5 billion) and light oils ($8.2 billion), followed by 

aircraft and spacecraft ($7.1 billion). Passenger and transport motor vehicles and parts were 

also major U.S. exports to Canada in 2014.

U.S. imports from Canada amounted to $346.1 billion in 2014, an increase of 4.1 percent over 

imports in 2013. In 2014, the top U.S. imports from Canada were energy-related products, 

including petroleum-related products and natural gas, followed by transportation equipment, 

particularly passenger motor vehicles and parts. U.S.-Canada merchandise trade data are 

shown in appendix tables A.27 through A.29.

In 2014, the United States and Canada continued to address a range of trade topics. They 

consulted on agricultural and industrial goods matters, through forums such as the CanadaUnited States Consultative Committee on Agriculture and the Canada-United States Regulatory 

Cooperation Council. The aim was to facilitate trade by focusing on particular trade distortions 

caused by behind-the-border measures. 

In March 2014, the dispute settlement body under the 2006 Canada-United States Softwood 

Lumber Agreement (SLA 2006) came to a decision in a major 2011 case involving provincial 

export subsidies. The body determined that Canada was no longer required to collect 

compensatory adjustments in the case once the SLA 2006 expired on October 12, 2013, despite 

the two-year extension of the agreement to October 12, 2015. More details on this case appear 

later in this section.
Year in Trade

U.S. International Trade Commission | 161

Figure 6.4: U.S. merchandise trade with Canada, 2010–14 

Source: USITC DataWeb (accessed February 12, 2015); data compiled from official statistics of the U.S. Department of 

Commerce.

Figure 6.5: U.S. private services trade with Canada, 2010–14a

Source: USDOC, BEA, U.S. International Transactions Accounts Data, March 19, 2015, tables 1.2 and 1.3. a Data for 2014 are preliminary.

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

2010 2011 2012 2013 2014

Exports Imports Trade balance

(Billion $)

-100

-50

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

400

2010 2011 2012 2013 2014

(Billion $)

Total U.S. exports General U.S. imports Merchandise trade balance
Chapter 6: U.S. Relations with Selected Major Trading Partners

162| www.usitc.gov

Agriculture 

Regulatory Cooperation Council

In February 2011, the Regulatory Cooperation Council (RCC) was formed to identify specific 

regulatory issues where technical collaboration between the two governments might lessen 

regulatory differences that hinder cross-border trade and investment. In December 2011, the 

RCC released its Joint Action Plan on Regulatory Cooperation, with 29 initiatives. In June 2013, 

the RCC met to review progress on the initiatives, as well as to open a public comment process 

on how to advance U.S.-Canadian regulatory cooperation.466

Following its review, the RCC began to focus on harmonizing rules addressing trade in meat 

products between the two countries, in particular: (1) the equivalence of meat safety systems, 

(2) meat and poultry product export certification, and (3) meat cut nomenclature. (See box 6.1 

for the RCC regulatory initiatives taken in the agriculture and food sector under the plan.)

On February 24, 2014, Canada and the United States agreed to adopt the U.S. Institutional 

Meat Purchase Specifications (IMPS) as the standard nomenclature used to classify wholesale 

cuts of meat. 467 Previously, differences in names for cuts and labeling requirements could 

hinder trade between the two countries as a result of red tape and regulatory uncertainty.468

On November 12, 2014, documents using the IMPS classifications were released as the North 

American approach to standard meat nomenclature, covering fresh beef, lamb, veal, and 

pork. 469 The bilateral adoption of the IMPS represented the first regulatory revision brought 

about as a result of the 2011 RCC initiatives, according to the U.S. State Department. 470

 

466 White House, United States-Canada Regulatory Cooperation Council––Joint Forward Plan––August 2014, n.d. 

(accessed March 10, 2015), 2. 467 USDOS, U.S. Embassy, Ottawa, “U.S., Canada Harmonize Names of Meat Cuts,” February 24, 2014; USDOC, ITA, 

“U.S.-Canada Regulatory Cooperation Council—United States and Canada Release RCC Joint Forward Plan,” n.d. 

(accessed March 10, 2015).

468 USDA, AMS, “U.S. and Canada Harmonize Names of Meat Cuts,” February 24, 2014; Perimeter Security and 

Economic Competitiveness (Canada), “Canada-United States Regulatory Cooperation Council News,” May 2014. 469 USDOS, U.S. Embassy, Ottawa, “24 February 2014: U.S., Canada Harmonize Names of Meat Cuts to Facilitate 

Trade,” February 24, 2014. 470 Ibid.
Year in Trade

U.S. International Trade Commission | 163

Box 6.1: Regulatory initiatives under the RCC Joint Action Plan undertaken in the agriculture and food 

sector

Food safety:

• Develop common approaches to food safety while minimizing inspection activities;

• Enhance the compatibility of meat safety systems to reduce administrative procedures while 

maintaining public health outcomes;

• Establish mutually acceptable food safety laboratory recognition criteria, test results, and 

methodologies; and

• Streamline the certification requirements for meat and poultry shipped between the two countries.

Agricultural production:

• Further align crop protection product (e.g., pesticides) approvals and establishment of maximum 

pesticide residue limits/tolerances;

• Further align marketing application, submission, and review processes for veterinary drugs, 

including efforts to establish identical maximum drug residue limits/tolerances;

• Develop a "perimeter approach" to plant protection to leverage each country's mutual advantage 

and streamline certification requirements for cross-border shipments; and 

• Work towards a common approach to zoning of foreign animal diseases.

Marketing:

• Create a common meat cut nomenclature system and regulatory alignment tool; and 

• Develop comparable financial risk mitigation tools to protect fresh produce sellers from buyers that 

default.

Source: White House, United States-Canada Regulatory Cooperation Council—Joint Action Plan—December 2011 (accessed 

March 10, 2015).

In addition, the RCC released its Joint Forward Plan (JFP) on August 29, 2014, as the next step in 

better regulatory alignment.471 Based on numerous inputs—discussions in the RCC, discussions 

between relevant U.S. and Canadian agencies, the 2013 review of progress, and stakeholder 

comments submitted—the JFP outlined three future areas of work:

 

471 White House, United States-Canada Regulatory Cooperation Council––Joint Forward Plan––August 2014, n.d. 

(accessed March 10, 2015), 1–41.
Chapter 6: U.S. Relations with Selected Major Trading Partners

164| www.usitc.gov

(1) Regulatory Partnership Statements (RPSs). These will outline the structure for managing

ongoing agency-to-agency cooperation. Although varying in structure and format, the RPSs 

will (1) aim to foster high-level commitment on the part of the two governments for their 

agencies to work together; (2) offer a means for stakeholders to help list priorities and 

discuss implementation of the initiatives, and (3) provide for an annual review mechanism 

to provide updates and consider adjustments.472

(2) Department-to-Department Commitments and Work Plans. While the RPSs are being 

developed, the JFP sets out a number of bilateral commitments between select agencies in 

specific regulatory areas, focused on a 3- to 5-year timeframe.

(3) Cross-Cutting Issues. Experience has shown that some laws and policies concerning 

international regulatory cooperation are more challenging to address than others. Joint 

funding of new initiatives or sharing information with foreign governments are examples of 

these challenging areas. These are subjects that the RCC expects to explore in greater detail.

Softwood Lumber Agreement 

On March 26, 2014, the London Court of International Arbitration (LCIA) released its 

determination concerning the joint request for arbitration submitted by Canada and the United 

States in September 2013 under the 2006 Canada-United States Softwood Lumber Agreement 

(SLA 2006). 473 The determination addressed the remedy awarded to the United States in 

January 2011 in LCIA case no. 81010, where the United States contended that certain forestry 

programs in the Canadian provinces of Ontario and Quebec violated the anti-circumvention 

clause of the SLA 2006474 by providing subsidies on softwood lumber exports to the United 

States. Because the tribunal determined that a number of these forestry programs violated the 

anti-circumvention clause, it directed Canada to either “cure the breaches” of the agreement 

within 30 days, or apply additional export charges to shipments of softwood lumber by 

Canadian exporters as compensation in an amount equivalent to the loss to U.S. producers as a 

result of these programs. The tribunal calculated this amount to approximate US$58.85 million. 

Canada began to apply these compensatory adjustments starting March 1, 2011.

In January 2012, Canada and the United States agreed to extend the SLA 2006 for an additional 

two years, from its original expiration on October 12, 2013, to its new expiration date of 

 

472 For further details, visit the U.S. and Canadian RCC websites found at www.trade.gov/rcc and 

http://actionplan.gc.ca/rcc. 473 LCIA No. 81010, “The United States of America and Canada––AWARD,” April 2, 2014, par. 17. For further 

details, see USITC, The Year in Trade 2013, July 2014, 134–35. 474 LCIA No. 81010, “The United States of America and Canada––AWARD,” April 2, 2014, par. 1–3.
Year in Trade

U.S. International Trade Commission | 165

October 12, 2015. 475 As the original 2013 expiration date of the agreement approached, the 

United States raised the point that Canada had collected less than half the amount awarded 

under the 2011 determination. For its part, Canada indicated that it considered the obligation 

to apply compensatory adjustments ended with the expiration of the original agreement. As a 

consequence, the two parties requested clarification from the original tribunal in September 

2013 regarding the time period for these compensatory adjustments.

In its March 2014 determination, 476 the tribunal found that “Canada has no obligation to 

continue to apply the Compensatory Adjustments beyond October 12, 2013.” In its award 

dated April 2, 2014, the tribunal indicated its reasoning that the compensatory adjustments 

specified in the January 2011 award applied to the agreement in effect at the time, and 

therefore, the adjustments awarded at the time expired on the date that the original SLA 

expired, that is, October 12, 2013. 477

Procurement 

Canada and the United States have both made a number of plurilateral and bilateral 

commitments granting access to one another's procurement markets. These commitments 

include the revised WTO Agreement on Government Procurement, which entered into force in 

2014; NAFTA (1994); and the 2010 Canada-United States Agreement on Government 

Procurement. 478 Although U.S. businesses have access under these agreements to most 

Canadian federal departments, as well as a number of provincial and municipal entities in 

Canada, U.S. suppliers reportedly have access to only a small number479 of more the than 40 

Crown Corporations in Canada. (While Crown Corporations operate largely as private 

commercial companies, they are government-owned and have public policy objectives.) In 

February 2014, Canada announced a new procurement strategy for defense projects that gives 

greater flexibility to the federal government to improve economic outcomes from defense 

procurement projects.480 In particular, federal departments in Canada can now delegate 

 

475 The initial Canada-United States Softwood Lumber Agreement was in force from 1991 to 2001. A second SLA 

was signed in 2006, and entered into force on October 12, 2006, for a term of seven years. This SLA was originally 

set to expire October 12, 2013, with the possibility of a two-year extension. 476 The March 2014 determination is dated March 21, 2014, and was “communicated to the Parties” on March 26, 

2014. LCIA No. 81010, “The United States of America and Canada––DETERMINATION,” March 21, 2014, 3; LCIA No. 

81010, “The United States of America and Canada––AWARD,” April 2, 2014, par. 17. 477 LCIA No. 81010, “The United States of America and Canada––AWARD,” April 2, 2014, par. 102. 478 USTR, 2014 National Trade Estimate Report on Foreign Trade Barriers, March 31, 2014, 51. 479 USDOS, Bureau of Western Hemisphere Affairs, “U.S. Relations with Canada,” September 10, 2014; USTR, 

“Canada,” 2014 National Trade Estimate Report on Foreign Trade Barriers, March 31, 2014, 51. 480 USDOS, Bureau of Western Hemisphere Affairs, “U.S. Relations with Canada,” September 10, 2014.
Chapter 6: U.S. Relations with Selected Major Trading Partners

166| www.usitc.gov

purchasing authorities to the Crown Corporations––the large majority of which are not bound 

by procurement rules under bilateral or plurilateral agreements.481

China

In 2014, China remained the United States’ second-largest single-country trading partner based 

on two-way merchandise trade, accounting for 14.9 percent of total U.S. merchandise trade. 

U.S. two-way merchandise trade with China amounted to $590.7 billion in 2014, an increase of 

5.1 percent over $562.2 billion in 2013. The U.S. merchandise trade deficit with China, which 

rose by 7.5 percent, or $23.9 billion, to $342.6 billion in 2014, remained higher than the U.S. 

merchandise trade deficit with any other trading partner. The expansion of this deficit with 

China 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 6.6). In 2014, China 

was the United States’ fourth-largest single-country trading partner based on two-way services 

trade, accounting for 4.9 percent of total U.S. services trade. The U.S. services trade surplus 

with China increased by 14.4 percent, from $23.2 billion in 2013 to $26.5 billion in 2014 

(figure 6.7).

China was the third-largest single-country destination for U.S. merchandise exports in 2014, 

behind Canada and Mexico. U.S. merchandise exports to China amounted to $124.0 billion in 

2014, a 1.9 percent increase over 2013. Leading U.S. exports to China in 2014 were soybeans 

(11.9 percent of total U.S. exports to China), aircraft and parts (11.2 percent), and passenger 

motor vehicles (8.7 percent). Other leading U.S. exports to China included metal waste and 

scrap, processors or controllers, and grain sorghum. The increase in the value of U.S. exports to 

China in 2014 was led by a $2.4 billion increase in exports of passenger motor vehicles, a 

$1.5 billion increase in exports of soybeans, a $1.4 billion increase in exports of grain sorghum, 

and a $1.3 billion increase in exports of aircraft and parts. 

In 2014, China remained the largest source of U.S. imports. U.S. merchandise imports from 

China amounted to $466.7 billion, an increase of 6.0 percent over 2013. Leading U.S. imports 

from China in 2014 were computers and parts, cellphones, telecommunications equipment, 

toys, video games, and electrical static converters. The increase in the value of U.S. imports in 

2014 was led by growth in imports of cellphones, computer parts, telecommunication 

equipment, and color televisions. U.S.-China merchandise trade data are shown in appendix 

tables A.30 through A.32.

 

481 Ibid.
Year in Trade

U.S. International Trade Commission | 167

Figure 6.6: U.S. merchandise trade with China, 2010–14

Source: USITC DataWeb (accessed February 12, 2015); data compiled from official statistics of the U.S. Department of 

Commerce.

Figure 6.7: U.S. private services trade with China, 2010–14a

Source: USDOC, BEA, U.S. International Transactions Accounts Data, March 19, 2015, tables 1.2 and 1.3. a Data for 2014 are preliminary.

-400

-300

-200

-100

0

100

200

300

400

500

2010 2011 2012 2013 2014

(Billion $)

Total U.S. exports General U.S. imports Merchandise trade balance

0

10

20

30

40

50

2010 2011 2012 2013 2014

Exports Imports Trade balance

(Billion $)
Chapter 6: U.S. Relations with Selected Major Trading Partners

168| www.usitc.gov

In 2014, U.S.-China trade relations focused on the following topics: China’s intellectual property 

rights (IPR) protection and enforcement; access to China's agricultural market; access to China's 

medical devices and pharmaceuticals market; and Bilateral Investment Treaty (BIT) 

negotiations. These topics were among the principal themes of the July 2014 session of the 

U.S.-China Strategic and Economic Dialogue (S&ED) 482 and the December 2014 Joint 

Commission on Commerce and Trade (JCCT), 483 as well as other high-level bilateral official 

meetings. 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. 484 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 filed 16 complaints under the WTO 

Dispute Settlement Understanding against China, and China has filed 9 such complaints against 

the United States.485 In 2014, there were major developments in a number of ongoing WTO 

dispute settlement proceedings involving the United States and China. In a proceeding brought 

by the United States regarding China's measures related to the exportation of rare earths, 

tungsten, and molybdenum (DS431), in August 2014, the WTO DSB adopted the Appellate Body 

and panel reports. 486 In September 2014, China stated that it intended to implement the DSB's 

recommendations and rulings in this matter.487 In July 2014, the WTO DSB adopted the 

Appellate Body and panel reports in a proceeding brought by China against the United States 

regarding U.S. countervailing and antidumping measures on certain products from China 

(DS449); 488 in August, the United States stated that it intended to implement the DSB's 

recommendations and rulings. 489 Developments in these and other WTO dispute settlement 

proceedings during 2014 are described in more detail in chapter 3 and appendix table A.22.

 

482 U.S. Department of the Treasury, “Updated: U.S.-China Joint Factsheet Sixth Meeting of the Strategic and 

Economic Dialogue,” July 11, 2014. 483 USDOC, “25th U.S.-China Joint Commission on Commerce and Trade,” December 19, 2014. 484 The establishment of the S&ED was announced in 2009 by U.S. President Obama and Chinese President Hu 

Jintao. The S&ED replaced the former Senior Dialogue and Strategic Economic Dialogue (SED) under the George W. 

Bush administration. 

485 On February 11, 2015, the United States filed the latest WTO dispute settlement case against China (DS489) 

regarding certain Chinese measures providing subsidies contingent upon export performance to enterprises in 

several industries in China. WTO, “Chronological List of Dispute Cases” (accessed March 16, 2015). 486 USTR, “U.S. Trade Representative Michael Froman Announces U.S. Victory in Challenge to China's Rare Earth 

Export Restraints,” August 2014.

487 WTO, “Dispute Settlement: DS431; China—Measures Related to the Exportation of Rare Earths, Tungsten and 

Molybdenum” (accessed January 22, 2015). 488 USTR, “United States Welcomes WTO's Rejection of China's Challenge to U.S. Countervailing Duty Law, Regrets 

Findings on Challenge to Specific Proceedings,” March 2014. 489 WTO, “Dispute Settlement: DS449: United States—Countervailing and Anti-dumping Measures on Certain 

Products from China” (accessed January 22, 2015).
Year in Trade

U.S. International Trade Commission | 169

Intellectual Property Rights Enforcement 

The United States and China have had lengthy and long-standing consultations on IPR issues, 

particularly since China’s accession to the WTO and its acceptance of the WTO Trade-Related 

Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS) Agreement.490 As a result, China has undertaken 

wide-ranging revisions to its laws, but much work reportedly remains to be done. 491

USTR’s 2014 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.492 USTR noted significant concerns with the theft of U.S. firms’ 

trade secrets, forced transfer of IPR and technology, the difficulty of obtaining legal redress, 

and problems with non-deterrent IPR enforcement in general. However, USTR also 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, in 

August 2013, the National People's Congress enacted amendments to China's Trademark Law, 

including provisions to combat trademark squatting, expand protection to sound marks, permit 

multiclass registration, and streamline application and appeal procedures. 493 In May 2014, the 

revised Trademark Law and implementing regulations went into effect.494

USTR’s 2014 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. 495 In 2014, the Chinese 

website Xunlei made several notable improvements, including shutting down its problematic 

affiliated service, GouGou, and transitioning another affiliated service, KanKan, to a legitimate 

format. Xunlei also created a mechanism for reporting unauthorized content and entered into 

agreements with several rights holder organizations to distribute licensed content. In 

recognition of Xunlei's effort, USTR removed Xunlei from the list of notorious markets in 

2014. 496 USTR also noted that a number of online markets in China have been the subject of 

deterrent enforcement actions in China's courts, such as Kuaibo.com/QVOD, a previously listed 

online market, which closed as a result of enforcement efforts.497 Serious online problems are 

still reported, however. 

 

490 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. 491 USTR, 2014 Special 301 Report, April 2014, 30–31. 492 Ibid., 8. 493 USTR, 2014 Special 301 Report, April 2014, 10. 494 Ibid., 31. 495 For more information about this USTR report, see chapter 2. 496 USTR, 2014 Out-of-Cycle Review of Notorious Markets, March 5, 2015, 4. 497 Ibid., 4.
Chapter 6: U.S. Relations with Selected Major Trading Partners

170| www.usitc.gov

In its review, USTR said that while Chinese authorities engage in routine enforcement actions in 

physical markets, a number of Chinese markets still sell counterfeit goods and/or facilitate the 

distribution of significant quantities of counterfeit merchandise for consumption in China and 

abroad. The following Chinese markets were named as key contributors to counterfeiting: Jin 

Long Pan Foreign Trade Garment Market and Jinshun Garment Market in Guangzhou; the Qi Pu 

Market in Shanghai; and the Silk Market in Beijing. 498

Agricultural Market Access

Although China remained the United States' largest agricultural export market in 2014, 499 U.S. 

agricultural exports to China have declined continuously for three years, falling from 

$25.9 billion in 2012 to $25.5 billion in 2013 and $24.6 billion in 2014. In 2014, China accounted 

for 16.3 percent of total U.S. agricultural exports. 500

U.S. producers of agricultural products continue to face a number of Chinese nontariff barriers, 

particularly in the areas of SPS measures and inspection-related requirements.501 In 2014, China 

continued to block U.S. beef over concerns related to bovine spongiform encephalopathy (BSE). 

This exclusion remained in place even though the United States has been recognized by the 

World Organization for Animal Health (OIE) as being in the lowest-risk category for this 

disease502—that is, U.S. beef poses a negligible risk of transmitting BSE.

503 In 2014, China also 

continued to block imports of U.S. pork due to China's zero-tolerance policy for ractopamine. 

Again, China maintained this policy despite the fact that U.S. pork had been declared safe to 

trade under the international scientific guidelines.

504 In 2014, citing concerns about avian 

influenza, China also continued to impose import suspensions on poultry from Arkansas, 

 

498 USTR, 2014 Out-of-Cycle Review of Notorious Markets, March 5, 2015, 20, 21. 499 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. 500 USDA, “Top 15 U.S. Agricultural Export Destinations, by Calendar Year, $U.S. Value,” March 20, 2015. 501 USTR, 2014 Report to Congress on China’s WTO Compliance, December 2014, 97. 502 Ibid., 17. 503 OIE guidelines recommend no restrictions on imports of beef from a negligible risk country other than 

presenting a veterinary certificate attesting to the BSE risk status. Source: OIE. 504 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. FAO, 

“Information Sheet: Discussion on Ractopamine in Codex,” April 26, 2012. A maximum residue limit (MRL) or 

allowable tolerance for ractopamine in pork was established by the Codex Alimentarius Commission, a UN food 

standards-setting body, in 2012. 
Year in Trade

U.S. International Trade Commission | 171

California, New Jersey, New York, and Wisconsin, 505 although China lifted its import ban on 

poultry and poultry products from Virginia in May 2014. 506

Agricultural Biotechnology 

Under China's regulations on agricultural biotechnology, any foreign company that exports raw 

materials or products using genetically engineered (GE) organisms or containing GE ingredients 

must apply to China's Ministry of Agriculture (MOA) for a GE safety certificate. China has also 

listed GE products subject to labeling rules, requiring that if these products are sold in China, 

they must be clearly labeled with the name of the GE materials as well as any applicable special 

restrictions. Such GE products include soybeans and soybean-related products, as well as corn 

and corn-related products. 507

Because soybeans and corn are among the top U.S. agricultural exports to China, increased 

delays in China's agricultural biotechnology approval process in 2014 not only disrupted trade 

but also created uncertainty among U.S. exporters.508 Since November 2013, China has 

repeatedly refused shipments of U.S. corn on the grounds that some contained a genetic 

modification developed by Syngenta AG that China has not approved. 509 The U.S. National 

Grain and Feed Association (NGFA) estimated that China's zero-tolerance policy on Syngenta's 

corn technology caused up to $2.9 billion of economic losses for U.S. agriculture.

510 A similar 

problem affected U.S. hay exports in 2014. Since summer 2014, shipments of U.S. hay to China 

have plunged, and some deliveries have been rejected, because Chinese inspectors detected

the presence of hay made from a biotech alfalfa that China has not approved. 511

Agricultural biotechnology was among the top issues discussed at high-level bilateral meetings 

in 2014. In November 2014, the United States and China agreed to intensify science-based 

agricultural innovation for food security, and committed to strengthen dialogue to enable 

increased use of innovative technologies in agriculture.512 Both sides agreed to conduct an 

annual Strategic Agricultural Innovation Dialogue at the vice-ministerial level within the 

 

505 The import bans on poultry from California and New Jersey took effect beginning in May 2014 and September 

2014, respectively. The import bans on poultry from Arkansas, New York, and Wisconsin took effect in 2013. USDA, 

“Export Requirements for the People's Republic of China,” February 17, 2015.

506 Responding to an outbreak of high-pathogenic avian influenza in Oregon and Washington State, China banned 

all poultry imports from the United States, effective January 9, 2015. USDA, “Export Requirements for the People's 

Republic of China,” February 17, 2015.

507 Library of Congress, “Restrictions on Genetically Modified Organisms: China” (accessed January 23, 2015). 508 USTR, 2014 Report to Congress on China’s WTO Compliance, December, 2014, 17. 509 Bunge, “U.S. Corn Exports to China Dry Up,” April 11, 2014. 510 NGFA, “NGFA Estimates Up to $2.9 Billion Loss,” April 2014. 511 Newman, “China's Hard Line on Biotech Burns U.S. Hay,” December 15, 2014. 512 White House, “U.S.-China Economic Relations,” November 12, 2014. 
Chapter 6: U.S. Relations with Selected Major Trading Partners

172| www.usitc.gov

framework of the JCCT, with the first meeting to be held in early 2015. 513 In December 2014, 

China announced that import approvals were pending for three biotechnology products of 

significant importance to U.S. farmers, including two soybean events and one corn event.514

Medical Devices and Pharmaceuticals Market 

Access

China is the world's second-largest market for medical devices and pharmaceutical products, 

with promising growth potential.515 The United States is among China's major suppliers, 

exporting billions of dollars of medical devices and pharmaceutical products to China every 

year.516

China imposes strict requirements for accessing its medical devices and pharmaceuticals 

market. To export medical devices to China, an exporter is required to submit documents 

covering instructions for use, quality standards, test methods, and other relevant information 

for the inspection and approval of China's drug regulatory authority. Before applying for 

customs formalities, the exporter must also receive an import product registration 

certificate.517 Similarly, foreign pharmaceutical manufacturers are required to apply for a 

license for manufacturing or marketing pharmaceutical products in China. 518

At the JCCT meeting in December, the two sides made important progress in streamlining 

China's regulatory process, cutting red tape in China's approval procedures, and reducing the 

time for medical devices and innovative pharmaceutical products to reach Chinese markets.519

In particular, China agreed to push forward the reform of its medical device and pharmaceutical

regulatory review and approval system. It also agreed to make efforts to eliminate its drug 

application backlog by adding personnel and funds, streamlining the relevant mechanisms, and 

speeding the review process. China further promised to carry out measures to prevent 

duplicative testing in clinical trials and to allow clinical trials of a drug to be conducted in China 

at the same time they are conducted in another country. It also agreed to take measures 

loosening the rules around clinical trials to improve the efficiency of exporting medical devices 

 

513 USDOC, “25th U.S.-China Joint Commission on Commerce and Trade,” December 19, 2014. 514 Ibid. An event is a genotype produced from a single transformation of a plant species using a specific genetic 

construct. For example, two lines of the same plant species that are transformed with the same or different 

constructs constitute two events. ETS, Glossary, n.d. http://excellencethroughstewardship.org/resources/glossary/

(accessed May 7, 2015).

515 China Briefing, “Market Overview: The Medical Device Industry in China,” December 3, 2014. 516 USDOC, “25th U.S.-China Joint Commission on Commerce and Trade,” December 19, 2014. 517 CFDA, “Regulations for the Supervision and Administration of Medical Devices,” December 19, 1992. 518 CFDA, “Regulations for Implementation of the Drug Administration Law,” August 4, 2002. 519 USTR, “U.S.-China Joint Factsheet on the 25th U.S.-China Joint Commission on Commerce and Trade,” 

December 2014.
Year in Trade

U.S. International Trade Commission | 173

to China. Lastly, China and the United States agreed to engage in high-level dialogue in 2015 to 

further promote efficient access to the Chinese pharmaceutical and medical devices markets.520

The United States and China also made significant progress in promoting access to safe and 

high-quality medicines in China. At the July S&ED, China promised to consider amending its 

Drug Administration Law, 521 which would address a gap in regulatory oversight of 

manufacturers (including “export only” producers and distributors) of bulk chemicals that can 

be used as active pharmaceutical ingredients.522 China also agreed to create a multi-ministerial 

work mechanism focusing on developing a regulatory and enforcement framework for highquality medicines.523

U.S.-China Bilateral Investment Treaty

Building upon both countries' mutual interests in supporting and promoting open investment 

and market-based competition, the United States and China agreed to launch negotiations for a 

bilateral investment treaty (BIT) on June 18, 2008. 524 However, negotiations were delayed due 

to a review of the United States’ 2004 model BIT, which concluded in April 2012 with the 

release of the revised 2012 model BIT. 525 U.S.-China negotiations have been based on the new 

model BIT, which provided investors with “improved market access; protection from 

discriminatory, expropriatory, or otherwise harmful government treatment; and a mechanism 

to pursue binding international arbitration for breaches of the treaty.”526 In 2013, the two 

countries agreed to negotiate a BIT on the basis of pre-establishment national treatment 527

with a “negative list” approach. Such a BIT would provide national treatment at all phases of 

investment, including market access (i.e., the “pre-establishment” phase of investment), and in 

 

520 USTR, “U.S.-China Joint Factsheet on the 25th U.S.-China Joint Commission on Commerce and Trade,” 

December 2014. 521 U.S. Department of the Treasury, “Sixth Meeting of the U.S.-China Strategic and Economic Dialogue U.S. Fact 

Sheet – Economic Track,” July 11, 2014. 522 USTR, Fiscal Year 2016 Budget, February 2015, 70. 523 Ibid. 524 U.S. Department of the Treasury, “Fourth Cabinet-level Meeting of the U.S.-China Strategic Economic Dialogue,”

June 18, 2008. 525 The United States negotiates BITs on the basis of a “model” text. In 2009, the United States initiated a review of 

the United States' 2004 model BIT to ensure that it was consistent with the public interest and the Obama 

Administration's overall economic agenda. The review was concluded in April 2012 with the release of the revised 

2012 model BIT. USTR, “United States Concludes Review of Model Bilateral Investment Treaty,” April 2012. 526 USTR, “United States Concludes Review of Model Bilateral Investment Treaty,” April 2012. 527 National treatment is the principle of giving others the same treatment as one’s own nationals. WTO, “An 

informal press guide to ‘WTO speak’,” 

https://www.wto.org/english/thewto_e/minist_e/min01_e/brief_e/brief22_e.htm (accessed May 7, 2015).
Chapter 6: U.S. Relations with Selected Major Trading Partners

174| www.usitc.gov

all sectors of the Chinese economy, except where explicitly excluded on a negative list. 528

According to the U.S. Department of the Treasury, this was the first time that China agreed to 

negotiate a BIT on this scale—one that will help in “eliminating market barriers, and leveling the 

playing field for U.S. businesses in China.” 529

In 2014, the United States and China continued to pursue BIT negotiations as a top priority in 

their economic relations. 530 At the July 2014 S&ED meeting, the two sides agreed to intensify 

BIT negotiations with the aim of reaching agreement on core issues and major articles of the 

treaty text by the end of the year. They also agreed to begin the “negative list” negotiations 

early in 2015, to identify exceptions based on each other’s “negative list” offers.531 In 

November 2014, U.S. and China leaders met in Beijing and agreed again to speed up the U.S.-

China BIT negotiation. 532

Mexico

In 2014, Mexico was the United States’ third-largest single-country merchandise trading 

partner, following Canada and China. Merchandise trade between the two countries increased 

by 5.5 percent to $534.5 billion in 2014, accounting for 13.5 percent of U.S. trade with the 

world. The U.S. merchandise trade deficit with Mexico fell by $0.6 billion in 2014, to 

$53.8 billion, as U.S exports grew faster than U.S. imports. It was the United States’ fourthlargest merchandise trade deficit with any single country after China, Germany, and Japan 

(figure 6.8); the U.S. trade deficit with China, for example, was more than six times that with 

Mexico. At the same time, the U.S. trade surplus in services with Mexico decreased by 

21.9 percent to $9.2 billion in 2014 (figure 6.9). Mexico was the United States’ sixth-largest 

single-country trading partner for services in 2014, after the United Kingdom, Canada, Japan, 

China, and Germany. 

 

528 U.S. Department of the Treasury, “Economic Track Fifth Meeting,” July 12, 2013; USTR, 2013 Report to Congress 

on China’s WTO Compliance, December, 2013, 77. A “negative list” lists those sectors where investments would be 

explicitly excluded from the terms of the BIT.

529 U.S. Department of The Treasury, “U.S. and China Breakthrough Announcement,” July 15, 2013. 530 White House, “U.S.-China Economic Relations,” November 12, 2014. 531 U.S. Department of the Treasury, “Updated: U.S.-China Joint Fact Sheet; Sixth Meeting of the Strategic and 

Economic Dialogue,” July 11, 2014. 532 Government of the UK, British Embassy, Beijing, “China Politics Update—End of 2014 Special Edition” (accessed 

April 2, 2015). It was reported that the United States and China had missed their goal of reaching agreement on 

the core text of the U.S.-China BIT by the end of 2014; that the United States was still waiting for China's proposed 

negative list offer; and that China would likely submit its offer within the first quarter of 2015. See Inside U.S. 

Trade, “U.S.-China BIT 'Core Text' Outstanding,” January 30, 2015; Inside U.S. Trade, “China Draft Law Would 

Revamp Investment Review,” February 12, 2015.
Year in Trade

U.S. International Trade Commission | 175

Figure 6.8: U.S. merchandise trade with Mexico, 2010–14

Source: USITC DataWeb (accessed February 12, 2015); data compiled from official statistics of the U.S. Department of 

Commerce.

Figure 6.9: U.S. private services trade with Mexico, 2010–14a

Source: USDOC, BEA, U.S. International Transactions Accounts Data, March 19, 2015, tables 1.2 and 1.3. a Data for 2014 are preliminary.

-100

-50

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

2010 2011 2012 2013 2014

(Billion $)

Total U.S. exports General U.S. imports Merchandise trade balance

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

2010 2011 2012 2013 2014

Exports Imports Trade balance

(Billion $)
Chapter 6: U.S. Relations with Selected Major Trading Partners

176| www.usitc.gov

U.S. merchandise exports to Mexico totaled $240.3 billion in 2014, an increase of 6.3 percent 

from 2013. In 2014, the leading U.S. exports to Mexico were electronic products—computer 

parts and accessories, cellphones, processor controllers, and parts for electrical apparatus for 

electrical circuits. These were followed by transportation equipment (particularly parts and 

accessories for motor vehicles, and aircraft and aircraft parts), chemicals and related products, 

energy-related products, and machinery. Other leading exports to Mexico included oil, articles 

of plastic, corn, copper ores, and soybeans.

In 2014, U.S. merchandise imports from Mexico increased by 4.9 percent to $294.2 billion. 

Leading U.S. imports from Mexico included transportation equipment (passenger motor 

vehicles and parts, trucks, and road tractors for semi-trailers), electronic products (televisions, 

computers, and cellphones), and energy-related products. Other leading imports from Mexico 

were medical instruments and nonmonetary gold. Particularly important in the increase of U.S. 

imports from Mexico was the rise in the value of vehicles and vehicle parts and accessories. 

U.S.-Mexico merchandise trade data are shown in appendix tables A.33 through A.35.

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 countries (table 5.2). 533 In 

2014, Mexico continued to take part in the ongoing negotiations under the Trans-Pacific 

Partnership (TPP), a prospective regional trade agreement between the United States and 11 

other countries (including Mexico).534 To strengthen the U.S.-Mexico commercial and economic 

relationship, a new High Level Economic Dialogue (HLED) was established in 2013. 

Developments in 2014 regarding the HLED, NAFTA’s cross-border trucking provisions, and the 

sugar trade agreement between the United States and Mexico are described below. 

High Level Economic Dialogue

On September 20, 2013, U.S. and Mexican officials launched the HLED, a cabinet-level group 

that meets annually. The HLED work plan has three pillars: promoting competitiveness and 

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

partnering for regional and global leadership.535

In 2014, under the HLED, the governments of the United States and Mexico (1) initialed an air 

transport agreement aimed at competitive pricing and more convenient air service; (2) 

improved infrastructure at the border to cut wait times significantly for people crossing into the 

 

533 For more information on NAFTA, see chapter 5. Originating goods of Mexico are eligible under every rate line in 

HTS chapters 1–97. 534 Mexico officially joined the ongoing negotiations under TPP in October 2012. The TPP is discussed in chapter 5. 535 White House, “U.S.-Mexico Partnership,” May 2, 2013; White House, “U.S.-Mexico High Level Economic 

Dialogue,” September 20, 2013. For more information on the HLED, see USITC, The Year in Trade 2013, 2014, 146.
Year in Trade

U.S. International Trade Commission | 177

United States at San Diego, CA, and Nogales, AZ; (3) signed an agreement for mutual 

recognition of the “trusted trader” programs to ease the flow of goods across borders; and (4) 

signed a memorandum of intent to promote investment.536 On January 6, 2015, at the second 

cabinet-level meeting of the HLED in Washington, DC, the two governments agreed to work to 

continue advancing their shared interests; strengthen their close and productive bilateral 

economic and commercial ties; enhance competitiveness; create additional trade and economic 

opportunities; and promote increased regional and global cooperation. The strategic goals for 

2015 include six key areas: energy, modern borders, workforce development, regulatory 

cooperation, partnering in regional and global leadership, and stakeholder engagement.537

Cross-Border Trucking between the United States 

and Mexico

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.538

To address these concerns and to meet its obligations under NAFTA, the U.S. Department of 

Transportation (USDOT) and the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA) initiated 

the U.S.-Mexico Cross-Border Long-Haul Trucking Pilot Program (Pilot Program). 539

The Pilot Program was launched on October 14, 2011, and concluded on October 10, 2014. 540

To implement the program, the USDOT Secretary and his counterpart from Mexico established 

an agreement that also suspended the approximately $2.4 billion annually in retaliatory tariffs 

imposed by Mexico on U.S. agricultural and manufacturing goods between 2009 and 2011. 541

After the Pilot Program's conclusion, FMCSA analyzed and evaluated its results. It found 

“evidence that Mexico-domiciled motor carriers operating beyond the commercial zone had 

safety records that were equal to or better than the national average for U.S. and Canadian 

 

536 USDOC, “U.S.-Mexico High Level Economic Dialogue,” January 6, 2015; USDOC, “Joint Statement: United StatesMexico High Level Economic Dialogue,” January 6, 2015; USDOC, “Progress Report on the U.S.-Mexico High Level 

Economic Dialogue” (accessed March 18, 2015). 537 USDOC, “Joint Statement: United States-Mexico High Level Economic Dialogue,” January 6, 2015. 538 Developments in cross-border truck services between the United States and Mexico 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; USITC, The Year in Trade 

2013, 2014, 149. 539 76 Fed. Reg. 20807 (April 13, 2011). 540 Details of the program are reported in USITC, The Year in Trade 2011, 2012, 5-14. 541 USDOT, FMCSA, “United States-Mexico Cross-Border Long-Haul Trucking Pilot Program Report to Congress,” 

January 2015.
Chapter 6: U.S. Relations with Selected Major Trading Partners

178| www.usitc.gov

motor carriers operating in the United States.” 542 FMCSA concluded “that the Pilot Program 

successfully demonstrated that Mexican motor carriers can and do operate throughout the 

United States at a safety level equivalent to U.S and Canada-domiciled motor carriers.” 543 As a 

result, on October 10, 2014, FMCSA authorized the 13 carriers that were participating in the 

Pilot Program at its completion to continue long-haul operations in the United States.

Effective on January 15, 2015, USDOT announced that it had submitted the required report on 

the Pilot Program to Congress and was accepting applications from Mexico-domiciled motor 

carriers interested in conducting long-haul operations in the United States.544

Sugar Suspension Agreements between the United 

States and Mexico

On March 28, 2014, domestic sugar producers filed complaints under the U.S. antidumping and 

countervailing duty laws with the Commission and the USDOC. The petitioners claimed that 

sugar from Mexico was being dumped in the U.S. market and received unfair subsidies from the 

Mexican government, thereby injuring U.S. sugar producers. In response, the Commission 

instituted antidumping and countervailing duty investigations 545 and on May 12, 2014, made 

preliminary affirmative determinations in both investigations. 546

On April 24, 2014, the USDOC initiated both an antidumping duty investigation547 and a 

countervailing duty investigation on sugar from Mexico.548 On August 26, 2014, the USDOC 

announced its affirmative preliminary determination in the countervailing duty investigation 

and calculated a preliminary subsidy rate of 2.99 to 17.01 percent. As a result, the USDOC 

instructed U.S. Customs and Border Protection (Customs) to require cash deposits based on 

these preliminary rates.549 On October 27, 2014, the USDOC announced its affirmative 

preliminary determination in the antidumping duty investigation and determined that sugar 

from Mexico has been sold in the United States at dumping margins ranging from 39.54 percent 

to 47.26 percent. As a result, the USDOC instructed Customs to require cash deposits based on 

these preliminary rates, adjusted for export subsidies as appropriate.550 On the same day, the 

USDOC announced that it had initialed two draft agreements with the government of Mexico 

 

542 Ibid., 1. 543 Ibid., 2. 544 80 Fed. Reg. 2179 (January 15, 2015). 545 79 Fed. Reg. 18697 (April 3, 2014). 546 USITC, Sugar from Mexico: Investigation Nos. 701-TA-513 and 731-TA-1249 (Preliminary), USITC publication 

4467, May 2014.

547 79 Fed. Reg. 22795 (April 24, 2014). 548 79 Fed. Reg. 22790 (April 24, 2014). 549 USDOC, “Commerce Preliminarily Finds Countervailable Subsidization of Import of Sugar,” August 26, 2014. 550 USDOC, “Commerce Preliminarily Finds Dumping of Import of Sugar,” October 27, 2014.
Year in Trade

U.S. International Trade Commission | 179

and Mexican sugar exporters, respectively. If finally adopted, the agreements would suspend 

antidumping and countervailing duty investigations of imports of Mexican sugar, allowing 

Mexican sugar to continue to enter the U.S. market without antidumping or countervailing 

duties.551

On December 19, 2014, the USDOC and Mexican government officials and exporters signed 

agreements suspending the countervailing duty and antidumping duty investigations on sugar 

from Mexico, without issuance of final determinations. 552 The countervailing duty agreement 

contains provisions to prevent an oversupply of sugar in the U.S. market, to prevent imports 

from being concentrated during certain times of the year, and to limit the amount of refined 

sugar that may enter the U.S. market from Mexico. Mexico’s export limit is set at 100 percent 

of U.S. needs after accounting for U.S. production and U.S. imports from tariff-rate quota 

countries.553 The antidumping duty agreement establishes reference prices, or minimum prices, 

to guard against undercutting or suppression of U.S. prices. These minimum prices are 

$0.26 per pound for refined sugar and $0.22 per pound for all other sugar.554 USDOC instructed 

Customs to refund any cash deposits collected as a result of the preliminary determinations of 

August 23, 2014, and October 27, 2014. 555

Japan

In 2014, Japan remained the United States' fourth-largest single-country trading partner in 

terms of two-way merchandise trade, accounting for 5.1 percent of total U.S. merchandise 

 

551 USDOC, “Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Suspension Agreements on Sugar from Mexico,” October 27, 

2014; USDOC, “Agreement Suspending the Antidumping Duty Investigation on Sugar from Mexico,” October 27, 

2014; USDOC, “United States and Mexico Reach Deal on Sugar Import Investigations,” October 27, 2014. 552 79 Fed. Reg. 78039 (December 29, 2014); USDOC, “Fact Sheet: Antidumping and Countervailing Duty 

Suspension Agreements on Sugar from Mexico,” December 19, 2014; USDOC, “United States and Mexico Finalize 

Deal on Sugar Import Investigations,” December 19, 2014. 553 79 Fed. Reg. 78039 (December 29, 2014); USDOC, “Agreement Suspending the Countervailing Duty 

Investigation on Sugar,” December 19, 2014. 554 79 Fed. Reg. 78039 (December 29, 2014); USDOC, “Agreement Suspending the Antidumping Duty Investigation 

on Sugar,” December 19, 2014. 555 On January 8, 2015, Imperial Sugar Company, Sugar Land, Texas (Imperial), and AmCane Sugar LLC, Taylor, 

Michigan (AmCane), filed petitions regarding the suspension agreements on Mexican sugar imports with the 

Commission. The petitioners claimed that the suspension agreements of December 19, 2014, do not completely 

eliminate the injurious effects of U.S. imports of sugar from Mexico. In response, the Commission instituted 

investigations no. 704-TA-1 and 734-TA-1. On March 19, 2015, the Commission determined that the injurious 

effect of imports of sugar from Mexico on the domestic industry as a whole is completely eliminated by the 

suspension agreements of December 19, 2014, agreed to by the USDOC and the government of Mexico and 

Mexican exporters of sugar. On May 4, 2015, the USDOC announced that, having received timely requests to 

continue from Imperial and AmCane, it would resume the antidumping and countervailing duty investigations of 

sugar from Mexico. See USITC, “USITC Determines That Injurious Effect of Imports of Sugar,” March 19, 2015; 

USITC, Sugar from Mexico: Investigation Nos. 704-TA-1 and 734-TA-1 (Review), April 2015; 80 Fed. Reg. 25278 

(May 4, 2015). 
Chapter 6: U.S. Relations with Selected Major Trading Partners

180| www.usitc.gov

trade. U.S. merchandise trade with Japan declined by 1.4 percent from 2013 to 2014, from 

$203.8 billion in 2013 to $200.9 billion in 2014. The decline was driven primarily by a decrease 

in U.S. imports from Japan, which fell by $4.6 billion (3 percent) from 2013 to 2014. Meanwhile, 

the U.S. merchandise trade deficit with Japan declined 8.7 percent to $67.0 billion in 2014, the 

third-largest U.S. bilateral deficit for the year after those with China and Germany (figure 6.10).

The reduction of the U.S. trade deficit with Japan was driven by an increase in U.S. exports to 

Japan and a decrease of U.S. imports from Japan in value terms. In 2014, U.S. services exports 

to Japan rose 1.0 percent to $46.3 billion, while imports of services from Japan rose 3.0 percent 

to $28.3 billion. The result was a $352 million decrease in the U.S. services surplus with Japan, 

to $18.0 billion in 2014 (figure 6.11).

Japan remained the fourth-largest destination for U.S. merchandise exports, accounting for 

4.1 percent of global U.S. exports (table A.5). Between 2013 and 2014, U.S. total exports to 

Japan increased by 2.7 percent, from $65.2 billion in 2013 to $67.0 billion in 2014 (table A.36).

Leading U.S. exports to Japan were aircraft and parts, corn, and certain medicaments. The 

increase in U.S. exports was driven mainly by the rise of exports in major sectors, such as 

aircraft and parts (which increased by $0.4 billion) and corn (which increased by $0.8 billion).

The increase in U.S. exports of other leading products, such as liquefied propane (which 

increased by $0.4 billion, or 66.6 percent) and acyclic ethers (which increased by $0.2 billion, or 

28.0 percent), also contributed to the overall increase. Lower U.S. corn prices in 2014 resulted 

in a significant rise in U.S. exports of corn to Japan. 556 Moreover, the dramatic increase in U.S. 

production of propane, coupled with its competitive price compared to that of other Japanese 

import sources, led the United States to gain market share in Japan's propane import 

market.557

Japan remained the fourth-largest source of U.S. merchandise imports, accounting for 

5.7 percent of global U.S. imports (table A.5). The value of U.S. imports from Japan declined by 

3.3 percent to $133.9 billion in 2014, down from $138.6 billion in 2013. Leading U.S. imports 

from Japan were passenger motor vehicles, parts of airplanes and helicopters, gearboxes and 

parts for motor vehicles, and parts for printers and copying machines. The decline in U.S. 

imports from Japan was led by a variety of products, including imports of passenger motor 

vehicles, gearboxes and parts for motor vehicles, and television and digital cameras. Imports of 

certain airplane parts, however, increased by 26.7 percent from 2013 to 2014. The decline in 

U.S. imports of passenger motor vehicles from Japan was principally driven by Japanese auto 

companies shifting their production to North America. For instance, Mazda opened new plants 

 

556 USDA, FAS, Japan: Grain and Feed Update—January 2015, January 29, 2015. 557 USDOE, EIA, “U.S. Gas Plant Production of Propane and Propylene,” n.d. (accessed March 17, 2015); GTIS, 

Global Trade Atlas database (accessed March 17, 2015).
Year in Trade

U.S. International Trade Commission | 181

Figure 6.10: U.S. merchandise trade with Japan, 2010–14

Source: USITC DataWeb (accessed February 12, 2015); data compiled from official statistics of the U.S. Department of 

Commerce.

Figure 6.11: U.S. private services trade with Japan, 2010–14a

Source: USDOC, BEA, U.S. International Transactions Accounts Data, March 19, 2015, tables 1.2 and 1.3. a Data for 2014 are preliminary.

-100

-50

0

50

100

150

200

2010 2011 2012 2013 2014

(Billion $)

Total U.S. exports General U.S. imports Merchandise trade balance

0

10

20

30

40

50

2010 2011 2012 2013 2014

Exports Imports Trade balance

(Billion $)
Chapter 6: U.S. Relations with Selected Major Trading Partners

182| www.usitc.gov

and started producing Mazda 2 and Mazda 3 in Mexico in 2014. Honda also launched its Fit 

production in Mexico in the same year.558 The decrease of U.S. imports of television and digital 

cameras from Japan, on the other hand, reflects changes in consumer demand, as U.S. 

consumers increasingly use smartphones to take pictures. U.S.-Japan merchandise trade data 

are shown in appendix tables A.36 through A.38.

Economic dialogue between the United States and Japan in 2014 centered on trying to break 

new ground in the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) negotiations. The United States held many 

meetings to negotiate with Japan in the context of the TPP negotiations in 2014, which Japan 

officially joined in July 2013. 559 In particular, the two countries addressed issues of concern in 

the passenger motor vehicle, agricultural, and insurance sectors, as well as other nontariff 

measures in areas such as express delivery, transparency, government procurement, and SPS

measures.560 TPP negotiations with Japan are described in more detail below. In addition, the 

United States worked closely with Japan over other trade issues of common interest, including 

coordinating on WTO dispute settlement matters, working towards successfully expanding the 

WTO Information Technology Agreement, and working together under the Asia-Pacific 

Economic Cooperation (APEC) forum framework to address localization barriers to trade.561

TPP Negotiations and Dialogue

Japan joined the TPP negotiations in July 2013. 562 During 2014, negotiations between the 

United States and Japan focused on Japan's import protection mechanisms for several 

categories of sensitive agriculture products, and U.S. concerns over nontariff measures in the 

Japanese passenger motor vehicle market that limit exports of U.S.-made motor vehicles to 

Japan.563

Passenger Vehicle Market Access

U.S. exporters have faced a broad range of nontariff measures in Japan's automotive market.564

The United States and Japan agreed to address nontariff measures in Japan's passenger motor 

vehicle market through parallel negotiations to TPP. 565 Specifically, USTR announced that the 

United States seeks to (1) establish enforceable commitments relevant to the automotive 

 

558 Autoweek, “Mazda Opens New Plant in Salamanca, Mexico,” February 27, 2014; Autoblog, “2015 Honda Fit 

Production Gets Underway in Mexico,” February 25, 2014. 559 USTR, 2015 Trade Policy Agenda and 2014 Annual Report, March 2015, 145. 560 Ibid. 561 Ibid., 145–46. 562 CRS, The Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) Negotiations and Issues for Congress, March 20, 2015, 3. 563 Ibid., 4. 564 USTR, “U.S.-Japan Bilateral Negotiations on Motor Vehicle Trade,” n.d. (accessed May 14, 2015). 565 Ibid.
Year in Trade

U.S. International Trade Commission | 183

sector that will address a broad range of nontariff measures in Japan's passenger vehicle 

market, including regulatory transparency, standards, certification, financial incentives, and 

distribution; and (2) establish an accelerated dispute settlement procedure that would apply to 

the automotive sector and include a mechanism to “snap back” tariffs as a potential remedy, as 

well as a special motor vehicle safeguard.566

In November 2014, during TPP-related bilateral talks on passenger motor vehicle trade, the 

United States reportedly proposed a “tariff delay mechanism” as part of the special auto 

dispute settlement procedures. This mechanism would allow the United States to extend the 

phaseout of its auto tariff beyond the framework that the United States commits to abide by in 

a final TPP agreement, if a special dispute settlement panel were to find that Japan had 

imposed nontariff measures that materially affected the sales or use of U.S. motor vehicles or 

motor vehicle parts in Japan.567 Though the two sides reportedly made some progress during 

these talks, a number of issues remain.568

Agricultural Products

Japan is the United States' fourth-largest market for agricultural exports.569 During 2014, the 

United States and Japan negotiated over several agricultural market access issues. 570 According 

to USTR, the two sides “continued to make some progress in narrowing the gaps on treatment 

of a range of agricultural products.” 571 Meanwhile, recent Japanese press reports suggested 

that the Japanese government improved its market access offers to the United States on pork, 

beef, and rice during bilateral negotiations parallel to the TPP, though issues remain. 572

Japan Post

In 2014, the United States continued to press Japan on the competitive position held by Japan 

Post Holdings Co. (Japan Post or JP), a government-owned company in the banking, insurance, 

and express delivery sectors of the Japanese economy.573 Though the U.S. government remains 

neutral as to whether Japan Post should be privatized, the United States continued to call on 

the Japanese government to ensure that all necessary measures are taken to achieve a level 

 

566 USTR, “U.S.-Japan Bilateral Negotiations on Motor Vehicle Trade,” n.d. (accessed March 19, 2015). 567 Inside U.S. Trade, “USTR Cites Progress in Japan TPP Auto Talks,” November 4, 2014. 568 Ibid. 569 USTR, “Japan” (accessed May 14, 2015). 570 USTR, “Readout of Meeting between United States and Japanese Trade Negotiators,” August 2014. 571 USTR, “Readout of Meeting between Acting Deputy USTR Wendy Cutler and Ambassador Hiroshi Oe,” July 2014;

USTR, “Readout of Meeting between United States and Japanese Trade Negotiators,” August 2014. 572 CRS, The Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) Negotiations and Issues for Congress, March 20, 2015, 23. 573 USTR, 2015 National Trade Estimate Report on Foreign Trade Barriers, March 2015, 213; Reuters, “Japan Post: 

IPO to Include Separate Listings,” December 26, 2014.
Chapter 6: U.S. Relations with Selected Major Trading Partners

184| www.usitc.gov

playing field between the Japan Post companies and private sector participants in the abovementioned sectors.574

In 2014, Japan made some progress in privatizing Japan Post. On October 1, 2014, the Japanese 

Ministry of Finance (MOF) announced the selection of 11 lead manager security firms for the 

initial public offering (IPO) of Japan Post Holdings. 575 The IPO is a process in which the stock 

holdings of JP Holdings will be sold to institutional investors, which in turn can sell the stock to 

the general public. On December 26, 2014, Japan Post announced that three entities, JP 

Holdings (the parent company) and its two financial subsidiaries, JP Bank and JP Insurance, 

would go public at the same time in the “latter half of” Japanese fiscal year 2015, which begins 

April 1, 2015. 576 USTR reported that it anticipates that JP Group will submit a preliminary 

application for the stock listings to the Tokyo Stock Exchange in March 2015. It is also expected 

that the IPO will take place in fall 2015. 577

Though announcements have been made on JP Holdings' determination to initiate the IPO 

process, the precise timing as well as the pace and volume of the share sales of the three 

companies remain unknown. The United States stated that it would continue to monitor the 

developments and urge that the IPO process proceed in a fully transparent manner.578

Republic of Korea

The Republic of Korea (South Korea) was the United States' sixth-largest single-country 

merchandise trading partner in 2014. Two-way merchandise trade was valued at $114.2 billion 

in 2014, accounting for 2.9 percent of U.S. trade with the world. The United States recorded a 

$25.1 billion merchandise trade deficit with South Korea in 2014, a 21.2 percent increase from 

$20.7 billion in 2013 (figure 6.12). At the same time, the U.S. trade surplus in services with 

South Korea remained stable between 2013 and 2014, at $12.3 billion (figure 6.13). 

U.S. merchandise exports to South Korea were valued at just over $44.5 billion in 2014, an 

increase of 6.8 percent from 2013. Leading U.S. exports to South Korea during the year included 

processors or controllers; machines for the production of semiconductor devices or electronic 

integrated circuits; aircraft and parts; corn; and medicaments. 

Among the top exports to South Korea, the largest increases occurred in machines for the 

production of semiconductor devices or electronic integrated circuits (up by 65.2. percent or 

 

574 USTR, 2015 National Trade Estimate Report on Foreign Trade Barriers, March 2015, 215. 575 Ibid. 576 Ibid. 577 USTR, 2015 National Trade Estimate Report on Foreign Trade Barriers, March 2015, 213. 578 Ibid., 214.
Year in Trade

U.S. International Trade Commission | 185

$861 million), and corn (up by 334.8 percent or $815 million). U.S. corn exports to South Korea 

rebounded sharply, rising from $243 million in 2013 to $1.1 billion in 2014 (after dropping 

60.6 percent from 2012 to 2013) as corn prices reached a five-year low.579 The most significant 

decrease in value among top exports was in aircraft and parts, which fell by 23.4 percent or 

$612 million.

U.S. merchandise imports from South Korea totaled $69.6 billion in 2014, an increase of 

11.6 percent from 2013. About 20.9 percent of U.S. merchandise imports from South Korea 

were passenger motor vehicles, which also experienced the largest increase at 20.5 percent or 

$2.5 billion in 2014. Other leading U.S. imports from South Korea included cellphones, 

petroleum-related products, and computer parts. U.S.-South Korea merchandise trade data are 

shown in appendix tables A.39 through A.41.

U.S. trade relations with South Korea continued to focus on the U.S.-Korea FTA (KORUS), which 

celebrated its second anniversary in 2014. South Korea also announced its intent to complete 

an initial round of preliminary consultations with the 12 TPP countries regarding its interest in 

joining that trade initiative.580 These topics, as well as a new bilateral agreement on organic 

equivalency,581 are addressed further below.

There were also developments in WTO dispute settlement proceedings involving the United 

States and South Korea in 2014. At the request of South Korea, the WTO established a panel on 

January 22, 2014, regarding U.S. antidumping and countervailing duty measures imposed on 

large residential washers from South Korea. In December the panel informed the DSB that the 

panel's work was delayed, and its final report is expected to be issued by the end of 2015.

582

South Korea also requested that the United States enter into WTO consultations regarding U.S. 

antidumping measures on certain oil country tubular goods from South Korea and the 

investigation methodology underlying such measures in December.583

 

579 Newman, “U.S. Corn Prices Fall to Five-Year Low,” September 30, 2014. 580 Inside U.S. Trade, “Korea Plans to Complete Initial Round,” February 3, 2014. 581 USTR, “United States and Korea Streamline Organic Trade,” July 1, 2014. 582 WTO, “Dispute Settlement: DS464; United States—Anti-dumping and Countervailing Measures on Large 

Residential Washers from Korea” (accessed February 18, 2015). 583 WTO, “Dispute Settlement DS488; United States—Anti-Dumping Measures on Certain Oil Country Tubular 

Goods from Korea” (accessed February 18, 2015). In January 2015, Turkey, Russia, and Ukraine all requested to 

join the consultations. 
Chapter 6: U.S. Relations with Selected Major Trading Partners

186| www.usitc.gov

Figure 6.12: U.S. merchandise trade with South Korea, 2010–14

Source: USITC DataWeb (accessed February 12, 2015); data compiled from official statistics of the U.S. Department of 

Commerce.

Figure 6.13: U.S. private services trade with South Korea, 2010–14a

Source: USDOC, BEA, U.S. International Transactions Accounts Data, March 19, 2015, tables 1.2 and 1.3.

a Data for 2014 are preliminary.

-40

-20

0

20

40

60

80

2010 2011 2012 2013 2014

(Billion $)

Total U.S. exports General U.S. imports Merchandise trade balance

0

5

10

15

20

25

2010 2011 2012 2013 2014

Exports Imports Trade balance

(Billion $)
Year in Trade

U.S. International Trade Commission | 187

U.S.-Korea FTA 

The KORUS FTA entered into force on March 15, 2012. 584 As of yearend 2014, three rounds of 

tariff cuts and eliminations had taken place under the agreement.

585 As a result, over twothirds of the value of U.S. agricultural exports to South Korea is now eligible for duty-free 

treatment.586 According to USTR, the agreement will eliminate tariffs on over 95 percent of U.S. 

exports of industrial and consumer goods by 2016. 587

On December 15, the third meeting of the KORUS Joint Committee was held in Washington, 

DC.588 The ministers reviewed KORUS's implementation over the first three years, reviewed the 

work of the various committees and working groups under the agreement in 2014, and agreed 

to additional meetings in 2015. 589 Ministers also addressed issues of U.S. concern related to the 

automobile and financial services sectors. In particular, the United States is concerned about a 

new South Korean auto emissions standard that could affect U.S. exports of larger, higheremission vehicles. The United States also registered concerns about South Korea's regulations 

affecting cross-border financial data flows. 590

Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP)

Since expressing its interest in joining the TPP in November 2013, South Korea has been holding 

bilateral preliminary talks with the 12 countries participating in the TPP negotiations. 591 In the 

first such bilateral meeting, South Korean Deputy Trade Minister Choi met with Acting Deputy 

USTR Wendy Cutler on January 13, 2014. 592 South Korea also held preliminary talks with 

Mexico, Peru, Chile, Malaysia, and Singapore in January, and with the other six TPP members 

(Japan, Canada, Australia, New Zealand, Vietnam, and Brunei) in February.593 South Korea held 

 

584 The KORUS FTA is also discussed in chapter 5. 585 USTR, “U.S.-Korea Free Trade Agreement Shows Strong Results,” March 12, 2014. The three rounds of tariff cuts 

and eliminations took place on the date of the agreement's entry into force (March 15, 2012), January 1, 2013, and 

January 1, 2014. A further round of tariff cuts took place on January 1, 2015. 586 Ibid.; Yeongkwan, “KORUS FTA vs. Korea-EU FTA: Why the Differences?” May 2011. 587 USTR, “U.S.-Korea Free Trade Agreement Shows Strong Results,” March 12, 2014. 588 For more information on this meeting, see chapter 5. 589 USTR, “Statement on Meeting of the U.S.-Korea Free Trade Agreement (KORUS) Joint Committee,” 

December 15, 2014. 590 USTR, 2015 Trade Policy Agenda and 2014 Annual Report, February 2014, 131; Inside U.S. Trade, “USTR Pushes 

Back against New Korean Curbs,” December 24, 2014. 591 USTR, “Statement by U.S. Trade Representative Michael Froman on Korea’s Announcement,” November 29, 

2013; Korea Times, “Trade Deal Conundrum,” April 29, 2014. 592 USTR, “Press Week Ahead: January 13–17,” January 13, 2014. 593 Inside U.S. Trade, “Korea Plans to Complete Initial Round of TPP Consultations,” February 3, 2014; Inside U.S. 

Trade, “Seoul Kicks Off 2nd Round of TPP Consultations,” April 18, 2014.
Chapter 6: U.S. Relations with Selected Major Trading Partners

188| www.usitc.gov

further bilateral consultations with TPP countries in April and May.594 By yearend, South Korea 

was still actively considering TPP participation, but had not yet made an official decision. 595

In late 2013, U.S. Trade Representative Froman said that the United States wished to conclude 

TPP negotiations with the current 12 partners, and then consider the accession of additional 

members.596 In April 2014, President Obama said at a business roundtable in Seoul that “fully 

implementing KORUS also is the single most important step that South Korea can take now to 

show that it’s prepared to eventually meet the high standards of TPP.” 597 USTR has identified 

issues remaining under KORUS to include excessive origin-verification checks for imported 

goods, restrictions on cross-border financial data transfers, and new emission standards for 

automobiles that may affect U.S. exports. 598

Organic Labeling Agreement

On July 1, 2014, an agreement to streamline certification of organic processed products 

between the United States and South Korea went into effect. Under the agreement, products 

certified in either country as organic can now be labeled as such in both countries.599

Previously, two separate certifications were required to meet each country's divergent organic 

standards. This equivalency agreement is the first of its kind for South Korea, while the United 

States has similar ones in place with Canada, the EU, and Japan.600

Brazil

In 2014, Brazil was the United States' ninth-largest single-country trading partner. Brazil was 

also the United States' largest South American trading partner. Two-way merchandise trade 

between the United States and Brazil increased by 1.4 percent to $72.8 billion in 2014, 

accounting for 1.8 percent of total U.S. merchandise trade with the world. The United States 

recorded a merchandise trade surplus with Brazil of $12.1 billion in 2014; this surplus was down 

26.7 percent from 2013, because of a decline in U.S. exports combined with an increase in U.S. 

 

594 Inside U.S. Trade, “Official: U.S. Hopes to Consult Further with Korea,” March 21, 2014; Inside U.S. Trade, “Seoul 

Kicks Off 2nd Round of TPP Consultations,” April 18, 2014; Inside U.S. Trade, “Korean Officials Hold TPP 

Consultations on Sidelines,” May 13, 2014. 595 Korea Times, “Seoul May Go for Both US Trade Pact, China's Regional Bank,” March 12, 2015. 596 USTR, “Statement by U.S. Trade Representative Michael Froman on Korea’s Announcement,” November 29, 

2013; CRS, The Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP): Negotiations and Issues for Congress, March 20, 2015, 3. 597 U.S. Embassy, Seoul, “Remarks by President Obama at Business Roundtable,” April 26, 2014. 598 USTR, 2015 Trade Policy Agenda and 2014 Annual Report, February 2014, 131; Inside U.S. Trade, “Obama Says 

'Fully' Implementing KORUS Will Help,” May 2, 2014. 

599 USTR, “United States and Korea Streamline Organic Trade,” July 1, 2014. 600 Ibid.; USDA, AMS, “National Organic Program” (accessed March 30, 2015). 
Year in Trade

U.S. International Trade Commission | 189

imports (figure 6.14). At the same time, Brazil was the United States' seventh-largest singlecountry trading partner in services in 2014. The United States ran a services trade surplus of 

$19.1 billion with Brazil in 2014, a decline of 0.3 percent from 2013 (figure 6.15). 

U.S. merchandise exports to Brazil fell by 3.9 percent to $42.4 billion in 2014, from $44.1 billion 

in 2013. The largest U.S. export to Brazil was aircraft and parts (11.2 percent of total U.S. 

merchandise exports to Brazil), followed by refined petroleum oils (10.1 percent). Other leading 

U.S. exports to Brazil included light oils and preparations, liquefied propane, medicaments, 

telecommunications equipment, coal, processors or controllers, and wheat and meslin. The 

decline in the value of U.S. exports to Brazil in 2014 was led by a $0.5 billion decrease in exports 

of wheat and meslin, a $0.5 billion decrease in exports of aircraft and parts, and a $0.4 billion 

decrease in exports of processors or controllers, which more than offset the increases in 

exports of refined petroleum oils, light oils, and liquefied propane. 

U.S. merchandise imports from Brazil increased by 9.8 percent, rising from $27.6 billion in 2013 

to $30.3 billion in 2014. Leading U.S. imports from Brazil included crude petroleum, airplanes, 

semifinished iron or non-alloy steel products, coffee, refined petroleum oils, and chemical 

wood pulp, soda, or sulfates. The value of U.S. imports of iron ores and soybeans increased by 

the largest amounts during 2013–14, rising by 499.1 percent and 203.1 percent, respectively. 

U.S.-Brazil merchandise trade data are shown in appendix tables A.42 through A.44.

On October 1, 2014, the United States and Brazil signed a memorandum of understanding 

(MOU) ending a long-standing dispute in the WTO. 601 The WTO had found that certain U.S. 

agricultural programs were inconsistent with the United States' WTO commitments; these 

programs included domestic support to cotton under the marketing loan and countercyclical 

payment programs, and export credit guarantees under the GSM-102 program.602 This topic is 

addressed in more detail below.

 

601 USTR, “United States and Brazil Reach Agreement to End WTO Cotton Dispute,” October 1, 2014. 602 USTR, “U.S., Brazil Agree on Framework Regarding WTO Cotton Dispute,” June 17, 2010.
Chapter 6: U.S. Relations with Selected Major Trading Partners

190| www.usitc.gov

Figure 6.14: U.S. merchandise trade with Brazil, 2010–14

Source: USITC DataWeb (accessed February 12, 2015); data compiled from official statistics of the U.S. Department of 

Commerce.

Figure 6.15: U.S. private services trade with Brazil, 2010–14a

Source: USDOC, BEA, U.S. International Transactions Accounts Data, March 19, 2015, tables 1.2 and 1.3. a Data for 2014 are preliminary.

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

2010 2011 2012 2013 2014

(Billion $)

Total U.S. exports General U.S. imports Merchandise trade balance

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

2010 2011 2012 2013 2014

Exports Imports Trade balance

(Billion $)
Year in Trade

U.S. International Trade Commission | 191

Cotton

On June 25, 2010, the United States and Brazil signed a Framework for a Mutually Agreed 

Solution to the Cotton Dispute in the WTO Organization (WT/DS267) to avert the imposition of 

Brazilian countermeasures on U.S. trade, following the findings of a WTO dispute settlement 

panel.603 The framework provided for specific obligations for the United States, including 

adjusting its GSM-102 export credit guarantee program, meeting quarterly for discussions on 

the programs at issue, and reaching a definitive solution to the dispute.604 Under a related 

MOU signed in 2010, the United States also agreed to transfer $147.3 million annually to the 

Brazilian Cotton Institute for technical assistance and a capacity-building fund for Brazilian 

farmers.605 Over the last four years, Brazil and the United States have worked on the elements 

of the settlement to the dispute, including changes in the operation of the GSM-102 program 

and changes to cotton domestic support programs.606 The framework agreement expired on 

February 7, 2014, with the enactment of the U.S. 2014 Farm Bill (Pub. L. 113-79). 607 The 2014 

Farm Bill included changes to the GSM-102 program and the U.S. cotton support programs, 

including removing cotton from the price- and revenue-based support programs and replacing 

them with a stand-alone, county-based revenue insurance policy called the Stacked Income 

Protection Plan (STAX).608

On October 1, 2014, the two governments signed an MOU, 609 and on October 16, they notified 

the WTO that they had agreed that the dispute was terminated.610 The MOU includes new rules 

governing the fees for and tenors of guarantees under the GSM-102 program and a final 

 

603 USTR, “United States and Brazil Reach Agreement to End WTO Cotton Dispute,” October 2014. For more 

background on the cotton dispute, see USITC, The Year in Trade 2010: Operation of the Trade Agreements 

Program, July 2012, 5-23. 604 USTR, “United States and Brazil Reach Agreement to End WTO Cotton Dispute,” October 2014; WTO, “United 

States—Subsidies on Upland Cotton: Joint Communication from Brazil and the United States,” WT/DS267/45, 

August 31, 2010.

605 USTR, “United States and Brazil Reach Agreement to End WTO Cotton Dispute,” October 1, 2014;

USTR, “U.S., Brazil Agree on Framework Regarding WTO Cotton Dispute,” June 17, 2010; USDOS, “Memorandum of 

Understanding between the Government of the United States of America and the Government of the Federative 

Republic of Brazil Regarding a Fund for Technical Assistance and Capacity Building with Respect to the Cotton 

Dispute (WT/DS267) in the World Trade Organization,” 2010, 

http://www.state.gov/documents/organization/143669.pdf. 606 USDA, “United States and Brazil Reach Agreement to End WTO Cotton Dispute,” October 1, 2014. 607 USTR, “United States and Brazil Reach Agreement to End WTO Cotton Dispute,” October 1, 2014. 608 Agricultural Act of 2014 (Pub. L. 113-79, February 7, 2014), Title I, Part II, Sect. 1119. Also, see CRS, Status of the 

WTO Brazil-U.S. Cotton Case, December 12, 2013, 8–9; CRS, The 2014 Farm Bill (P.L. 113-79): Summary and Sideby-side, February 12, 2014; WTO, “Dispute Settlement: DS267; United States—Subsidies on Upland Cotton” 

(accessed March 19, 2015).

609 USTR, “Memorandum of Understanding Related to the Cotton Dispute (WT/DS267),” 

http://ustr.gov/sites/default/files/20141001201606893.pdf (accessed March 27, 2014); USDA, “United States and 

Brazil Reach Agreement to End WTO Cotton Dispute,” October 1, 2014. 610 WTO, “Dispute Settlement: DS267; United States—Subsidies on Upland Cotton” (accessed March 19, 2015).
Chapter 6: U.S. Relations with Selected Major Trading Partners

192| www.usitc.gov

transfer of $300 million to the Brazilian Cotton Institute for technical assistance and capacitybuilding activities in the Brazilian cotton sector. 611 In addition, Brazil gave up its rights to 

impose countermeasures against U.S. trade or initiate any further proceeding in this dispute. 

Brazil also agreed not to bring new WTO actions against U.S. domestic cotton support programs 

or against agricultural export credit guarantees under the GSM-102 program if the program 

operates consistently with the agreed terms. The MOU expires on September 30, 2018. 612

Taiwan

In 2014, Taiwan was the United States' 10th-largest single-economy trading partner, accounting 

for 1.7 percent of total U.S. trade with the world. U.S. two-way merchandise trade with Taiwan 

amounted to $67.4 billion in 2014, an increase of 6.3 percent over $63.4 billion in 2013. The 

U.S. merchandise trade deficit with Taiwan grew by 10.2 percent, or $1.3 billion, from 

$12.5 billion in 2013 to $13.7 billion in 2014 (figure 6.16). On the other hand, the U.S. services 

trade surplus with Taiwan grew by 7.4 percent, from $4.2 billion in 2013 to $4.5 billion in 2014

(figure 6.17).

In 2014, U.S. merchandise exports to Taiwan amounted to $26.8 billion, a 5.4 percent increase 

from $25.5 billion in 2013. Machines for semiconductor manufacturing remained the leading 

U.S. export to Taiwan, accounting for 7.9 percent of U.S. merchandise exports to Taiwan, 

though it shrank by 9.5 percent, falling from $2.4 billion in 2013 to $2.1 billion in 2014. Other 

leading U.S. exports to Taiwan included aircraft and parts, memory chips, ferrous waste and 

scrap, soybeans, light oils, and electronic integrated circuits. The increase in the value of U.S. 

exports to Taiwan in 2014 was led by aircraft and parts (up by 106.9 percent or $994 million), 

memory chips (up by 25.6 percent or $254 million), and corn (up by 122.8 percent or 

$222 million). 

 

611 USTR, “Memorandum of Understanding Related to the Cotton Dispute (WT/DS267),” 

https://ustr.gov/sites/default/files/20141001201606893.pdf(accessed March 27, 2014); USDA, “United States and 

Brazil Reach Agreement to End WTO Cotton Dispute,” October 1, 2014. 612 Ibid. 
Year in Trade

U.S. International Trade Commission | 193

Figure 6.16: U.S. merchandise trade with Taiwan, 2010–14

Source: USITC DataWeb (accessed February 12, 2015); data compiled from official statistics of the U.S. Department of 

Commerce.

Figure 6.17: U.S. private services trade with Taiwan, 2010–14a

Source: USDOC, BEA, U.S. International Transactions Accounts Data, March 19, 2015, tables 1.2 and 1.3.

a Data for 2014 are preliminary.

-20

-10

0

10

20

30

40

50

2010 2011 2012 2013 2014

(Billion $)

Total U.S. exports General U.S. imports Merchandise trade balance

0

5

10

15

2010 2011 2012 2013 2014

Exports Imports Trade balance

(Billion $)
Chapter 6: U.S. Relations with Selected Major Trading Partners

194| www.usitc.gov

In 2014, U.S. merchandise imports from Taiwan amounted to $40.6 billion, a 6.9 percent 

increase from $37.9 billion in 2013. Leading U.S. imports were cellphones, memory chips, 

computer parts and accessories, electronic integrated circuits, processors or controllers, and 

telecommunication equipment. Cellphones remained the top U.S. import from Taiwan, 

accounting for 4.0 percent of U.S. merchandise imports from Taiwan, though a declining trend 

continued in 2014. On the other hand, U.S. imports of telecommunications equipment, 

electronic integrated circuits, memory chips, and photosensitive semiconductor devices 

continued to rise. U.S.-Taiwan merchandise trade data are shown in appendix tables A.45 

through A.47.

As indicated below, the U.S.-Taiwan Trade and Investment Framework Agreement (TIFA) has 

served as a key mechanism for U.S.-Taiwan dialogue on trade issues in the absence of official 

diplomatic ties. The eighth TIFA Council meeting under the auspices of the American Institute in 

Taiwan and the Taipei Economic and Cultural Representative Office in the United States was 

held in April in Washington, DC. In 2014, U.S.-Taiwan trade relations focused on access to 

Taiwan's agricultural market, including Taiwan's slow process in establishing a maximum 

residue limit (MRL) for ractopamine, pesticides, and other agrochemicals; Taiwan’s tariff-rate 

quota system for rice imports; and Taiwan's agriculture biotechnology regulations.

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 for strengthening bilateral commercial ties, and covers a broad 

range of trade and investment issues important to U.S. and Taiwan stakeholders.613 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 during 2012 on this issue (see section below), the United States and 

Taiwan resumed the TIFA talks. They also launched two working groups on investment and 

technical barriers to trade under the TIFA, as well as a joint interagency working group on SPS 

and agricultural standards in 2013. 614

In 2014, through the TIFA working group discussions and TIFA Council meeting, concrete

progress was reportedly made on issues that concerned the United States. Taiwan amended 

laws to increase penalties for trade secret theft and improve investigatory tools to enhance 

enforcement; clarified the criteria used to review investments; lifted data localization 

requirements in the banking sector; revised multi-pack labeling requirements and 

 

613 USTR, “United States and Taiwan Enhance Trade Ties,” April 2014. 614 USTR, “Deputy U.S. Trade Representative Demetrios Marantis Welcomes,” March 10, 2013.
Year in Trade

U.S. International Trade Commission | 195

incombustibility testing methods; and improved the transparency and predictability of 

pharmaceutical pricing and reimbursement policies in Taiwan. 615 The Taiwan authorities also 

outlined plans to strengthen IPR enforcement. The two sides agreed on further engagement 

under TIFA on intellectual property protection (e.g., online piracy) and on pharmaceutical and 

medical device market access issues, as well as long-standing agricultural issues. 616

Agricultural Market Access

Maximum Residue Limits 

Following Taiwan's implementation of a maximum residue limit (MRL) for ractopamine in beef

muscle cuts consistent with the Codex standard in 2012, 617 U.S. beef exports to Taiwan grew—

a trend that continued in 2014. However, Taiwan has not implemented an MRL for ractopamine 

in other beef products (i.e., offal) or pork. 618 It thus still kept market access restrictions on 

some imports of beef offal and all imports of pork and pork products containing traces of 

ractopamine in 2014, which continued to disrupt U.S. meat exports to Taiwan.619

In addition, Taiwan has not adopted internationally established MRLs for pesticides and other 

agrochemicals, and it has been slow to develop its own science-based MRLs. Taiwan's process 

has generated a substantial backlog of MRL applications. Moreover, it has led to the rejection of 

various U.S. agricultural exports, including fresh fruits, vegetables, and grains, because they 

contain residues of pesticide or other crop protection compounds for which Taiwan has not yet 

established MRLs, though the residues are within U.S. or Codex Alimentarius standards. In 

2014, USTR noted that although Taiwan has made efforts to reduce the backlog of MRL 

applications, shipments of U.S. agricultural products remain at risk of rejection, causing a high 

level of uncertainty for the U.S. agricultural industry. In May 2014, the United States provided 

Taiwan authorities with a U.S. MRL priority list, which included more than 250 chemicals, so 

that Taiwan could focus its efforts on resolving major U.S. concerns.620

 

615 USTR, 2015 Trade Policy Agenda and 2014 Annual Report, March 2015, 149. 616 USTR, “United States and Taiwan Enhance Trade Ties,” April 2014. 617 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. FAO, 

“Information Sheet: Discussion on Ractopamine in Codex,” April 26, 2012; USTR, 2011 Report on Sanitary and 

Phytosanitary Measures, March 2011, 24. A maximum residue limit (MRL) or allowable tolerance for ractopamine 

in beef and pork was established by the Codex Alimentarius Commission (Codex), a UN food standards-setting 

body, in 2012.

618 USTR, 2015 National Trade Estimate Report on Foreign Trade Barriers, March 2015, 377. 619 Ibid., 319. 620 USTR, 2015 Trade Policy Agenda and 2014 Annual Report, March 2015; USTR, 2014 Trade Policy Agenda and 

2013 Annual Report, March 2014.
Chapter 6: U.S. Relations with Selected Major Trading Partners

196| www.usitc.gov

Rice 

In 2002, upon accession to the WTO, Taiwan agreed to open an import quota of 144,720 metric 

tons (mt) on a brown rice basis.621 Subsequently, Taiwan adopted a complex tariff-rate quota 

(TRQ) system 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: simultaneous 

buy-sell (SBS) and normal tenders.622 The U.S. allocation, at 64,634 mt, accounted for the 

largest share of the public sector import quota. 623

In 2007, 2008, and 2013, the United States could not fill its CSQ, as Taiwan rejected bids for U.S. 

rice under the CSQ, stating that high U.S. prices exceeded Taiwan's ceiling price.624 In 2014, for 

the same reason, out of the total CSQ allotted to the United States, only 46,100 mt were filled, 

with a shortfall of 18,534 mt, which were retendered on a global basis. 625 U.S. exporters have 

raised concerns that Taiwan’s ceiling price mechanism, which is not transparent, has arbitrarily 

set prices lower than the levels bid by U.S. exporters, causing their bids to fail. 626

In 2006, Taiwan imposed an import ban on U.S. long grain rice in response to the low-level 

presence of two regulated lines of genetically engineered (GE) rice found in U.S. commercial 

rice.627 This issue was raised in several bilateral engagements, both technically and under the 

TIFA annual meetings. In 2014, the USDA reported that Taiwan had lifted the long-standing ban, 

and Taiwan's Agriculture and Food Agency scheduled two tenders of U.S.-origin long grain rice 

for December 10, 2014. This action marked the first U.S. long grain rice tender since Taiwan 

opened its market to rice imports in 2002. 628

 

621 “On a brown rice basis” means the weight of all rice is measured as if it were all brown rice, regardless of 

whether it is actually brown, white, or paddy rice. For more information on Taiwan's rice TRQ, see USITC, Rice: 

Global Competitiveness of the U.S. Industry, April 2015. 622 SBS tendering is subject to a markup price (a floor price). Normal tendering is subject to a preset ceiling price 

calculated on the basis of DDP (delivery, duty paid) terms. Rice is delivered to designated warehouses in 

accordance with contract terms. USDA, FAS, Taiwan: Grain and Feed Annual; Corn, Wheat, Rice, June 4, 2009. 623 USTR, 2014 National Trade Estimate Report on Foreign Trade Barriers, March 2014, 320. 624 For more details, see USITC, Year in Trade 2013, 2014, 164. 625 USTR, 2015 National Trade Estimate Report on Foreign Trade Barriers, March 2015, 381. 626 USTR, 2014 National Trade Estimate Report on Foreign Trade Barriers, March 2014, 320. 627 USDA, FAS, Taiwan Lifts Longstanding Ban, December 1, 2014; USDA, APHIS, Report of LibertyLink Rice Incidents

(accessed March 17, 2015). Also see the following section for Taiwan's policies on GE products. 628 USDA, FAS, Taiwan Lifts Longstanding Ban, December 1, 2014.
Year in Trade

U.S. International Trade Commission | 197

Agricultural Biotechnology 

Taiwan is one of the world's leading purchasers of U.S. food and agricultural products, and it 

ranks overall as the United States' seventh-largest agricultural export market.629 As of July 

2014, Taiwan had granted approvals for a total of 31 single biotech events and 38 stacked 

events630 of corn and soybeans combined.631

In 2014, Taiwan amended its Food Safety and Sanitation Act (FSSA), introducing changes that 

could potentially affect U.S. food and agricultural exports to Taiwan. Before the FSSA was 

amended, Taiwan had limited its biotech regulatory scope to GE soybeans and corn. Under the 

amended FSSA, for the first time, Taiwan specifically requires health risk assessments, labeling, 

and traceability for all GE products. 632 In particular, the new regulations require the following: 

(1) Taiwan authorities must review and assess the health risks of all GE food raw materials; (2) 

importers of GE food raw materials must file product registrations, acquire permits, and 

establish a system for tracing the source and tracking the flow of GE food raw materials; and (3) 

packaging and food labeling must indicate the presence of GE food raw materials.

633 As a result, 

GE products (including those from the United States) such as canola, cotton, sugar beets, and 

alfalfa must be registered and approved by Taiwan authorities by February 5, 2016. 634

Following the amendment of the FSSA, on June 20, 2014, Taiwan officials announced proposed 

new labeling regulations. 635 The current labeling regulations are limited to food products made 

using GE soybeans or corn at or above a threshold level of 5 percent. Under the proposed new 

labeling regulations, the labeling threshold would be reduced from the current 5 percent to 3 

percent, and the scope would be expanded to all GE food products. Food additives would be 

subject to the same labeling requirements as food products, though highly processed products 

are exempt from GE labeling requirements.636

 

629 USDA, FAS, “Taiwan” (accessed April 1, 2015). 630 Stacked events refer to genetically modified organisms cultivated by combing or stacking of different traits, 

events, or genes. Taverniers et al., “Gene Stacking in Transgenic Plants,” 2008, 197–218. 631 USDA, FAS, Taiwan: Agricultural Biotechnology Annual; Food Safety, July 15, 2014. 632 Ibid. 633 Government of Taiwan, Ministry of Health and Welfare, “Act Governing Food Safety and Sanitation,” 2014, 

http://law.moj.gov.tw/Eng/LawClass/LawAll.aspx?PCode=L0040001 (accessed on April 1, 2015). 634 USDA, FAS, Taiwan: Agricultural Biotechnology Annual; Food Safety, July 15, 2014. 635 As of May 15, 2015, the proposed GE food labeling regulations are still not in effect. For more information, see 

USDA, FAS, “Taiwan: New GE Regulatory Oversight and Changes to GE Labeling Proposal,” February 9, 2015. 636 USDA, FAS, Taiwan: Agricultural Biotechnology Annual; Food Safety, July 15, 2014.
Chapter 6: U.S. Relations with Selected Major Trading Partners

198| www.usitc.gov

India

In 2014, the United States had a trade deficit with India in both merchandise and services trade. 

India remained the United States' 11th-largest single-country trading partner based on two-way 

merchandise trade, accounting for 1.7 percent of total U.S. merchandise trade with the world. 

U.S. two-way merchandise trade with India was valued at $66.9 billion, an increase of 

5.0 percent from 2013. The U.S. merchandise trade deficit with India increased 18.0 percent, 

from $20.0 billion in 2013 to $23.6 billion in 2014, as U.S. exports decreased and imports 

increased (figure 6.18). In addition, India was the United States' 9th-largest single-country 

trading partner based on two-way services trade, and continued to be the only top U.S. trading 

partner with which the United States carried a services trade deficit in 2014. The services trade 

deficit showed consistent growth until 2013, when it declined, but in 2014 the deficit grew 

again by 3.3 percent, rising to $6.0 billion (figure 6.19). 

U.S. merchandise exports to India contracted by 1.0 percent, from $21.8 billion in 2013 to 

$21.6 billion in 2014. Leading U.S. exports to India included nonindustrial diamonds, aircraft 

and parts, airplanes, nonmonetary gold, and coal.637 The decline in exports to India in 2014 was 

led by a decline in exports of nonmonetary gold, aircraft and parts, and diamonds. Exports of 

airplanes mitigated the overall decrease with a 17.9 percent increase in 2014, as did chemical 

wood pulp exports, which increased by 273.1 percent.

U.S. merchandise imports from India increased by 8.1 percent in 2014 to $45.2 billion. Leading 

U.S. imports included nonindustrial diamonds, certain medicaments, petroleum-related 

products, and frozen shrimp. The growth in imports was driven by an increase in petroleumrelated imports, as well as increases in frozen shrimp, medicaments, nonindustrial diamonds, 

and flat-rolled iron or non-alloy steel products. In spite of the overall growth, a few leading 

products saw some decline in U.S. imports, including mucilages and thickeners and reception 

apparatus for televisions. U.S. merchandise trade data are shown in appendix tables A.48 

through A.50.

 

637 Because the United States and India are both major centers for global trade in diamonds, diamonds lead U.S.-

India trade for both imports and exports. Though diamonds are the top U.S. export to India (at $3.7 billion or 17.2 

percent of total U.S. exports to India), nearly all ($3.6 billion) of this trade was in re-exports. For more information 

on re-exports, see chapter 1 of this study as well as the “Trade Metrics” section of USITC, Shifts in U.S. 

Merchandise Trade 2014, June 2015).
Year in Trade

U.S. International Trade Commission | 199

Figure 6.18: U.S. merchandise trade with India, 2010–14

Source: USITC DataWeb (accessed February 12, 2015); data compiled from official statistics of the U.S. Department of 

Commerce.

Figure 6.19: U.S. private services trade with India, 2010–14a

Source: USDOC, BEA, U.S. International Transactions Accounts Data, March 19, 2015, tables 1.2 and 1.3. a Data for 2014 are preliminary.

-30

-20

-10

0

10

20

30

40

50

2010 2011 2012 2013 2014

(Billion $)

Total U.S. exports General U.S. imports Merchandise trade balance

-10

-5

0

5

10

15

20

25

2010 2011 2012 2013 2014

Exports Imports Trade balance

(Billion $)
Chapter 6: U.S. Relations with Selected Major Trading Partners

200| www.usitc.gov

After Prime Minister Narendra Modi took office in May 2014, the number of meetings between 

U.S. and Indian officials to discuss the improvement of trade relations increased. These 

encounters included a meeting of the Trade Policy Forum (TPF) and other meetings at various 

levels.638 As a result of this increased engagement, negotiations for the WTO Trade Facilitation 

Agreement were concluded in 2014, as noted in chapter 3. 

There were also developments in WTO dispute settlement proceedings involving the United 

States and India in 2014. In May 2014 the WTO DSB established a panel in a dispute brought by 

the United States regarding India's measures relating to solar cells and solar modules.639 In 

October 2014, the WTO DSB circulated the panel report in the dispute brought by the United 

States on Indian measures concerning certain agricultural imports from the United States, 

which was appealed to the WTO Appellate Body by India in January 2015. 640 Additionally, in 

December 2014 Appellate Body and panel reports were adopted in a dispute brought by India 

on U.S. countervailing measures on certain hot-rolled carbon steel flat products from India. 641

Trade and Investment Dialogue

President Obama and Prime Minister Narendra Modi held their first bilateral summit in 

September 2014. Among other things, they pledged to establish an Indo-U.S. Investment 

Initiative to increase investment as well as to address the impasse on public stockholding for 

food security and the Trade Facilitation Agreement in the WTO. Additionally, they committed to 

establish an annual high-level Intellectual Property Working Group as part of the Trade Policy 

Forum; to work through the Trade Policy Forum (discussed below) to improve the business 

environment for investment in both the United States and India; and to hold public-private 

discussions on new areas of cooperation in early 2015 under the Commercial Dialogue.642

On November 25, 2014, USTR Froman met with Indian Minister of Commerce and Industry, 

Nirmala Sitharaman, for the eighth ministerial-level meeting of the India-United States Trade 

Policy Forum.643 The Trade Policy Forum was created in 2005, but meetings had not been held 

 

638 For detailed information on the topics discussed below, see USITC, Trade, Investment, and Industrial Policies in 

India, December 2014. 639 WTO, “Dispute Settlement: DS456; India—Certain Measures Relating to Solar Cells and Solar Modules”

(accessed March 12, 2015); see chapter 3 for further information.

640 WTO, “Dispute Settlement: DS430; India—Measures Concerning the Importation of Certain Agricultural 

Products from the United States” (accessed March 12, 2015); see chapter 3 for further information.

641 WTO, “Dispute Settlement: DS436; United States—Countervailing Measures on Certain Hot-Rolled Carbon Steel 

Flat Products from India” (accessed March 12, 2015); see chapter 3 for further information. 642 White House, “U.S.-India Joint Statement,” September 30, 2014. Much of these commitments were reaffirmed 

during the second bilateral summit between President Obama and Prime Minister Modi in India in January 2015. 

White House, “U.S.-India Joint Statement—'Shared Effort; Progress for All,'“ January 25, 2015. 643 USTR, “India and United States Joint Statement on the Trade Policy Forum,” November 25, 2014.
Year in Trade

U.S. International Trade Commission | 201

since 2010. 644 The 2014 meeting included work sessions on agriculture, services, promoting 

investment in manufacturing, and intellectual property. According to USTR, the forum will 

continue to be an arena for increased cooperation and exchange of information for greater 

improvement of India's intellectual property environment.645

In July 2014, negotiations on the WTO Trade Facilitation Agreement stalled as a result of 

concerns raised by India and some other developing countries with issues related to food 

security that were being considered in the WTO. In November 2014, the governments of the 

United States and India concluded discussions that addressed the concerns expressed and 

allowed both the resumption of discussions and the eventual conclusion of negotiations on the 

Trade Facilitation Agreement.646

Localization Requirements

Among issues that were discussed at the Trade Policy Forum and at other bilateral and 

multilateral forums was the ongoing concern of U.S. policymakers and businesses about the 

presence of local-content requirements (LCRs) and local testing requirements in some Indian 

policies. As indicated below, these policies tend to affect the information communications 

technology (ICT) and solar manufacturing industries. Two policies of particular U.S. concern 

were the Jawaharlal Nehru National Solar Mission (JNNSM) and telecommunications license 

amendments.

Jawaharlal Nehru National Solar Mission

India launched the JNNSM in 2010 with the goal of having 20 gigawatts of grid-connected solar 

power installed by 2022, establishing India as “a global leader in solar energy.”647 The JNNSM is 

to be implemented in three phases, each split into multiple “batches.” The batches have 

different, additional requirements for domestically manufactured materials, among other rules 

and goals. Phase II, batch 1 began in October 2013 and extends through 2017. 648

In February 2013, the United States requested consultations with India under the WTO Dispute 

Settlement Understanding to examine the domestic content requirements of the JNNSM, and in 

February 2014 requested supplementary consultations concerning certain domestic content 

requirements under phase II of the JNNSM. In April 2014 the United States requested 

 

644 USTR, “United States and India Hold Seventh Trade Policy Forum,” September 21, 2010. 645 USTR, “Statement by the Office of the U.S. Trade Representative on the Out-of-Cycle Review of India,”

December 12, 2014.

646 USTR, “Statement by Ambassador Froman on U.S.-India WTO Trade Facilitation Agreement,” November 13, 

2014. See chapter 3 for a discussion of the Trade Facilitation Agreement. 647 Government of India, MNRE, “Jawaharlal Nehru National Solar Mission,” n.d. (accessed May 1, 2015), 2. 648 See USITC, Trade, Investment, and Industrial Policies in India, December 2014, chapter 6, for more information.
Chapter 6: U.S. Relations with Selected Major Trading Partners

202| www.usitc.gov

establishment of a dispute settlement panel to review the matter, and a panel was established 

in May 2014. 649

Telecommunication License Amendments

Since 2009, India's Ministry of Communications and Information Technology has issued 

amendments to the rules governing India's telecommunication licenses that affect ICT 

equipment. A 2010 amendment included a requirement that foreign manufacturers of ICT 

equipment and software transfer sensitive source codes and technology to Indian 

companies.650 In response to input from U.S. industry groups, in 2011, the Indian government 

revised the amendment to instead require local testing for ICT equipment that is considered to 

have security implications. 651 This amendment was meant to go into effect in June 2014, but 

was postponed until April 2015. 652

Additionally, the Ministry of Communications and Information Technology established an incountry testing requirement on electronic equipment for compliance with consumer safety 

standards. This requirement became effective in January 2014. U.S. companies subject to the 

requirement have reported significant delays in these tests due to the approval board's lack of 

capacity to manage the volume of ICT hardware that enters the Indian market.653

Intellectual Property Rights

India has been on USTR's priority watch list, or has been designated a priority foreign country, 

since 1989, and remains on the priority watch list as of April 2014. In April 2014, USTR released 

the 2014 Special 301 Report, which stated that USTR would begin an out-of-cycle review of 

India in the fall of 2014. 654 The review began in October 2014655 and concluded in December 

2014. USTR noted that there had been engagement with the Indian government multiple times 

during the period of the review and that India had made a number of commitments to work on 

IPR issues, including agreement on a 2015 work plan on intellectual property. While noting that 

 

649 WTO, “Dispute Settlement: DS456; India—Certain Measures Relating to Solar Cells and Solar Modules” 

(accessed March 12, 2015); see chapter 3 for further information. 

650 European Commission, “Trade,” November 26, 2013. 651 European Commission, “Security,” November 26, 2014; Industry representative, telephone interview by USITC 

staff, September 30, 2014.

652 USTR, 2015 National Trade Estimate Report on Foreign Trade Barriers, March 2015, 168. 653 Industry representative, interview by USITC staff, Washington, DC, January 16, 2014. 654 USTR, 2014 Special 301 Report to Congress, May 2014, 37. 655 USTR, “USTR Begins Special 301 Report Out-of-Cycle Review of India,” October 14, 2014. 
Year in Trade

U.S. International Trade Commission | 203

there has been some progress on IPR issues, USTR states that it has continued to engage with 

India for greater improvement of India's IPR environment.656

In a report prepared at the request of the House Committee on Ways and Means and the 

Senate Committee on Finance—Trade, Investment, and Industrial Policies in India: Effects on 

the U.S. Economy—the Commission identified a number of IPR issues, including patent, 

copyright, trademark, and trade secret issues. Among these issues, compulsory licensing 

continued to be an issue noted by the U.S. and international pharmaceutical industry in 

2014. 657 In July 2014, the Bombay High Court rejected Bayer's appeal of the 2013 ruling that 

awarded Natco (an Indian pharmaceutical firm) a compulsory license for Nexavar, a cancer 

drug. 658 Though a number of other applications for compulsory licenses were rejected in 2014, 

this is an ongoing area of U.S. concern and discussion with India.659

 

656 USTR, “Statement by the Office of the U.S. Trade Representative on the Out-of-Cycle Review of India,”

December 12, 2014. See chapter 2 for further discussion of the Special 301 Report and Out-of-Cycle Review. 657 Compulsory licensing of patents is the granting to a company or individual that is not the patent owner the use 

of the rights of the patent without the permission of the patent owner. WTO, “An Informal Press Guide to 'WTO 

Speak,'“ n.d. (accessed May 1, 2015). 

https://www.wto.org/english/thewto_e/minist_e/min01_e/brief_e/brief22_e.htm. 658 For background on the Nexavar case, see USITC, Trade, Investment, and Industrial Policies in India, December 

2014, chapter 5.

659 USITC, Trade, Investment, and Industrial Policies in India, December 2014.

Year in Trade

U.S. International Trade Commission | 205

Bibliography

AGOA.info. “AFOA Product Eligibility,” n.d. http://agoa.info/about-agoa/product-eligibility.html

(accessed March 10, 2015).

Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC). “APEC at a Glance,” February 2015. 

http://publications.apec.org/publication-detail.php?pub_id=1610.

———. “APEC China 2014 Commences in Ningbo,” February 22, 2014. 

http://www.apec.org/Press/News-Releases/2014/0222_ningbo.aspx. 

———. “About Us: Action Plans” http://www.apec.org/About-Us/How-APEC-Operates/ActionPlans.aspx (accessed on February 25, 2014). 

———. “About Us: How APEC Operates.” http://www.apec.org/About-Us/How-APECOperates.aspx (accessed February 24, 2015).

———. “About Us: Scope of Work” http://www.apec.org/About-Us/How-APECOperates/Scope-of-Work.aspx (accessed on February 24, 2015). 

———. APEC's Bogor Goals Progress Report. 

http://www.apec.org/~/media/Files/AboutUs/AchievementsBenefits/2014_BG_Reports

/APEC%20%20Bogor%20Goals%20Progress%20ReportOct2014%20report%20format.pdf

(accessed August 8, 2014).

———. “2014 APEC Ministerial Meeting Joint Ministerial Statement,” November 8, 2014. 

http://apec.org/Meeting-Papers/Ministerial-Statements/Annual/2014/2014_amm.aspx.

———. 2014 Leaders' Declaration: The 22nd APEC Economic Leaders' Declaration: Beijing 

Agenda for an Integrated, Innovative and Interconnected Asia-Pacific, November 11,

2014. http://www.apec.org/Meeting-Papers/LeadersDeclarations/2014/2014_aelm.aspx. 

———. “2014 Leaders' Declaration: Annex A: The Beijing Roadmap,” November 11, 2014. 

http://www.apec.org/Meeting-Papers/LeadersDeclarations/2014/2014_aelm/2014_aelm_annexa.aspx.

———. “2014 Leaders' Declarations: Annex B: APEC Strategic Blueprint,” November 11, 2014. 

http://www.apec.org/Meeting-Papers/LeadersDeclarations/2014/2014_aelm/2014_aelm_annexb.aspx.

———. “Regional Economic Integration Agenda.” Fact sheet. http://www.apec.org/AboutUs/About-APEC/Fact-Sheets/Regional-Economic-Integration-Agenda.aspx (accessed 

January 14, 2014).
Bibliography

206| www.usitc.gov

———. “APEC China 2014 Commences in Ningbo,” February 22, 2014. 

http://www.apec.org/Press/News-Releases/2014/0222_ningbo.aspx.

———. “APEC Ministers Renew Commitment to Resist Protectionism,” November 11, 2010. 

http://www.apec.org/Press/News-Releases/2010/1111_commitment.aspx.

———. “Events.” http://www.apec.org/Events-Calendar.aspx (accessed February 25, 2014).

———. “APEC Committee on Trade and Investment 2014 Annual Report to Ministers,”

November 2014. 

http://mddb.apec.org/Documents/2014/SOM/CSOM/14_csom_031_rev1.pdf. 

———. “Pathways to FTAAP,” November 14, 2010. http://www.apec.org/MeetingPapers/Leaders-Declarations/2010/2010_aelm/pathways-to-ftaap.aspx.

Autoblog. “2015 Honda Fit Production Gets Underway in Mexico,” February 25, 2014. 

http://www.autoblog.com/2014/02/25/2015-honda-fit-mexico-production-starts/.

Autoweek. “Mazda Opens New Plant in Salamanca, Mexico,” February 27, 2014. 

http://autoweek.com/article/car-news/mazda-opens-new-plant-salamanca-mexico.

Bloomberg News. “Toyota, Ford Halt Production As South Africa Strike Deepens,” July 14, 2014. 

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2014-07-14/toyota-ford-halt-production-insouth-africa-as-strike-deepens.

———. “Federal Reserve Issues FOMC Statement.” Press release, September 17, 2014. 

http://www.federalreserve.gov/newsevents/press/monetary/20140917a.htm.

———. “Open Market Operations,” n.d. 

http://www.federalreserve.gov/monetarypolicy/openmarket.htm (accessed March 12, 

2015).

Bogen, Jeffrey R., Mai-Chi Hoang, Kristy L. Howell, and Erin M. Whitaker. “Comprehensive 

Restructuring and Annual Revision of the U.S. International Transactions Accounts.”

Survey of Current Business 94, no. 7 (July 2014). 

http://www.bea.gov/scb/pdf/2014/07%20July/0714_annual_international_transactions

_accounts.pdf.

Borga, Maria, and Jennifer Koncz-Bruner. "Trends in Digitally-Enabled Trade in Services." BEA,

2012. http://bea.gov/international/pdf/trends_in_digitally_enabled_services.pdf.

Borga, Maria, and Kristy L. Howell. “The Comprehensive Restructuring of International 

Economic Accounts.” Survey of Current Business 94, no. 3 (March 2014). 

http://www.bea.gov/scb/pdf/2014/03%20March/0314_restructuring_the_international

_economic_accounts.pdf.
Year in Trade

U.S. International Trade Commission | 207

Boulevard Extérieur. “TTTIP: Fourth Round and Still a Long Way to Go,” March 22, 2014. 

http://www.boulevard-exterieur.com/TTIP-four-rounds-and-still-a-long-way-to-go.html.

Bourassa, Betsy. “U.S. and China Breakthrough Announcement on the Bilateral Investment 

Treaty Negotiations.” U.S. Department of Treasury, July 15, 2013. 

http://www.treasury.gov/connect/blog/Pages/U.S.-and-China-BreakthroughAnnouncement-.aspx.

Bunge, Jacob. “U.S. Corn Exports to China Dry Up over GMO Concerns.” Wall Street Journal,

April 11, 2014. 

http://www.wsj.com/news/articles/SB100014240527023038736045794937904050238

08.

Canada-United States Regulatory Cooperation Council (RCC). Canadian Secretariat. “Canada's 

Economic Action Plan: Regulatory Cooperation Council,” n.d. 

http://actionplan.gc.ca/en/content/regulatory-cooperation-council (accessed March 10, 

2015).

Charles, Jacqueline. “Haiti Raises Minimum Wage for Factory Workers, Others.” Miami Herald,

May 9, 2014. http://www.canadahaitiaction.ca/content/haiti-raises-minimum-wagefactory-workers-others.

China Briefing. “Market Overview: The Medical Device Industry in China,” December 3, 2014. 

http://www.china-briefing.com/news/2014/12/03/market-overview-medical-deviceschina.html.

———. “Regulations for Implementation of the Drug Administration Law of the People's 

Republic of China,” August 4, 2002. 

Cisco. The Zettabyte Era—Trends and Analysis. VNI Forecast Highlights, June 10, 2014. 

http://www.cisco.com/c/en/us/solutions/collateral/service-provider/visual-networkingindex-vni/VNI_Hyperconnectivity_WP.html.

Commission for Environmental Cooperation (CEC). “CEC Ministerial Statement—2014: Twentyfirst Regular Session of the CEC Council,” July 17, 2014. 

http://www.cec.org/Page.asp?PageID=122&ContentID=25796&SiteNodeID=219&BL_Ex

pandID=.

———. “Submission on Enforcement Matters: Active Submissions.”

http://www.cec.org/Page.asp?PageID=1226&SiteNodeID=544 (accessed March 12, 

2015).
Bibliography

208| www.usitc.gov

———. “Submission on Enforcement Matters.”

http://www.cec.org/Page.asp?PageID=924&SiteNodeID=210 (accessed March 12, 

2015).

———. “Part Three: Commission for Environment Cooperation.” Article 14 and Article 15. 

http://www.cec.org/Page.asp?PageID=122&ContentID=2732&SiteNodeID=567&BL_Exp

andID=#A14 (accessed March 12, 2015).

Commission for Environmental Cooperation (CEC). Secretariat. “Three Countries Working 

Together.” http://www.cec.org/Page.asp?PageID=924&SiteNodeID=310 (accessed 

March 12, 2015).

Commission for Labor Cooperation (CLC). “The National Administrative Offices.”

http://www.naalc.org/commission/nao.htm (accessed March 13, 2015). 

Congressional Research Service (CRS). Japan-U.S. Relations: Issues for Congress, by Emma 

Chanlett-Avery, Mark E. Manyin, Ian E. Rinehart, Rebecca M. Nelson, and Brock R. 

Williams. CRS Report RL33436, January 13, 2015.

http://fas.org/sgp/crs/row/RL33436.pdf.

———. Status of the WTO Brazil-U.S. Cotton Case, December 12, 2013.

https://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/row/R43336.pdf.

———. The 2014 Farm Bill (P.L. 113-79): Summary and Side-by-side, February 12, 2014.

https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/13882813/2014/02.12.14%20CRS%20R43076%2

02014FB%20Side%20x%20Side%2012Feb14.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.

———. Trade Adjustment Assistance for Firms: Economic, Program, and Policy Issues, by Mary 

Jane Bolle. CRS Report RS20210, January 30, 2015. 

http://www.hsdl.org/?view&did=762055.

———. Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) Negotiations and Issues for Congress, by Ian F. 

Fergusson, Mark A. McMinimy, and Brock R. Williams. CRS Report R42694, March 20, 

2015. http://fas.org/sgp/crs/row/R42694.pdf.

———. U.S.-India Economic Relations: In Brief, by Michael F. Martin, Shayerah Ilias Akhtar, K. 

Alan Kronstadt, Samir Kumar, and Alison Siskin. CRS Report R43741, September 26, 

2014. http://fas.org/sgp/crs/row/R43741.pdf.
Year in Trade

U.S. International Trade Commission | 209

———. “U.S. International Investment Agreements: Issues for Congress,” by Shayerah Ilias 

Akhtar and Martin A. Weiss. CRS Report R43052, April 29, 2013.

Daimler, “Mercedes-Benz Tuscaloosa Plant (Mercedes-Benz U.S. International Inc.),” n.d. 

https://www.daimler.com/dccom/0-5-1382119-1-1333338-1-0-0-0-0-0-9506-0-0-0-0-0-

0-0-0.html (accessed March 30, 2015).

Economist Intelligence Unit. “Vehicle Sales Decline in the First Four Months of 2014,” May 8, 

2014. 

http://country.eiu.com/ArticleIndustry.aspx?articleid=1171795501&Country=SouthAfric

a&topic=Industry&subtopic=Automotive.

European Commission (EC). “EU and US Negotiators Kick off a Fifth Round of Talks on New 

Trade and Investment Pact (TTIP).” Press release, May 20, 2014. 

http://trade.ec.europa.eu/doclib/press/index.cfm?id=1065.

———. “EU-US Talks Trade—6th Round to Start on 14 July.” News archives, June 2014. 

http://trade.ec.europa.eu/doclib/press/index.cfm?id=1093.

———. “EU-US Trade—7th Round of Talks on Transatlantic Trade Pact Ends in the US.” Press 

release, October 3, 2014. http://trade.ec.europa.eu/doclib/press/index.cfm?id=1158.

———. “EU-US Trade—Latest Round of Talks on Transatlantic Trade Pact Ends in Brussels.”

Press release, July 18, 2014. 

http://trade.ec.europa.eu/doclib/press/index.cfm?id=1132&title=EU-US-trade-

%E2%80%93-latest-round-of-talks-on-transatlantic-trade-pact-ends-in-Brussels.

———. “EU-U.S. Trade—Negotiators Explore Ways to Help SMEs Take Advantage of TTIP, As 

Fourth Round of Talks Ends in Brussels.” Press release, March 14, 2014. 

http://trade.ec.europa.eu/doclib/press/index.cfm?id=1041.

———. “EU, U.S. Trade Talks—Negotiators Hear from 90 Representatives of Environmental and 

Consumer Groups, Business, and Trade Unions.” Press release, March 11, 2014. 

http://trade.ec.europa.eu/doclib/press/index.cfm?id=1035.

———. “Negotiations Meet for the Fourth Round of Transatlantic Trade and Investment 

Partnership (TTIP) talks.” Press release, March 10, 2014. 

http://trade.ec.europa.eu/doclib/press/index.cfm?id=1034.

———. “Now Online - EU Negotiating Texts in TTIP,” February 10, 2015. 

http://trade.ec.europa.eu/doclib/press/index.cfm?id=1230#market-access.

———. “Report of the Seventh Round of Negotiations,” October 23, 2014. 

http://trade.ec.europa.eu/doclib/docs/2014/october/tradoc_152859.pdf.
Bibliography

210| www.usitc.gov

———. “Sixth Round of Negotiations for the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership 

(TTIP): Extract from the Joint Press Conference by Ignacio Garcia Bercero, Chief EU 

Negotiator for the TTIP, and Dan Mullaney, Chief US Negotiator for the TTIP,” July 18, 

2014. http://ec.europa.eu/avservices/video/player.cfm?ref=I091332. 

———. “Statement on the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership.” Press release, 

November 16, 2014. http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_STATEMENT-14-

1820_en.htm.

———. “Security Requirements for Telecommunication Networks.” Market Access Database, 

November 26, 2013. 

http://madb.europa.eu/madb/barriers_details.htm?barrier_id=115396&version=3.

———. “Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership: Chief Negotiators' Briefing to 

Stakeholders, 6th Round,” July 16, 2014. 

http://trade.ec.europa.eu/doclib/docs/2014/august/tradoc_152720.pdf.

European Commission (EC). United States Trade Representative (USTR). “Transatlantic Trade 

and Investment Partnership: The Opportunities for Small and Medium-sized 

Enterprises,” n.d. 

http://trade.ec.europa.eu/doclib/docs/2014/march/tradoc_152266.pdf or 

https://ustr.gov/sites/default/files/03142014-TTIP-opportunities-for-SMEs.pdf

(accessed April 3, 2015).

European Parliament. Policy Department. “Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership 

(TTIP) Negotiations: State of Play.” DG EXPO/B/PolDep/Note/2014_155, August 2014. 

http://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/etudes/BRIE/2014/536397/EXPO_BRI%28201

4%29536397_EN.pdf.

Ezell, Stephen J., and Robert D. Atkinson. The Indian Economy at a Crossroads. Brussels: 

European Commission, January 2, 2011. 

http://ec.europa.eu/energy/renewables/studies/doc/renewables/2011_financing_rene

wable.pdf.

Federal Reserve. “Historical Rates for the Japanese Yen.” Statistical release, March 16, 2015. 

http://www.federalreserve.gov/releases/h10/hist/dat00_ja.htm.

Federal Reserve System. Board of Governors. “Foreign Exchange Rates: H.10 Weekly.” n.d. 

http://www.federalreserve.gov/releases/h10/hist/ (accessed March 5, 2015).

Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO). “Discussion on Ractopamine in 

Codex and in the Joint FAO/WHO Expert Committee on Food Additives (JECFA).”

Information Sheet, April 26, 2012. 

http://www.fao.org/fileadmin/user_upload/agns/pdf/Ractopamine_info_sheet_CodexJECFA_rev_26April2012__2_.pdf.
Year in Trade

U.S. International Trade Commission | 211

Foreso, Cynthia. “U.S. Becoming a Leading Exporter of Petroleum Products.” U.S. International 

Trade Commission. Executive Briefings on Trade. Washington, DC: USITC, December 

2014. http://www.usitc.gov/publications/332/executive_briefings/e8-22454.pdf.

González, Angel. “Five Years after Quake, Emerging Northern Haiti Facing Challenges.” January 

12, 2015. http://omegaworldnews.com/?p=15074.

Government of Alberta (Canada). International and Intergovernmental Relations. “International 

Trade Agreements––Record of Understanding between the Governments of Canada and 

the United States of America Regarding Areas of Agricultural Trade,” December 2, 1998. 

———. “International Trade Agreements––The Canada-U.S. Consultative Committee on 

Agriculture (CCA) Terms of Reference (April 20, 1999),” n.d. (accessed March 3, 2015). 

Government of Australia. Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade (DFAT). “Statement of the 

Ministers and Heads of Delegation for the Trans-Pacific Partnership Countries,” February 

25, 2104. http://www.dfat.gov.au/trade/agreements/tpp/news/Pages/statement-ofthe-ministers-and-heads-of-delegation-for-the-trans-pacific-partnership-countries2.aspx.

———. “TPP Chief Negotiators' Meeting, Ho Chi Minh City, Vietnam 12–15 May 2014.”

http://dfat.gov.au/trade/agreements/tpp/news/Pages/news.aspx (accessed March 5, 

2015).

———. “Trade in Services Agreement (TiSA),” n.d. 

https://www.dfat.gov.au/trade/negotiations/services/trade-in-services-agreement.html

(accessed March 10, 2014).

———. “Trade Ministers' Report to Leaders,” November 10, 2014. 

http://www.dfat.gov.au/trade/agreements/tpp/Documents/tpp-ministers-report-toleaders-20141110.pdf. 

———. “Trans-Pacific Partnership Agreement: About the TPP Negotiations”

http://dfat.gov.au/trade/agreements/tpp/Pages/trans-pacific-partnership-agreementtpp.aspx (accessed April 13, 2015).

———. “Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) Agreement Ministerial Meeting—Concluding Press 

Conference,” October 27, 2014. 

http://trademinister.gov.au/transcripts/Pages/2014/ar_tr_141027.aspx.

———. “Robb to Host TPP Trade Ministers' Meeting.” Press release, October 2, 2014. 

http://trademinister.gov.au/releases/Pages/2014/ar_mr_141002.aspx.
Bibliography

212| www.usitc.gov

Government of Canada. Department of Foreign Affairs, Trade, and Development (DFATD). 

“Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) Free Trade Negotiations.”

http://www.international.gc.ca/trade-agreements-accords-commerciaux/agr-acc/tppptp/rounds-series.aspx?lang=eng (assessed February 10, 2015).

———. “TPP Officials Meeting (July 2014).” http://www.international.gc.ca/trade-agreementsaccords-commerciaux/agr-acc/tpp-ptp/rounds-series.aspx?lang=eng (accessed March 2, 

2015).

———. “TPP Officials Meeting: Hanoi, Vietnam (September 2014).”

http://www.international.gc.ca/trade-agreements-accords-commerciaux/agr-acc/tppptp/rounds-series.aspx?lang=eng (assessed February 10, 2014).

———. “TPP Officials' Meeting: Washington, D.C. (December 2014).”

http://www.international.gc.ca/trade-agreements-accords-commerciaux/agr-acc/tppptp/rounds-series.aspx?lang=eng.

Government of Canada. Department of Foreign Affairs, Trade and Development (DFATD). Tariffs 

and Goods Market Access Division (TPG). “Consultative Committees on Agriculture––

Canada-United States Consultative Committee on Agriculture,” n.d. (accessed March 4, 

2015).

Government of Chile. Ministry of Foreign Affairs. “En Washington prosiguen esta semana las 

negociaciones del TPP” [TPP negotiations continue in Washington this week]. Press 

release, December 9, 2014. http://www.direcon.gob.cl/2014/12/en-washingtonprosiguen-esta-semana-las-negociaciones-del-tpp/.

Government of China. China Food and Drug Administration (CFDA). “Regulations for the 

Supervision and Administration of Medical Devices,” December 19, 1992.

Government of Ecuador. Secretaría Nacional de Comunicación [national communications 

office]. “En defensa de su soberanía, Ecuador renuncia de manera unilateral e 

irrevocable a las ATPDEA [In defense of its sovereignty, Ecuador unilaterally and 

irrevocably withdraws from ATPDEA].” Press release, June 27, 2013. 

http://www.comunicacion.gob.ec/en-defensa-de-su-soberania-ecuador-renuncia-demanera-unilateral-e-irrevocable-a-las-atpdea/.

Government of India. Ministry of Communications and Information Technology (MCIT). 

“Notification: Policy for Preference to Domestically Manufactured Electronic Goods in 

Procurement due to Security Considerations and in Government Procurement,” January 

22, 2013.

Government of India. Ministry of New and Renewable Energy (MNRE). “Jawaharlal Nehru 

National Solar Mission: Towards Building Solar India,” n.d. http://www.mnre.gov.in/filemanager/UserFiles/mission_document_JNNSM.pdf (accessed May 1, 2015).
Year in Trade

U.S. International Trade Commission | 213

Government of New Zealand. Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade (MFAT). “Trans-Pacific 

Strategic Economic Partnership Agreement National Interest Analysis,” July 2005. 

http://www.mfat.govt.nz/downloads/trade-agreement/transpacific/transpacific-sepania.pdf. 

———. “Trans-Pacific Strategic Economic Partnership (P4) Agreement.”

http://www.mfat.govt.nz/Trade-and-Economic-Relations/2-Trade-Relationships-andAgreements/Trans-Pacific/2-P4.php.

———. “Trans-Pacific Strategic Economic Partnership Agreement National Interest Analysis,”

July 2005. http://www.mfat.govt.nz/downloads/tradeagreement/transpacific/transpacific-sepa-nia.pdf. 

Government of Malaysia, Ministry of International Trade and Industry, “Brief on the TransPacific Partnership (TPP),” n.d. 

http://www.miti.gov.my/storage/documents/c94/com.tms.cms.document.Document_6

2357eea-c0a8156f-2c11008e-9a1ecbed/1/TPP%20-%20Briefing%20Notes.pdf (accessed 

May 7, 2015).

Government of the UK. British Embassy, Beijing. “China Politics Update—End of 2014 Special 

Edition.”

https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/3927

73/CPU-12.pdf (accessed on April 2, 2015).

Global Trade Information Service, Inc. (GTIS). Global Trade Atlas database. 

https://www.gtis.com (accessed various dates).

Grimm, Alexis N., and Charu S. Krishnan. “U.S. International Services: Trade in Services in 2013 

and Services Supplied through Affiliates in 2012.” Survey of Current Business 94, no. 10 

(October 2014).

http://www.bea.gov/scb/pdf/2014/10%20October/1014_international_services.pdf.

House.gov. “TPP Market Access Letter.” Letter from 148 members of Congress to the President 

of the United States, July 30, 2014. 

http://waysandmeans.house.gov/uploadedfiles/tpp_market_access_letter.pdf.

Inside U.S. Trade. “U.S.-China BIT 'Core Text' Outstanding As Parties Prepare Negative List 

Offers,” January 30, 2015. http://insidetrade.com/inside-us-trade/us-china-bit-coretext-outstanding-parties-prepare-negative-list-offers.

———. “China Draft Law Would Revamp Investment Review, Control Test,” February 12, 2015. 

http://insidetrade.com/inside-us-trade/china-draft-law-would-revamp-investmentreview-control-test.
Bibliography

214| www.usitc.gov

———. “Korea Moves to Resolve Issues Flagged by U.S. as Hurdles to TPP Entry,” August 1, 

2014. http://insidetrade.com/inside-us-trade/korea-moves-resolve-issues-flagged-ushurdles-tpp-entry.

———. “Korea Plans to Complete Initial Round of TPP Consultations in February,” February 3, 

2014. http://insidetrade.com/daily-news/korea-plans-complete-initial-round-tppconsultations-february.

———. “Korean Officials Hold TPP Consultations on Sidelines of Chiefs' Meeting,” May 13, 

2014. http://insidetrade.com/daily-news/korean-officials-hold-tpp-consultationssidelines-chiefs-meeting.

———. “Obama Says “Fully” Implementing KORUS Will Help Seoul's Bid for TPP,” May 2, 2014.

http://insidetrade.com/inside-us-trade/obama-says-fully-implementing-korus-will-helpseouls-bid-tpp.

———. “Official: U.S. Hopes to Consult Further with Korea on TPP Within Weeks,” March 21, 

2014. http://insidetrade.com/inside-us-trade/official-us-hopes-consult-further-koreatpp-within-weeks.

———. “Seoul Kicks Off 2nd Round of TPP Consultations in Malaysia, Singapore,” April 18, 

2014. http://insidetrade.com/inside-us-trade/seoul-kicks-2nd-round-tpp-consultationsmalaysia-singapore.

———. “South Korea Weighs Potential TPP Entry after Negotiations Are Concluded,”

September 19, 2014. http://insidetrade.com/inside-us-trade/south-korea-weighspotential-tpp-entry-after-negotiations-are-concluded.

———. “USTR Cites Progress in Japan TPP Auto Talks; Slated To Resume at APEC,” November 4, 

2014. http://insidetrade.com/inside-us-trade/ustr-cites-progress-japan-tpp-auto-talksslated-resume-apec.

———. “WTO Poised To Break TFA Impasse This Week after Last-Minute Obstacle,” November 

28, 2014. http://insidetrade.com/inside-us-trade/wto-poised-break-tfa-impasse-weekafter-last-minute-obstacle.

Inter-American Development Bank (IDB). “IDB Inter-American Development Bank: Haiti to 

Expand Business Facilities at Caracol Industrial Park with Support from IDB.” News 

release, December 12, 2014. http://www.iadb.org/en/news/news-releases/2014-12-

12/caracol-industrial-park-and-haiti,11020.html.

International Centre for Trade and Sustainable Development (ICTSD). “ITA Expansion Talks Hit 

Roadblock.” Bridges. Vol. 18, no. 43, December 18, 2014. http://www.ictsd.org/bridgesnews/bridges/news/ita-expansion-talks-hit-roadblock.
Year in Trade

U.S. International Trade Commission | 215

International Monetary Fund (IMF). “IMF Executive Board Concludes 2014 Article IV 

Consultation with Canada.” Press release No. 15/25, January 30, 2015. 

http://www.imf.org/external/np/sec/pr/2015/pr1525.htm.

———. World Economic Outlook (WEO) Update. Washington, DC: IMF, January 2015. 

http://www.imf.org/external/pubs/ft/weo/2015/update/01/pdf/0115.pdf.

International Center for Trade and Sustainable Development, “US Congress considers AGOA 

renewal as September deadline approaches,” February 24, 2015. 

http://www.ictsd.org/bridges-news/bridges-africa/news/us-congress-considers-agoarenewal-as-september-deadline-approaches.

Irish Government News Service. “Coveney Secures Access for Irish Beef in US—Ireland First EU 

Member State to Obtain US Approval,” January 5, 2015. 

http://merrionstreet.ie/en/NewsRoom/Releases/COVENEY_SECURES_ACCESS_FOR_IRISH_BEEF_IN_US_%E2%80%93_IRE

LAND_FIRST_EU_MEMBER_STATE_TO_OBTAIN_US_APPROVAL.html. 

Irwin, Neil. “What the Dollar's Rise Tells Us about the Global Economy.” The Upshot (blog). New 

York Times, October 8, 2014. http://www.nytimes.com/2014/10/09/upshot/what-thedollars-rise-tells-us-about-the-global-economy.html?_r=0&abt=0002&abg=1.

Knowler, Greg. “Changing Air Cargo Landscape Threatens Recovery, Industry Group Hears.”

Journal of Commerce, October 7, 2014. http://www.joc.com/air-cargo/changing-aircargo-landscapte-threatens-recovery-industry-group-hears_20141007.html.

Korea Times. “Seoul May Go for Both US Trade Pact, China's Regional Bank,” March 12, 2015. 

http://koreatimes.co.kr/www/news/nation/2015/03/113_175091.html.

———. “Trade Deal Conundrum,” April 29, 2014. 

http://koreatimes.co.kr/www/news/opinon/2014/04/137_156356.html.

Korean Embassy of the United States. “Remarks by President Obama at Business Roundtable,”

April 26, 2014. http://koreatimes.co.kr/www/news/nation/2015/03/113_175091.html.

Library of Congress. “Restrictions on Genetically Modified Organisms: China.”

http://www.loc.gov/law/help/restrictions-on-gmos/china.php#_ftn51 (accessed on 

January 23, 2015).

London Court of International Arbitration. “The United States of America and Canada––

AWARD.” (LCIA) No. 81010, April 2, 2014. http://www.international.gc.ca/controlscontroles/assets/pdfs/softwood/lc-05.pdf.

———. “The United States of America and Canada––DETERMINATION,” March 21, 2014. 

http://www.international.gc.ca/controls-controles/assets/pdfs/softwood/lc-04.pdf.
Bibliography

216| www.usitc.gov

NAFTA Secretariat. “Overview of the Dispute Settlement Provisions.” https://www.nafta-secalena.org/Default.aspx?tabid=93&language=en-US (accessed March 13, 2015).

———. “Status Report of Dispute Settlement Proceedings.” NAFTA—Chapter 19 Active Cases, 

https://www.nafta-sec-alena.org/Home/Dispute-Settlement/Status-Report-of-PanelProceedings (accessed March 13, 2015).

National Grain and Feed Association (NGFA). “NGFA Estimates Up to $2.9 Billion Loss to U.S. 

Corn, Soy in Aftermath of Trade disruption with China over Detection of Unapproved 

Syngenta Agrisure Viptera MIR 162 Corn,” April 2014. 

http://www.ngfa.org/2014/04/21/ngfa-estimates-up-to-2-9-billion-loss-to-u-s-corn-soyin-aftermath-of-trade-disruption-with-china-over-detection-of-unapproved-syngentaagrisure-viptera-mir-162-corn-2/.

Newman, Jesse. “China's Hard Line on Biotech Burns U.S. Hay.” Wall Street Journal, December 

15, 2014. http://www.wsj.com/articles/u-s-hay-exports-to-china-shrivel-up1418598477.

Newman, Jesse. “U.S. Corn Prices Fall to Five-Year Low on Higher-than-Expected Supplies.” The 

Wall Street Journal, September 30, 2014. http://www.wsj.com/articles/u-s-cornstockpiles-rise-after-sharp-increase-in-output-1412093706.

North American Development Bank (NADB). BECC-COCEF Quarterly Status Report, December 

31, 2014. http://www.nadb.org/pdfs/FreqUpdates/JointStatusReport.pdf.

———. “Summary of Project Implementation Activities,” December 31, 2014. 

http://www.nadb.org/pdfs/FreqUpdates/ProjectMatrix.pdf.

OECD, “Global Value Chains,” n.d., http://www.oecd.org/sti/ind/global-value-chains.htm

(accessed March 6, 2015).

———. “Reviews of Market Openness: Chile, Estonia, Israel and Slovenia.” 

http://www.oecd.org/tad/tradedev/reviewsofmarketopennesschileestoniaisraelandslov

enia.htm (accessed July 2, 2015).

Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD). Council. “Meeting of the 

Council at Ministerial Level, 6–7 May 2014––2014 Ministerial Council Statement 

(Adopted at the Council Meeting at Ministerial Level on 7 May 2014).”

C/MIN(2014)15/FINAL, May 7, 2014. 

http://www.mofa.go.jp/mofaj/files/000038053.pdf.

———. “Meeting of the Council at Ministerial Level, 6–7 May 2014––Chair’s Summary.”

C/MIN(2014)16, May 7, 2014. http://www.mofa.go.jp/mofaj/files/000038051.pdf.
Year in Trade

U.S. International Trade Commission | 217

Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD). Trade and Agriculture 

Directorate (TAD). Trade Committee (TC). “Summary Record: 163rd Session of the Trade 

Committee––Confidential––12 February 2014.” TAD/TC/M(2014)1, May 13, 2014. 

https://www.oecd.int/olis/vgn-exttemplating/quickaccess/download/DOC/PDF/2/TAD/TC/M(2014)1?id=618931.

———. “Summary Record: 164th Session of the Trade Committee––Plenary Session, 27–28 

May 2014.” TAD/TC/M(2014)2, September 15, 2014. https://www.oecd.int/olis/vgn-exttemplating/quickaccess/download/DOC/PDF/2/TAD/TC/M(2014)2/ANN?id=621018.

———. “Summary Record: 164th Session of the Trade Committee––Confidential Session, 27–

28 May 2014.” TAD/TC/M(2014)2/ANN, September 15, 2014. 

https://www.oecd.int/olis/vgn-exttemplating/quickaccess/download/DOC/PDF/2/TAD/TC/M(2014)2/ANN?id=621018.

———. “Summary Record: 165th Session of the Trade Committee––G20 Session––5 November 

2014.” TAD/TC/M(2014)4/ADD, December 18, 2014. https://www.oecd.int/olis/vgn-exttemplating/quickaccess/download/DOC/PDF/2/TAD/TC/M(2014)3/ADD?id=623754.

———. “Summary Record: 165th Session of the Trade Committee––Plenary Session––6 

November 2014.” TAD/TC/M(2014)3, December 18, 2014. 

https://www.oecd.int/olis/vgn-exttemplating/quickaccess/download/DOC/PDF/2/TAD/TC/M(2014)3?id=623752.

Perimeter Security and Economic Competitiveness (Canada). “Canada-United States Regulatory 

Cooperation Council News.” Electronic newsletter, May 2014. 

http://www.actionplan.gc.ca/sites/eap/files/media/legacy_files/pdfs/rcc_news_may_20

14_eng.pdf (accessed March 10, 2015).

RCC. See Canada-United States Regulatory Cooperation Council.

Reuters. “Japan Post: IPO to Include Separate Listings of Bank, Insurance Units,” December 26, 

2014. http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/12/26/us-japan-post-ipoidUSKBN0K40AN20141226.

Robert E. Scott. “Currency Manipulation and the 896,600 U.S. Jobs Lost Due to the U.S.-Japan 

Trade Deficit.” Economic Policy Institute, February 4, 2015. 

http://www.epi.org/publication/currency-manipulation-and-the-896600-u-s-jobs-lostdue-to-the-u-s-japan-trade-deficit/.

Smith, Nathan. “New Year Begins with New TPP Talks, Obama 'Optimistic.'“ NBR, December 16, 

2014. http://www.nbr.co.nz/article/new-year-begins-new-tpp-talks-obama-optimisticns-166778.

Société Nationale des Parcs Industriels (Sonapi). Parc Industriel de Caracol. “2014 Year End 

Report,” n.d. (accessed March 5, 2015).
Bibliography

218| www.usitc.gov

Sutton, Kara. “TTIP Negotiations: A Summary of Rounds 4 and 5.” Bertelsmann Foundation, 

June 12, 2014. http://www.bfna.org/publication/bbrief-ttip-negotiations-a-summary-ofrounds-4-and-5.

Taverniers, Isabel, Nina Papazova, Yves Bertheau, Marc de Loose, and Arne Holst-Jensen. “Gene 

Stacking in Transgenic plants: Towards Compliance between Definitions, Terminology, 

and Detection within the EU Regulatory Framework.” Environmental Biosafety Research

7 (2008). 

http://www.academia.edu/2714688/Gene_stacking_in_transgenic_plants_towards_co

mpliance_between_definitions_terminology_and_detection_within_the_EU_regulatory

_framework. 

Telecommunications Regulatory Authority of India (TRAI). “Converged Licensing Regime: 

Telecom Licensing Framework,” 2012. http://www.itu.int/ITUD/asp/CMS/Events/2012/ITP2012/Jaipal_Singh_Tomar_TelecomLicensingFramework.pd

f.

U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA). “United States and Brazil Reach Agreement to End WTO 

Cotton Dispute.” News release no. 0219.14, October 1, 2014. 

http://www.usda.gov/wps/portal/usda/usdamediafb?contentid=2014/10/0219.xml&pri

ntable=true. 

———. “U.S. and Canada Harmonize Names of Meat Cuts to Facilitate Trade.” News release no. 

046-14, February 24, 2014. 

http://www.ams.usda.gov/AMSv1.0/ams.fetchTemplateData.do?template=TemplateU&

page=Newsroom&resultType=Details&dDocName=STELPRDC5106533&dID=195917&de

scription=U.S.+and+Canada+Harmonize+Names+of+Meat+Cuts+to+Facilitate+Trade&to

pNav=Newsroom&leftNav=&rightNav1.

U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA). Agricultural Marketing Service (AMS). “National Organic 

Program: International Trade Policies; Korea,” October 3, 2014. 

http://www.ams.usda.gov/AMSv1.0/NOPTradeKorea.

———. “U.S. and Canada Harmonize Names of Meat Cuts to Facilitate Trade.” News release 

No.: 046-14, February 24, 2014. 

http://www.ams.usda.gov/AMSv1.0/ams.fetchTemplateData.do?template=TemplateU&

navID=&page=Newsroom&resultType=Details&dDocName=STELPRDC5109723&dID=20

6019&wf=false&description=U.S.+and+Canada+Release+Revised+Institutional+Meat+Pu

rchase+Specifications+to+Facilitate+Trade+&topNav=Newsroom&leftNav=&rightNav1=

&rightNav2 (accessed March 10, 2015).

U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA). Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS). 

“APHIS Finalizes Bovine Import Regulations.” News release, November 1, 2013. 

http://www.aphis.usda.gov/newsroom/2013/11/bse_final_rule.shtml.
Year in Trade

U.S. International Trade Commission | 219

———. Report of LibertyLink Rice Incidents.

http://www.aphis.usda.gov/newsroom/content/2007/10/content/printable/RiceReport

10-2007.pdf.

U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA). Economic Research Service (ERS). “Top 15 U.S. 

Agricultural Export Destinations, by calendar year, $U.S. value,” March 20, 2015. 

http://www.ers.usda.gov/data-products/foreign-agricultural-trade-of-the-united-states-

(fatus)/calendar-year.aspx. 

U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA). Foreign Agricultural Service (FAS). Japan: Grain and 

Feed Update—January 2015, by Keiko Fujibayashi. GAIN Report No. JA5001, January 29, 

2015. 

http://gain.fas.usda.gov/Recent%20GAIN%20Publications/Grain%20and%20Feed%20Up

date_Tokyo_Japan_1-29-2015.pdf.

———. Taiwan: New GE Regulatory Oversight and Changes to GE Labeling Proposal, by Chiou 

Mey Perng. GAIN Report No. TW15006, February 9, 2015.

———. “Taiwan.” http://www.fas.usda.gov/regions/taiwan (accessed on April 1, 2015).

———. Taiwan: Agricultural Biotechnology Annual; Food Safety and Sanitation Act Tightens 

Regulatory Requirements on GE Products, by Chiou Mey Perng. GAIN Report No. 

TW14028, July 15, 2014. 

http://gain.fas.usda.gov/Recent%20GAIN%20Publications/Agricultural%20Biotechnolog

y%20Annual_Taipei_Taiwan_7-15-2014.pdf.

———. Taiwan: Grain and Feed Annual; Corn, Wheat, Rice Situation and Outlook, by Chiou Mey 

Perng and Shane Dicks. GAIN Report no. TW9031, June 4, 2009. 

http://gain.fas.usda.gov/Recent%20GAIN%20Publications/Commodity%20Report_GRAI

N%20AND%20FEED%20ANNUAL_Taipei_Taiwan_5-18-2009.pdf.

———. Taiwan Lifts Longstanding Ban on U.S. Long Grain Rice and Schedules Tender, by Chiou 

Mey Perng. GAIN Report no. TW14045, December 1, 2014. 

http://gain.fas.usda.gov/Recent%20GAIN%20Publications/Taiwan%20Lifts%20Longstan

ding%20Ban%20on%20U.S.%20Long%20Grain%20Rice%20and%20Schedules%20_Taipei

_Taiwan_12-1-2014.pdf.

U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA). Food Safety and Inspection Service (FSIS). “Export 

Requirements for the People’s Republic of China,” February 17, 2015. 

http://www.fsis.usda.gov/wps/portal/fsis/topics/international-affairs/exportingproducts/export-library-requirements-by-country/peoples-republic-of-china (accessed 

on January 22, 2015).

———. Ireland Beef Equivalence Reinstatement Audit, June 30–July 7, 2014, December 2014. 

http://www.fsis.usda.gov/wps/wcm/connect/89df6f49-0416-4c77-b558-

a2377876c146/Ireland_2014_FAR.pdf?MOD=AJPERES. 
Bibliography

220| www.usitc.gov

U.S. Department of Commerce (USDOC). “22nd U.S.-China Joint Commission on Commerce and 

Trade Signing Ceremony.” Fact sheet, November 21, 2011. 

http://www.commerce.gov/news/fact-sheets/2011/11/21/22nd-us-china-jointcommission-commerce-and-trade-signing-ceremony-fact-.

———. “25th U.S.-China Joint Commission on Commerce and Trade.” Fact sheet, December 19, 

2014.

———. “U.S.-Mexico High Level Economic Dialogue.” Fact sheet, January 6, 2015. 

http://www.commerce.gov/news/fact-sheets/2015/01/06/fact-sheetus%E2%80%93mexico-high-level-economic-dialogue.

———. “Joint Statement: United States-Mexico High Level Economic Dialogue.” Press release, 

January 6, 2015. http://www.commerce.gov/news/press-releases/2015/01/06/jointstatement-united-states-mexico-high-level-economic-dialogue.

———. “Progress Report on the U.S.-Mexico High Level Economic Dialogue.”

http://trade.gov/hled/hled-progress-report-06262014.asp (accessed March 18, 2015).

———. “Secretary Pritzker Co-Chairs U.S.-Mexico High Level Economic Dialogue and Outlines 

Future Engagement.” 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 (accessed March 18, 2015).

———. “U.S. International Transactions: Fourth Quarter and Year 2014.” Press release, BEA 15-

11, March 19, 2015. 

http://www.bea.gov/newsreleases/international/transactions/2015/trans414.htm.

U.S. Department of Commerce (USDOC). Bureau of Economic Analysis (BEA). “A Guide to the 

U.S. International Transactions Accounts,” by Christopher L. Bach. BEA briefing, February 

10, 2010. http://www.bea.gov/scb/pdf/2010/02%20February/0210_guide.pdf. 

———. Foreign Direct Investment in the United States. Database. 

http://bea.gov/international/di1fdiop.htm (accessed on February 22, 2015).

———. “Gross Domestic Product: Fourth Quarter and Annual 2014 (Second Estimate).” Press 

release, BEA 15-07, February 27, 2015. 

http://www.bea.gov/newsreleases/national/gdp/gdpnewsrelease.htm.

———. “Gross Domestic Product, Percent Change from Previous Period,”

http://www.bea.gov/national/index.htm#gdp (accessed March 19, 2015).

———. “Table 3.1: U.S. International Transactions Accounts Data,” March 19, 2015. 

http://bea.gov/iTable/iTable.cfm?ReqID=62&step=1#reqid=62&step=6&isuri=1&6210=1

&6200=51. 
Year in Trade

U.S. International Trade Commission | 221

———. “International Surveys: U.S. Direct Investment Abroad.”

http://bea.gov/surveys/diasurv.htm (accessed on February 22, 2015).

U.S. Department of Commerce (USDOC). Economic Development Administration (EDA). Fiscal 

Year 2014 Annual Report to Congress: Trade Adjustment Assistance. 

http://www.eda.gov/pdf/annual-reports/taaf/FY14-TAAF-Annual-Report-toCongress.pdf (accessed March 9, 2015).

U.S. Department of Commerce (USDOC). International Trade Administration (ITA). “AGOA: 

General Country Eligibility Provisions,” n.d. http://trade.gov/agoa/eligibility/ (accessed 

March 10, 2015).

———. “AGOA Preferences: Country Eligibility, Apparel Eligibility, and Textile Eligibility 

(Category 0 and Category 9).” Excel table, December 30, 2014. 

http://web.ita.doc.gov/tacgi/eamain.nsf/d511529a12d016de852573930057380b/8a3ce

c919226ed0f852573940048b050?OpenDocument.

———. “Agreement Suspending the Antidumping Duty Investigation on Sugar from Mexico,”

December 19, 2014. http://enforcement.trade.gov/agreements/sugar-mexico/ADAgreement.pdf (accessed March 21, 2015). 

———. “Agreement Suspending the Countervailing Duty Investigation on Sugar from Mexico,”

December 19, 2014. http://enforcement.trade.gov/agreements/sugar-mexico/CVDAgreement.pdf.

———. “Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Suspension Agreements on Sugar from Mexico.”

Fact sheet, October 27, 2014. 

http://enforcement.trade.gov/download/factsheets/factsheet-mexico-sugarsuspension-agreement-102914.pdf (accessed March 21, 2015).

———. “Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Suspension Agreements on Sugar from Mexico.”

Fact sheet, December 19, 2014.

http://enforcement.trade.gov/download/factsheets/factsheet-mexico-sugarsuspension-agreement-ad-cvd-121914.pdf. 

———. “Commerce Initiates Antidumping Duty and Countervailing Duty Investigations of 

Import of Sugar from Mexico.” Fact sheet, April 18, 2014. 

http://enforcement.trade.gov/download/factsheets/factsheet-mexico-sugar-cvdinitiation-041814.pdf.

———. “Commerce Preliminarily Finds Countervailable Subsidization of Imports of Sugar from 

Mexico.” Fact sheet, August 26, 2014. 

http://enforcement.trade.gov/download/factsheets/factsheet-mexico-sugar-ad-prelim082614.pdf.
Bibliography

222| www.usitc.gov

———. “Commerce Preliminarily Finds Dumping of Imports of Sugar from Mexico.” Fact sheet, 

October 27, 2014. http://enforcement.trade.gov/download/factsheets/factsheetmexico-sugar-ad-prelim-102714.pdf.

———. Trade and Development Act of 2000, n.d. http://www.otexa.ita.doc.gov/AGOACBTPA/Trade_and_Development_Act_of_2000.pdf (accessed March 11, 2015).

———. “United States and Mexico Finalize Deal on Sugar Import Investigations.” Press release, 

December 19, 2014. http://trade.gov/press/press-releases/2014/us-and-mexicofinalize-deal-on-sugar-import-investigations-121914.asp.

———. “United States and Mexico Reach Deal on Sugar Import Investigations.” Press release, 

October 27, 2014. http://op.bna.com/itr.nsf/id/esin-9qav5c/$File/Sugar.pdf.

———. “U.S.-Canada Regulatory Cooperation Council––United States and Canada Release RCC 

Joint Forward Plan,” n.d. http://www.trade.gov/rcc/ (accessed March 10, 2015).

———. “U.S.-Canada Regulatory Cooperation Council.” Website, n.d. (accessed March 10, 

2015). http://www.trade.gov/rcc/.

U.S. Department of Commerce (USDOC). Office of Textiles and Apparel (OTEXA). “U.S. Imports 

under Trade Preference Programs.” http://otexa.ita.doc.gov/agoa-cbtpa/catv0.htm

(accessed February 11, 2015).

U.S. Department of Labor (USDOL). Update: The Colombian Labor Action Plan: Three Years 

Later, April 7, 2014. http://www.dol.gov/ilab/media/pdf/Colombia_Labor_Action_Planupdate-April2014.pdf.

U.S. Department of Labor (USDOL). Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS). “Labor Force Statistics from 

the Current Population Survey,” n.d. http://data.bls.gov/timeseries/LNS14000000

(accessed March 5, 2015). 

U.S. Department of Labor (USDOL). Employment and Training Administration (ETA). 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 9, 

2015).

———. “TAA Program Benefits and Services under Reversion 2014,” n.d. 

http://www.doleta.gov/tradeact/2014_amend_att1.cfm (accessed March 9, 2015).

———. “Training and Employment Guidance Letter No. 16-14,” December 23, 2014. 

http://wdr.doleta.gov/directives/corr_doc.cfm?DOCN=4135.

———. “TAA Program Extended through Fiscal Year 2015,” n.d. 

http://www.doleta.gov/tradeact/ (accessed March 9, 2015).
Year in Trade

U.S. International Trade Commission | 223

———. “Petition Filing Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ),” n.d. 

http://www.doleta.gov/tradeact/FAQ.cfm (accessed March 9, 2015).

U.S. Department of Labor (USDOL). Bureau of International Labor Affairs (ILAB). “Free Trade 

Agreement Administration,” n.d. http://www.dol.gov/ilab/trade/agreements/ (accessed 

April 6, 2014).

———. “Guatemala Submission under CAFTA-DR,” n.d. 

http://www.dol.gov/ilab/trade/agreements/guatemalasub.htm (accessed on April 6, 

2015).

———. “Honduras Submission under CAFTA-DR,” n.d. 

http://www.dol.gov/ilab/trade/agreements/hondurassub.htm (accessed April 6, 2014).

———. “Submissions under the Labor Provisions of Free Trade Agreements.”

http://www.dol.gov/ilab/trade/agreements/fta-subs.htm (accessed March 12, 2015). 

U.S. Department of Labor (USDOL). Bureau of International Labor Affairs (ILAB). Office of Trade 

and Labor Affairs (OTLA). “Division of Monitoring and Enforcement of Trade Agreements 

(META).” http://www.dol.gov/ilab/about/offices/ (accessed March 12, 2015).

U.S. Department of Labor (USDOL). Bureau of International Labor Affairs (ILAB). Office of Trade 

and Labor Affairs (OTLA). Free Trade Agreements Administration. “Ministerial 

Consultations Joint Declaration between the Department of Labor of the United States 

of America and the Secretariat of Labor and Social Welfare of the United Mexican States 

Concerning Mexican NAO Public Communications MEX 2003-1, MEX 2005-1, and MEX 

2011-1 under the North American Agreement on Labor Cooperation.”

http://www.dol.gov/opa/media/press/ilab/ILAB20140543-US-Mex-Declaration.pdf

(accessed March 12, 2015).

———. “U.S. Response to Mexico’s Request for Migrant Worker Outreach.”

http://www.dol.gov/ilab/trade/preference-programs/US-Mexico.htm (accessed March 

12, 2015).

U.S. Department of Homeland Security (USDHS). U.S. Customs and Border Protection 

(Customs). “Making AGOA Claims during the GSP Lapse,” November 18, 2014. 

http://apps.cbp.gov/csms/viewmssg.asp?Recid=20382&page=&srch_argv=14-

000601&srchtype=all&btype=&sortby=&sby.

———. “U.S., Mexico Sign Mutual Recognition Arrangement.” Press release, October 17, 2014. 

http://www.cbp.gov/newsroom/national-media-release/2014-10-17-000000/usmexico-sign-mutual-recognition-arrangement.

U.S. Department of State (USDOS). 2014 Investment Climate Statement: India, June 2014. 

http://www.state.gov/e/eb/rls/othr/ics/2014/228298.htm.
Bibliography

224| www.usitc.gov

———. “CAFTA-DR Investor-State Arbitrations,” n.d. http://www.state.gov/s/l/c33165.htm.

———. “Encouraging Active Participation in the Trade in Services Agreement (TiSA) 

Negotiations (State 091920),” July 28, 2014.

———. “Joint Communiqué of United States-Morocco Environmental Meetings,” October 28, 

2014. http://www.state.gov/e/oes/rls/fs/2013/234720.htm.

———. “NAFTA Investor-State Arbitrations: Cases Filed against the Government of Canada.”

http://www.state.gov/s/l/c3740.htm (accessed March 13, 2015).

———. “NAFTA Investor-State Arbitrations: Cases Filed against United Mexican States.”

http://www.state.gov/s/l/c3742.htm (accessed March 13, 2015).

———. “NAFTA Investor-State Arbitrations: Cases Filed against the United States of America.”

http://www.state.gov/s/l/c3741.htm (accessed March 13, 2015).

———. “Overview of U.S. Export Control System.”

http://www.state.gov/strategictrade/overview/ (accessed on March 12, 2015).

———. “Trade in Services Agreement (TiSA) Negotiations Make Slow Progress in Eighth Round 

(State 123984),” October 20, 2014.

———. “Trade in Services Agreement (TiSA) Negotiations Proceed While Substantive Issues Are 

Discussed in Ninth Round (State 000546),” January 5, 2015.

———. “Trade, Investment, and Industrial Policies in India: Effects on the U.S. Economy,”

December 2014. 

http://www.usitc.gov/publications/industry_econ_analysis_332/2014/trade_investmen

t_and_industrial_policies_india.htm.

———. “U.S.-Morocco 2014-2017 Plan of Action for Environmental Cooperation,” October 28, 

2014. http://www.state.gov/e/oes/eqt/trade/morocco/239560.htm?goMobile=0.

———. “WTO Environmental Goods Agreement Negotiations Progressing (State 004282),”

January 14, 2015.

U.S. Department of State (USDOS). Bureau of Western Hemisphere Affairs (BWHA). “U.S.

Relations with Canada.” Fact sheet, September 10, 2014. 

http://www.state.gov/r/pa/ei/bgn/2089.htm.

U.S. Department of State (USD0S). Embassy of the United States, Ottawa. “24 February 2014: 

U.S., Canada Harmonize Names of Meat Cuts to Facilitate Trade.” Press release, 

February 24, 2014.
Year in Trade

U.S. International Trade Commission | 225

U.S. Department of Transportation (USDOT). Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration 

(FMCSA). “Unites States-Mexico Cross-Border Long-Haul Trucking Pilot Program Report 

to Congress,” January 2015. http://www.fmcsa.dot.gov//mission/policy/united-statesmexico-cross-border-long-haul-trucking-pilot-program-report-congress.

U.S. Department of Treasury. “Sixth Meeting of the U.S.-China Strategic and Economic Dialogue 

U.S. Fact Sheet – Economic Track.” Press release, July 11, 2014. 

http://www.treasury.gov/press-center/press-releases/Pages/jl2563.aspx.

———. “Updated: U.S.-China Joint Factsheet Sixth Meeting of the Strategic and Economic 

Dialogue.” Press release, July 11, 2014.

———. “U.S. Fact Sheet—Economic Track Fifth Meeting,” July 12, 2013.

———. “U.S. Fact Sheet: Fourth Cabinet-level Meeting of the U.S.-China Strategic Economic 

Dialogue,” June 18, 2008. 

http://www.treasury.gov/initiatives/Documents/sedusfactsheet.pdf.

U.S. Department of the Treasury. Internal Revenue Service (IRS). Background and History of the 

HTIC, n.d. http://www.irs.gov/Individuals/HCTC:-Latest-News-and-Background (accessed 

March 9, 2015).

U.S. Department of the Treasury. Office of International Affairs. “Report to Congress on 

International Economic and Exchange Rate Policies,” October 15, 2014. 

http://www.treasury.gov/resource-center/international/exchange-ratepolicies/Documents/2014-10-15%20FXR.pdf.

U.S. Energy Information Administration, “U.S. Gas Plant Production of Propane and Propylene,”

n.d. http://www.eia.gov/dnav/pet/hist/LeafHandler.ashx?n=PET&s=MPRFPUS2&f=M

(accessed March 17,2015).

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. 

http://www.otexa.ita.doc.gov/PDFs/GAO2012ReportHaiti_Earned_Import_Allowance.p

df.

U.S. Grains Council. “South Korea: A Price Driven Market Ready to Rebound.” News release, 

March 21, 2013. http://www.grains.org/news/20130321/south-korea-price-drivenmarket-ready-rebound.

U.S. International Trade Commission (USITC). AGOA: Trade and Investment Performance 

Overview. USITC Publication 4461. Washington, DC: USITC, 2014. 

http://www.usitc.gov/publications/332/pub4461.pdf.
Bibliography

226| www.usitc.gov

———. Andean Trade Preference Act: Impact on U.S. Industries and Consumers and on Drug 

Crop Eradication and Crop Substitution, 2013. USITC Publication 4486. Washington, DC: 

USITC, September 2012. http://www.usitc.gov/publications/332/pub4486.pdf.

———. Caribbean Basin Economic Recovery Act, 21st Report 2011–12. USITC Publication 4428. 

Washington, DC: USITC, September 2013.

———. China's Agricultural Trade: Competitive Conditions and Effects on U.S. Exports. USITC 

Publication 4219. Washington, DC: USITC, 2011.

———. 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.

———. Digital Trade in the U.S. and Global Economies, Part 1. USITC Publication 4415. 

Washington, DC: USITC, July 2013. http://www.usitc.gov/publications/332/pub4415.pdf.

———. Digital Trade in the U.S. and Global Economies, Part 2. USITC Publication 4485. 

Washington, DC: USITC, August 2014. 

http://www.usitc.gov/publications/332/pub4485.pdf.

———. Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (HTS) 2015, Annotated for Statistical 

Reporting Purposes, 2015. USITC Publication 4513. Washington, DC: USITC, 2015. 

http://www.usitc.gov/2015_htsa_basic_edition.htm.

———. Interactive Tariff and Trade DataWeb (Dataweb)/U.S. Department of Commerce 

(USDOC). http://dataweb.usitc.gov (accessed various dates).

———. “Investigation Nos. 704-TA-1 and 734-TA-1, Sugar from Mexico.” Federal Register

notice, January 9, 2015. 

http://www.usitc.gov/secretary/fed_reg_notices/701_731/704_1_notice01212015sgl.p

df.

———. Rice: Global Competitiveness of the U.S. Industry. USITC Publication 4530. Washington, 

DC: USITC, April 2015. http://www.usitc.gov/publications/332/pub4530.pdf.

———. “Sub-Saharan African Trade and Investment under AGOA Will Be Focus of Four New 

USITC Investigations.” Press release, November 13, 2013.

———. Sugar from Mexico: Investigation Nos. 701-TA-513 and 731-TA-1249 (Preliminary).

USITC Publication 4467. Washington, DC: USITC, May 2014.

———. 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.
Year in Trade

U.S. International Trade Commission | 227

———. The Year in Trade 2008: Operation of the Trade Agreements Program; 60th Report. 

USITC Publication 4091. Washington, DC: USITC, July 2009.

———. The Year in Trade 2010: Operation of the Trade Agreements Program; 62nd Report.

USITC Publication 4247. Washington, DC: USITC, July 2011.

———. The Year in Trade 2012: Operation of the Trade Agreements Program; 64th Report.

USITC Publication 4416. Washington, DC: USITC, July 2013.

———. The Year in Trade 2013: Operation of the Trade Agreements Program, 65th Report. 

USITC Publication 4481. Washington, DC: USITC, July 2014.

———. Trade, Investment, and Industrial Policies in India: Effects on the U.S. Economy. USITC 

Publication 4501. Washington, DC: USITC, December 2014. 

http://www.usitc.gov/publications/industry_econ_analysis_332/2014/trade_investmen

t_and_industrial_policies_india.htm.

U.S. Trade Representative (USTR). 2011 Report on Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures.

Washington, DC: USTR, March 2011.

———. 2013 National Trade Estimate Report on Foreign Trade Barriers. Washington, DC: USTR, 

March 2013.

———. 2013 Report to Congress on China’s WTO Compliance. Washington, DC: USTR, 

December, 2013.

———. 2014 National Trade Estimate Report on Foreign Trade Barriers. Washington, DC: USTR, 

March 2014.

———. 2014 Out-of-Cycle Review of Notorious Markets. Washington, DC: USTR, March 5, 2015. 

https://s3.amazonaws.com/s3.documentcloud.org/documents/1682846/2014-

notorious-markets-list-published-0.pdf.

———. 2014 Report to Congress on China’s WTO Compliance. Washington, DC: USTR, 

December, 2014.

———. 2014 Special 301 Report. Washington, DC: USTR, April, 2014. 

https://ustr.gov/sites/default/files/USTR%202014%20Special%20301%20Report%20to%

20Congress%20FINAL.pdf.

———. 2014 Trade Policy Agenda and 2013 Annual Report. Washington, DC: USTR: March 

2014.

———. 2015 National Trade Estimate Report on Foreign Trade Barriers. Washington, DC: USTR: 

March, 2015.
Bibliography

228| www.usitc.gov

———. 2015 Trade Policy Agenda and 2014 Annual Report. March 2015. 

https://ustr.gov/about-us/policy-offices/press-office/reports-andpublications/2015/2015-Trade-Policy-Agenda-and-2014-Annual-Report.

———. “Acting Deputy USTR Wendy Cutler to Host U.S.-Japan Bilateral Meeting on the TransPacific Partnership.” Press release, March 24, 2014. https://ustr.gov/about-us/policyoffices/press-office/press-releases/2014/March/Acting-Deputy-USTR-Cutler-to-host-USJapan-bilateral-meetings-on-TPP.

———. “Ambassador Froman Meets with Japan's Minister of State and Economic and Fiscal 

Policy Akira Amari.” Press release, February 15, 2014. https://ustr.gov/about-us/policyoffices/press-office/press-releases/2014/February/USTR-Froman-meets-Japan-Ministerof-State-for-Econ-Akira-Amari.

———. “Ambassador Froman Travels to Guatemala to Continue Push for Enforcement of 

Worker Rights.” Press release, August 1, 2014. https://ustr.gov/about-us/policyoffices/press-office/press-releases/2014/August/Ambassador-Froman-TravelsGuatemala-Continue-Push-for-Enforcement-Worker-Rights.

———. “Bilateral and Regional Negotiations and Agreements––Canada.” 2014 Trade Policy 

Agenda and 2013 Annual Report of the President of the United States on the Trade 

Agreements Program. Washington, DC: USTR: March 3, 2014.

———. “Canada.” 2014 National Trade Estimate Report on Foreign Trade Barriers. Washington, 

DC: USTR: March 31, 2014.

———. “China Fails a Second Time in Its Challenge to U.S. Countervailing Duty Law.” Press 

release, July 7, 2014. https://ustr.gov/about-us/policy-offices/press-office/pressreleases/2014/July/China-Fails-Second-Time-in-its-Challenge-to-US-Countervailing-DutyLaw.

———. “Deputy U.S. Trade Representative Demetrios Marantis Welcomes Hard Work, 

Productive Outcomes in Revived U.S.-Taiwan Talks,” March 10, 2013.

———. “East African Community,” n.d. https://ustr.gov/countries-regions/africa/regionaleconomic-communities-rec/east-african-community (accessed April 8, 2015).

———. “Free Trade Agreements.” https://ustr.gov/trade-agreements/free-trade-agreements

(accessed April 8, 2015).

———. Fiscal Year 2016 Budget. Washington, DC: USTR, February 2015.

———. “In the Matter of Guatemala—Issues Relating to the Obligations under Article 16.2.1(a) 

of the CAFTA-DR,” n.d. http://www.ustr.gov/issue-areas/labor/bilateral-and-regionaltrade-agreements/guatemala-submission-under-cafta-dr (accessed on April 6, 2014).
Year in Trade

U.S. International Trade Commission | 229

———. “India and United States Joint Statement on the Trade Policy Forum.” Press release, 

November 25, 2014. https://ustr.gov/ustr.max.gov/about-us/policy-offices/pressoffice/press-releases/2014/November/India-and-US-Joint-Statement-On-the-tradepolicy-forum.

———. “Joint Communiqué of the U.S.-Panama Environmental Affairs Council and 

Environmental Cooperation Commission,” January 29, 2014. 

https://ustr.gov/sites/default/files/Joint-Communique-English-toPanama%2001292014.pdf.

———. “Joint Statement at the TPP Ministers' Meeting in Singapore.” Press release, May 20, 

2014. https://ustr.gov/about-us/policy-offices/press-office/pressreleases/2014/May/Joint-Statement-at-the-TPP-Ministers-Meeting-in-Singapore.

———. “Joint Statement from the First Meeting of the United States-Panama Free Trade 

Commission of the United States-Panama Trade Promotion Agreement.” Press release, 

May 29, 2014. https://ustr.gov/about-us/policy-offices/press-office/pressreleases/2014/May/Joint-Statement-from-1st-Meeting-of-US-Panama-Free-TradeCommission-US-Panama-TPA (accessed April 7, 2015).

———. “Joint Statement from the Seventh Meeting of the U.S.-Pakistan TIFA Council.” Press 

release, May 14, 2014. https://ustr.gov/about-us/policy-offices/press-office/pressreleases/2014/May/Joint-Statement-from-Seventh-Meeting-US%E2%80%93PakistanTIFA-Council.

———. “Joint Statement from the United States—Central Asia Trade and Investment 

Framework Agreement (TIFA) Council Meeting.” Press release, June 19, 2014. 

https://ustr.gov/about-us/policy-offices/press-office/press-releases/2014/May/JointStatement-US%E2%80%93Central-Asia-Trade-Investment-Framework-AgreementCouncil-Mtg#.

———. “Joint Statement Labor Subcommittee of the United States-Jordan Free Trade 

Agreement,” June 26, 2014. http://www.ustr.gov/sites/default/files/06262014-jointsatement-of-the-labor-Subcommittee-US-Jordan-FTA.pdf.

———. “Joint Statement of the Labor Affairs Council of the United States-Panama Trade 

Promotion Agreement,” January 28, 2014. 

https://ustr.gov/sites/default/files/Panama%20LAC%20joint%20statement%20FINAL%2

0TEXT.pdf.

———. “Joint Statement of the Labor Affairs Council Peru-United States Trade Promotion 

Agreement (TPA).” Press release, October 17, 2014. https://ustr.gov/about-us/policyoffices/press-office/press-releases/2014/October/Joint-Statement-Labor-AffairsCouncil-Peru-US-Trade-Promotion-Agreement.
Bibliography

230| www.usitc.gov

———. “Joint Statement of the Labor Subcommittee of the United States-Morocco Free Trade 

Agreement.” Press release, September 26, 2014. https://ustr.gov/about-us/policyoffices/press-office/press-releases/2014/September/Joint-Statement-LaborSubcommittee-US-Morocco-Free-Trade-Agreement.

———. “Joint Statement of the Ministers and Heads of Delegation for the Trans-Pacific 

Partnership Countries.” Press release, October 27, 2014. https://ustr.gov/aboutus/policy-offices/press-office/press-releases/2014/October/Joint-Statement-of-theMinisters-and-Heads-of-Delegation-for-the-TPP-Countries.

———. “Joint Statement of the U.S.-Tunisia Council on Trade and Investment.” Press release, 

June 15, 2014. https://ustr.gov/about-us/policy-offices/press-office/pressreleases/2014/June/Joint-Statement-of-the-US-Tunisia-Council-on-Trade-andInvestment.

———. “Mali Now Eligible for Trade Benefits.” Press release, December 2013. 

https://ustr.gov/about-us/policy-offices/press-office/pressreleases/2013/December/Mali-Eligible-for-Trade-Benefits-Under-AGOA.

———. “Opening Remarks by U.S. and EU Chief Negotiators for T-TIP Round Seven Press 

Conference,” October 3, 2014. https://ustr.gov/trade-agreements/free-tradeagreements/transatlantic-trade-and-investment-partnership-t-tip/readou-0.

———. “Press Week Ahead: January 13–17.” Press release, January 13, 2015. 

https://ustr.gov/about-us/policy-offices/press-office/pressreleases/2014/January/press-office-week-ahead-January13-17. 

———. “Readouts from T-TIP Negotiating Rounds.” https://ustr.gov/trade-agreements/freetrade-agreements/transatlantic-trade-and-investment-partnership/readouts (accessed 

May 7, 2015).

———. “Readout of Ambassador Froman’s Call with EU Commissioner for Trade Cecilia 

Malmström,” November 3, 2014. https://ustr.gov/about-us/policy-offices/pressoffice/press-releases/2014/November/Readout-Amb-Froman-Call-with-EUCommissioner-for-Trade-Cecilia-Malmstr%C3%B6m.

———. “Readout of Meeting between Acting Deputy USTR Wendy Cutler and Ambassador 

Hiroshi Oe on TPP.” Press release, March 12, 2014. https://ustr.gov/about-us/policyoffices/press-office/press-releases/2014/March/Meeting-readout-Acting-Deputy-USTRCutler-Ambassador-Oe-on-TPP.

———. “Readout of Meeting between United States and Japanese Trade Negotiators Regarding 

TPP and Agriculture.” Press release, August, 2014. https://ustr.gov/about-us/policyoffices/press-office/press-releases/2014/August/Readout-Meeting-Btwn-US-JapaneseTrade-Negotiators-Regarding-TPP-Agriculture.
Year in Trade

U.S. International Trade Commission | 231

———. “Round Five: Arlington, Virginia.” n.d. https://ustr.gov/trade-agreements/free-tradeagreements/transatlantic-trade-and-investment-partnership/readouts/round5

(accessed April 15, 2015).

———.”Round Four: Brussels, Belgium.” n.d. https://ustr.gov/trade-agreements/free-tradeagreements/transatlantic-trade-and-investment-partnership/readouts/round4

(accessed May 7, 2015).

———. “Statement by Ambassador Froman on U.S.-India WTO Trade Facilitation Agreement.”

Press release, November 27, 2014. https://ustr.gov/about-us/policy-offices/pressoffice/press-releases/2014/November/Statement-by-Ambassador-Froman-on-US-IndiaWTO-Trade-Facilitation-Agreement.

———. “Statement by the Office of the U.S. Trade Representative on the Out-of-Cycle Review 

of India,” December 12, 2014. https://ustr.gov/about-us/policy-offices/pressoffice/press-releases/2014/December/Statement-by-the-Office-of-the-USTR-on-Out-ofCycle-Review-of-India.

———. “Statement by U.S. Trade Representative Michael Froman Following Meetings with EU 

Commissioner Karel de Gucht,” February 2014. https://ustr.gov/about-us/policyoffices/press-office/press-releases/2014/February/Statement-by-USTR-FromanFollowing-Meetings-with-EU-Commissioner-de-Gucht.

———. “Statement by U.S. Trade Representative Michael Froman on Korea’s Announcement 

Regarding the Trans-Pacific Partnership.” Press release, November 29, 2013. 

https://ustr.gov/about-us/policy-offices/press-office/pressreleases/2013/November/Froman-statement-TPP-Korea.

———. “Statement of the Ministers and Heads of Delegations for the Trans-Pacific Partnership 

Countries.” Press release, February 25, 2014. https://ustr.gov/about-us/policyoffices/press-office/press-releases/2014/February/Statement-of-Ministers-and-Headsof-Delegation-for-TPP-countries.

———. “Statement on Meeting of the U.S.-Korea Free Trade Agreement (KORUS), Joint 

Committee.” Press release, December 15, 2014. https://ustr.gov/about-us/policyoffices/press-office/press-releases/2014/December/Statement-on-meeting-US-KoreaFTA-Joint-Committee.

———. “Statement on the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership.” Press release, 

November 16, 2014. https://ustr.gov/about-us/policy-offices/press-office/pressreleases/2014/November/Statement-on-the-Transatlantic-Trade-and-InvestmentPartnership.
Bibliography

232| www.usitc.gov

———. “The United States and the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan Hold a Labor Subcommittee 

Meeting Under the U.S.-Jordan Free Trade Agreement.” Press release, July 2, 2014. 

https://ustr.gov/about-us/policy-offices/press-office/press-releases/2014/July/USJordan-hold-Labor-Subcommittee-Meeting-Under-US-Jordan-FTA.

———. “The United States and the Economic Community of West African States Sign Trade and 

Investment Framework Agreement.” Press release, 2015. https://ustr.gov/aboutus/policy-offices/press-office/press-releases/2014/August/US-ECOWAS-Sign-Trade-andInvestment-Framework-Agreement.

———. “TPP Meetings in Vietnam.” Press release, May 14, 2014. https://ustr.gov/aboutus/policy-offices/press-office/press-releases/2014/May/TPP-meetings-in-Vietnam.

———. “TPP Negotiations Make Important Progress on Agreement.” Press release, September 

10, 2014. https://ustr.gov/about-us/policy-offices/press-office/pressreleases/2014/September/TPP-Negotiators-Make-Important-Progress-on-Agreement.

———. “Trade and Investment Framework Agreements.” https://ustr.gov/tradeagreements/trade-investment-framework-agreements (accessed March 5, 2015).

———. “Transcript: Chief Negotiators Dan Mullaney and Ignacio Garcia Bercero Hold a Press 

Conference Following the Fourth Round of Transatlantic Trade and Investment 

Partnership (TTIP) Negotiations,” March 14, 2014. https://ustr.gov/about-us/policyoffices/press-office/press-releases/2014/March/TTIP-Fourth-Round-Press-Conferencetranscript.

———. “Trans-Pacific Partners and United States Launch FTA Negotiations.” Press release, 

September 2008. https://ustr.gov/trans-pacific-partners-and-united-states-launch-ftanegotiations.

———. “Trans-Pacific Partnership Leaders' Statement.” Press release, November 10, 2014. 

https://ustr.gov/about-us/policy-offices/press-office/pressreleases/2014/November/Trans-Pacific-Partnership-leaders-statement.

———. “Trans-Pacific Partnership Trade Ministers' Report to Leaders.” Press release, 

November 10, 2014. https://ustr.gov/about-us/policy-offices/press-office/pressreleases/2014/November/Trans-Pacific-Partnership-Trade-Ministers-Report-to-Leaders.

———. “Transcript from the Closing Press Conference on the Fifth Round of Transatlantic Trade 

and Investment Partnership (TTIP),” May 23, 2014. https://ustr.gov/about-us/policyoffices/press-office/speeches/transcripts/2014/May/Transcript-from-Closing-PressConference-Fifth-Round-TTIP-Negotiations.
Year in Trade

U.S. International Trade Commission | 233

———. “Transcript of Press Gaggle with U.S. Trade Representative Froman and European 

Commissioner for Trade Malmström.” Press release, December 8, 2014. 

https://ustr.gov/about-us/policy-offices/press-office/press-releases/2014/TranscriptPress-Gaggle-USTR-Froman-EU-Commissioner-Malmstrom#.

———. “United States and Angola Hold Second Trade and Investment Framework Agreement 

Meeting.” Press release, April 1, 2014. https://ustr.gov/about-us/policy-offices/pressoffice/press-releases/2014/April/US-and-Angola-Hold-2nd-Trade-and-InvestmentFramework-Agreement-Meeting.

———. “United States and Brazil Reach Agreement to End WTO Cotton Dispute.” Press release, 

October 1, 2014. https://ustr.gov/about-us/policy-offices/press-office/pressreleases/2014/October/United-States-and-Brazil-Reach-Agreement-to-End-WTOCotton-Dispute.

———. “United States and India Hold Seventh Trade Policy Forum.” Press release, September 

21, 2010. https://ustr.gov/about-us/policy-offices/press-office/pressreleases/2010/september/united-states-and-india-hold-seventh-trade-polic.

———. “United States and Iraq Hold Inaugural Trade and Investment Framework Agreement 

Meeting and Register Progress on Bilateral Issues.” Press release, March 5, 2014. 

https://ustr.gov/about-us/policy-offices/press-office/press-releases/2014/March/USand-Iraq-hold-inaugural-Trade-and-Investment-Framework-Agreement-Meeting.

———. “United States and Korea Streamline Organic Trade.” Press release, July 1, 2014. 

https://ustr.gov/about-us/policy-offices/press-office/press-releases/2014/July/UnitedStates-and-Korea-Streamline-Organic-Trade.

———. “United States and Nigeria Hold 8th Trade and Investment Framework Agreement 

Meeting.” Press release, March 11, 2014. https://ustr.gov/about-us/policyoffices/press-office/press-releases/2014/March/US-and-Nigeria-hold-8th-TradeInvestment-Framework-Agreement-meeting.

———. “United States and Panama Hold Inaugural Meeting of the Labor Affairs Council under 

the U.S.-Panama Trade Promotion Agreement.” Press release, January 28, 2014. 

https://ustr.gov/about-us/policy-offices/press-office/press-releases/2014/January/USPanama-Hold-Inaugural-Meeting-of-Labor-Affairs-Council-under-US-Panama-TPA.

———. “United States and Philippines Commit to Intensified Engagement on Trade.” Press 

release, March 20, 2014. https://ustr.gov/about-us/policy-offices/press-office/pressreleases/2014/March/US-and-Philippines-commit-to-intensified-engagement-on-trade.

———. “United States and Taiwan Enhance Trade Ties.” Press release, April 5, 2014. 

https://ustr.gov/about-us/policy-offices/press-office/press-releases/2014/April/UnitedStates-and-Taiwan-Enhance-Trade-Ties.
Bibliography

234| www.usitc.gov

———. “United States and West African Nations Sign Agreement Promoting Trade.” Press 

release, April 24, 2002. 

https://ustr.gov/archive/Document_Library/Press_Releases/2002/April/United_States_

West_African_Nations_Sign_Agreement_Promoting_Trade.html.

———. “United States Challenges Indonesia’s Ongoing Import Restrictions on Horticultural 

Products, Animals, and Animal Products.” Press release, May 8, 2014. 

https://ustr.gov/about-us/policy-offices/press-office/press-releases/2014/May/USChallenges-Indonesia-Ongoing-Import-Restrictions-Horticulture-Animal-Products#.

———. “United States Concludes Review of Model Bilateral Investment Treaty.” Press release, 

April 20, 2012. https://ustr.gov/about-us/policy-offices/press-office/pressreleases/2012/april/united-states-concludes-review-model-bilateral-inves.

———. “United States Prevails in WTO Trade Enforcement Dispute against Argentina's Import 

Licensing Restrictions.” Press release, August 22, 2014. https://ustr.gov/about-us/policyoffices/press-office/press-releases/2014/August/US-Prevails-in-WTO-Dispute-AgainstArgentinas-Import-Licensing-Restrictions.

———. “United States Proceeds with Labor Enforcement Case against Guatemala.” Press 

release, September 18, 2014. https://ustr.gov/about-us/policy-offices/pressoffice/press-releases/2014/September/United-States-Proceeds-with-LaborEnforcement-Case-Against-Guatemala.

———. “United States Requests WTO Panel to Examine Indonesia's Import Restrictions on U.S. 

Agriculture.” Press release, March 18, 2015. https://ustr.gov/about-us/policyoffices/press-office/press-releases/2015/march/united-states-requests-wto-panel.

———. “United States Welcomes WTO's Rejection of China's Challenge to U.S. Countervailing 

Duty Law, Regrets Findings on Challenge to Specific Proceedings.” Press release, March 

27, 2014. http://www.ustr.gov/about-us/press-office/press-releases/2014/March/USWelcomes-WTO-Rejection-of-China-Challenge-to-US-Countervailing-Duty-Law.

———. “United States Wins Victory in Rare Earths Dispute with China: WTO Report Finds 

China’s Export Restraints Breach WTO Rules.” Press release, March 26, 2014. 

https://ustr.gov/about-us/policy-offices/press-office/press-releases/2014/March/USwins-victory-in-rare-earths-dispute-with-China.

———. “U.S. Announces Compliance in World Trade Organization “Dolphin-Safe” Labeling 

Dispute.” Press release, July 12th, 2013. https://ustr.gov/about-us/policy-offices/pressoffice/press-releases/2013/july/US-complies-tuna-dolphin#.

———. “U.S.-China Joint Fact Sheet on the 25th U.S.-China Joint Commission on Commerce 

and Trade.” Fact sheet, December 2014. https://ustr.gov/about-us/policy-offices/pressoffice/fact-sheets/2014/december/us-china-joint-fact-sheet-25th-us.
Year in Trade

U.S. International Trade Commission | 235

———. “U.S.-India Agreement on Trade Facilitation.” Fact sheet, November 13, 2014. 

https://ustr.gov/about-us/policy-offices/press-office/fact-sheets/2014/November/USIndia-Agreement-on-Trade-Facilitation.

———. “ U.S.-Japan Bilateral Negotiations on Motor Vehicle Trade and Non-Tariff Measures,”

n.d. https://ustr.gov/trade-agreements/free-trade-agreements/trans-pacificpartnership/tpp-chapter-chapter-negotiating-16 (accessed March 19, 2015).

———. “U.S.-Korea Free Trade Agreement Shows Strong Results on Second Anniversary.” Press 

release, March 12, 2014. https://ustr.gov/about-us/policy-offices/press-office/pressreleases/2014/March/US-Korea-Free-Trade-Agreement-Shows-Strong-Results-onSecond-Anniversary.

———. “U.S. Trade Representative Michael Froman Announces U.S. Victory in Challenge to 

China's Rare Earth Export Restraints,” August 7, 2014. http://www.ustr.gov/aboutus/press-office/press-releases/2014/August/USTR-Froman-US-Victory-in-Challenge-toChina-Rare-Earth-Export-Restraints.

———. “USTR Begins Special 301 Report Out-of-Cycle Review of India,” October 14, 2014. 

https://ustr.gov/about-us/policy-offices/press-office/pressreleases/2014/October/USTR-Begins-Special-301-Report-Out-of-Cycle-Review-of-India.

———. “USTR Participates in Inaugural Environment Meetings with Panama.” Press release, 

February 2014. https://ustr.gov/about-us/policy-offices/pressoffice/blog/2014/February/USTR-participates-in-inaugural-environment-meetings-withPanama-government.

———. “WTO Appellate Body Affirms U.S. Victory in Trade Enforcement Dispute against 

Argentina's Import Licensing Restrictions.” Press release, January 15, 2015. 

https://ustr.gov/about-us/policy-offices/press-office/press-releases/2015/january/wtoappellate-body-affirms-us.

———. “WTO Panel Issues a Mixed Result in China's Challenge to U.S. Countervailing Duties.”

Press release, July 14, 2014. https://ustr.gov/about-us/policy-offices/press-office/pressreleases/2014/JulyWTO-Panel-Issues-Mixed-Result-in-Chinas-Challenge-to-USCountervailing-Duties.

———. “WTO Rejects the Majority of India's Challenges to U.S. Countervailing Duties Taken to 

Address India's Unfair Steel Subsidies.” Press release, July 14, 2014. 

https://ustr.gov/about-us/policy-offices/press-office/press-releases/2014/July/WTORejects-Indias-Challenges-to-US-CVDuties-Address-India-Unfair-Steel-Subsidies.

Washington Trade Daily. “An ITA Breakthrough,” November 12, 2014.

———. “China and the ITA,” March 18, 2014.
Bibliography

236| www.usitc.gov

———. “Intensive ITA Consultations with China,” November 5, 2014.

———. “ITA––Close but No 'Cigar',” December 15, 2014.

———. “Still Gaps in TPP.” Vol. 23, No. 40, February 26, 2014.

———. “Success in Geneva,” November 28, 2014.

———. “Today's GC Meeting,” November 27, 2014.

———. “TPP Starts Off Fast in Singapore.” February 24, 2014.

———. “One More Day on ITA,” December 12, 2014.

Wearden, Graeme. “ECB Cuts Interest Rates and Announces New Stimulus Scheme—As It 

Happened.” Guardian, September 4, 2014. 

http://www.theguardian.com/business/live/2014/sep/04/ecb-decision-mario-draghigerman-factory-orders-live.

White House. “Establishing a Comprehensive Approach to Expanding Sub-Saharan Africa's 

Capacity for Trade and Investment.” Presidential memorandum, August 4, 2014. 

https://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2014/08/04/presidential-memorandumestablishing-comprehensive-approach-expanding-su.

———. “Joint Statement by North American Leaders—21st Century North America: Building 

the Most Competitive and Dynamic Region in the World.” Press release, February 19, 

2014. https://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2014/02/19/joint-statementnorth-american-leaders-21st-century-north-america-buildi.

———. “Presidential Proclamation—To Take Certain Actions under the African Growth and 

Opportunity Act and for Other Purposes,” December 23, 2014. 

http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2014/12/23/presidential-proclamationtake-certain-actions-under-african-growth-and-.

———. “Statement on the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership,” November 16, 

2014. http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2014/11/16/statementtransatlantic-trade-and-investment-partnership.

———. “Supporting Economic Growth at Home and Abroad by Eliminating Trade Barriers on 

Information Technology Products.” Fact sheet, November 10, 2014.

———. “Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (T-TIP).” Fact sheet, June 17, 2013. 

https://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2013/06/17/fact-sheet-transatlantictrade-and-investment-partnership-t-tip.
Year in Trade

U.S. International Trade Commission | 237

———. “U.S.-China Economic Relations.” Fact sheet, November 12, 2014. 

http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2014/11/12/fact-sheet-us-chinaeconomic-relations (accessed January 23, 2015).

———. “U.S.-India Joint Statement,” September 27, 2013. https://www.whitehouse.gov/thepress-office/2013/09/27/us-india-joint-statement.

———. “U.S.-India Joint Statement,” September 30, 2014. https://www.whitehouse.gov/thepress-office/2014/09/30/us-india-joint-statement.

———. “U.S.-India Joint Statement—'Shared Effort; Progress for All.” January 25, 2015. 

https://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2015/01/25/us-india-joint-statementshared-effort-progress-all.

———. “U.S.-Mexico High-Level Economic Dialogue.” Fact sheet, September 20, 2013. 

http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2013/09/20/fact-sheet-us-mexico-highlevel-economic-dialogue.

———. “U.S.-Mexico Partnership.” Fact sheet, May 2, 2013. http://www.whitehouse.gov/thepress-office/2013/05/02/fact-sheet-us-mexico-partnership.

———. “United States-Canada Regulatory Cooperation Council, Joint Action Plan,” December 

2011. https://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/uscanada_rcc_joint_action_plan3.pdf.

———. “United States-Canada Regulatory Cooperation Council––Joint Forward Plan,” August 

2014. https://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/omb/oira/irc/us-canada-rccjoint-forward-plan.pdf.

World Trade Organization (WTO). “9th WTO Ministerial Conference, Bali, 2013 and After––Bali 

Package and November 2014 decisions,” n.d. (accessed March 30, 2015).

———. “Chronological List of Dispute Cases,” n.d. 

https://www.wto.org/english/tratop_e/dispu_e/dispu_status_e.htm (accessed March 

12, 2015).

———. “Dispute Settlement,” n.d. 

https://www.wto.org/english/tratop_e/dispu_e/dispu_e.htm (accessed March 3, 2015). 

———. “Dispute Settlement: DS267; United States—Subsidies on Upland Cotton.” Online 

summary prepared by the WTO Secretariat, n.d. 

https://www.wto.org/english/tratop_e/dispu_e/cases_e/ds267_e.htm (accessed March 

23, 2015).
Bibliography

238| www.usitc.gov

———. “Dispute Settlement: DS316; European Communities—Measures Affecting Trade in 

Large Civil Aircraft.” Online summary prepared by the WTO Secretariat, n.d. 

https://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. 

https://www.wto.org/english/tratop_e/dispu_e/cases_e/ds353_e.htm (accessed March 

23, 2015). 

———. “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. https://www.wto.org/english/tratop_e/dispu_e/cases_e/ds381_e.htm

(accessed March 8, 2015).

———. “Dispute Settlement: DS384; United States—Certain Country of Origin Labelling (COOL) 

Requirements.” Online summary prepared by the WTO Secretariat, n.d. 

https://www.wto.org/english/tratop_e/dispu_e/cases_e/ds384_e.htm (accessed March 

8, 2015).

———. “Dispute Settlement: DS386: United States—Certain Country of Origin Labelling 

Requirements.” Online summary prepared by the WTO Secretariat, n.d. 

https://www.wto.org/english/tratop_e/dispu_e/cases_e/ds386_e.htm (accessed March 

8, 2015).

———. “Dispute Settlement: DS414; China—Countervailing and Anti-Dumping Duties on Grain 

Oriented Flat-rolled Electrical Steel from the United States.” Online summary prepared 

by the WTO Secretariat, n.d. 

https://www.wto.org/english/tratop_e/dispu_e/cases_e/ds414_e.htm (accessed March 

8, 2015).

———. “Dispute Settlement: DS429; United States—Anti-Dumping Measures on Certain Frozen 

Warmwater Shrimp from Viet Nam.” Online summary prepared by the WTO Secretariat, 

n.d. https://www.wto.org/english/tratop_e/dispu_e/cases_e/ds429_e.htm (accessed 

March 19, 2015).

———. “Dispute Settlement: DS430; India—Measures Concerning the Importation of Certain 

Agricultural Products from the United States.” Online summary prepared by the WTO 

Secretariat, n.d. https://www.wto.org/english/tratop_e/dispu_e/cases_e/ds430_e.htm

(accessed March 19, 2015).

———. “Dispute Settlement: DS431; China—Measures Related to the Exportation of Rare 

Earths, Tungsten and Molybdenum.” Online summary prepared by the WTO Secretariat, 

n.d. https://www.wto.org/english/tratop_e/dispu_e/cases_e/ds431_e.htm (accessed 

January 22, 2015).
Year in Trade

U.S. International Trade Commission | 239

———. “Dispute Settlement: DS436; United States—Countervailing Measures on Certain HotRolled Carbon Steel Flat Products from India.” Online summary prepared by the WTO 

Secretariat, n.d. https://www.wto.org/english/tratop_e/dispu_e/cases_e/ds436_e.htm

(accessed March 8, 2015).

———. “Dispute Settlement: DS437; United States—Countervailing Duty Measures on Certain 

Products from China.” Online summary prepared by the WTO Secretariat, n.d. 

https://www.wto.org/english/tratop_e/dispu_e/cases_e/ds437_e.htm (accessed March 

8, 2015).

———. “Dispute Settlement: DS444; Argentina—Measures Affecting the Importation of 

Goods.” Online summary prepared by the WTO Secretariat, n.d. 

https://www.wto.org/english/tratop_e/dispu_e/cases_e/ds444_e.htm (accessed March 

17, 2015).

———. “Dispute Settlement: DS449: United States—Countervailing and Anti-dumping 

Measures on Certain Products from China.” Online summary prepared by the WTO 

Secretariat, n.d. https://www.wto.org/english/tratop_e/dispu_e/cases_e/ds449_e.htm

(accessed January 22, 2015).

———. “Dispute Settlement: DS456; India—Certain Measures Relating to Solar Cells and Solar 

Modules.” Online summary prepared by the WTO Secretariat, n.d.

https://www.wto.org/english/tratop_e/dispu_e/cases_e/ds456_e.htm (accessed March 

16, 2015).

———. “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.

https://www.wto.org/english/tratop_e/dispu_e/cases_e/ds464_e.htm (accessed March 

16, 2015).

———. “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.

https://www.wto.org/english/tratop_e/dispu_e/cases_e/ds471_e.htm (accessed March 

16, 2015).

———. “Dispute Settlement: DS478; Indonesia—Importation of Horticultural Products, Animals 

and Animal Products.” Online summary prepared by the WTO Secretariat, n.d.

https://www.wto.org/english/tratop_e/dispu_e/cases_e/ds478_e.htm (accessed March 

6, 2015).
Bibliography

240| www.usitc.gov

———. “Dispute Settlement: DS487; United States—Conditional Tax Incentives for Large Civil 

Aircraft.” Online summary prepared by the WTO Secretariat, n.d. 

https://www.wto.org/english/tratop_e/dispu_e/cases_e/ds487_e.htm (accessed March 

16, 2015).

———. “Dispute Settlement: DS488; United States—Anti-Dumping Measures on Certain Oil 

Country Tubular Goods from Korea.” Online summary prepared by the WTO Secretariat, 

n.d. https://www.wto.org/english/tratop_e/dispu_e/cases_e/ds488_e.htm (accessed 

March 16, 2015).

———. “Dispute Settlement: Legal Text: Understanding on Rules and Procedures Governing the 

Settlement of Disputes,” n.d. 

https://www.wto.org/english/tratop_e/dispu_e/dsu_e.htm (accessed March 4, 2015).

———. “General Council––Annual Report (2014).” WT/GC/167, January 19, 2015.

———. “General Council: Decision of 28 November 2014––WT/L/941––28 November 2014––

Post-Bali Work––General Council Decision of 27 November 2014,” November 28, 2014.

———. “Marrakesh Agreement Establishing the World Trade Organization.” The Results of the 

Uruguay Round of Multilateral Trade Negotiations: The Legal Texts. Geneva, WTO: 1995. 

https://www.wto.org/english/docs_e/legal_e/04-wto_e.htm.

———. “Memorandum of Understanding Related to the Cotton Dispute” (WT/DS267). 

https://ustr.gov/sites/default/files/20141001201606893.pdf.

———. “Report (2014) of the Committee of Participants on the Expansion of Trade in 

Information Technology Products.” G/L/1088, November 5, 2014.

———. “Report (2014) of the Committee on Government Procurement.” GPA/126, November 

26, 2014.

———. “Trade and Transfer of Technology––Ministerial Decision––WT/MIN(13)/35––

WT/L/910,” n.d. (accessed March 4, 2015).

———. “Trade Facilitation,” n.d. (accessed March 30, 2015).

———. “TRIPS Non-violation and Situation Complaints––Ministerial Decision––

WT/MIN(13)/31––WT/L/906,” n.d. 

http://wto.org/english/thewto_e/minist_e/mc9_e/balideclaration_e.htm (accessed 

February 19, 2015).

———. “Work Programme on Electronic Commerce––Ministerial Decision––WT/MIN(13)/32––

WT/L/907,” n.d.
Year in Trade

U.S. International Trade Commission | 241

———. “Work Programme on Small Economies––Ministerial Decision––WT/MIN(13)/33––

WT/L/908,” n.d.

———. “Azevêdo Launches Intensive Consultations on Taking the Bali Package Forward.” News 

release, September 15, 2014. 

https://www.wto.org/english/news_e/spra_e/spra30_e.htm.

———. “Azevêdo: Members Unable to Bridge the Gap on Trade Facilitation.” News release, 

July 31, 2014.

———. “Montenegro and New Zealand to Join the WTO's Agreement on Government 

Procurement.” News release, October 29, 2014.

World Trade Organization (WTO). General Council. “27 November 2014––Minutes of the 

Meeting Held in the Centre William Rappard on 27 November 2014––1 Public 

Stockholding for Food Security Purposes, Preparatory Committee on Trade Facilitation—

Protocol of Amendment, and Post-Bali Work.” WT/GC/M/154, January 15, 2015.

———. “Decision on Waiver Relating to Special Treatment for Rice of the Philippines––Waiver 

Decision of 24 July 2014.” WT/L/932, July 25, 2014.

———. “Introduction of Harmonized System 2002 Changes into WTO Schedules of Tariff 

Concessions––Waiver Decision of 11 December 2014.” WT/L/945, December 12, 2014.

———. “Introduction of Harmonized System 2007 Changes into WTO Schedules of Tariff 

Concessions––Waiver Decision of 11 December 2014.” WT/L/946, December 12, 2014.

———. “Introduction of Harmonized System 2012 Changes into WTO Schedules of Tariff 

Concessions––Waiver Decision of 11 December 2014.” WT/L/947, December 12, 2014.

World Trade Organization (WTO). Ministerial Conference. Ninth Session. Bali, 3–6 December 

2013. “Agreement on Trade Facilitation––Ministerial Decision of 7 December 2013.”

WT/MIN(13)/36––WT/L/911, December 11, 2013.

World Trade Organization (WTO). Ministerial Conference. Ninth Session. Bali, 3–6 December 

2013. “Public Stockholding for Food Security Purposes––Ministerial Decision of 7 

December 2013.” WT/MIN(13)/38––WT/L/913, December 11, 2013.

World Trade Organization (WTO).General Council. “Agenda Item 2––Report by the Chairman of 

the Trade Negotiations Committee––Wednesday, 10 December 2014.” JOB/GC/71, 

December 11, 2014.

World Trade Organization (WTO).General Council. 10–11 December 2014. “Agenda Item 3––

Implementation of the Bali Outcomes––Statement by the Chairman.” JOB/GC/72, 

December 11, 2014.
Bibliography

242| www.usitc.gov

Yamashita, Kazuhito. “The TPP and Agricultural Revitalization (Final Part): Where To for 

Negotiations?” The Cannon Institute for Global Studies, March 31, 2014. 

http://www.iist.or.jp/en-m/2014/0229-0925/.
Year in Trade

U.S. International Trade Commission | 243

Appendix A

Data Tables

Year in Trade

U.S. International Trade Commission | 245

Table A.1: U.S. merchandise trade with the world, by USITC digest sector, 2012–14

Sector 

grouping Description 2012 2013 2014

% change 

2013–14

Million $

Total exports

1 Agricultural products 154,130 157,655 164,848 4.6

2 Forest products 39,832 40,835 41,280 1.1

3 Chemicals and related products 228,914 231,276 234,687 1.5

4 Energy-related products 143,356 154,575 162,553 5.2

5 Textiles and apparel 22,472 23,324 23,916 2.5

6 Footwear 1,332 1,391 1,449 4.2

7 Minerals and metals 164,013 161,636 153,122 -5.3

8 Machinery 138,530 139,636 145,526 4.2

9 Transportation equipment 313,445 322,112 335,629 4.2

10 Electronic products 257,690 261,223 267,573 2.4

11 Miscellaneous manufactures 41,354 43,813 47,946 9.4

12 Special provisions 40,635 42,116 44,916 6.6

Total 1,545,703 1,579,593 1,623,443 2.8

General imports

1 Agricultural products 123,323 126,678 136,184 7.5

2 Forest products 37,071 39,996 42,092 5.2

3 Chemicals and related products 237,262 236,704 251,615 6.3

4 Energy-related products 428,235 384,153 349,955 -8.9

5 Textiles and apparel 113,866 118,019 121,684 3.1

6 Footwear 23,887 24,810 26,014 4.8

7 Minerals and metals 195,080 190,435 205,082 7.7

8 Machinery 167,784 170,212 184,701 8.5

9 Transportation equipment 363,318 375,445 403,018 7.3

10 Electronic products 415,476 421,672 438,167 3.9

11 Miscellaneous manufactures 104,751 109,931 114,314 4.0

12 Special provisions 66,250 70,265 72,362 3.0

Total 2,276,302 2,268,321 2,345,187 3.4

Source: USITC DataWeb (accessed February 12, 2015); data compiled from the official statistics of the U.S. Department of 

Commerce.

Note: Because of rounding, figures may not add up to totals shown.
Appendix A: Data Tables

246 | www.usitc.gov

Table A.2: Leading U.S. total exports to the world by Schedule B subheading, 2012–14

Schedule B 

subheading Description 2012 2013 2014

% change 

2013–14

Million $

8800.00 Aircraft, spacecraft, and parts thereof 94,346 104,999 112,722 7.4

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.

71,362 77,522 74,313 -4.1

2710.12 Light oils and preparations 31,069 34,495 37,238 8.0

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 20,659 22,807 25,390 11.3

1201.90 Soybeans, whether or not broken, other than seed 24,602 21,562 24,206 12.3

8703.24 Passenger motor vehicles with spark-ignition internal combustion reciprocating piston engine, cyclinder capacity 

over 3,000 cc

21,039 22,769 22,392 -1.7

7108.12 Gold, nonmonetary, unwrought n.e.s.o.i. (other than powder) 33,804 32,710 21,196 -35.2

7102.39 Diamonds, nonindustrial, worked, including polished or drilled 16,589 19,099 20,928 9.6

3004.90 Medicaments, in measured doses, etc. (excluding vaccines, etc., coated bandages etc. and pharmaceutical 

goods), n.e.s.o.i

21,313 19,526 20,744 6.2

8542.31 Processors or controllers 16,722 16,916 17,455 3.2

8517.62 Machines for the reception, conversion and transmission or regeneration of voice, images or other data, 

including switching and routing apparatus

15,685 15,855 17,238 8.7

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

14,818 15,281 15,909 4.1

2709.00 Petroleum oils and oils from bituminous minerals, crude 2,634 5,103 12,246 140.0

9018.90 Instruments and appliances for medical, surgical or veterinary sciences, n.e.s.o.i., and parts and accessories 

thereof

10,763 11,198 11,680 4.3

8517.12 Telephones for cellular networks or for other wireless networks 7,359 9,692 11,207 15.6

3002.10 Antisera and other blood fractions, and modified immunological products 6,523 8,530 11,077 29.9

1005.90 Corn (maize), other than seed corn 9,424 6,495 10,743 65.4

8708.99 Parts and accessories for motor vehicles, n.e.s.o.i. 11,852 10,797 10,654 -1.3

7113.19 Jewelry and parts thereof, of precious metal other than silver 7,785 9,071 10,153 11.9

8708.29 Parts and accessories of bodies (including cabs) for motor vehicles, n.e.s.o.i. 9,005 9,895 9,433 -4.7

8542.39 Electronic integrated circuits, n.e.s.o.i. 8,743 8,885 9,132 2.8

2701.12 Bituminous coal, whether or not pulverized, but not agglomerated 14,306 10,586 8,223 -22.3

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

7,780 9,023 8,193 -9.2

2711.12 Propane, liquefied 2,726 4,905 7,702 57.0
Year in Trade

U.S. International Trade Commission | 247

Schedule B 

subheading Description 2012 2013 2014

% change 

2013–14

1001.99 Wheat & meslin other than durum or seed wheat 7,988 10,272 7,460 -27.4

Total of items shown 488,894 517,994 537,633 3.8

All other 1,056,809 1,061,599 1,085,810 2.3

Total of all commodities 1,545,703 1,579,593 1,623,443 2.8

Source: USITC DataWeb (accessed February 12, 2015); data compiled from the official statistics of the U.S. Department of Commerce.

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.”
Appendix A: Data Tables

248 | www.usitc.gov

Table A.3: Leading U.S. general imports from the world by HTS subheading, 2012–14

HTS 

subheading Description 2012 2013 2014

% change 

2013–14

Million $

2709.00 Petroleum oils and oils from bituminous minerals, crude 315,820 273,836 246,970 -9.8

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

74,723 82,674 83,878 1.5

8703.24 Passenger motor vehicles with spark-ignition internal combustion reciprocating piston engine, cyclinder capacity 

over 3,000 cc

65,395 61,996 60,189 -2.9

8517.12 Telephones for cellular networks or for other wireless networks 43,660 49,727 53,002 6.6

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.

52,999 52,593 48,834 -7.1

8471.30 Portable automatic data processing machines, weight not more than 10 kg, consisting of at least a central 

processing unit, keyboard & a display

43,151 42,638 41,973 -1.6

3004.90 Medicaments, in measured doses, etc. (excluding vaccines, etc., coated bandages etc. and pharmaceutical 

goods), n.e.s.o.i.

34,316 33,909 39,664 17.0

8517.62 Machines for the reception, conversion and transmission or regeneration of voice, images or other data, 

including switching and routing apparatus

27,307 29,869 33,489 12.1

2710.12 Light oils and preparations 36,669 33,578 27,632 -17.7

7102.39 Diamonds, nonindustrial, worked, including polished or drilled 19,639 22,852 24,051 5.2

8542.31 Processors or controlers 14,933 16,811 17,790 5.8

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.

14,294 15,490 17,182 10.9

8528.72 Reception apparatus for television, incorporating a screen or video display device, color 16,670 14,456 15,501 7.2

8803.30 Parts of airplanes or helicopters, n.e.s.o.i. 11,986 13,107 15,091 15.1

8471.50 Processing units other than those of 8471.41 and 8471.49, n.e.s.o.i. 15,141 15,248 14,607 -4.2

8708.99 Parts and accessories for motor vehicles, n.e.s.o.i. 13,212 12,693 13,520 6.5

7108.12 Gold, nonmonetary, unwrought n.e.s.o.i. (other than powder) 15,874 14,143 12,827 -9.3

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

9,468 10,470 12,646 20.8

8708.29 Parts and accessories of bodies (including cabs) for motor vehicles, n.e.s.o.i. 10,622 11,259 12,202 8.4

9503.00 Toys, including riding toys o/than bicycles, puzzles, reduced scale models 10,915 11,122 12,145 9.2

8411.91 Parts of turbojets or turbopropellers 10,297 11,116 11,993 7.9

8802.40 Airplanes and other aircraft n.e.s.o.i., of an unladen weight exceeding 15,000 kg 5,613 9,232 11,884 28.7

8471.70 Automatic data processing storage units, n.e.s.o.i. 13,141 11,996 11,463 -4.4

2711.21 Natural gas, gaseous 7,512 9,182 10,976 19.5
Year in Trade

U.S. International Trade Commission | 249

HTS 

subheading Description 2012 2013 2014

% change 

2013–14

8443.99 Parts and accessories of printing machinery, n.e.s.o.i. 10,669 10,535 10,074 -4.4

Total of items shown 894,028 870,531 859,583 -1.3

All other 1,382,274 1,397,790 1,485,604 6.3

Total of all commodities 2,276,302 2,268,321 2,345,187 3.4

Source: USITC DataWeb (accessed February 12, 2015); data compiled from the official statistics of the U.S. Department of Commerce.

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.”
Appendix A: Data Tables

250 | www.usitc.gov

Table A.4: U.S. trade with top 15 single-country trading partners, 2014

Rank Country

Total 

exports

General 

imports Total

% of total 

trade

Million $

1 Canada 312,125 346,063 658,188 16.6

2 China 124,024 466,656 590,680 14.9

3 Mexico 240,326 294,157 534,484 13.5

4 Japan 66,964 133,939 200,903 5.1

5 Germany 49,443 123,181 172,624 4.3

6 Korea 44,544 69,606 114,150 2.9

7 United Kingdom 53,865 54,049 107,914 2.7

8 France 31,197 47,015 78,213 2.0

9 Brazil 42,418 30,337 72,755 1.8

10 Taiwan 26,836 40,572 67,407 1.7

11 India 21,628 45,228 66,856 1.7

12 Saudi Arabia 18,679 47,038 65,716 1.7

13 Netherlands 43,669 20,807 64,476 1.6

14 Italy 16,988 42,081 59,069 1.5

15 Belgium 34,824 20,905 55,729 1.4

Top 15 1,127,530 1,781,633 2,909,162 73.3

All others 495,913 563,554 1,059,468 26.7

Total 1,623,443 2,345,187 3,968,630 100.0

Source: USITC DataWeb (accessed February 12, 2015); data compiled from the official statistics of the U.S. Department of 

Commerce.

Note: Because of rounding, figures may not add up to totals shown.
Year in Trade

U.S. International Trade Commission | 251

Table A.5: Top 15 U.S. single-country export markets and import sources, 2014

Type/rank Country Million $ % of total exports

Total exports

1 Canada 312,125 19.2

2 Mexico 240,326 14.8

3 China 124,024 7.6

4 Japan 66,964 4.1

5 United Kingdom 53,865 3.3

6 Germany 49,443 3.0

7 Korea 44,544 2.7

8 Netherlands 43,669 2.7

9 Brazil 42,418 2.6

10 Hong Kong 40,877 2.5

11 Belgium 34,824 2.1

12 France 31,197 1.9

13 Singapore 30,532 1.9

14 Taiwan 26,836 1.7

15 Australia 26,668 1.6

Top 15 countries 1,168,312 72.0

All others 455,131 28.0

Total 1,623,443 100.0

General Imports

1 China 466,656 19.9

2 Canada 346,063 14.8

3 Mexico 294,157 12.5

4 Japan 133,939 5.7

5 Germany 123,181 5.3

6 Korea 69,606 3.0

7 United Kingdom 54,049 2.3

8 Saudi Arabia 47,038 2.0

9 France 47,015 2.0

10 India 45,228 1.9

11 Italy 42,081 1.8

12 Taiwan 40,572 1.7

13 Ireland 33,982 1.4

14 Switzerland 31,187 1.3

15 Vietnam 30,584 1.3

Top 15 countries 1,805,338 77.0

All others 539,849 23.0

Total 2,345,187 100.0

Source: USITC DataWeb (accessed February 12, 2015); data compiled from the official statistics of the U.S. Department of 

Commerce.

Note: Because of rounding, figures may not add up to totals shown.
Appendix A: Data Tables

252 | www.usitc.gov

Table A.6: U.S. private services exports and imports from the world, by category, 2012–14

Service industry 2012 2013 2014 

% change, 

2013–14

Exports Million $

Travel 161,249 173,131 176,951 2.2

Charges for the use of intellectual property n.i.e. 125,492 129,178 132,653 2.7

Financial services 76,605 84,066 88,418 5.2

Professional and management consulting services 53,539 55,758 59,312 6.4

Passenger fares 39,364 41,642 43,668 4.9

Technical, trade-related, and other business services 38,273 37,637 36,633 -2.7

Research and development services 28,080 30,052 32,582 8.4

Air transporta 22,319 23,880 24,070 0.8

Maintenance and repair services, n.i.e. 15,115 16,295 18,710 14.8

Sea transportb 17,055 17,175 18,107 5.4

Other 53,492 54,074 54,476 0.7

Total 630,583 662,888 685,580 3.4

Imports

Travel 100,317 104,677 111,714 6.7

Insurance services 53,203 50,454 49,315 -2.3

Charges for the use of intellectual property n.i.e. 39,502 39,015 41,940 7.5

Professional and management consulting services 33,269 34,480 38,621 12.0

Sea transportb 33,206 36,256 36,321 0.2

Passenger fares 29,565 32,029 34,890 8.9

Research and development services 28,713 32,142 33,776 5.1

Technical, trade-related, and other business services 25,365 26,088 24,212 -7.2

Computer services 23,221 23,643 24,208 2.4

Financial services 16,975 18,683 19,658 5.2

Other 39,163 39,321 39,842 1.3

Total 422,499 436,791 454,497 4.1

Source: USDOC, BEA, “U.S. International Transactions Accounts Data: Table 3.1,” March 19, 2015.

Note: Data for 2014 are preliminary. a Air transport includes airport and air freight services.

b Sea transport includes sea port and sea freight services.
Year in Trade

U.S. International Trade Commission | 253

Table A.7: Antidumping cases active in 2014, 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-1205 Silica bricks China 11/15/2012 A A A N 1/9/2014

731-TA-1206 Nickel-plated steel Japan 3/27/2013 A A A A 5/21/2014

731-TA-1207 Prestressed steel tie wire China 4/23/2013 A A A A 6/12/2014

731-TA-1208 Prestressed steel tie wire Mexico 4/23/2013 A A A A 6/12/2014

731-TA-1209 Prestressed steel tie wire Thailand 4/23/2013 A N N c 5/5/2014

731-TA-1210 Welded stainless steel pressure pipe Malaysia 5/16/2013 A A A A 7/14/2014

731-TA-1211 Welded stainless steel pressure pipe Thailand 5/16/2013 A A A A 7/14/2014

731-TA-1212 Welded stainless steel pressure pipe Vietnam 5/15/2013 A A A A 7/14/2014

731-TA-1213 Steel threaded rod India 6/27/2013 A A A N 5/1/2014

731-TA-1214 Steel threaded rod Thailand 6/27/2013 A A A N 5/1/2014

731-TA-1215 Oil country tubular goods India 7/2/2013 A A A A 9/2/2014

731-TA-1216 Oil country tubular goods Korea 7/2/2013 A N A A 9/2/2014

731-TA-1217 Oil country tubular goods Philippines 7/2/2013 A A A N 9/2/2014

731-TA-1218 Oil country tubular goods Saudi Arabia 7/2/2013 A A N c 8/19/2014

731-TA-1219 Oil country tubular goods Taiwan 7/2/2013 A N A A 9/2/2014

731-TA-1220 Oil country tubular goods Thailand 7/2/2013 A A A N 9/2/2014

731-TA-1221 Oil country tubular goods Turkey 7/2/2013 A A A A 9/2/2014

731-TA-1222 Oil country tubular goods Ukraine 7/2/2013 A A A A 9/2/2014

731-TA-1223 Oil country tubular goods Vietnam 7/2/2013 A A A A 9/2/2014

731-TA-1224 Ferrosilicon Russia 7/19/2013 A N N c 7/31/2014

731-TA-1225 Ferrosilicon Venezuela 7/19/2013 A A A N 9/8/2014

731-TA-1226 Chlorinated isocyanurates Japan 8/29/2013 A A A N 11/3/2014

731-TA-1227 Steel concrete rebar Mexico 9/4/2013 A A A A 10/28/2014

731-TA-1228 Steel concrete rebar Turkey 9/4/2013 A A N c 9/15/2014

731-TA-1229 Monosodium glutamate China 9/16/2013 A A A A 11/10/2014

731-TA-1230 Monosodium glutamate Indonesia 9/16/2013 A A A A 11/10/2014

731-TA-1231 Grain-oriented electrical steel China 9/18/2013 A A A N 11/4/2014

731-TA-1232 Grain-oriented electrical steel Czech Republic 9/18/2013 A A A N 11/4/2014

731-TA-1233 Grain-oriented electrical steel Germany 9/18/2013 A A A N 9/8/2014

731-TA-1234 Grain-oriented electrical steel Japan 9/18/2013 A A A N 9/8/2014

731-TA-1235 Grain-oriented electrical steel Korea 9/18/2013 A A A N 11/4/2014

731-TA-1236 Grain-oriented electrical steel Poland 9/18/2013 A A A N 9/8/2014
Appendix A: Data Tables

254 | www.usitc.gov

USITC 

investigation 

number Product Country of origin

Date of 

institution

USITC 

prelim

ITAa

prelim

ITA 

final

USITC

final

Date of final 

actionb

731-TA-1237 Grain-oriented electrical steel Russia 9/18/2013 A A A N 11/4/2014

731-TA-1238 Non-oriented electrical steel China 9/30/2013 A A A A 11/18/2014

731-TA-1239 Non-oriented electrical steel Germany 9/30/2013 A A A A 11/18/2014

731-TA-1240 Non-oriented electrical steel Japan 9/30/2013 A A A A 11/18/2014

731-TA-1241 Non-oriented electrical steel Korea 9/30/2013 A A A A 11/18/2014

731-TA-1242 Non-oriented electrical steel Sweden 9/30/2013 A A A A 11/18/2014

731-TA-1243 Non-oriented electrical steel Taiwan 9/30/2013 A A A A 11/18/2014

731-TA-1244 Tetrafluoroethane China 10/22/2013 A A A N 12/3/3014

731-TA-1245 Calcium hypochlorite China 12/18/2013 A A A d d

731-TA-1246 Crystalline silicon photovoltaic products China 12/31/2013 A A A d d

731-TA-1247 Crystalline silicon photovoltaic products Taiwan 12/31/2013 A A A d d

731-TA-1248 Steel wire rod China 1/31/2014 A A A d d

731-TA-1249 Sugar Mexico 3/28/2014 A A e e e

731-TA-1250 53-foot domestic dry containers China 4/23/2014 A A d d d

731-TA-1251 Steel nails India 5/29/2014 N c c c c

731-TA-1252 Steel nails Korea 5/29/2014 A d d d d

731-TA-1253 Steel nails Malaysia 5/29/2014 A A d d d

731-TA-1254 Steel nails Oman 5/29/2014 A A d d d

731-TA-1255 Steel nails Taiwan 5/29/2014 A N d d d

731-TA-1256 Steel nails Turkey 5/29/2014 N c c c c

731-TA-1257 Steel nails Vietnam 5/29/2014 A A d d d

731-TA-1258 Certain passenger vehicle and light truck tires China 6/3/2014 A d d d d

731-TA-1259 Boltless steel shelving units China 8/26/2014 A d d d d

731-TA-1260 Welded line pipe Korea 10/16/2014 A d d d d

731-TA-1261 Welded line pipe Turkey 10/16/2014 A d d d d

731-TA-1262 Melamine China 11/12/2014 d d d d d

731-TA-1263 Melamine Tinidad & Tobago 11/12/2014 d d d d d

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 Not applicable.

d Pending as of December 31, 2014.

e Suspended investigation.
Year in Trade

U.S. International Trade Commission | 255

Table A.8: Antidumping duty orders and suspension agreements in effect as of December 31, 2014

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 Non-oriented electrical steel Dec. 3, 2014

Monosodium glutamate Nov. 26, 2014

Prestressed steel tie wire June 24, 2014

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

Steel threaded rod April 14, 2009

Circular welded austenitic stainless pressure pipe Mar. 17, 2009

Small-diameter graphite electrodes Feb. 26, 2009
Appendix A: Data Tables

256 | www.usitc.gov

Country Commodity

Effective date of original 

action

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

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
Year in Trade

U.S. International Trade Commission | 257

Country Commodity

Effective date of original 

action

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

Brass sheet and strip Mar. 6, 1987

Germany Non-oriented electrical steel Dec. 3, 2014

Lightweight thermal paper Nov. 24, 2008

Sodium nitrite Aug. 27, 2008

Seamless pipe Aug. 3, 1995

Brass sheet and strip Mar. 6, 1987

India Oil country tubular goods Sept. 10, 2014

Commodity matchbooks Dec. 11, 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
Appendix A: Data Tables

258 | www.usitc.gov

Country Commodity

Effective date of original 

action

Indonesia Monosodium glutamate Nov. 26, 2014

Coated paper suitable for high-quality print graphics using sheetfed pressesNov. 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 Non-oriented electrical steel Dec. 3, 2014

Diffusion-annealed, nickel-plated flat-rolled steel products May 29, 2014

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 Non-oriented electrical steel Dec. 3, 2014

Oil country tubular goods Sept. 10, 2014

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

Stainless steel wire rod Sept. 15, 1998

Welded ASTM A-312 stainless steel pipe Dec. 30, 1992
Year in Trade

U.S. International Trade Commission | 259

Country Commodity

Effective date of original 

action

Circular welded non-alloy steel pipe Nov. 2, 1992

Latvia Steel concrete reinforcing bars Sept. 7, 2001

Malaysia Welded stainless steel pressure pipe July 21, 2014

Polyethylene retail carrier bags Aug. 9, 2004

Stainless steel butt-weld pipe fittings Feb. 23, 2001

Mexico Steel concrete rebar Nov. 6, 2014

Prestressed steel tie wire June 24, 2014

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

Sweden Non-oriented electrical steel Dec. 3, 2014

Taiwan Non-oriented electrical steel Dec. 3, 2014

Oil country tubular goods Sept. 10, 2014

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
Appendix A: Data Tables

260 | www.usitc.gov

Country Commodity

Effective date of original 

action

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 Welded stainless steel pressure pipe July 21, 2014

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

Trinidad and 

Tobago

Carbon and certain alloy steel wire rod Oct. 29, 2002

Turkey Oil country tubular goods Sept. 10, 2014

Light-walled rectangular pipe and tube May 30, 2008

Pasta July 24, 1996

Welded carbon steel pipe May 15, 1986

Ukraine 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 Oil country tubular goods Sept. 10, 2014

Welded stainless steel pressure pipe July 21, 2014

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.
Year in Trade

U.S. International Trade Commission | 261

Table A.9: Countervailing duty cases active in 2014, 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-498 Steel threaded rod India 6/27/2013 A A A N 8/18/2014

701-TA-499 Oil country tubular goods India 7/2/2013 A A A A 9/2/2014

701-TA-500 Oil country tubular goods Turkey 7/2/2013 A N A A 9/2/2014

701-TA-501 Chlorinated isocyanurates China 8/29/2013 A A A A 11/3/2014

701-TA-502 Steel concrete rebar Turkey 9/4/2013 A N A A 10/28/2014

701-TA-503 Monosodium glumate China 9/16/2013 A A (

c

) (

d

) 4/7/2014

701-TA-504 Monosodium glumate Indonesia 9/16/2013 A N (

c

) (

d

) 4/7/2014

701-TA-505 Grain-oriented electrical steel China 9/18/2013 A A A N 11/4/2014

701-TA-506 Non-oriented electrical steel China 9/30/2013 A A A A 11/18/2014

701-TA-507 Non-oriented electrical steel Korea 9/30/2013 A N N (

d

) 10/14/2014

701-TA-508 Non-oriented electrical steel Taiwan 9/30/2013 A A A A 11/18/2014

701-TA-509 Tetrafluoroethane China 10/22/2013 A A A N 12/3/2014

701-TA-510 Calcium hypoclorite China 12/18/2013 A A A (

e

) (

e

)

701-TA-511 Crystalline silicon photovoltaic products China 12/31/2013 A A A (

e

) (

e

)

701-TA-512 Steel wire rod China 1/31/2014 A A A (

e

) (

e

)

701-TA-513 Sugar Mexico 3/28/2014 A A (

f

) (

f

) (

f

)

701-TA-514 53-foot domestic dry containers China 4/23/2014 A A (

e

) (

e

) (

e

)

701-TA-515 Steel nails India 5/29/2014 N (

d

) (

d

) (

d

) (

d

)

701-TA-516 Steel nails Korea 5/29/2014 A N (

e

) (

e

) (

e

)

701-TA-517 Steel nails Malaysia 5/29/2014 A N (

e

) (

e

) (

e

)

701-TA-518 Steel nails Oman 5/29/2014 A N (

e

) (

e

) (

e

)

701-TA-519 Steel nails Taiwan 5/29/2014 A N (

e

) (

e

) (

e

)

701-TA-520 Steel nails Turkey 5/29/2014 N (

d

) (

d

) (

d

) (

d

)

701-TA-521 Steel nails Vietnam 5/29/2014 A A (

e

) (

e

) (

e

)

701-TA-522 Certain passenger vehicle and light truck tires China 6/3/2014 A A (

e

) (

e

) (

e

)

701-TA-523 Boltless steel shelving units China 8/26/2014 A (

e

) (

e

) (

e

) (

e

)

701-TA-524 Welded line pipe Korea 10/16/2014 A (

e

) (

e

) (

e

) (

e

)
Appendix A: Data Tables

262 | www.usitc.gov

USITC 

investigation 

number Product Country of origin

Date of 

institution

USITC 

prelim

ITAa

prelim ITA final USITC final

Date of final 

actionb

701-TA-525 Welded line pipe Turkey 10/16/2014 A (

e

) (

e

) (

e

) (

e

)

701-TA-526 Melamine China 11/12/2014 (

e

) (

e

) (

e

) (

e

) (

e

)

701-TA-527 Melamine Tinidad & Tobago 11/12/2014 (

e

) (

e

) (

e

) (

e

) (

e

)

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 Withdrawn by petitioning firm(s).

d Not applicable.

e Pending as of December 31, 2014. f

Suspended investigation.
Year in Trade

U.S. International Trade Commission | 263

Table A.10: Countervailing duty orders in effect as of December 31, 2014

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 Non-oriented electrical steel Dec. 3, 2014

Chlorinated isocyanurates Nov. 13, 2014

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

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 Oil country tubular goods Sept. 10, 2014

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
Appendix A: Data Tables

264 | www.usitc.gov

Country Commodity

Effective date of original 

action

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

Taiwan Non-oriented electrical steel Dec. 3, 2014

Thailand Hot-rolled carbon steel flat products Dec. 3, 2001

Turkey Steel concrete rebar Nov. 6, 2014

Oil country tubular goods Sept. 10, 2014

Pasta July 24, 1996

Welded carbon steel pipe Mar. 7, 1986

Vietnam Steel wire garment hangers Feb. 5, 2013

Polyethylene retail carrier bags May 4, 2010

Source: U.S. International Trade Commission.
Year in Trade

U.S. International Trade Commission | 265

Table A.11: Reviews of existing antidumping and countervailing duty orders completed in 2014, by date 

of completion

USITC investigation 

number Product Country of origin Action

Completion 

datea

731-TA-1114 Steel nails China Continued 1/10/2014

701-TA-405 Hot-rolled steel products India Continued 1/15/2014

701-TA-406 Hot-rolled steel products Indonesia Continued 1/15/2014

701-TA-408 Hot-rolled steel products Thailand Continued 1/15/2014

731-TA-899 Hot-rolled steel products China Continued 1/15/2014

731-TA-906 Hot-rolled steel products Taiwan Continued 1/15/2014

731-TA-907 Hot-rolled steel products Thailand Continued 1/15/2014

731-TA-908 Hot-rolled steel products Ukraine Continued 1/15/2014

731-TA-900 Hot-rolled steel products India Continued 1/15/2014

731-TA-901 Hot-rolled steel products Indonesia Continued 1/15/2014

701-TA-448 Off-the-road tires China Continued 1/15/2014

731-TA-1117 Off-the-road tires China Continued 1/15/2014

701-TA-452 Raw flexible magnets China Continued 1/15/2014

731-TA-1129 Raw flexible magnets China Continued 1/15/2014

731-TA-1130 Raw flexible magnets Taiwan Continued 1/15/2014

731-TA-990 Non-malleable cast iron pipe fittings China Continued 1/29/2014

731-TA-1136 Sodium nitrite China Continued 1/29/2014

731-TA-1137 Sodium nitrite Germany Continued 1/29/2014

731-TA-1123 Steel wire garment hangers China Continued 2/18/2014

701-TA-450 Laminated woven sacks China Continued 3/11/2014

731-TA-1122 Laminated woven sacks China Continued 3/11/2014

731-TA-394 Bearings Japan Revoked 3/26/2014

731-TA-399 Bearings United Kingdom Revoked 3/26/2014

731-TA-749 Persulfates China Continued 3/28/2014

731-TA-1140 Innersprings China Continued 4/3/2014

731-TA-1141 Innersprings South Africa Continued 4/3/2014

731-TA-1142 Innersprings Vietnam Continued 4/3/2014

731-TA-752 Crawfish tail meat China Continued 4/28/2014

731-TA-1148 Frontseating service valves China Revoked 4/28/2014

701-TA-455 Circular welded carbon quality steel line pipe China Continued 5/2/2014

731-TA-1149 Circular welded carbon quality steel line pipe China Continued 5/2/2014

731-TA-1143 Small diameter graphite electrodes China Continued 6/2/2014

731-TA-1146 HEDP China Revoked 6/2/2014

731-TA-1147 HEDP India Revoked 6/2/2014

701-TA-449 Light-walled rectangular pipe and tube China Continued 6/9/2014

731-TA-1118 Light-walled rectangular pipe and tube China Continued 6/9/2014

731-TA-1119 Light-walled rectangular pipe and tube Korea Continued 6/9/2014

731-TA-1120 Light-walled rectangular pipe and tube Mexico Continued 6/9/2014

731-TA-1121 Light-walled rectangular pipe and tube Turkey Continued 6/9/2014

731-TA-991 Silicon metal Russia Continued 6/11/2014

701-TA-417 Carbon steel wire rod Brazil Continued 6/16/2014

731-TA-953 Carbon steel wire rod Brazil Continued 6/16/2014

731-TA-957 Carbon steel wire rod Indonesia Continued 6/16/2014
Appendix A: Data Tables

266 | www.usitc.gov

USITC investigation 

number Product Country of origin Action

Completion 

datea

731-TA-958 Carbon steel wire rod Mexico Continued 6/16/2014

731-TA-959 Carbon steel wire rod Moldova Continued 6/16/2014

731-TA-961 Carbon steel wire rod Trinidad and 

Tobago

Continued 6/16/2014

701-TA-454 Welded stainless steel pressure pipe China Continued 7/7/2014

731-TA-1144 Welded stainless steel pressure pipe China Continued 7/7/2014

701-TA-415 Polyethylene terephthalate (PET) film India Continued 7/11/2014

731-TA-933 Polyethylene terephthalate (PET) film India Continued 7/11/2014

731-TA-934 Polyethylene terephthalate (PET) film Taiwan Continued 7/11/2014

731-TA-1021 Malleable iron pipe fittings China Continued 8/4/2014

731-TA-1145 Threaded rod China Continued 8/4/2014

731-TA-1022 Refined brown aluminum oxide China Continued 10/14/2014

731-TA-1012 Frozen fish fillets Vietnam Continued 11/26/2014

Source: U.S. International Trade Commission. a The completion date shown is the date of the USITC notification of USDOC, except in the case of a revocation where the date 

shown is the date of ITA's Federal Register notice.
Year in Trade

U.S. International Trade Commission | 267

Table A.12: Section 337 investigations and related proceedings completed by the U.S. International Trade Commission during 2014 and those

pending on December 31, 2014

Status of 

investigation Article Country a Commission determination b

Completed

337-TA-501 Certain Encapsulated Integrated Circuit Devices and Products 

Containing Same

Malaysia One related (ancillary) remand proceeding, issued 

limited exclusion order; and one related (ancillary) 

rescission proceeding, exclusion order rescinded.

337-TA-641 Variable Speed Wind Turbines and Components Thereof Japan One related (ancillary) remand proceeding, 

terminated based on a settlement agreement.

337-TA-739 Certain Ground Fault Circuit Interrupters and Products Containing 

Same

China One related (ancillary) bond return proceeding, 

terminated based on return of bond to respondent; 

and one related (ancillary) advisory proceeding, 

terminated based on a settlement agreement; and 

one related (ancillary) bond forfeiture proceeding, 

terminated based on forfeiture of bond to 

complainant.

337-TA-744 Certain Mobile Devices, Associated Software, and Components 

Thereof

No foreign respondents One related (ancillary) remand proceeding, 

terminated based on expiration of the patent; one 

related (ancillary) bond forfeiture proceeding, 

terminated based on a stipulation.

337-TA-750 Certain Mobile Devices and Related Software No foreign respondents One related (ancillary) remand proceeding, 

terminated based on a settlement agreement.

337-TA-796 Certain Electronic Digital Media Devices and Components Thereof Korea One related (ancillary) bond return proceeding, bond 

return denied; and one related (ancillary) bond 

forfeiture proceeding, bond forfeiture denied.

337-TA-800 Certain Wireless Devices with 3G Capabilities and Components 

Thereof

China, Finland Terminated based on withdrawal of the complaint.

337-TA-800 Certain Wireless Devices with 3G Capabilities and Components 

Thereof

China, Finland One related (ancillary) remand proceeding, 

terminated based on withdrawal of the complaint.

337-TA-816 Certain Wiper Blades Korea, China, Taiwan Terminated based on a settlement agreement.

337-TA-823 Certain Kinesiotherapy Devices and Components Thereof Sweden, China,

Netherlands

One related (ancillary) advisory proceeding, advisory 

opinion issued.

337-TA-830 Certain Dimmable Compact Fluorescent Lamps and Products 

Containing Same

China One related (ancillary) enforcement proceeding, 

imposed civil penalties; one related (ancillary) 

modification proceeding, terminated as moot.

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 Issued cease and desist orders.

337-TA-837 Certain Audiovisual Components and Products Containing the Same Japan, Taiwan Terminated based on a finding of no violation.
Appendix A: Data Tables

268 | www.usitc.gov

Status of 

investigation Article Country a Commission determination b

337-TA-847 Certain Electronic Devices, Including Mobile Phones and Tablet 

Computers, and Components Thereof

Taiwan Terminated based on a settlement agreement.

337-TA-849 Certain Rubber Resins and Processes for Manufacturing Same China, Hong Kong, Canada Issued limited exclusion order.

337-TA-850 Electronic Imaging Devices Taiwan, Korea, China Terminated based on a finding of no violation.

337-TA-853 Certain Wireless Consumer Electronics Devices and Components 

Thereof

Taiwan, Switzerland, China, 

Japan, Korea, Canada

Terminated based on a finding of no violation.

337-TA-854 Certain Two-Way Global Satellite Communication Devices, System 

and Components Thereof

United Kingdom One related (ancillary) enforcement proceeding, 

imposed civil penalty.

337-TA-859 Certain Integrated Circuit Chips and Products Containing the Same No foreign respondents Terminated based on a finding of no violation.

337-TA-860 Certain Optoelectronic Devices for Fiber Optic Communications, 

Components Thereof, and Products Containing the Same

Denmark, Germany, France, 

Israel

Issued limited exclusion order and cease and desist 

orders.

337-TA-861 

(consolidated with 

337-TA-867)

Certain Cases for Portable Electronic Devices China, Hong Kong Issued general exclusion order.

337-TA-861 

(consolidated with 

337-TA-867)

Certain Cases for Portable Electronic Devices China, Hong Kong One related (ancillary) advisory proceeding, 

terminated based on withdrawal of the request.

337-TA-862 Certain Electronic Devices, Including Wireless Communication 

Devices, Tablet Computers, Media Players, and Televisions, and 

Components Thereof

Korea Terminated based on a settlement agreement.

337-TA-866 Certain Wireless Communications Equipment and Articles Therein Sweden Terminated based on a settlement agreement.

337-TA-867 

(consolidated with 

337-TA-861)

Certain Cases for Portable Electronic Devices China, Taiwan Issued general exclusion order.

337-TA-867 

(consolidated with 

337-TA-861)

Certain Cases for Portable Electronic Devices China, Taiwan One related (ancillary) advisory proceeding, 

terminated based on withdrawal of the request.

337-TA-868 Certain Wireless Devices with 3G and/or 4G Capabilities and 

Components Thereof

China, Finland, Korea Terminated based on a finding of no violation.

337-TA-871 Certain Wireless Communications Base Stations and Components 

Thereof

Sweden Terminated based on withdrawal of the complaint.

337-TA-872 Compact Fluorescent Reflector Lamps, Products Containing Same and 

Components Thereof

No foreign respondents Terminated based on a finding of no violation.

337-TA-873 Certain Integrated Circuit Devices and Products Containing the Same Taiwan, Korea, Finland Terminated based on withdrawal of the complaint.

337-TA-876 Certain Microelectromechanical Systems (MEMs Devices) and 

Products Containing Same

No foreign respondents Terminated based on a settlement agreement.

337-TA-877 Certain Omega-3 Extracts from Marine or Aquatic Biomass and Norway, Israel, New Zealand, Terminated based on a settlement agreement.
Year in Trade

U.S. International Trade Commission | 269

Status of 

investigation Article Country a Commission determination b

Products Containing the Same Canada

337-TA-879 Certain Sleep-Disordered Breathing Treatment Systems and 

Components Thereof

Taiwan One related (ancillary) advisory proceeding, advisory 

opinion issued; and one related (ancillary) rescission 

proceeding, consent order rescinded.

337-TA-881 Certain Windshield Wiper Devices and Components Thereof Mexico Terminated based on a settlement agreement.

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 Terminated based on a finding of no violation.

337-TA-885 Certain Portable Electronic Communications Devices, Including 

Mobile Phones and Components Thereof

Taiwan Terminated based on a settlement agreement.

337-TA-886 Certain TV Programs, Literary Works for TV Production and Episode 

Guides Pertaining to Same

Canada Terminated based on a finding of no violation.

337-TA-889 Certain Wireless Devices, Including Mobile Phones and Tablets Korea Terminated based on a settlement agreement.

337-TA-890 Certain Sleep-Disordered Breathing Treatment Systems and 

Components Thereof

China Issued limited exclusion order and cease and desist 

orders.

337-TA-892 Certain Point-to Point Network Communication Devices and Products 

Containing Same

Taiwan, Korea, Japan, 

Sweden

Terminated based on withdrawal of the complaint.

337-TA-894 Certain Tires and Products Containing Same China, Thailand Issued limited exclusion order and cease and desist 

orders.

337-TA-896 Certain Thermal Support Devices for Infants, Infant Incubators, Infant 

Warmers, and Components Thereof

Japan Terminated based on a settlement agreement.

337-TA-898 Certain Marine Sonar Imaging Devices, Products Containing the 

Same, and Components Thereof

Hong Kong, United Kingdom Terminated based on a settlement agreement.

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

Terminated based on a settlement agreement.

337-TA-901 Certain Handheld Magnifiers and Products Containing Same China Terminated based on a consent order.

337-TA-902 Certain Windshield Wipers and Components Thereof Belgium Terminated based on a settlement agreement.

337-TA-903 Certain Antivenom Compositions and Products Containing the Same Mexico Terminated based on a settlement agreement.

337-TA-904 Certain Acousto-Magnetic Electronic Article Surveillance Systems, 

Components Thereof, and Products Containing Same

China, Hong Kong, Belgium, 

United Kingdom

Terminated based on a settlement agreement.

337-TA-905 Certain Wireless Devices, Including Mobile Phones and Tablets II Finland, Korea, Japan, 

Sweden, China

Terminated based on a settlement agreement.

337-TA-906 Certain Standard Cell Libraries, Products Containing or Made Using 

the Same, Integrated Circuits Made Using the Same, and Products 

Containing Such Integrated Circuits

Taiwan Terminated based on a settlement agreement.

337-TA-911 Certain Lithium Silicate Materials and Products Containing the Same Germany Terminated based on a settlement agreement.
Appendix A: Data Tables

270 | www.usitc.gov

Status of 

investigation Article Country a Commission determination b

337-TA-912 Certain Earpiece Devices Having Positioning and Retaining Structure 

and Components Thereof

Ireland Terminated based on a settlement agreement.

337-TA-915 Certain Set-Top Boxes, Gateways, Bridges, and Adapters and 

Components Thereof

Taiwan Terminated based on a settlement agreement.

337-TA-917 Certain Silicon Tuners and Products Containing Same, Including 

Television Tuners

Germany, Luxembourg Terminated based on a settlement agreement.

337-TA-919 Certain Archery Products and Related Marketing Materials China Issued limited exclusion order.

337-TA-920 Certain Integrated Circuits and Products Containing the Same Taiwan, China, Japan, 

Malaysia, Mexico

Terminated based on a settlement agreement.

337-TA-927 Certain Noise Cancelling Headphones and Components Thereof Ireland, China Terminated based on a settlement agreement.

Pending

337-TA-055 Certain Novelty Glasses Hong Kong One related (ancillary) rescission proceeding; pending 

before the Commission. 

337-TA-087 Certain Coin-Operated Audio Visual Games and Components Thereof Taiwan, Japan One related (ancillary) rescission proceeding; pending 

before the Commission.

337-TA-105 Certain Coin-Operated Audio Visual Games and Components Thereof 

(viz., Rally-X and Pac Man)

Taiwan, Japan One related (ancillary) rescission proceeding; pending 

before the Commission.

337-TA-112 Certain Cube Puzzles Taiwan, Japan One related (ancillary) rescission proceeding; pending 

before the Commission.

337-TA-287 Certain Strip Lights Taiwan One related (ancillary) rescission proceeding; pending 

before the Commission.

337-TA-295 Certain Novelty Teleidoscopes Hong Kong One related (ancillary) rescission proceeding; pending 

before the Commission.

337-TA-562 Certain Incremental Dental Positioning Adjustment Appliances and

Methods of Producing Same

British Virgin Islands, 

Pakistan

One related (ancillary) remand enforcement 

proceeding, pending before the ALJ.

337-TA-613 Certain 3G Mobile Handsets and Components Thereof Finland One related (ancillary) remand proceeding, pending 

before the ALJ.

337-TA-698 Certain DC-DC Controllers and Products Containing the Same Hong Kong, Taiwan One related (ancillary) remand enforcement 

proceeding, pending before the Commission.

337-TA-883 Certain Opaque Polymers Turkey, Netherlands Pending before the Commission.

337-TA-884 Certain Consumer Electronics with Display and Processing 

Capabilities

China, Japan, Taiwan Pending before the Commission.

337-TA-887 Certain Crawler Cranes and Components Thereof China Pending before the Commission.

337-TA-888 Certain Silicon Microphone Packages and Products Containing Same China Pending before the Commission.

337-TA-893 Certain Flash Memory Chips and Products Containing Same Taiwan, Japan, Hong Kong Pending before the ALJ.

337-TA-895 Certain Multiple Mode Outdoor Grills and Parts Thereof China, Hong Kong Pending before the Commission.
Year in Trade

U.S. International Trade Commission | 271

Status of 

investigation Article Country a Commission determination b

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-899 Certain Vision-Based Driver Assistance System Cameras and 

Components Thereof

No foreign respondents Pending before the ALJ.

337-TA-907 Certain Vision-Based Driver Assistance System Cameras and 

Components Thereof

No foreign respondents Pending before the ALJ.

337-TA-908 Certain Soft-Edged Trampolines and Components Thereof Australia Pending before the Commission.

337-TA-909 Certain Non-Volatile Memory Devices and Products Containing Same United Kingdom, Germany, 

Thailand

Pending before the ALJ.

337-TA-910 Certain Television Sets, Television Receivers, Television Tuners, and 

Components Thereof

Taiwan, Korea, Japan, China Pending before the ALJ.

337-TA-913 Certain Hemostatic Products and Components Thereof Denmark Pending before the ALJ.

337-TA-914 Certain Sulfentrazone, Sulfentrazone Compositions, and Processes for 

Making Sulfentrazone

China Pending before the ALJ.

337-TA-916 Certain Non-Volatile Memory Chips and Products Containing the 

Same

Taiwan, Hong Kong, Japan Pending before the ALJ.

337-TA-918 Certain Toner Cartridges and Components Thereof China, Hong Kong Pending before the ALJ.

337-TA-921 Certain Marine Sonar Imaging Devices, Including Downscan and 

Sidescan Devices, Products Containing the Same, and Components 

Thereof

Taiwan Pending before the ALJ.

337-TA-922 Certain Devices Containing Non-Volatile Memory and Products 

Containing the Same

United Kingdom, Thailand Pending before the ALJ.

337-TA-923 Certain Loom Kits for Creating Linked Articles China Pending before the ALJ.

337-TA-924 Certain Light Reflectors and Components, Packaging, and Related 

Advertising Thereof

Hong Kong, China Pending before the ALJ.

337-TA-925 Certain Communications or Computing Devices, and Components 

Thereof

Taiwan, Korea Pending before the ALJ.

337-TA-926 Certain Marine Sonar Imaging Systems, Products Containing the 

Same, and Components Thereof

Taiwan Pending before the ALJ.

337-TA-928 Certain Windshield Wipers and Components Thereof Belgium Pending before the ALJ.

337-TA-929 Certain Beverage Brewing Capsules, Components Thereof, and 

Products Containing the Same

Hong Kong, China Pending before the ALJ.

337-TA-930 Certain Laser Abraded Denim Garments Canada, Italy, Sweden Pending before the ALJ.

337-TA-931 Certain Formatted Magnetic Data Storage Tapes and Cartridges 

Containing Same

Japan Pending before the ALJ.

337-TA-932 Certain Consumer Electronics and Display Devices with Graphics 

Processing and Graphics Processing Units Therein

Korea Pending before the ALJ.
Appendix A: Data Tables

272 | www.usitc.gov

Status of 

investigation Article Country a Commission determination b

337-TA-933 Certain Stainless Steel Products, Certain Processes for Manufacturing 

or Relating to Same, and Certain Products Containing Same

India, Germany, Taiwan Pending before the ALJ.

337-TA-934 Certain Dental Implants Brazil Pending before the ALJ.

337-TA-935 Certain Personal Transporters, Components Thereof, and Manuals 

Therefor

China Pending before the ALJ.

337-TA-936 Certain Footwear Products China, Canada, Italy, 

Australia, Japan 

Pending before the ALJ.

337-TA-937 Certain Windshield Wipers and Components Thereof Mexico Pending before the ALJ.

337-TA-938 Certain Coaxial Cable Connectors and Components Thereof and 

Products Containing Same

No foreign respondents Pending before the ALJ.

337-TA-939 Certain Three-Dimensional Cinema Systems and Components Thereof Korea Pending before the ALJ.

337-TA-940 Certain Snowmobiles with Engines Having Exhaust TemperatureControlled Engine Technology and Components ThereofCanada Pending before the ALJ.

337-TA-941 Certain Graphics Processing Chips, Systems on a Chip, and Products 

Containing the Same

Taiwan, Hong Kong Pending before the ALJ.

337-TA-942 Certain Wireless Devices, Including Mobile Phones and Tablets III Singapore, Taiwan 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 

the “Republic of Korea (South Korea).” b ALJ stands for “Administrative Law Judge.”
Year in Trade

U.S. International Trade Commission | 273

Table A.13: Outstanding Section 337 exclusion orders as of December 31, 2014

Investigation no. Article Country a

Date patent 

expires b

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 PacMan)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, Malaysia

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-424 Certain Cigarettes and Packaging Thereof No foreign respondents Nonpatent

337-TA-440 Certain 4-Androstenediol China July 13, 2018

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
Appendix A: Data Tables

274 | www.usitc.gov

Investigation no. Article Country a

Date patent 

expires b

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

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, 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
Year in Trade

U.S. International Trade Commission | 275

Investigation no. Article Country a

Date patent 

expires b

Mar. 1, 2019

Mar. 22, 2019

337-TA-563 Certain Portable Power Stations and Packaging Therefor China Feb. 4, 2017

Nonpatent

337-TA-565 Certain Ink Cartridges and Components Thereof Hong Kong, China, Germany, Korea May 18, 2019

May 18, 2019

Apr. 3, 2022

Aug. 17, 2023

Aug. 26, 2023

337-TA-567 Certain Foam Footwear Canada Mar. 28, 2020

Oct. 3, 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

337-TA-603 Certain DVD Players and Recorders and Certain Products Containing Same China, Hong Kong 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 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 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
Appendix A: Data Tables

276 | www.usitc.gov

Investigation no. Article Country a

Date patent 

expires b

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-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 China, Hong Kong 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

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, 

Macau

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
Year in Trade

U.S. International Trade Commission | 277

Investigation no. Article Country a

Date patent 

expires b

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-780 Certain Protective Cases and Components Thereof China, Hong Kong Sept. 29, 2023

May 11, 2024

June 15, 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

337-TA-849 Certain Rubber Resins and Processes for Manufacturing Same China, Hong Kong, Canada Nonpatent

337-TA-860 Certain Optoelectronic Devices for Fiber Optic Communications, Components Thereof, and 

Products Containing the Same

Denmark, Germany, France, Israel June 8, 2015

337-TA-861/867 Certain Cases for Portable Electronic Devices; and Certain Cases for Portable Electronic 

Devices

Taiwan, Hong Kong, China Feb. 6, 2029

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
Appendix A: Data Tables

278 | www.usitc.gov

Investigation no. Article Country a

Date patent 

expires b

June 7, 2025

June 7, 2025

May 1, 2029

337-TA-890 Certain Sleep-Disordered Breathing Treatment Systems and Components Thereof China May 11, 2017

Feb. 16, 2018

March 19, 2023

March 19, 2023

July 20, 2027

337-TA-894 Certain Tires and Products Containing Same China, Thailand June 4, 2016

March 9, 2018

Jan. 19, 2024

March 2, 2024

March 2, 2024

337-TA-919 Certain Archery Products and Related Marketing Materials China March 30, 2018

Jan. 15, 2023

Nonpatent

Source: U.S. International Trade Commission. a This column lists the countries of the foreign respondents named in the notice of investigation. “Hong Kong” refers to “Hong Kong, China”; “Macau” refers to “Macau, China”; 

and “Korea” refers to the “Republic of Korea.” 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 two outstanding exclusion orders in inv. No. 337-TA-650.
Year in Trade

U.S. International Trade Commission | 279

Table A.14: U.S. imports for consumption claiming eligibility under the GSP, by leading GSP beneficiary, 

2012–14

Source 2012 2013 2014

% change 

2013–14

Thousand $

India 4,455,470 4,224,447 4,443,078 5.2

Thailand 3,707,630 3,336,945 3,488,472 4.5

Brazil 2,334,295 2,292,515 1,892,626 -17.4

Indonesia 2,207,648 1,835,333 1,681,985 -8.4

South Africa 1,294,211 1,089,865 1,356,248 24.4

Philippines 1,238,769 1,268,027 1,328,583 4. 8

Turkey 1,148,012 1,216,519 1,130,842 -7.0

Angola 628,322 710,350 844,571 18.9

Russia 543,931 466,574 405,747 -13.0

Ecuador 106,886 183,339 291,553 59.0

Kazakhstan 111,379 100,431 220,539 119.6

Sri Lanka 157,984 158,439 178,085 12.4

Pakistan 195,098 225,128 159,767 -29.0

Georgia 124,058 107,444 154,646 43.9

Bolivia 129,211 157,112 100,856 -35.8

Congo (DROC) 93,700 50,155 96,618 92.6

Venezuela 98,573 110,262 90,766 -17.7

Armenia 80,600 86,784 81,323 -6.3

Tunisia 149,061 146,534 81,312 -44.5

Uruguay 57,058 92,184 76,982 -16.5

Cote d`Ivoire 96,148 84,544 69,905 -17.3

Egypt 60,480 70,853 67,128 -5.3

Paraguay 69,701 79,579 61,156 -23.2

Cambodia 34,881 41,085 55,535 35.2

Zimbabwe 36,737 5,795 50,685 774.6

Subtotal, top 25 GSP beneficiaries 19,159,843 18,140,242 18,409,012 1.5

All other beneficiaries 882,584 369,672 271,989 -26.4

Total U.S. imports for consumption under the GSP 20,042,427 18,509,915 18,681,001 0.9

Source: USITC DataWeb (accessed February 12, 2015); data compiled from the official statistics of the U.S. Department of 

Commerce.

Note: Argentina and Colombia both exited the GSP in 2013. Because of rounding, figures may not add to totals shown.
Appendix A: Data Tables

280 | www.usitc.gov

Table A.15: U.S. imports for consumption claiming eligibility under the GSP, by USITC digest sector, 

2012–14

Sector 

grouping Description 2012 2013 2014

% change 

2013–14

Million $

U.S. imports for consumption

1 Agricultural products 3,037 2,966 2,640 -11.0

2 Forest products 546 600 642 7.0

3 Chemicals and related products 4,217 3,702 3,524 -4.8

4 Energy-related products 884 711 846 19.0

5 Textiles and apparel 612 570 524 -8.2

6 Footwear 1 4 10 123.5

7 Minerals and metals 4,299 3,910 4,183 7.0

8 Machinery 2,116 2,093 2,284 9.2

9 Transportation equipment 1,885 1,683 1,768 5.0

10 Electronic products 854 960 1,075 12.1

11 Miscellaneous manufactures 1,593 1,311 1,186 -9.5

Total U.S. imports for consumption under the GSP 20,042 18,510 18,681 0.9

Percent of total

Share of U.S. imports for consumption

1 Agricultural products 15.2 16.0 14.1

2 Forest products 2.7 3.2 3.4

3 Chemicals and related products 21.0 20.0 18.9

4 Energy-related products 4.4 3.8 4.5

5 Textiles and apparel 3.1 3.1 2.8

6 Footwear 0.0 0.0 0.1

7 Minerals and metals 21.5 21.1 22.4

8 Machinery 10.6 11.3 12.2

9 Transportation equipment 9.4 9.1 9.5

10 Electronic products 4.3 5.2 5.8

11 Miscellaneous manufactures 7.9 7.1 6.4

Total U.S. imports for consumption under the GSP 100.0 100.0 100.0

Source: USITC DataWeb (accessed February 12, 2015); data compiled from the official statistics of the U.S. Department of 

Commerce.

Note: Because of rounding, figures may not add to totals shown.
Year in Trade

U.S. International Trade Commission | 281

Table A.16: Leading U.S. imports for consumption claiming eligibility under the GSP, by HTS provision, 2012–14

HTS 

provision Description 2012 2013 2014

% change 

2013–14

Million $

2709.00 Petroleum oils and oils from bituminous minerals, crude 824 649 769 18.5

7202.41 Ferrochromium, containing more than 4% (wt.) carbon 373 320 458 43.3

8415.90 Parts, n.e.s.o.i., of air conditioning machines 193 262 381 45.2

7202.30 Ferrosilicon manganese 280 172 296 72.3

7606.12 Aluminum alloy rectangular (including square) plates, sheets and strip, over 0.2 mm thick 399 267 273 2.4

7113.19 Jewelry and parts thereof, of precious metal other than silver 335 333 267 -19.9

2202.90 Nonalcoholic beverages, n.e.s.o.i. (including milk-based drinks and nonalcoholic beer) 149 185 228 23.5

4015.19 Gloves, mittens and mitts, other than surgical, of vulcanized rubber 251 239 208 -12.8

2106.90 Food preparations n.e.s.o.i. 224 211 203 -3.7

8708.99 Parts and accessories for motor vehicles, n.e.s.o.i. 260 206 200 -2.9

8481.80 Taps, cocks, valves and similar appliances for pipes, vats or the like, including thermostatically controlled valves, n.e.s.o.i. 176 145 191 31.9

4011.10 New pneumatic tires, of rubber, of a kind used on motor cars (including station wagons and racing cars) 575 347 186 -46.3

6802.99 Worked monumental or building stone n.e.s.o.i., of stone n.e.s.o.i. 145 196 181 -7.9

7801.10 Refined lead, unwrought 17 36 175 379.9

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.

127 150 164 9.8

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 subhding 

note 1 to ch. 44

137 145 159 9.6

8708.94 Steering wheels, steering columns and steering boxes and parts thereof, for motor vehicles 105 125 154 23.0

7323.93 Table, kitchen or other household articles and parts thereof, of stainless steel 112 134 139 4.1

9001.50 Spectacle lenses of materials other than glass 95 128 139 9.0

8483.10 Transmission shafts (including camshafts and crankshafts) and cranks 191 134 138 2.6

6802.91 Worked monumental or building stone n.e.s.o.i., of marble, travertine and alabaster 94 123 135 9.8

1701.14 Other cane sugar, raw, in solid form, w/o added flavoring or coloring not subject subheading note 2 162 49 129 161.4

1704.90 Sugar confectionary (including white chocolate), not containing cocoa, n.e.s.o.i. 130 138 127 -8.6

8409.99 Parts for use with compression-ignition internal combustion piston engines, n.e.s.o.i. 161 101 126 25.4

2804.69 Silicon, containing by weight less than 99.99% of silicon 116 119 122 2.5

Total of items shown 5,633 4,914 5,548 12.9

All other HTS subheadings 14,410 13,596 13,133 -3.4

Total U.S. imports for consumption under the GSP 20,042 18,510 18,681 0.9

Source: USITC DataWeb (accessed February 12, 2015); data compiled from the official statistics of the U.S. Department of Commerce.

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.”
Appendix A: Data Tables

282 | www.usitc.gov

Table A.17: U.S. imports for consumption under AGOA, by source, 2012–14

Source 2012 2013 2014

% change 

2013–14

Thousand $

Angola 6,619,092 6,000,958 3,539,542 -41.0

Nigeria 17,556,644 10,818,897 2,799,049 -74.1

South Africa 2,383,352 2,578,496 1,747,633 -32.2

Chad 2,376,665 2,397,799 1,632,682 -31.9

Gabon 1,271,621 924,951 607,486 -34.3

Kenya 287,836 336,594 417,061 23.9

Congo (ROC) 1,225,539 1,039,454 360,168 -65.4

Lesotho 300,689 320,807 288,889 -10.0

Mauritius 160,030 188,260 218,173 15.9

Swaziland 62,373 53,940 59,076 9.5

Malawi 46,307 47,084 57,640 22.4

Ghana 16,988 60,489 57,017 -5.7

Ethiopia 18,301 31,714 35,675 12.5

Cameroon 111,612 36,427 23,005 -36.9

Tanzania 10,446 10,360 17,486 68.8

Botswana 10,427 5,856 9,458 61.5

Mozambique 30 1,362 802 -41.1

Cote d`Ivoire 29,901 229 555 142.0

Djibouti 0 0 411 b

Cape Verde 117 146 333 127.6

Rwanda 8 9 187 1892.3

Uganda 64 56 59 6.0

Madagascar 0 0 42 b

Zambia 7 8 36 330.0

Senegal 5,634 11 24 113.9

Burkina Faso 5 7 10 56.0

Mali 21 0 6 b

Togo 44,448 0 3 b

Niger 1 (

a

) 2 b

Guinea 0 6 0 -100.0

Namibia 216 0 0 b

Total U.S. imports for consumption under AGOA 32,538,373 24,853,920 11,872,510 

Source: USITC DataWeb (accessed February 12, 2015); data compiled from the official statistics of the U.S. Department of 

Commerce.

Note: Because of rounding, figures may not add to totals shown. a Less than $500.

b Undefined.
Year in Trade

U.S. International Trade Commission | 283

Table A.18: Leading U.S. imports for consumption under AGOA, by HTS provision, 2012–14

HTS 

provision Description 2012 2013 2014

% change 

2013–14

Million $

2709.00 Petroleum oils and oils from bituminous minerals, crude 27,905 20,039 7,919 -60.5

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

1,872 2,098 1,298 -38.2

2710.12 Light oils and preparations 896 771 581 -24.7

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. 452 465 514 10.5

7202.11 Ferromanganese, containing more than 2% (wt.) carbon 197 180 181 0.4

6203.42 Men's or boys' trousers, bib and brace overalls, breeches and shorts of cotton, not knitted or crocheted 135 140 166 18.7

6205.20 Men's or boys' shirts of cotton, not knitted or crocheted 129 149 148 -0.6

6110.30 Sweaters, pullovers, sweatshirts, vests and similar articles of manmade fibers, knitted or crocheted 68 99 98 -1.1

6204.62 Women's or girls' trousers, bib and brace overalls, breeches and shorts of cotton, not knitted or crocheted 105 88 95 7.8

6104.63 Women's or girls' trousers, bib and brace overalls, breeches and shorts of synthetic fibers, knitted or crocheted 47 84 84 -0.2

0802.62 Macadamia nuts, shelled 57 52 71 36.1

6109.90 T-shirts, singlets, tank tops and similar garments, of textile materials n.e.s.o.i., knitted or crocheted 27 40 53 32.7

6105.20 Men's or boys' shirts of manmade fibers, knitted or crocheted 35 49 53 8.5

2401.20 Tobacco, partly or wholly stemmed/stripped 39 37 48 31.5

3823.70 Industrial fatty alcohols 54 61 46 -24.2

0805.10 Oranges, fresh 39 51 41 -19.3

6204.63 Women's or girls' trousers, bib and brace overalls, breeches and shorts of synthetic fibers, not knitted or crocheted 20 30 36 19.5

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

30 33 33 -1.0

6103.43 Men's or boys' trousers, bib and brace overalls, breeches and shorts of synthetic fibers, knitted or crocheted 26 28 32 12.0

6110.20 Sweaters, pullovers, sweatshirts, vests and similar articles of cotton, knitted or crocheted 34 27 28 3.1

8111.00 Manganese and artcles thereof, including waste and scrap 24 23 25 10.7

6104.62 Women's or girls' trousers, bib and brace overalls, breeches and shorts of cotton, knitted or crocheted 56 22 19 -15.2

2207.10 Ethyl alcohol, undenatured, of an alcoholic strength by volume of 80% vol. or higher 17 17 17 1.0

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 9 16 74.6

6105.10 Men's or boys' shirts of cotton, knitted or crocheted 19 15 16 1.9

Total of items shown 32,289 24,608 11,617 -52.8

All other HTS provisions 250 246 256 4.1

Total U.S. imports for consumption under AGOA 32,538 24,854 11,873 -52.2

Source: USITC DataWeb (accessed February 12, 2015); data compiled from the official statistics of the U.S. Department of Commerce.

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.”
Appendix A: Data Tables

284 | www.usitc.gov

Table A.19: U.S. imports for consumption under ATPA/ATPDEA, by source, 2012–14

Source 2012 2013 2014

% change 

2013–14

Million $

Colombiaa 5,314 0 0 (

c

)

Ecuadorb 5,869 2,575 0 -100.0

Total 11,183 2,575 0 -100.0

Source: USITC DataWeb (accessed February 12, 2015); data compiled from the official statistics of the U.S. Department of 

Commerce.

Note: Because of rounding, figures may not add to totals shown. The President’s authority to provide duty-free treatment 

under ATPA expired on July 31, 2013. a Colombia’s status as an ATPA beneficiary country ended effective May 15, 2012. This table excludes 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 Undefined.

Table A.20: U.S. imports for consumption under CBERA/CBTPA, by source, 2012–14

Source 2012 2013 2014

% change

2013–14

Thousand $

Trinidad and Tobago 2,171,197 1,640,709 1,234,490 -24.8

Haiti 436,783 361,839 405,495 12.1

Bahamas 130,539 142,667 157,151 10.2

Jamaica 206,201 90,231 71,760 -20.5

Belize 131,943 104,777 60,575 -42.2

St. Kitts-Nevis 22,350 18,933 18,338 -3.1

Guyana 5,315 4,532 11,837 161.2

Sint Maartena 5,365 b

Barbados 3,813 2,081 5,295 154.5

St Lucia 1,836 3,210 1,142 -64.4

Grenada 341 295 443 50.0

St. Vincent and the Grenadines 138 141 182 28.9

Aruba 27 18 75 311.7

Dominica 117 170 53 -69.0

British Virgin Island 451 103 50 -51.5

Antigua and Barbuda 30 24 19 -22.3

Montserrat Island 24 0 0 b

Panamac 26,308 0 0 b

Total U.S. imports for consumption under CBERA/CBTPA 3,137,413 2,369,731 1,972,270 -16.8

Source: USITC DataWeb (accessed February 12, 2015); data compiled from the official statistics of the U.S. Department of 

Commerce.

Note: Because of rounding, figures may not add to totals shown. a The Netherlands Antilles no longer exists, but CBERA trade is reported for one portion of the Netherlands Antilles that 

includes Sint Maarten. Eligibility for Sint Maarten itself has not been implemented. b Undefined.

c The U.S.-Panama Trade Promotion Agreement entered into effect on October 31, 2012.
Year in Trade

U.S. International Trade Commission | 285

Table A.21: Leading U.S. imports for consumption under CBERA/CBTPA, by HTS provision, 2012–14

HTS 

provision Description 2012 2013 2014

% change 

2013–14

Million $

2905.11 Methanol (methyl alcohol) 1,022 1,172 1,024 -12.6

6109.10 T-shirts, singlets, tank tops and similar garments of cotton, knitted or crocheted 225 209 247 18.4

2709.00 Petroleum oils and oils from bituminous minerals, crude 1,164 371 192 -48.2

3903.11 Polystyrene, expandable, in primary forms 129 142 155 9.4

6110.20 Sweaters, pullovers, sweatshirts, vests and similar articles of cotton, knitted or crocheted 176 118 121 2.5

1701.14 Other cane sugar, raw, in solid form, w/o added flavoring or coloring not subject subheading note 2 13 0 20 (

a

)

0714.30 Fresh, frozen, or dried, or chilled yams (dioscorea spp.) 16 17 18 7.2

2933.61 Melamine 22 17 17 0.7

2103.90 Sauces and preparations therefor, n.e.s.o.i.; mixed condiments and mixed seasonings 11 11 14 23.0

6109.90 T-shirts, singlets, tank tops and similar garments, of textile materials n.e.s.o.i., knitted or crocheted 16 11 13 26.7

0804.50 Guavas, mangoes and mangosteens, fresh or dried 9 12 13 4.2

8525.50 Transmission apparatus for television 12 11 10 -7.7

2106.90 Food preparations n.e.s.o.i. 6 8 10 18.2

2009.11 Orange juice, frozen, whether or not sweetened 8 7 9 30.2

0807.20 Papayas (papaws), fresh 11 12 8 -34.8

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.

40 133 7 -94.6

2009.19 Orange juice, other than frozen, not fortified with vitamins or minerals, of a brix value exceeding 20 8 5 7 31.0

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 5 5 0.4

2202.10 Waters, including mineral waters and aerated waters, sweetened or flavored 5 5 5 3.3

8504.90 Parts for electrical transformers, static converters and inductors 4 3 5 49.0

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.

4 5 4 -11.5

2202.90 Nonalcoholic beverages, n.e.s.o.i. (including milk-based drinks and nonalcoholic beer) 5 4 4 13.2

2208.40 Rum and tafia 1 2 3 26.3

6110.30 Sweaters, pullovers, sweatshirts, vests and similar articles of manmade fibers, knitted or crocheted 5 2 3 49.0
Appendix A: Data Tables

286 | www.usitc.gov

HTS 

provision Description 2012 2013 2014

% change 

2013–14

0406.30 Cheese, processed, not grated or powdered 2 2 3 28.5

Total of items shown 2,918 2,283 1,916 -16.1

All other HTS provisions 220 87 57 -34.9

Total of all commodities 3,137 2,370 1,972 -16.8

Source: USITC DataWeb (accessed February 12, 2015); data compiled from the official statistics of the U.S. Department of Commerce

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.” The U.S.-Panama Trade 

Promotion Agreement entered into force on October 31, 2012. a Undefined.
Year in Trade

U.S. International Trade Commission | 287

Table A.22: WTO dispute settlement cases to which the United States was a party, developments in 

2014

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 is established (08/23/01) and composed (10/25/01).

Panel report is circulated (09/16/02).

U.S. notifies Dispute Settlement Body (DSB) it will appeal panel 

decision (10/18/02).

Appellate Body report is circulated (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 (2006–14).

Japan notifies DSB that as the level of authorization was marginal, 

no suspension of concessions would be applied for the tenth year 

starting September 1, 2014 (08/18/14).

DS316 European Communities—

Measures Affecting Trade in 

Large Civil Aircraft

United States U.S. requests consultations with EC (10/06/04).

Panel is established (07/20/05) and composed (10/17/05).

Panel report is circulated (06/30/10).

EU notifies DSB it will appeal decision to Appellate Body 

(07/21/10); U.S. does the same (08/19/10).

Appellate Body report is circulated (05/18/11).

DSB adopts Appellate Body and panel reports (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).
Appendix A: Data Tables

288 | www.usitc.gov

Case no. Title Complainant Action (month/day/year)

DS322 United States—Measures 

Relating to Zeroing and 

Sunset Reviews

Japan Japan requests consultations (11/24/04).

Panel is established (02/28/05) and composed (04/15/05).

Panel report is circulated (09/20/06).

Japan informs the DSB it will appeal the decision (10/11 /06); U.S. 

informs the DSB it will also appeal (10/23/06).

Appellate Body report is circulated (01/9/07).

DSB adopts Appellate Body and panel reports (01/23/07).

Implementation of adopted reports. Japan asks that a reasonable 

period of time for implementation be determined by binding 

arbitration pursuant to Article 21.3(c) of the DSU (03/29/07); DSB 

appoints arbitrator ((04/27/07). U.S. and Japan inform DSB they 

have agreed on a reasonable period of time, expiring December 

24, 2007, and no longer seek to have the reasonable period of time 

determined through binding arbitration (05/04/07). 

Compliance proceedings. Japan requests establishment of a 

compliance panel (04/07/08), and DSB refers to the original panel 

(04/18/08). Article 21.5 compliance panel report is circulated 

(04/24/09). U.S. notifies DSB it will appeal compliance panel 

decision to the Appellate Body (05/20/09). Article 21.5 Appellate 

Body report is circulated (08/18/09), and the DSB adopts Appellate 

Body and compliance panel reports (08/31/09).

Proceedings under Article 22 of the DSU (remedies). Japan seeks 

authorization to suspend concessions pursuant to Article 22.2 of 

the DSU (01/10/08). U.S. objects to the level of suspension and 

requests the matter be referred to arbitration under Article 22.6 of 

the DSU (01/18/08). The DSB agrees to refer to arbitration 

(01/21/08). U.S. and Japan ask arbitrator to suspend work 

(06/06/08); Japan asks arbitrator to resume (04/23/10); U.S. and 

Japan ask arbitrator to suspend work (12/15/10); and U.S. and 

Japan inform the DSB of a 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 February 

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).

DS350 United States—Continued 

Existence and Application of 

Zeroing Methodology

European 

Communities

EC requests consultations (10/02/06).

Panel is established (06/04/07) and composed (07/06/07).

Panel report is circulated (10/01/08).

EC (11/06/08) and U.S. (11/18/08) notify DSB of decision to appeal.

Appellate Body report is circulated (02/04/09); DSB adopts 

Appellate Body and panel reports (02/19/09).

U.S. and EC agree that a reasonable period for the U.S. to 

implement the DSB's recommendations and rulings is December, 

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).
Year in Trade

U.S. International Trade Commission | 289

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 is 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 is circulated (03/31/11).

EU notifies DSB that it will appeal the decision to the Appellate 

Body (04/01/11); the U.S. also notifies its decision to appeal 

(04/28/11).

Appellate Body report is circulated (03/12/12); DSB adopts 

Appellate Body and panel reports (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 removal of adverse 

effects in this dispute, and that it fully complies with DSB 

recommendations and rulings (09/23/12).

Compliance proceedings: EU requests consultations under Article 

21.5 (09/25/12), and then requests establishment of a compliance 

panel (10/11/12). A compliance panel is composed (10/30/12). The 

chair initially informs the DSB that, due to the scale and complexity 

of the dispute, the panel expects to circulate its report within the 

first half of 2014 (01/15/13). The chair later informs the DSB that 

the panel does not expect to complete its work before mid-2015 

(05/27/14).

Countermeasures: EU requests authority to take countermeasures 

under Article 22 of the DSU and Articles 4, 10, and 7.9 of the SCM 

Agreement (09/27/12). The U.S. objects to the level of suspension 

of concessions and other obligations, and refers the matter to 

arbitration under Article 22.6 of the DSU (10/22/12). At the DSB 

meeting it is agreed to refer the matter to arbitration (10/23/10).

The U.S. and EU later ask the arbitrator to suspend arbitration 

proceedings (11/27/12), and the arbitrator suspends proceedings 

(11/28/12).
Appendix A: Data Tables

290 | www.usitc.gov

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 is established (11/27/07) and composed (03/27/08).

Panel report is circulated (08/12/09).

China (09/22/09) and U.S. (10/05/09) notify the DSB of their 

respective decisions to appeal the panel decision to the Appellate 

Body.

Appellate Body report is circulated (12/21/09).

DSB adopts Appellate Body and panel reports (01/19/10).

China and U.S. inform DSB that they have agreed that a reasonable 

period for China to implement the DSB recommendations and 

rulings is by March 14, 2011 (07/12/10).

China reports to DSB that it has made efforts to implement DSB 

recommendations and rulings, but the U.S. expresses concern 

about lack of progress by China (03/25/11).

U.S. and China inform the 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 the 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 

Anti-Dumping and 

Countervailing Duties on 

Certain Products from China

China China requests consultations with U.S. (09/19/08).

Panel is established (01/20/09) and composed (03/04/09).

Panel report is circulated (10/22/10).

China notifies DSB it will appeal the panel’s decision to the 

Appellate Body (12/01/10).

Appellate Body report is circulated (03/11/11).

DSB adopts Appellate Body and panel reports (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 and rulings is February 25, 2012 (07/05/11).

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 the DSB it has brought the measures at issue into full 

compliance with DSB recommendations and rulings (08/31/12); 

however, China says that it does not agree with the U.S. claim to 

such effect (09/28/12).
Year in Trade

U.S. International Trade Commission | 291

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 is 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 is circulated (09/15/11).

U.S. notifies the 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 (05/16/12); DSB adopted the 

Appellate Body and panel reports (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 period of 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).

Compliance proceedings. Mexico requests establishment of a 

compliance panel (11/14/13); the DSB agrees to refer to original 

panel (01/22/14); and the panel is composed (01/27/14). Panel 

chair informs the DSB that the panel expects to issue its final 

report by December 2014 (04/16/14).

DS384 United States—Certain 

Country of Origin Labelling 

(COOL) Requirements 

Canada Canada requests consultations with the U.S. (12/01/08).

Single panel is established to examine this dispute and DS386 

(11/19/09); panel composed (05/10/10).

Panel report is circulated (11/18/11).

U.S. notifies the DSB that it will appeal the decision to the 

Appellate Body (03/23/12), and Canada notifies the DSB it will do 

the same (03/28/12).

Appellate Body report is circulated (06/29/12); the DSB adopts the 

Appellate Body and panel reports (07/23/12).

Reasonable period of time, arbitration. U.S. informs DSB it intends 

to implement DSB recommendations and rulings and will need a 

reasonable period of time to do so (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).

Compliance proceedings. Canada requests establishment of a 

compliance panel (08/19/13); DSB refers to original panel if 

possible (09/25/13); compliance panel composed (09/27/13) to 

review matters in DS384 and DS386. Compliance panel issues 

report finding violation in this dispute and DS386 (10/20/14). 

United States notifies the DSB it will appeal decision to the 

Appellate Body (11/28/14). Canada files appeal (12/12/14).
Appendix A: Data Tables

292 | www.usitc.gov

Case no. Title Complainant Action (month/day/year)

DS386 United States—Certain 

Country of Origin Labelling 

Requirements

Mexico Mexico requests consultations with the U.S. (12/17/08).

Single panel is established to examine this dispute and DS384 

(11/19/09); panel composed (05/10/10).

Panel report is circulated (11/18/11).

U.S. notifies the DSB that it will appeal decision to the Appellate 

Body (03/23/12), and Mexico notifies the DSB it will do the same 

(03/28/12).

Appellate Body report is circulated (06/29/12); Appellate Body and 

panel reports are adopted (07/23/12).

Reasonable period of time, arbitration. 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).

Compliance proceedings. Mexico requests establishment of a 

compliance panel (08/19/13); DSB refers to original panel if 

possible (09/25/13); compliance panel composed (09/27/13) to 

review matters in DS384 and DS386. Compliance panel issues 

report finding violation in this dispute and DS384 (10/20/14). 

United States notifies the DSB it will appeal decision to the 

Appellate Body (11/28/14). Mexico files appeal (12/12/14).

DS387 China—Grants, Loans and 

other Incentives

United States U.S. requests consultations (12/19/08).

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).

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 (12/21/11), and DSB adopts the 

Appellate Body and panel reports (01/20/12).

Philippines states that it intends to implement DSB’s 

recommendations and ruling and would require a reasonable 

period of time to do so (02/22/12), and Philippines and U.S. inform 

DSB that they have agreed that the reasonable period of 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).
Year in Trade

U.S. International Trade Commission | 293

Case no. Title Complainant Action (month/day/year)

DS404 United States—Antidumping Measures on 

Certain Shrimp from Viet 

Nam

Vietnam Vietnam requests consultations (02/01/10).

Panel is established (05/18/10) and composed (07/26/10).

Panel report is circulated (07/11/11); and the DSB adopts the panel 

report (09/02/11).

Vietnam and U.S. inform DSB they have agreed that a reasonable 

period of time for the U.S. to implement the DSB 

recommendations expires on July 2, 2012 (10/31/11).

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 in a manner that protects public health and respects its 

WTO obligations, and will need 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).

Proceedings under Article 22 of the DSU (remedies). 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). U.S. and Indonesia request Arbitrator to suspend 

circulation of Arbitrator's award (06/23/14), and Arbitrator does so 

(06/24/14). U.S. and Indonesia notify the DSB they have reached a 

mutually agreed solution, and that Indonesia is withdrawing its 

request to suspend concessions or other obligations (10/03/14). 

Chair of Arbitrator notifies DSB it is not necessary to issue a 

decision, and that the Arbitrator has completed its work 

(10/08/14).

DS413 China—Certain Measures 

Affecting Electronic 

Payment Services

United States U.S. requests consultations (09/15/10).

Panel is established (03/25/11) and composed (07/04/11).

Panel report is 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 period of 

time to do so (09/28/12).

China and U.S. inform the DSB that the reasonable period of time 

for China to implement is by July 31, 2013 (11/22/12).

China reports to the 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 (08/19/13).
Appendix A: Data Tables

294 | www.usitc.gov

Case no. Title Complainant Action (month/day/year)

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).

Reasonable period of time; arbitrator's determination. China states 

that it intends to implement the DSB’s recommendations and 

rulings and will need a reasonable period 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). China and U.S. inform DSB of agreed 

procedures under Articles 21 and 22 of DSU (08/19/13).

Compliance proceedings. 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); the DSB agrees to refer to original 

panel if possible (02/26/14); the panel is composed (03/17/14). 

Panel chair informs DSB that it expects to issue panel report in the 

second quarter of 2015 (09/22/14).

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).

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 is 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 is established (10/25/11) and composed (12/21/11).

Panel report is circulated (06/08/12), and DSB adopts panel report 

(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).
Year in Trade

U.S. International Trade Commission | 295

Case no. Title Complainant Action (month/day/year)

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 (08/02/13) and is 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).

China informs the DSB that it has fully implemented the DSB 

recommendations and rulings, but the U.S. disagrees that China 

has fully complied (07/22/14).

China and the U.S. inform the DSB of agreed procedures under 

Articles 21 and 22 of the DSU (07/15/14).

DS429 United States—AntiDumping Measures on 

Certain Frozen Warmwater 

Shrimp from Viet Nam

Vietnam Vietnam requests consultations (02/20/12).

Panel is established (02/27/13) and composed (07/12/13).

Panel report is circulated (11/17/14). Vietnam notifies DSB it will 

appeal decision to the Appellate Body (01/06/15).

DS430 India—Measures 

Concerning the Importation 

of Certain Agricultural 

Products from the United 

States

United States U.S. requests consultations (03/06/12).

Panel is established (06/25/12) and composed (02/18/13).

Panel report is circulated (10/14/14). India and U.S. request DSB to 

extend period for filing an appeal by 60 days (11/06/14), and DSB 

agrees (11/18/14).

India notifies DSB it will appeal the decision to the Appellate Body 

(01/26/15).

DS431 China—Measures Related to 

the Exportation of Rare 

Earths, Tungsten and 

Molybdenum

United States U.S. requests consultations (03/13/12).

Single panel is established to examine DS431 (as well as DS432 and 

DS433 brought by the EU and Japan) (07/23/12) ; panel is 

composed (09/24/12).

Panel report is circulated (03/26/14).

U.S. notifies the DSB that it will appeal the decision to the 

Appellate Body (04/08/14); China notifies the DSB it will appeal the 

decision in this dispute (04/17/14) and the other two disputes 

(04/25/14).

Appellate Body issues three reports in one document (08/07/14); 

DSB adopts Appellate Body and panel reports (08/29/14).

China informs the DSB that it intends to implement the DSB's 

recommendations and rulings, and will need a reasonable period 

of time to do so (09/26/14). China and U.S. inform the DSB they 

have agreed that a reasonable period of time will expire on May 2, 

2015 (12/08/14).

DS436 United States—Countervailing Measures on Certain 

Hot-Rolled Carbon Steel Flat 

Products from India

India India requests consultations (04/24/12).

Panel is established (08/31/12) and composed (02/18/13).

Panel report is circulated (07/14/14).

India notifies the DSB that it will appeal the decision (08/08/14), 

and U.S. files an appeal (08/13/14).

Appellate Body issues its report (12/08/14); and the DSB adopts 

the Appellate Body and panel reports (12/19/14).

U.S. informs the DSB that it intends to implement the DSB's 

recommendations and rulings and will need a reasonable period of 

time to do so (01/16/15).
Appendix A: Data Tables

296 | www.usitc.gov

Case no. Title Complainant Action (month/day/year)

DS437 United States—Countervailing Duty Measures on 

Certain Products from China

China China requests consultations (05/25/12).

Panel is established (09/28/12) and composed (11/26/12).

Panel report is circulated (07/14/14).

China appeals the panel decision to the Appellate Body (08/22/14); 

U.S. files a cross-appeal of a preliminary determination by the 

panel (08/27/14).

Appellate Body issues its report (12/18/14); DSB adopts Appellate 

Body and panel reports (01/16/15). 

DS440 China—Anti-Dumping and 

Countervailing Duties on 

Certain Automobiles from 

the United States

United States U.S. requests consultations (07/05/12).

Panel is established (10/23/12) and composed (02/11/13).

Panel report is circulated (05/23/14), and adopted by the DSB 

(06/18/14).

DS444 Argentina—Measures 

Affecting the Importation of 

Goods

United States U.S. requests consultations (08/21/12).

Single panel is established to examine DS438, DS44, and DS445 

(01/28/13); the panel is composed (05/27/13).

Panel report is circulated (08/22/14).

Argentina notifies DSB of its decision to appeal (09/26/14).

Appellate Body issues its reports in DS438, DS444, and DS445 

(01/15/15); and the DSB adopts the Appellate Body and panel 

reports (01/26/14).

DS447 United States—Measures 

Affecting the Importation of 

Animals, Meat and Other 

Animal Products from 

Argentina

Argentina Argentina requests consultations (08/30/12).

Panel is 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 is deferred (12/17/12).

DS449 United States—Countervailing and Anti-dumping 

Measures on Certain 

Products from China

China China requests consultations (09/17/12).

Panel is established (12/17/12) and composed (03/04/13).

Panel report is circulated (03/27/14).

China notifies the DSB it will appeal the decision to the Appellate 

Body (04/08/14); the U.S. notifies the DSB of its decision to appeal 

(04/17/14).

Appellate Body issues its report (07/07/14), and the DSB adopts 

the Appellate Body and panel reports (07/22/14); U.S. informs DSB 

it intends to implement the DSB recommendations and rulings and 

will need a reasonable period of time to do so (08/21/14).

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 is 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).

Panel is established (05/23/14) and composed (09/24/14).

DS464 United States—Antidumping and Countervailing 

Measures on large 

residential washers from 

Korea

Korea Korea requests consultations (08/29/13).

Panel is established (01/22/14) and composed (06/20/14).

Chair informs the DSB that the panel expects to issue its final 

report by the end of 2015 (12/15/14).
Year in Trade

U.S. International Trade Commission | 297

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 is established (03/26/14) and composed (08/28/14).

DS478 Indonesia—Importation of 

Horticultural Products, 

Animals and Animal 

Products

United States U.S. requests consultations (05/08/14).

DS487 United States—Conditional 

Tax Incentives for Large Civil 

Aircraft

European 

Union

EU requests consultations (12/19/14).

DS488 United States—AntiDumping Measures on 

Certain Oil Country Tubular 

Goods from Korea

Korea Korea requests consultations (12/19/14).

Source: WTO, “Chronological List of Disputes Cases,” https://www.wto.org/english/tratop_e/dispu_e/dispu_status_e.htm.

Note: This list focuses on formal actions in disputes during 2014; some intermediate procedural actions are omitted. Selected 

pre-2014 and post-2014 actions are noted to place the 2014 actions in context.

Table A.23: NAFTA Chapter 19 substantive challenges to original and five-year review determinations of 

USITC and USDOC, developments in 2014

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). Decision date: 

(04/29/14).

USA-MEX-2012-1904-02 Bottom Mount Combination RefrigeratorFreezers (AD) (Investigating authority: 

International Trade Administration)

Request for panel review 

(04/24/12). Status: Terminated.

USA-MEX-2014-1904-01 Steel Concrete Reinforcing Bar from Mexico 

(AD) (Investigating authority: International 

Trade Administration)

Request for panel review 

(10/16/14). Status: Active.b

USA-MEX-2014-1904-02 Steel Concrete Reinforcing Bar from Mexico 

and Turkey (AD) (Investigating authority: 

International Trade Commission)

Request for panel review 

(12/01/14). 

Status: Active.

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, 2015).

Note: This list includes active cases during 2014, including those in which little if any formal action occurred during 2014. a AD stands for antidumping duty and CVD stands for countervailing duty. b The request for panel review was subsequently withdrawn and the status of the case changed to "terminated." See notice of 

the U.S. NAFTA Secretariat published in the Federal Register on May 29, 2015, 80 Fed. Reg. 30661.
Appendix A: Data Tables

298 | www.usitc.gov

Table A.24: U.S. merchandise trade with the European Union (28 countries), by USITC digest sector, 

2012–14

Sector 

grouping Description 2012 2013 2014

% change 

2013–14

Million $

Total exports

1 Agricultural products 12,411 13,999 14,866 6.2

2 Forest products 5,225 5,171 5,291 2.3

3 Chemicals and related products 56,879 57,280 59,104 3.2

4 Energy-related products 26,129 26,574 24,363 -8.3

5 Textiles and apparel 2,409 2,513 2,601 3.5

6 Footwear 92 111 105 -5.9

7 Minerals and metals 27,701 21,203 24,282 14.5

8 Machinery 18,729 19,330 21,123 9.3

9 Transportation equipment 52,979 52,951 56,755 7.2

10 Electronic products 46,444 46,499 49,485 6.4

11 Miscellaneous manufactures 9,137 8,930 10,705 19.9

12 Special provisions 7,551 7,589 8,018 5.6

Total 265,686 262,151 276,698 5.5

General imports

1 Agricultural products 20,516 21,475 22,739 5.9

2 Forest products 4,535 4,751 4,941 4.0

3 Chemicals and related products 87,933 86,888 96,196 10.7

4 Energy-related products 27,776 24,483 22,338 -8.8

5 Textiles and apparel 5,425 5,696 6,236 9.5

6 Footwear 1,687 1,869 2,087 11.7

7 Minerals and metals 30,279 29,456 32,646 10.8

8 Machinery 41,693 41,877 47,377 13.1

9 Transportation equipment 85,625 90,980 100,111 10.0

10 Electronic products 42,489 43,086 45,130 4.7

11 Miscellaneous manufactures 15,267 17,409 17,868 2.6

12 Special provisions 18,971 19,624 20,168 2.8

Total 382,197 387,591 417,837 7.8

Source: USITC DataWeb (accessed February 12, 2015); data compiled from the official statistics of the U.S. Department of 

Commerce.

Note: Because of rounding, figures may not add up to totals shown.
Year in Trade

U.S. International Trade Commission | 299

Table A.25: Leading U.S. total exports to the European Union (28 countries), by Schedule B subheading, 2012–14

Schedule B 

subheading Description 2012 2013 2014

% change 

2013–14

Million $

8800.00 Aircraft, spacecraft, and parts thereof 27,243 29,080 30,756 5.8

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.

16,199 18,265 15,815 -13.4

3004.90 Medicaments, in measured doses, etc. (excluding vaccines, etc., coated bandages etc. and pharmaceutical goods), 

n.e.s.o.i.

11,358 10,063 10,445 3.8

3002.10 Antisera and other blood fractions, and modified immunological products 3,747 5,096 6,894 35.3

9018.90 Instruments and appliances for medical, surgical or veterinary sciences, n.e.s.o.i., and parts and accessories 

thereof

3,959 4,177 4,386 5.0

7102.39 Diamonds, nonindustrial, worked, including polished or drilled 3,433 3,503 4,358 24.4

2701.12 Bituminous coal, whether or not pulverized, but not agglomerated 6,232 4,543 3,840 -15.5

9701.10 Paintings, drawings and pastels, hand executed works of art, framed or not framed 2,772 2,909 3,837 31.9

8703.33 Passenger motor vehicles with compression-ignition internal combustion piston engine (diesel), cylinder capacity 

over 2,500 cc

3,838 3,433 3,741 9.0

8517.62 Machines for the reception, conversion and transmission or regeneration of voice, images or other data, including 

switching and routing apparatus

3,438 3,389 3,557 5.0

7108.12 Gold, nonmonetary, unwrought n.e.s.o.i. (other than powder) 7,364 1,504 3,298 119.2

9018.39 Medical etc. needles n.e.s.o.i., catheters, cannulae and the like; parts and accessories therof 2,488 2,779 2,902 4.4

3822.00 Composite diagnostic or laboratory reagents, other than those pharmaceuticals in heading 3002 or 3006; certified 

reference materials

2,417 2,577 2,630 2.1

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

2,269 1,931 2,326 20.5

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

1,563 1,533 1,975 28.9

1201.90 Soybeans, whether or not broken, other than seed 1,481 1,528 1,860 21.7

7113.19 Jewelry and parts thereof, of precious metal other than silver 1,582 1,374 1,795 30.6

0802.12 Almonds, fresh or dried, shelled 1,020 1,452 1,675 15.3

8471.50 Processing units other than those of 8471.41 and 8471.49, n.e.s.o.i. 1,614 1,268 1,488 17.4

9018.19 Electro-diagnostic apparatus (and apparatus for functional exploratory examination or for checking physiological 

parameters) n.e.s.o.i., and parts, etc.

1,477 1,426 1,482 3.9

2711.12 Propane, liquefied 373 894 1,463 63.6

9021.39 Artificial parts of the body (other than artificial joints) and parts and accessories thereof, n.e.s.o.i. 1,114 1,243 1,451 16.8

3002.20 Vaccines for human medicine 1,378 698 1,411 102.3
Appendix A: Data Tables

300 | www.usitc.gov

Schedule B 

subheading Description 2012 2013 2014

% change 

2013–14

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.

1,089 1,295 1,384 6.8

8411.99 Parts of gas turbines, n.e.s.o.i. (other than parts for turbojets or turbopropellers) 1,947 1,559 1,300 -16.6

Total of items shown 111,393 107,520 116,067 7.9

All other HTS subheadings 154,293 154,630 160,631 3.9

Total of all commodities 265,686 262,151 276,698 5.5

Source: USITC DataWeb (accessed February 12, 2015); data compiled from the official statistics of the U.S. Department of Commerce.

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.”
Year in Trade

U.S. International Trade Commission | 301

Table A.26: Leading U.S. general imports from the European Union (28 countries), by HTS provision, 2012–14

HTS 

provision Description 2012 2013 2014

% change 

2013–14

Million $

3004.90 Medicaments, in measured doses, etc. (excluding vaccines, etc., coated bandages etc. and pharmaceutical goods), 

n.e.s.o.i.

16,735 14,828 18,773 26.6

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

14,275 16,708 18,462 10.5

8703.24 Passenger motor vehicles with spark-ignition internal combustion reciprocating piston engine, cyclinder capacity over 

3,000 cc

18,016 18,281 18,368 0.5

2710.12 Light oils and preparations 18,478 15,456 12,981 -16.0

8411.91 Parts of turbojets or turbopropellers 6,581 7,056 7,322 3.8

8802.40 Airplanes and other aircraft n.e.s.o.i., of an unladen weight exceeding 15,000 kg 3,750 5,778 6,803 17.7

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.

4,804 5,550 6,696 20.6

3002.10 Antisera and other blood fractions, and modified immunological products 3,505 4,308 5,007 16.2

9701.10 Paintings, drawings and pastels, hand executed works of art, framed or not framed 4,491 5,210 4,933 -5.3

3004.31 Medicaments, in measured doses, etc., containing insulin but not containing antibiotics 2,874 3,587 4,926 37.3

2934.99 Nucleic acids and their salts, whether or not chemically defined; other heterocyclic compounds; n.e.s.o.i. 4,716 3,715 4,852 30.6

8803.30 Parts of airplanes or helicopters, n.e.s.o.i. 4,520 4,526 4,752 5.0

8411.12 Turbojets of a thrust exceeding 25 kn 3,480 3,594 4,154 15.6

7102.39 Diamonds, nonindustrial, worked, including polished or drilled 3,650 4,198 4,107 -2.2

3004.39 Medicaments, in measured doses, etc., containing hormones or other steriods used primarily as hormones, but not 

containing antibiotics, n.e.s.o.i.

4,020 3,608 3,746 3.8

2933.59 Heterocyclic compounds containing a pyrimidine ring (hydrogenated or not) or a piperazine ring in the structure, 

n.e.s.o.i.

3,331 4,096 3,332 -18.7

3002.20 Vaccines for human medicine 1,381 2,383 3,065 28.6

8407.34 Spark-ignition reciprocating piston engines for propulsion of vehicles except railway or tramway stock, over 1,000 cc 

cylinder capacity

2,680 2,685 2,987 11.2

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

2,594 2,788 2,879 3.3

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.

3,426 1,682 2,609 55.1

8517.62 Machines for the reception, conversion and transmission or regeneration of voice, images or other data, including 

switching and routing apparatus

2,177 2,180 2,564 17.6

9021.39 Artificial parts of the body (other than artificial joints) and parts and accessories thereof, n.e.s.o.i. 2,475 2,794 2,437 -12.8
Appendix A: Data Tables

302 | www.usitc.gov

HTS 

provision Description 2012 2013 2014

% change 

2013–14

9018.90 Instruments and appliances for medical, surgical or veterinary sciences, n.e.s.o.i., and parts and accessories thereof 2,206 2,324 2,427 4.4

8708.40 Gear boxes and parts thereof, for motor vehicles 1,820 2,067 2,256 9.2

8486.20 Machines and apparatus for the manufacture of semiconductor devices or electronic integrated circuits 1,371 570 2,246 294.1

Total of items shown 137,358 139,972 152,684 9.1

All other HTS subheadings 244,839 247,619 265,153 7.1

Total of all commodities 382,197 387,591 417,837 7.8

Source: USITC DataWeb (accessed February 12, 2015); data compiled from the official statistics of the U.S. Department of Commerce.

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.”
Year in Trade

U.S. International Trade Commission | 303

Table A.27: U.S. merchandise trade with Canada, by USITC digest sector, 2012–14

Sector 

grouping Description 2012 2013 2014

% change 

2013–14

Million $

Total exports

1 Agricultural products 25,429 26,568 27,258 2.6

2 Forest products 10,902 11,008 10,785 -2.0

3 Chemicals and related products 40,210 40,515 40,971 1.1

4 Energy-related products 19,692 25,860 33,587 29.9

5 Textiles and apparel 5,251 5,423 5,459 0.7

6 Footwear 419 459 493 7.3

7 Minerals and metals 32,350 31,851 30,746 -3.5

8 Machinery 30,710 30,656 31,756 3.6

9 Transportation equipment 76,651 77,510 77,300 -0.3

10 Electronic products 35,799 35,147 34,841 -0.9

11 Miscellaneous manufactures 9,362 9,441 9,837 4.2

12 Special provisions 5,874 7,171 9,091 26.8

Total 292,651 301,610 312,125 3.5

General imports

1 Agricultural products 23,214 24,935 26,370 5.8

2 Forest products 16,464 18,088 18,942 4.7

3 Chemicals and related products 33,540 33,299 33,529 0.7

4 Energy-related products 103,792 110,241 116,232 5.4

5 Textiles and apparel 2,414 2,323 2,302 -0.9

6 Footwear 49 47 58 24.7

7 Minerals and metals 32,431 32,670 33,272 1.8

8 Machinery 13,374 13,589 13,659 0.5

9 Transportation equipment 73,442 71,518 74,189 3.7

10 Electronic products 9,521 9,123 9,104 -0.2

11 Miscellaneous manufactures 4,474 4,401 4,512 2.5

12 Special provisions 11,548 12,320 13,894 12.8

Total 324,264 332,553 346,063 4.1

Source: USITC DataWeb (accessed February 12, 2015); data compiled from the official statistics of the U.S. Department of Commerce.

Note: Because of rounding, figures may not add to totals shown.
Appendix A: Data Tables

304 | www.usitc.gov

Table A.28: Leading U.S. total exports to Canada, by Schedule B subheading, 2012–14

Schedule B 

subheading Description 2012 2013 2014

% change 

2013–14

Million $

2709.00 Petroleum oils and oils from bituminous minerals, crude 2,634 5,076 11,544 127.4

2710.12 Light oils and preparations 5,875 7,922 8,230 3.9

8800.00 Aircraft, spacecraft, and parts thereof 5,690 6,504 7,130 9.6

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

6,618 7,462 6,865 -8.0

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

6,036 5,960 6,789 13.9

8703.24 Passenger motor vehicles with spark-ignition internal combustion reciprocating piston engine, cyclinder capacity 

over 3,000 cc

5,595 6,156 6,431 4.5

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.

4,465 5,414 5,384 -0.5

8708.29 Parts and accessories of bodies (including cabs) for motor vehicles, n.e.s.o.i. 5,334 5,403 5,030 -6.9

2711.21 Natural gas, gaseous 2,851 3,705 4,437 19.8

8407.34 Spark-ignition reciprocating piston engines for propulsion of vehicles except railway or tramway stock, over 1,000 cc 

cylinder capacity

3,750 3,590 3,028 -15.7

8708.99 Parts and accessories for motor vehicles, n.e.s.o.i. 2,498 2,498 2,796 11.9

8708.40 Gear boxes and parts thereof, for motor vehicles 2,667 3,163 2,365 -25.2

3004.90 Medicaments, in measured doses, etc. (excluding vaccines, etc., coated bandages etc. and pharmaceutical goods), 

n.e.s.o.i.

2,485 2,199 2,356 7.1

8517.62 Machines for the reception, conversion and transmission or regeneration of voice, images or other data, including 

switching and routing apparatus

2,084 1,997 2,203 10.3

8471.30 Portable automatic data processing machines, weight not more than 10 kg, consisting of at least a central 

processing unit, keyboard & a display

1,970 1,980 2,167 9.5

8701.20 Road tractors for semi-trailers 2,269 1,889 2,047 8.4

8481.80 Taps, cocks, valves and similar appliances for pipes, vats or the like, including thermostatically controlled valves, 

n.e.s.o.i.

1,657 1,660 1,666 0.3

8471.50 Processing units other than those of 8471.41 and 8471.49, n.e.s.o.i. 1,618 1,605 1,613 0.5

8542.31 Processors or controlers 1,364 1,475 1,473 -0.1

8708.30 Brakes and servo-brakes and parts thereof n.e.s.o.i., for motor vehicles 1,287 1,315 1,370 4.1

8537.10 Boards, panels, consoles, etc. with electrical apparatus, for electric control or distribution of electricity, for a voltage 

not exceeding 1,000 v

1,049 1,210 1,295 7.0

8708.80 Suspension systems and parts thereof, for motor vehicles 1,456 1,370 1,263 -7.8

7606.12 Aluminum alloy rectangular (including square) plates, sheets and strip, over 0.2 mm thick 1,238 1,192 1,248 4.7
Year in Trade

U.S. International Trade Commission | 305

Schedule B 

subheading Description 2012 2013 2014

% change 

2013–14

8716.10 Trailers and semi-trailers for housing or camping 1,123 1,193 1,185 -0.6

8409.91 Parts for use with spark-ignition internal combustion piston engines (including rotary engines), n.e.s.o.i. 1,384 996 1,135 13.9

Total of items shown 74,999 82,937 91,051 9.8

All other HTS subheadings 217,652 218,673 221,075 1.1

Total of all commodities 292,651 301,610 312,125 3.5

Source: USITC DataWeb (accessed February 12, 2015); data compiled from the official statistics of the U.S. Department of Commerce.

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.”
Appendix A: Data Tables

306 | www.usitc.gov

Table A.29: Leading U.S. general imports from Canada, by HTS provision, 2012–14

HTS 

provision Description 2012 2013 2014

% change 

2013–14

Million $

2709.00 Petroleum oils and oils from bituminous minerals, crude 72,866 76,654 83,156 8.5

8703.24 Passenger motor vehicles with spark-ignition internal combustion reciprocating piston engine, cyclinder capacity 

over 3,000 cc

28,787 25,458 23,954 -5.9

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

16,257 17,679 18,627 5.4

2711.21 Natural gas, gaseous 7,503 9,168 10,953 19.5

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.

9,322 9,387 7,851 -16.4

2710.12 Light oils and preparations 7,114 7,136 5,728 -19.7

4407.10 Coniferous wood sawn or chipped lengthwise, sliced or peeled, whether or not planed, etc., over 6 mm (.236 in.) 

thick

3,246 4,226 4,810 13.8

8708.29 Parts and accessories of bodies (including cabs) for motor vehicles, n.e.s.o.i. 2,978 3,129 3,403 8.8

8802.40 Airplanes and other aircraft n.e.s.o.i., of an unladen weight exceeding 15,000 kg 1,467 2,294 3,331 45.2

7108.12 Gold, nonmonetary, unwrought n.e.s.o.i. (other than powder) 2,553 3,183 3,270 2.8

3004.90 Medicaments, in measured doses, etc. (excluding vaccines, etc., coated bandages etc. and pharmaceutical goods), 

n.e.s.o.i.

2,747 2,587 3,174 22.7

7601.20 Aluminum alloys, unwrought 2,158 2,112 2,661 26.0

2716.00 Electrical energy 1,914 2,429 2,626 8.1

3104.20 Potassium chloride 3,225 3,073 2,483 -19.2

8407.34 Spark-ignition reciprocating piston engines for propulsion of vehicles except railway or tramway stock, over 1,000 

cc cylinder capacity

2,612 1,900 2,458 29.4

8708.99 Parts and accessories for motor vehicles, n.e.s.o.i. 2,301 2,320 2,192 -5.5

3901.90 Polymers of ethylene n.e.s.o.i., in primary forms 1,640 1,836 2,150 17.1

7601.10 Aluminum, not alloyed, unwrought 2,065 2,358 2,083 -11.7

2711.12 Propane, liquefied 1,493 1,576 1,770 12.3

0102.29 Live cattle other than purebred breeding 1,057 1,262 1,741 37.9

4703.21 Chemical woodpulp, soda or sulfate, other than dissolving grades, semibleached or bleached, coniferous 1,398 1,446 1,518 5.0

8803.30 Parts of airplanes or helicopters, n.e.s.o.i. 1,217 1,367 1,485 8.6

3901.20 Polyethylene having a specific gravity of 0.94 or more, in primary forms 1,247 1,357 1,444 6.4

4802.61 Uncoated paper/paperboard for writing/printing/other graphic purposes n.e.s.o.i., ov 10% total fiber by 

mechanical/chemi- process, in rolls

1,401 1,491 1,400 -6.1
Year in Trade

U.S. International Trade Commission | 307

HTS 

provision Description 2012 2013 2014

% change 

2013–14

7403.11 Refined copper cathodes and sections of cathodes 925 1,274 1,359 6.6

Total of items shown 179,493 186,702 195,627 4.8

All other HTS subheadings 144,771 145,851 150,436 3.1

Total of all commodities 324,264 332,553 346,063 4.1

Source: USITC DataWeb (accessed February 12, 2015); data compiled from the official statistics of the U.S. Department of Commerce.

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.”
Appendix A: Data Tables

308 | www.usitc.gov

Table A.30: U.S. merchandise trade with China, by USITC digest sector, 2012–14

Sector 

grouping Description 2012 2013 2014

% change 

2013–14

Million $

Total exports

1 Agricultural products 27,201 26,840 26,078 -2.8

2 Forest products 6,376 6,905 7,041 2.0

3 Chemicals and related products 14,433 14,536 14,719 1.3

4 Energy-related products 2,702 3,155 2,139 -32.2

5 Textiles and apparel 1,285 1,388 1,274 -8.2

6 Footwear 54 51 56 8.9

7 Minerals and metals 12,461 12,238 10,967 -10.4

8 Machinery 8,966 9,542 10,084 5.7

9 Transportation equipment 18,506 26,057 29,932 14.9

10 Electronic products 16,893 19,304 19,897 3.1

11 Miscellaneous manufactures 802 767 845 10.1

12 Special provisions 837 954 990 3.8

Total 110,516 121,736 124,024 1.9

General imports

1 Agricultural products 7,063 6,989 7,008 0.3

2 Forest products 8,029 8,288 8,818 6.4

3 Chemicals and related products 28,022 29,470 31,874 8.2

4 Energy-related products 393 511 634 24.1

5 Textiles and apparel 45,066 46,469 47,204 1.6

6 Footwear 17,148 17,016 17,066 0.3

7 Minerals and metals 27,034 27,786 30,922 11.3

8 Machinery 41,031 44,346 48,024 8.3

9 Transportation equipment 17,046 18,052 21,499 19.1

10 Electronic products 170,940 176,141 186,289 5.8

11 Miscellaneous manufactures 59,420 60,787 62,866 3.4

12 Special provisions 4,436 4,592 4,453 -3.0

Total 425,626 440,448 466,656 6.0

Source: USITC DataWeb (accessed February 12, 2015); data compiled from the official statistics of the U.S. Department of Commerce.

Note: Because of rounding, figures may not add to totals shown.
Year in Trade

U.S. International Trade Commission | 309

Table A.31: Leading U.S. total exports to China, by Schedule B subheading, 2012–14

Schedule B 

subheading Description 2012 2013 2014

% change 

2013–14

Million $

1201.90 Soybeans, whether or not broken, other than seed 14,876 13,303 14,798 11.2

8800.00 Aircraft, spacecraft, and parts thereof 8,356 12,587 13,923 10.6

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

2,999 4,961 7,198 45.1

8703.24 Passenger motor vehicles with spark-ignition internal combustion reciprocating piston engine, cyclinder 

capacity over 3,000 cc

2,217 3,279 2,972 -9.3

8542.31 Processors or controlers 1,676 1,936 2,749 42.0

7404.00 Copper waste and scrap 2,975 2,792 2,123 -24.0

7602.00 Aluminum waste and scrap 2,366 2,249 1,764 -21.6

1007.90 Grain sorghum, other than seed 95 1,479 1,455.7

2303.30 Brewing or distilling dregs and waste, whether or not in the form of pellets 616 1,384 1,259 -9.0

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

827 1,040 1,125 8.2

8486.20 Machines and apparatus for the manufacture of semiconductor devices or electronic integrated circuits 477 834 1,119 34.3

5201.00 Cotton, not carded or combed 3,411 2,183 1,106 -49.3

8517.12 Telephones for cellular networks or for other wireless networks 782 1,434 1,092 -23.9

4707.10 Waste and scrap of unbleached kraft paper or paperboard or of corrugated paper or paperboard 1,214 1,074 1,025 -4.5

4403.20 Coniferous wood in the rough, whether or not stripped of bark or sapwood or roughly squared, not treated 568 863 876 1.6

8708.99 Parts and accessories for motor vehicles, n.e.s.o.i. 144 468 840 79.6

4703.21 Chemical woodpulp, soda or sulfate, other than dissolving grades, semibleached or bleached, coniferous 769 812 838 3.2

8517.62 Machines for the reception, conversion and transmission or regeneration of voice, images or other data, 

including switching and routing apparatus

639 652 804 23.3

8542.39 Electronic integrated circuits, n.e.s.o.i. 602 653 764 17.1

3004.90 Medicaments, in measured doses, etc. (excluding vaccines, etc., coated bandages etc. and pharmaceutical 

goods), n.e.s.o.i.

401 509 713 40.1

8542.32 Memories 618 1,044 707 -32.3

8703.90 Passenger motor vehicles, n.e.s.o.i. 158 194 678 248.5

2603.00 Copper ores and concentrates 664 610 650 6.6

2710.12 Light oils and preparations 392 581 631 8.6
Appendix A: Data Tables

310 | www.usitc.gov

Schedule B 

subheading Description 2012 2013 2014

% change 

2013–14

9030.40 Instruments and apparatus n.e.s.o.i., specially designed for telecommunications (for example, cross-talk 

meters, gain measuring instruments etc.)

583 1,011 588 -41.9

Total of items shown 48,326 56,545 61,822 9.3

All other HTS subheadings 62,189 65,191 62,202 -4.6

Total of all commodities 110,516 121,736 124,024 1.9

Source: USITC DataWeb (accessed February 12, 2015); data compiled from the official statistics of the U.S. Department of Commerce.

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.”
Year in Trade

U.S. International Trade Commission | 311

Table A.32: Leading U.S. general imports from China, by HTS provision, 2012–14

HTS 

provision Description 2012 2013 2014

% change 

2013–14

Million $

8517.12 Telephones for cellular networks or for other wireless networks 33,104 37,596 41,898 11.4

8471.30 Portable automatic data processing machines, weight not more than 10 kg, consisting of at least a central processing 

unit, keyboard & a display

40,836 39,610 38,574 -2.6

8517.62 Machines for the reception, conversion and transmission or regeneration of voice, images or other data, including 

switching and routing apparatus

10,874 11,901 13,237 11.2

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.

8,575 8,798 10,633 20.9

9503.00 Toys, including riding toys o/than bicycles, puzzles, reduced scale models 9,315 9,468 10,307 8.9

9504.50 Video game consoles and machines, other than of 9504.30; parts and acc. 4,734 4,653 4,536 -2.5

8504.40 Electrical static converters; power supplies for adp machines or units of 8471 3,676 4,061 4,484 10.4

8528.72 Reception apparatus for television, incorporating a screen or video display device, color 4,233 2,991 4,188 40.0

8443.99 Parts and accessories of printing machinery, n.e.s.o.i. 3,351 3,741 3,908 4.5

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

4,211 4,293 3,869 -9.9

8471.70 Automatic data processing storage units, n.e.s.o.i. 4,224 3,786 3,583 -5.4

6402.99 Footwear, with outer soles and uppers of rubber or plastics n.e.s.o.i., not covering the ankle 3,988 3,803 3,493 -8.2

8443.31 Machines which perform two or more of the functions of printing, copying or facsimile transmission, capable of 

connecting to an adp machine or to a ne

3,779 3,544 3,180 -10.3

6110.20 Sweaters, pullovers, sweatshirts, vests and similar articles of cotton, knitted or crocheted 3,074 3,308 3,116 -5.8

4202.92 Container bags, boxes, cases and satchels n.e.s.o.i., with outer surface of sheeting of plastics or of textile materials 3,090 3,101 3,057 -1.4

9401.61 Seats with wooden frames, upholstered, n.e.s.o.i. 2,464 2,762 2,952 6.9

8471.50 Processing units other than those of 8471.41 and 8471.49, n.e.s.o.i. 2,844 2,791 2,880 3.2

9403.20 Metal furniture, n.e.s.o.i. 2,531 2,699 2,841 5.3

6403.91 Footwear, with outer soles of rubber, plastics or composition leather and uppers of leather n.e.s.o.i., covering the 

ankle

2,550 2,471 2,805 13.5

8528.51 Monitors, other than crt, designed for use with adp machines 3,139 2,997 2,720 -9.2

6404.19 Footwear, with outer soles of rubber or plastics and uppers of textile materials, n.e.s.o.i. 2,270 2,387 2,525 5.8

9405.40 Electric lamps and lighting fittings, n.e.s.o.i. 2,078 2,422 2,525 4.2

9403.60 Wooden furniture, n.e.s.o.i. 2,390 2,420 2,516 4.0

8544.42 Insulated electric conductors, for a voltage not exceeding 1000 v, fitted with connectors 1,926 2,157 2,444 13.3
Appendix A: Data Tables

312 | www.usitc.gov

HTS 

provision Description 2012 2013 2014

% change 

2013–14

6307.90 Made-up textile articles, n.e.s.o.i. 2,159 2,194 2,349 7.1

Total of items shown 165,413 169,953 178,621 5.1

All other HTS subheadings 260,213 270,495 288,035 6.5

Total of all commodities 425,626 440,448 466,656 6.0

Source: USITC DataWeb (accessed February 12, 2015); data compiled from the official statistics of the U.S. Department of Commerce.

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.”
Year in Trade

U.S. International Trade Commission | 313

Table A.33: U.S. merchandise trade with Mexico, by USITC digest sector, 2012–14

Sector 

grouping Description 2012 2013 2014

% change 

2013–14

Million $

Total exports

1 Agricultural products 19,497 18,884 20,088 6.4

2 Forest products 5,528 5,733 5,829 1.7

3 Chemicals and related products 32,326 33,717 35,775 6.1

4 Energy-related products 24,128 23,528 24,116 2.5

5 Textiles and apparel 4,973 5,361 5,735 7.0

6 Footwear 97 121 120 -0.8

7 Minerals and metals 19,600 20,898 23,070 10.4

8 Machinery 19,676 21,212 23,168 9.2

9 Transportation equipment 35,661 39,146 41,366 5.7

10 Electronic products 45,042 47,931 50,651 5.7

11 Miscellaneous manufactures 2,764 2,655 3,018 13.7

12 Special provisions 6,615 6,893 7,391 7.2

Total 215,907 226,079 240,326 6.3

General imports

1 Agricultural products 17,752 19,296 21,194 9.8

2 Forest products 1,525 1,652 1,815 9.9

3 Chemicals and related products 9,130 9,652 10,656 10.4

4 Energy-related products 39,816 34,813 30,269 -13.1

5 Textiles and apparel 5,784 5,829 5,975 2.5

6 Footwear 492 549 500 -9.0

7 Minerals and metals 21,997 19,277 19,416 0.7

8 Machinery 25,328 26,358 28,927 9.7

9 Transportation equipment 77,861 85,139 96,238 13.0

10 Electronic products 65,628 65,174 64,730 -0.7

11 Miscellaneous manufactures 5,005 5,382 6,113 13.6

12 Special provisions 7,275 7,407 8,325 12.4

Total 277,594 280,529 294,157 4.9

Source: USITC DataWeb (accessed February 12, 2015); data compiled from the official statistics of the U.S. Department of Commerce.

Note: Because of rounding, figures may not add to totals shown.
Appendix A: Data Tables

314 | www.usitc.gov

Table A.34: Leading U.S total exports to Mexico, by Schedule B subheading, 2012–14

Schedule B 

subheading Description 2012 2013 2014

% change 

2013–14

Million $

2710.12 Light oils and preparations 11,604 11,444 10,724 -6.3

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.

8,553 9,310 10,457 12.3

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.

8,277 7,273 7,747 6.5

8408.20 Compression-ignition internal combustion piston engines (diesel or semi-diesel), for the propulsion of vehicles 

except railway or tramway stock

1,879 2,256 3,805 68.7

8708.99 Parts and accessories for motor vehicles, n.e.s.o.i. 5,255 4,521 3,554 -21.4

8708.29 Parts and accessories of bodies (including cabs) for motor vehicles, n.e.s.o.i. 2,478 3,195 3,247 1.6

2711.21 Natural gas, gaseous 1,587 2,162 2,887 33.5

8800.00 Aircraft, spacecraft, and parts thereof 2,433 3,226 2,819 -12.6

8517.62 Machines for the reception, conversion and transmission or regeneration of voice, images or other data, including 

switching and routing apparatus

2,420 2,471 2,649 7.2

3926.90 Articles of plastics, n.e.s.o.i. 1,928 2,156 2,389 10.8

8542.31 Processors or controlers 2,223 2,385 2,362 -1.0

8538.90 Parts for electrical apparatus for electrical circuits, boards, panels etc. for electric control or distribution of 

electricity, n.e.s.o.i.

1,784 1,931 2,323 20.3

1005.90 Corn (maize), other than seed corn 2,565 1,790 2,286 27.7

8708.40 Gear boxes and parts thereof, for motor vehicles 1,950 2,123 2,273 7.0

8471.70 Automatic data processing storage units, n.e.s.o.i. 2,493 2,306 2,255 -2.2

2603.00 Copper ores and concentrates 922 1,548 2,178 40.7

8542.39 Electronic integrated circuits, n.e.s.o.i. 1,584 2,026 2,005 -1.1

8703.24 Passenger motor vehicles with spark-ignition internal combustion reciprocating piston engine, cyclinder capacity 

over 3,000 cc

1,474 1,779 1,920 8.0

1201.90 Soybeans, whether or not broken, other than seed 1,860 1,538 1,819 18.3

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.

1,465 1,600 1,806 12.8

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

2,216 1,840 1,601 -13.0

7326.90 Articles of iron or steel, n.e.s.o.i. 1,389 1,435 1,559 8.6

8409.91 Parts for use with spark-ignition internal combustion piston engines (including rotary engines), n.e.s.o.i. 1,260 1,380 1,516 9.8

8544.49 Insulated electric conductors, for a voltage not exceeding 1000 v, not fitted with connectors 1,359 1,428 1,492 4.5
Year in Trade

U.S. International Trade Commission | 315

Schedule B 

subheading Description 2012 2013 2014

% change 

2013–14

9401.90 Parts of seats (except parts of medical, dentist', barbers' and similar seats), n.e.s.o.i. 831 1,074 1,340 24.7

Total of items shown 71,790 74,200 79,011 6.5

All other HTS subheadings 144,117 151,879 161,315 6.2

Total of all commodities 215,907 226,079 240,326 6.3

Source: USITC DataWeb (accessed February 12, 2015); data compiled from the official statistics of the U.S. Department of Commerce.

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.”
Appendix A: Data Tables

316 | www.usitc.gov

Table A.35: Leading U.S. general imports from Mexico, by HTS provision, 2012–14

HTS 

provision Description 2012 2013 2014

%change 

2013–14

Million $

2709.00 Petroleum oils and oils from bituminous minerals, crude 37,217 31,940 27,740 -13.2

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

12,204 15,344 14,839 -3.3

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

9,016 9,898 11,904 20.3

8528.72 Reception apparatus for television, incorporating a screen or video display device, color 11,495 10,757 10,792 0.3

8471.50 Processing units other than those of 8471.41 and 8471.49, n.e.s.o.i. 11,060 11,184 10,485 -6.2

8517.62 Machines for the reception, conversion and transmission or regeneration of voice, images or other data, 

including switching and routing apparatus

5,958 6,547 7,274 11.1

8701.20 Road tractors for semi-trailers 4,477 5,010 6,810 35.9

8544.30 Insulated ignition wiring sets and other wiring sets for vehicles, aircraft and ships 5,510 5,685 6,521 14.7

9401.90 Parts of seats (except parts of medical, dentist', barbers' and similar seats), n.e.s.o.i. 4,851 5,179 5,781 11.6

8708.29 Parts and accessories of bodies (including cabs) for motor vehicles, n.e.s.o.i. 3,459 3,869 4,237 9.5

8704.22 Motor vehicles for goods transport n.e.s.o.i., with compression-ignition internal combustion piston engine 

(diesel), gvw over 5 but not over 20 metric tons

2,842 3,293 4,019 22.1

8708.99 Parts and accessories for motor vehicles, n.e.s.o.i. 3,212 3,256 3,674 12.9

8537.10 Boards, panels, consoles, etc. with electrical apparatus, for electric control or distribution of electricity, for a 

voltage not exceeding 1,000 v

2,882 3,462 3,670 6.0

9018.90 Instruments and appliances for medical, surgical or veterinary sciences, n.e.s.o.i., and parts and accessories 2,681 2,784 3,038 9.1

8407.34 Spark-ignition reciprocating piston engines for propulsion of vehicles except railway or tramway stock, over 

1,000 cc cylinder capacity

2,051 2,752 2,785 1.2

7108.12 Gold, nonmonetary, unwrought n.e.s.o.i. (other than powder) 5,427 3,668 2,779 -24.2

8703.24 Passenger motor vehicles with spark-ignition internal combustion reciprocating piston engine, cyclinder 

capacity over 3,000 cc

3,347 2,760 2,759 0.0

8418.10 Combined refrigerator-freezers fitted with separate external doors 2,241 2,441 2,517 3.1

8708.40 Gear boxes and parts thereof, for motor vehicles 2,061 2,278 2,453 7.7

2203.00 Beer made from malt 1,825 1,925 2,450 27.3

8409.91 Parts for use with spark-ignition internal combustion piston engines (including rotary engines), n.e.s.o.i. 2,068 2,106 2,245 6.6

8415.90 Parts, n.e.s.o.i., of air conditioning machines 1,366 1,699 2,230 31.2

7106.91 Silver, unwrought n.e.s.o.i. (other than powder) 3,469 2,713 2,124 -21.7

8704.21 Motor vehicles for goods transport n.e.s.o.i., with compression-ignition internal combustion piston engine 

(diesel), gvw not over 5 metric tons

1,342 1,691 2,092 23.7
Year in Trade

U.S. International Trade Commission | 317

HTS 

provision Description 2012 2013 2014

%change 

2013–14

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

738 791 2,089 164.0

Total of items shown 142,798 143,034 147,307 3.0

All other HTS subheadings 134,796 137,495 146,851 6.8

Total of all commodities 277,594 280,529 294,157 4.9

Source: USITC DataWeb (accessed February 12, 2015); data compiled from the official statistics of the U.S. Department of Commerce.

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.”
Appendix A: Data Tables

318 | www.usitc.gov

Table A.36: U.S. merchandise trade with Japan, by USITC digest sector, 2012–14

Sector 

grouping Description 2012 2013 2014

% change 

2013–14

Million $

Total exports

1 Agricultural products 14,720 13,393 14,401 7.5

2 Forest products 2,187 2,250 2,190 -2.7

3 Chemicals and related products 12,694 11,199 11,736 4.8

4 Energy-related products 3,484 3,307 2,974 -10.1

5 Textiles and apparel 697 722 660 -8.6

6 Footwear 92 84 77 -8.0

7 Minerals and metals 3,443 3,654 3,874 6.0

8 Machinery 3,543 3,877 4,347 12.1

9 Transportation equipment 11,924 10,507 10,421 -0.8

10 Electronic products 14,270 13,336 13,111 -1.7

11 Miscellaneous manufactures 1,889 1,864 1,949 4.6

12 Special provisions 1,022 1,011 1,223 21.0

Total 69,964 65,206 66,964 2.7

General imports

1 Agricultural products 787 763 782 2.5

2 Forest products 525 468 452 -3.3

3 Chemicals and related products 12,916 12,660 12,642 -0.1

4 Energy-related products 697 779 568 -27.0

5 Textiles and apparel 758 712 745 4.6

6 Footwear 2 3 2 -37.7

7 Minerals and metals 8,153 7,433 7,399 -0.5

8 Machinery 20,832 18,908 18,749 -0.8

9 Transportation equipment 70,144 67,913 65,156 -4.1

10 Electronic products 26,304 24,217 22,898 -5.4

11 Miscellaneous manufactures 1,597 1,223 1,148 -6.1

12 Special provisions 3,723 3,495 3,397 -2.8

Total 146,438 138,573 133,939 -3.3

Source: USITC DataWeb (accessed February 12, 2015); data compiled from the official statistics of the U.S. Department of 

Commerce.

Note: Because of rounding, figures may not add to totals shown.
Year in Trade

U.S. International Trade Commission | 319

Table A.37: Leading U.S. total exports to Japan, by Schedule B subheading, 2012–14

Schedule B 

subheading Description 2012 2013 2014

% change 

2013–14

Million $

8800.00 Aircraft, spacecraft, and parts thereof 7,168 6,155 6,508 5.7

1005.90 Corn (maize), other than seed corn 2,988 1,849 2,686 45.3

3004.90 Medicaments, in measured doses, etc. (excluding vaccines, etc., coated bandages etc. and pharmaceutical goods), 

n.e.s.o.i.

2,234 1,903 2,232 17.3

9018.90 Instruments and appliances for medical, surgical or veterinary sciences, n.e.s.o.i., and parts and accessories thereof 1,262 1,330 1,206 -9.3

0203.19 Meat of swine, n.e.s.o.i., fresh or chilled 1,007 1,075 999 -7.1

1201.90 Soybeans, whether or not broken, other than seed 1,126 1,004 995 -0.9

1001.99 Wheat & meslin other than durum or seed wheat 1,079 1,027 924 -10.0

2711.12 Propane, liquefied 117 544 906 66.6

2909.19 Acyclic ethers (excluding diethyl ether) and their halogenated, sulfonated, nitrated or nitrosated derivatives 685 668 855 28.0

8486.20 Machines and apparatus for the manufacture of semiconductor devices or electronic integrated circuits 261 695 779 11.9

0201.30 Meat of bovine animals, boneless, fresh or chilled 570 708 753 6.3

2804.61 Silicon, containing by weight not less than 99.99% of silicon 625 643 747 16.2

8517.62 Machines for the reception, conversion and transmission or regeneration of voice, images or other data, including 

switching and routing apparatus

912 739 746 0.9

9018.39 Medical etc. needles n.e.s.o.i., catheters, cannulae and the like; parts and accessories therof 935 805 739 -8.2

0203.29 Meat of swine, n.e.s.o.i., frozen 758 723 731 1.0

7113.19 Jewelry and parts thereof, of precious metal other than silver 474 510 615 20.6

8803.30 Parts of airplanes or helicopters, n.e.s.o.i. 639 657 602 -8.3

0202.30 Meat of bovine animals, boneless, frozen 307 456 556 21.9

9021.39 Artificial parts of the body (other than artificial joints) and parts and accessories thereof, n.e.s.o.i. 722 692 530 -23.4

3002.10 Antisera and other blood fractions, and modified immunological products 452 441 514 16.6

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

614 579 503 -13.2

2701.12 Bituminous coal, whether or not pulverized, but not agglomerated 897 612 460 -24.9

3822.00 Composite diagnotic or laborartory reagents, other than those pharmaceuticals in heading 3002 or 3006; certified 

reference materials

486 465 450 -3.1

8529.90 Parts (except antennas and reflectors) for use with radio transmission, radar, radio navigational aid, reception and 

television apparatus, n.e.s.o.i.

544 358 432 20.8
Appendix A: Data Tables

320 | www.usitc.gov

Schedule B 

subheading Description 2012 2013 2014

% change 

2013–14

4403.20 Coniferous wood in the rough, whether or not stripped of bark or sapwood or roughly squared, not treated 350 455 424 -6.8

Total of items shown 27,214 25,092 26,892 7.2

All other HTS subheadings 42,749 40,113 40,072 -0.1

Total of all commodities 69,964 65,206 66,964 2.7

Source: USITC DataWeb (accessed February 12, 2015); data compiled from the official statistics of the U.S. Department of Commerce.

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.”
Year in Trade

U.S. International Trade Commission | 321

Table A.38: Leading U.S. general imports from Japan, by HTS provision, 2012–14

HTS 

provision Description 2012 2013 2014

% change 

2013–14

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

21,033 22,097 20,474 -7.3

8703.24 Passenger motor vehicles with spark-ignition internal combustion reciprocating piston engine, cyclinder capacity over 

3,000 cc

13,514 13,054 12,145 -7.0

8803.30 Parts of airplanes or helicopters, n.e.s.o.i. 3,236 3,811 4,828 26.7

8708.40 Gear boxes and parts thereof, for motor vehicles 3,797 3,366 3,098 -8.0

8443.99 Parts and accessories of printing machinery, n.e.s.o.i. 3,532 3,163 2,987 -5.6

8708.99 Parts and accessories for motor vehicles, n.e.s.o.i. 2,927 2,313 2,196 -5.1

8429.52 Mechanical shovels, excavators and shovel loaders with 360 degree revolving superstructure, self-propelled 2,701 1,871 2,056 9.9

8411.91 Parts of turbojets or turbopropellers 1,416 1,665 1,869 12.3

8486.20 Machines and apparatus for the manufacture of semiconductor devices or electronic integrated circuits 2,088 1,603 1,536 -4.2

2933.79 Lactams (excluding 6-hexanelactam), n.e.s.o.i. 1,112 1,303 1,389 6.6

8409.91 Parts for use with spark-ignition internal combustion piston engines (including rotary engines), n.e.s.o.i. 1,283 1,249 1,327 6.2

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

2,699 2,523 1,186 -53.0

8525.80 Television cameras; digital cameras and video camera recorders 2,299 1,449 1,067 -26.4

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

839 1,023 990 -3.2

8408.90 Compression-ignition internal combustion piston engines (diesel or semi-diesel engines), n.e.s.o.i. 1,012 811 953 17.5

8486.90 Parts and accessories 1,042 956 903 -5.6

9018.19 Electro-diagnostic apparatus (and apparatus for functional exploratory examination or for checking physiological 

parameters) n.e.s.o.i., and parts, etc.

726 781 878 12.5

8481.80 Taps, cocks, valves and similar appliances for pipes, vats or the like, including thermostatically controlled valves, 

n.e.s.o.i.

794 751 804 7.0

8457.10 Machining centers for working metal 910 715 784 9.7

8701.90 Tractors, n.e.s.o.i. 911 783 774 -1.2

8517.62 Machines for the reception, conversion and transmission or regeneration of voice, images or other data, including 

switching and routing apparatus

719 676 733 8.5

8407.21 Outboard engines for marine propulsion 510 593 700 18.1

8542.31 Processors or controlers 727 701 700 -0.1

8504.40 Electrical static converters; power supplies for adp machines or units of 8471 644 653 692 5.9
Appendix A: Data Tables

322 | www.usitc.gov

HTS 

provision Description 2012 2013 2014

% change 

2013–14

8537.10 Boards, panels, consoles, etc. with electrical apparatus, for electric control or distribution of electricity, for a voltage 

not exceeding 1,000 v

550 617 634 2.7

Total of items shown 71,018 68,528 65,703 -4.1

All other HTS subheadings 75,419 70,045 68,236 -2.6

Total of all commodities 146,438 138,573 133,939 -3.3

Source: USITC DataWeb (accessed February 12, 2015); data compiled from the official statistics of the U.S. Department of Commerce.

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.”
Year in Trade

U.S. International Trade Commission | 323

Table A.39: U.S. merchandise trade with Korea, by ITC digest sectors, 2012–14

Sector 

grouping Description 2012 2013 2014

% change 

2013–14

Million $

Total exports

1 Agricultural products 6,540 5,835 7,524 28.9

2 Forest products 850 866 890 2.8

3 Chemicals and related products 6,902 7,157 7,407 3.5

4 Energy-related products 1,971 1,636 2,035 24.4

5 Textiles and apparel 387 409 391 -4.4

6 Footwear 112 94 88 -6.3

7 Minerals and metals 4,117 4,082 3,682 -9.8

8 Machinery 6,042 5,944 6,829 14.9

9 Transportation equipment 5,712 6,380 6,149 -3.6

10 Electronic products 8,249 7,974 8,052 1.0

11 Miscellaneous manufactures 802 769 813 5.7

12 Special provisions 581 569 684 20.2

Total 42,265 41,715 44,544 6.8

General imports

1 Agricultural products 555 638 671 5.2

2 Forest products 516 540 617 14.4

3 Chemicals and related products 5,555 5,030 5,855 16.4

4 Energy-related products 3,072 3,035 3,067 1.1

5 Textiles and apparel 1,338 1,313 1,332 1.4

6 Footwear 26 23 18 -20.1

7 Minerals and metals 5,910 5,552 7,706 38.8

8 Machinery 6,892 6,635 7,101 7.0

9 Transportation equipment 18,804 20,841 24,042 15.4

10 Electronic products 14,610 16,701 17,381 4.1

11 Miscellaneous manufactures 668 828 819 -1.0

12 Special provisions 954 1,253 997 -20.4

Total 58,902 62,386 69,606 11.6

Source: USITC DataWeb (accessed February 12, 2015); data compiled from the official statistics of the U.S. Department of 

Commerce.

Note: Because of rounding, figures may not add to totals shown.
Appendix A: Data Tables

324 | www.usitc.gov

Table A.40: Leading U.S. total exports to Korea, by Schedule B subheading, 2012–14

Schedule B 

subheading Description 2012 2013 2014

% change 

2013–14

Million $

8542.31 Processors or controlers 2,017 2,456 2,582 5.1

8486.20 Machines and apparatus for the manufacture of semiconductor devices or electronic integrated circuits 1,982 1,321 2,182 65.2

8800.00 Aircraft, spacecraft, and parts thereof 2,593 2,613 2,001 -23.4

1005.90 Corn (maize), other than seed corn 618 243 1,058 334.8

3004.90 Medicaments, in measured doses, etc. (excluding vaccines, etc., coated bandages etc. and pharmaceutical goods), 

n.e.s.o.i.

545 688 701 2.0

2710.12 Light oils and preparations 43 260 670 157.9

8431.43 Parts for boring or sinking machinery, n.e.s.o.i. 226 462 477 3.2

7204.49 Ferrous waste and scrap, n.e.s.o.i. 947 746 474 -36.4

8486.90 Parts and accessories 501 444 463 4.1

8542.32 Memories 1,440 660 436 -33.8

8803.30 Parts of airplanes or helicopters, n.e.s.o.i. 415 468 418 -10.7

1001.99 Wheat & meslin other than durum or seed wheat 645 340 414 22.0

2701.12 Bituminous coal, whether or not pulverized, but not agglomerated 683 511 409 -19.9

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

196 341 402 17.7

0202.20 Meat of bovine animals, cuts with bone in (other than half or whole carcasses), frozen 206 265 365 37.8

1201.90 Soybeans, whether or not broken, other than seed 395 280 361 28.7

2926.10 Acrylonitrile 513 327 351 7.2

0203.29 Meat of swine, n.e.s.o.i., frozen 308 189 346 83.6

8542.39 Electronic integrated circuits, n.e.s.o.i. 361 394 345 -12.2

0202.30 Meat of bovine animals, boneless, frozen 269 215 335 56.1

8802.40 Airplanes and other aircraft n.e.s.o.i., of an unladen weight exceeding 15,000 kg 252 36 313 777.6

8703.33 Passenger motor vehicles with compression-ignition internal combustion piston engine (diesel), cylinder capacity 

over 2,500 cc

188 185 285 54.0

7110.21 Palladium, unwrought or in powder form 230 268 276 2.6

2902.50 Styrene (vinylbenzene; phenylethylene) 122 264 275 3.8
Year in Trade

U.S. International Trade Commission | 325

Schedule B 

subheading Description 2012 2013 2014

% change 

2013–14

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

249 294 270 -8.1

Total of items shown 15,944 14,270 16,210 13.6

All other HTS subheadings 26,321 27,445 28,334 3.2

Total of all commodities 42,265 41,715 44,544 6.8

Source: USITC DataWeb (accessed February 12, 2015); data compiled from the official statistics of the U.S. Department of Commerce.

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.”
Appendix A: Data Tables

326 | www.usitc.gov

Table A.41: Leading U.S. general imports from Korea, by HTS provision, 2012–14

HTS 

provision Description 2012 2013 2014

% change 

2013–14

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

8,818 8,578 10,159 18.4

8517.12 Telephones for cellular networks or for other wireless networks 4,525 6,087 6,525 7.2

8703.24 Passenger motor vehicles with spark-ignition internal combustion reciprocating piston engine, cyclinder capacity over 

3,000 cc

1,614 2,268 2,794 23.2

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.

2,757 2,495 2,782 11.5

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.

1,135 1,523 1,815 19.2

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

188 1,257 1,627 29.5

8542.39 Electronic integrated circuits, n.e.s.o.i. 1,816 1,692 1,520 -10.2

8708.99 Parts and accessories for motor vehicles, n.e.s.o.i. 974 1,049 1,273 21.4

7306.29 Seamed steel casing or tubing of kind used in drill. oil/gas, w/ext. diam 406.4mm or less or o/than circ. x-sect 831 785 1,265 61.1

8418.10 Combined refrigerator-freezers fitted with separate external doors 976 1,027 993 -3.3

4011.10 New pneumatic tires, of rubber, of a kind used on motor cars (including station wagons and racing cars) 1,299 1,010 939 -7.1

8708.29 Parts and accessories of bodies (including cabs) for motor vehicles, n.e.s.o.i. 805 834 875 4.8

2902.20 Benzene 594 357 816 128.6

8517.62 Machines for the reception, conversion and transmission or regeneration of voice, images or other data, including 

switching and routing apparatus

460 674 701 4.0

8523.51 Solid state non volatile storage devices 326 417 629 50.7

8517.70 Parts of telecommunications apparatus 359 385 584 51.8

8803.30 Parts of airplanes or helicopters, n.e.s.o.i. 415 485 573 18.2

8429.52 Mechanical shovels, excavators and shovel loaders with 360 degree revolving superstructure, self-propelled 652 456 488 6.9

8708.94 Steering wheels, steering columns and steering boxes and parts thereof, for motor vehicles 378 411 451 9.8

8542.32 Memories 543 876 449 -48.7

8451.29 Drying machines (except centrifugal type) for textile yarns, fabrics or made up textile articles, with a dry linen capacity 

exceeding 10 kg

477 597 441 -26.1

7306.19 Seamed (o/than welded stainless steel) pipe, w/ext. diam 406.4mm or less or o/than circ. x-sect, line pipe of a kind used 

for oil and gas pipelines

514 428 436 1.9

8708.40 Gear boxes and parts thereof, for motor vehicles 444 614 402 -34.6
Year in Trade

U.S. International Trade Commission | 327

HTS 

provision Description 2012 2013 2014

% change 

2013–14

8542.31 Processors or controlers 343 419 397 -5.3

8409.91 Parts for use with spark-ignition internal combustion piston engines (including rotary engines), n.e.s.o.i. 308 364 395 8.5

Total of items shown 31,551 35,090 39,331 12.1

All other HTS subheadings 27,351 27,297 30,275 10.9

Total of all commodities 58,902 62,386 69,606 11.6

Source: USITC DataWeb (accessed February 12, 2015); data compiled from the official statistics of the U.S. Department of Commerce.

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.”
Appendix A: Data Tables

328 | www.usitc.gov

Table A.42: U.S. merchandise trade with Brazil, by USITC digest sector, 2012–14

Sector 

grouping Description 2012 2013 2014

% change 

2013–14

Million $

Total exports

1 Agricultural products 720 1,968 1,651 -16.1

2 Forest products 450 416 404 -3.0

3 Chemicals and related products 9,540 10,339 10,352 0.1

4 Energy-related products 7,498 6,799 7,508 10.4

5 Textiles and apparel 304 273 303 10.9

6 Footwear 3 2 5 126.3

7 Minerals and metals 1,429 1,470 1,254 -14.7

8 Machinery 4,165 4,353 3,958 -9.1

9 Transportation equipment 10,334 9,397 8,547 -9.0

10 Electronic products 8,249 8,010 7,258 -9.4

11 Miscellaneous manufactures 325 317 401 26.6

12 Special provisions 791 774 776 0.2

Total 43,807 44,119 42,418 -3.9

General imports

1 Agricultural products 5,078 4,646 4,406 -5.2

2 Forest products 1,805 2,161 2,166 0.3

3 Chemicals and related products 2,624 2,276 2,337 2.7

4 Energy-related products 9,285 5,761 6,367 10.5

5 Textiles and apparel 112 117 131 12.2

6 Footwear 210 199 208 4.2

7 Minerals and metals 5,651 5,232 6,237 19.2

8 Machinery 1,253 1,067 997 -6.6

9 Transportation equipment 3,419 3,368 4,232 25.7

10 Electronic products 327 263 273 3.8

11 Miscellaneous manufactures 418 461 384 -16.7

12 Special provisions 1,942 2,084 2,599 24.7

Total 32,123 27,634 30,337 9.8

Source: USITC DataWeb (accessed February 12, 2015); data compiled from the official statistics of the U.S. Department of 

Commerce.

Note: Because of rounding, figures may not add to totals shown.
Year in Trade

U.S. International Trade Commission | 329

Table A.43: Leading U.S. total exports to Brazil, by Schedule B subheading, 2012–14

Schedule B 

subheading Description 2012 2013 2014

% change 

2013–14

Million $

8800.00 Aircraft, spacecraft, and parts thereof 5,714 5,206 4,736 -9.0

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.

3,929 3,780 4,274 13.1

2710.12 Light oils and preparations 1,350 808 969 19.9

2711.12 Propane, liquefied 239 676 929 37.3

3004.90 Medicaments, in measured doses, etc. (excluding vaccines, etc., coated bandages etc. and pharmaceutical goods), 

n.e.s.o.i.

716 752 844 12.3

8517.62 Machines for the reception, conversion and transmission or regeneration of voice, images or other data, including 

switching and routing apparatus

772 852 832 -2.3

2701.12 Bituminous coal, whether or not pulverized, but not agglomerated 1,235 981 784 -20.0

8542.31 Processors or controlers 1,128 1,202 769 -36.0

1001.99 Wheat & meslin other than durum or seed wheat 13 1,236 753 -39.1

3808.91 Insecticides 304 482 534 10.8

9018.90 Instruments and appliances for medical, surgical or veterinary sciences, n.e.s.o.i., and parts and accessories thereof 291 335 324 -3.3

8471.70 Automatic data processing storage units, n.e.s.o.i. 346 342 300 -12.3

3105.40 Ammonium dihydrogenorthophosphate (monoammonium phosphate) and mixtures thereof with diammonium 

hydrogenorthophosphate (diammonium phosphate)

186 193 287 49.1

2815.12 Sodium hydroxide (caustic soda), in aqueous solution (soda lye or liquid soda) 375 305 271 -11.2

2902.50 Styrene (vinylbenzene; phenylethylene) 246 308 267 -13.3

2207.10 Ethyl alcohol, undenatured, of an alcoholic strength by volume of 80% vol. or higher 122 113 266 135.3

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.

388 319 265 -16.8

3901.90 Polymers of ethylene n.e.s.o.i., in primary forms 145 243 247 1.5

8431.43 Parts for boring or sinking machinery, n.e.s.o.i. 415 280 246 -12.2

8708.99 Parts and accessories for motor vehicles, n.e.s.o.i. 211 232 242 4.6

3808.93 Herbicides, anti-sprouting products and plant-growth regulators 165 200 236 17.6

2931.90 Other organo inorganic compounds 75 152 219 44.4

9018.39 Medical etc. needles n.e.s.o.i., catheters, cannulae and the like; parts and accessories therof 176 199 217 9.3
Appendix A: Data Tables

330 | www.usitc.gov

Schedule B 

subheading Description 2012 2013 2014

% change 

2013–14

8481.80 Polyethers n.e.s.o.i., in primary forms 217 259 210 -18.8

Taps, cocks, valves and similar appliances for pipes, vats or the like, including thermostatically controlled valves, 

n.e.s.o.i.

153 179 196 9.4

Total of items shown 18,911 19,633 19,220 -2.1

All other HTS subheadings 24,896 24,485 23,198 -5.3

Total of all commodities 43,807 44,119 42,418 -3.9

Source: USITC DataWeb (accessed February 12, 2015); data compiled from the official statistics of the U.S. Department of Commerce.

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.”
Year in Trade

U.S. International Trade Commission | 331

Table A.44: Leading U.S. general imports from Brazil, by HTS provision, 2012–14

HTS 

provision Description 2012 2013 2014

% change 

2013–14

Million $

2709.00 Petroleum oils and oils from bituminous minerals, crude 7,506 4,163 5,152 23.8

8802.40 Airplanes and other aircraft n.e.s.o.i., of an unladen weight exceeding 15,000 kg 395 1,135 1,730 52.3

7207.12 Semifinished products of iron or nonalloy steel, under 0.25% (wt.) carbon, rectangular cross section, width not 

less than twice the thickness

1,890 1,487 1,553 4.5

0901.11 Coffee, not roasted, not decaffeinated 1,242 1,007 1,265 25.6

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.

1,612 1,331 1,022 -23.2

4703.29 Chemical woodpulp, soda or sulfate, other than dissolving grades, semibleached or bleached, nonconiferous 820 1,032 932 -9.7

7201.10 Nonalloy pig iron containing 0.5% (wt.) or less phosphorus, in primary forms 882 688 644 -6.5

6802.93 Worked monumental or building stone n.e.s.o.i., of granite 477 606 639 5.5

1201.90 Soybeans, whether or not broken, other than seed 183 555 203.1

2207.10 Ethyl alcohol, undenatured, of an alcoholic strength by volume of 80% vol. or higher 1,463 1,207 492 -59.2

7224.90 Semifinished products of alloy steel (other than stainless) n.e.s.o.i. 9 265 463 75.0

8409.99 Parts for use with compression-ignition internal combustion piston engines, n.e.s.o.i. 422 335 333 -0.5

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 458 448 304 -32.2

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

217 277 296 6.8

7202.93 Ferroniobium 287 219 288 31.6

2009.11 Orange juice, frozen, whether or not sweetened 155 154 255 65.3

2401.20 Tobacco, partly or wholly stemmed/stripped 360 397 251 -36.8

2902.20 Benzene 175 248 239 -3.5

1602.50 Meat or meat offal of bovine animals, prepared or preserved, n.e.s.o.i. 196 225 218 -3.1

2804.69 Silicon, containing by weight less than 99.99% of silicon 218 179 213 19.3

4802.56 Paper/paperboard for writing/printing/other graphic purpose, wt 40g/m2-150g/m2, n/o 10% fiber by 

mechanical/chemi- process, sized sheets

137 186 207 11.6

8803.30 Parts of airplanes or helicopters, n.e.s.o.i. 109 122 204 67.0

8412.90 Parts for engines and motors, n.e.s.o.i. 438 183 196 6.8

8429.20 Graders and levelers, self-propelled 352 151 190 25.8
Appendix A: Data Tables

332 | www.usitc.gov

HTS 

provision Description 2012 2013 2014

% change 

2013–14

2601.12 Agglomerated iron ores 41 31 187 499.1

Total of items shown 19,862 16,259 17,828 9.6

All other HTS subheadings 12,262 11,375 12,509 10.0

Total of all commodities 32,123 27,634 30,337 9.8

Source: USITC DataWeb (accessed February 12, 2015); data compiled from the official statistics of the U.S. Department of Commerce.

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.”
Year in Trade

U.S. International Trade Commission | 333

Table A.45: U.S. merchandise trade with Taiwan, by USITC digest sector, 2012–14

Sector 

grouping Description 2012 2013 2014

% change 

2013–14

Million $

Total exports

1 Agricultural products 3,301 3,207 3,639 13.5

2 Forest products 479 543 513 -5.6

3 Chemicals and related products 4,519 4,310 4,396 2.0

4 Energy-related products 663 1,227 1,063 -13.4

5 Textiles and apparel 119 113 118 5.1

6 Footwear 9 9 10 17.5

7 Minerals and metals 2,619 2,183 2,011 -7.8

8 Machinery 4,757 4,894 4,535 -7.3

9 Transportation equipment 1,375 2,339 3,508 50.0

10 Electronic products 5,761 5,367 5,694 6.1

11 Miscellaneous manufactures 325 880 850 -3.4

12 Special provisions 411 401 498 24.3

Total 24,337 25,472 26,836 5.4

General imports

1 Agricultural products 468 474 500 5.4

2 Forest products 208 215 215 0.1

3 Chemicals and related products 3,132 3,225 3,572 10.8

4 Energy-related products 287 26 55 110.5

5 Textiles and apparel 1,154 1,140 1,187 4.1

6 Footwear 43 50 51 1.4

7 Minerals and metals 5,188 5,114 5,736 12.2

8 Machinery 3,951 4,006 4,366 9.0

9 Transportation equipment 3,083 3,176 3,365 5.9

10 Electronic products 17,253 16,378 17,385 6.1

11 Miscellaneous manufactures 2,903 2,819 2,905 3.1

12 Special provisions 1,192 1,315 1,234 -6.2

Total 38,861 37,940 40,572 6.9

Source: USITC DataWeb (accessed February 12, 2015); data compiled from the official statistics of the U.S. Department of 

Commerce.

Note: Because of rounding, figures may not add to totals shown.
Appendix A: Data Tables

334 | www.usitc.gov

Table A.46: Leading U.S. total exports to Taiwan, by Schedule B subheading, 2012–14

Schedule B 

subheading Description 2012 2013 2014

% change 

2013–14

Million $

8486.20 Machines and apparatus for the manufacture of semiconductor devices or electronic integrated circuits 1,925 2,355 2,131 -9.5

8800.00 Aircraft, spacecraft, and parts thereof 663 930 1,924 106.9

8542.32 Memories 1,175 994 1,248 25.6

7204.49 Ferrous waste and scrap, n.e.s.o.i. 1,219 967 822 -15.0

1201.90 Soybeans, whether or not broken, other than seed 763 576 729 26.6

2710.12 Light oils and preparations 360 793 728 -8.2

8542.39 Electronic integrated circuits, n.e.s.o.i. 861 690 710 2.9

8542.31 Processors or controlers 432 509 600 17.9

8486.90 Parts and accessories 464 538 542 0.8

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.

21 564 528 -6.4

8803.30 Parts of airplanes or helicopters, n.e.s.o.i. 169 398 493 24.0

1005.90 Corn (maize), other than seed corn 310 181 402 122.8

1001.99 Wheat & meslin other than durum or seed wheat 357 371 348 -6.2

8802.12 Helicopters of an unladen weight exceeding 2,000 kg 346 344 -0.6

9031.41 Optical instruments for inspecting semiconductor wafers or devices or for inspecting photomasks or reticles used in manufg 

semiconductor devices

467 272 283 3.8

8517.62 Machines for the reception, conversion and transmission or regeneration of voice, images or other data, including switching 

and routing apparatus

408 405 270 -33.3

3004.90 Medicaments, in measured doses, etc. (excluding vaccines, etc., coated bandages etc. and pharmaceutical goods), n.e.s.o.i. 173 216 214 -1.2

2933.71 6-hexanelactam (epsilon-caprolactam) 151 184 199 8.2

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.

130 162 181 12.1

2804.61 Silicon, containing by weight not less than 99.99% of silicon 158 151 178 18.1

2844.20 Uranium and its compounds enriched in u235; plutonium and its compounds; alloys and other products containing enriched 

uranium or plutonium

171 114 168 47.0

9030.90 Parts and accessories of instruments and apparatus for measuring, checking or detecting electrical quantities, or ionizing 

radiations, n.e.s.o.i.

115 133 164 23.3

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

205 282 163 -42.1
Year in Trade

U.S. International Trade Commission | 335

Schedule B 

subheading Description 2012 2013 2014

% change 

2013–14

8703.24 Passenger motor vehicles with spark-ignition internal combustion reciprocating piston engine, cyclinder capacity over 3,000 cc 88 112 161 43.3

7106.10 Silver powder 181 140 160 14.6

Total of items shown 10,966 12,381 13,690 10.6

All other HTS subheadings 13,372 13,092 13,146 0.4

Total of all commodities 24,337 25,472 26,836 5.4

Source: USITC DataWeb (accessed February 12, 2015); data compiled from the official statistics of the U.S. Department of Commerce.

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.” 
Appendix A: Data Tables

336 | www.usitc.gov

Table A.47: Leading U.S. general imports from Taiwan, by HTS provision, 2012–14

HTS 

provision Description 2012 2013 2014

% change 

2013–14

Million $

8517.12 Telephones for cellular networks or for other wireless networks 2,422 2,011 1,627 -19.1

8542.32 Memories 1,060 1,392 1,527 9.7

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.

1,300 1,396 1,421 1.8

8542.39 Electronic integrated circuits, n.e.s.o.i. 1,133 1,185 1,403 18.4

8542.31 Processors or controlers 890 871 1,006 15.5

8517.62 Machines for the reception, conversion and transmission or regeneration of voice, images or other data, 

including switching and routing apparatus

545 623 996 59.8

8541.40 Photosensitive semiconductor devices, including photovoltaic cells; light-emitting diodes 464 645 829 28.6

8526.91 Radio navigational aid apparatus 1,377 808 809 0.2

8523.51 Solid state non volatile storage devices 515 553 690 24.8

8512.20 Electrical lighting or visual signaling equipment, for use on cycles or motor vehicles, except for use on bicycles 446 491 557 13.6

7318.15 Threaded screws and bolts n.e.s.o.i., with or without their nuts or washers, of iron or steel 512 493 511 3.6

8528.71 Reception apparatus for television, not designed to incorporate a screen or video display device 950 531 488 -8.2

8525.80 Television cameras; digital cameras and video camera recorders 552 612 480 -21.6

7318.14 Self-tapping screws, threaded, of iron or steel 428 428 479 11.9

8708.29 Parts and accessories of bodies (including cabs) for motor vehicles, n.e.s.o.i. 444 463 457 -1.2

8471.30 Portable automatic data processing machines, weight not more than 10 kg, consisting of at least a central 

processing unit, keyboard & a display

436 366 445 21.7

8712.00 Bicycles and other cycles (including delivery tricycles), not motorized 429 432 401 -7.2

8534.00 Printed circuits 355 371 371 0.2

8481.80 Taps, cocks, valves and similar appliances for pipes, vats or the like, including thermostatically controlled valves, 

n.e.s.o.i.

321 319 366 14.6

7318.16 Nuts, threaded, of iron or steel 312 325 359 10.3

8471.70 Automatic data processing storage units, n.e.s.o.i. 324 352 334 -5.2

9506.91 Articles and equipment for general physical exercise, gymnastics or athletics; n.e.s.o.i.; parts and accessories 

thereof

288 301 319 5.7

8504.40 Electrical static converters; power supplies for adp machines or units of 8471 318 319 297 -6.9

8708.99 Parts and accessories for motor vehicles, n.e.s.o.i. 269 271 283 4.4
Year in Trade

U.S. International Trade Commission | 337

HTS 

provision Description 2012 2013 2014

% change 

2013–14

9403.20 Metal furniture, n.e.s.o.i. 259 216 278 28.7

Total of items shown 16,349 15,775 16,733 6.1

All other HTS subheadings 22,512 22,165 23,839 7.6

Total of all commodities 38,861 37,940 40,572 6.9

Source: USITC DataWeb (accessed February 12, 2015); data compiled from the official statistics of the U.S. Department of Commerce.

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.”
Appendix A: Data Tables

338 | www.usitc.gov

Table A.48: U.S. merchandise trade with India, by USITC digest sector, 2012–14

Sector 

grouping Description 2012 2013 2014

% change 

2013–14

Million $

Total exports

1 Agricultural products 879 920 1,134 23.4

2 Forest products 775 763 905 18.7

3 Chemicals and related products 3,678 3,288 3,146 -4.3

4 Energy-related products 1,697 1,336 1,318 -1.4

5 Textiles and apparel 178 171 178 4.2

6 Footwear 4 3 3 1.3

7 Minerals and metals 7,036 6,533 6,215 -4.9

8 Machinery 1,857 1,558 1,535 -1.5

9 Transportation equipment 2,566 3,863 3,732 -3.4

10 Electronic products 2,665 2,668 2,735 2.5

11 Miscellaneous manufactures 378 420 399 -5.0

12 Special provisions 392 319 327 2.3

Total 22,106 21,842 21,628 -1.0

General imports

1 Agricultural products 5,793 4,455 4,440 -0.3

2 Forest products 158 179 205 14.9

3 Chemicals and related products 8,063 8,294 8,879 7.1

4 Energy-related products 3,270 3,946 4,622 17.1

5 Textiles and apparel 6,420 6,903 7,383 7.0

6 Footwear 266 297 349 17.4

7 Minerals and metals 8,673 10,343 11,066 7.0

8 Machinery 2,003 1,827 2,181 19.4

9 Transportation equipment 1,743 1,448 1,891 30.5

10 Electronic products 1,284 1,194 1,224 2.5

11 Miscellaneous manufactures 2,299 2,446 2,565 4.9

12 Special provisions 542 514 424 -17.5

Total 40,513 41,845 45,228 8.1

Source: USITC DataWeb (accessed February 12, 2015); data compiled from the official statistics of the U.S. Department of 

Commerce.

Note: Because of rounding, figures may not add to totals shown.
Year in Trade

U.S. International Trade Commission | 339

Table A.49: Leading U.S. total exports to India, by Schedule B subheading, 2012–14

Schedule B 

subheading Description 2012 2013 2014

% change 

2013–14

Million $

7102.39 Diamonds, nonindustrial, worked, including polished or drilled 2,579 3,858 3,724 -3.5

8800.00 Aircraft, spacecraft, and parts thereof 1,235 1,592 1,421 -10.7

8802.40 Airplanes and other aircraft n.e.s.o.i., of an unladen weight exceeding 15,000 kg 0 1,152 1,357 17.9

7108.12 Gold, nonmonetary, unwrought n.e.s.o.i. (other than powder) 2,907 1,515 1,189 -21.5

2701.12 Bituminous coal, whether or not pulverized, but not agglomerated 861 400 418 4.5

0802.11 Almonds, fresh or dried, in shell 278 324 405 25.1

8517.62 Machines for the reception, conversion and transmission or regeneration of voice, images or other data, 

including switching and routing apparatus

290 309 376 21.6

2707.99 Oils and products of the distillation of high temperature coal tar, n.e.s.o.i.; similar products which have a 

predominate (wt.) aromatic constituent, n.e.s.o.i.

393 430 335 -22.0

2713.11 Petroleum coke, not calcined 196 231 315 36.5

3105.30 Diammonium hydrogenorthophosphate (diammonium phosphate) 558 315 278 -11.9

7113.19 Jewelry and parts thereof, of precious metal other than silver 223 248 238 -4.1

4702.00 Chemical woodpulp, dissolving grades 51 52 195 273.1

7204.49 Ferrous waste and scrap, n.e.s.o.i. 379 142 179 26.0

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.

90 191 162 -15.4

4707.10 Waste and scrap of unbleached kraft paper or paperboard or of corrugated paper or paperboard 145 150 159 6.0

2809.20 Phosphoric acid and polyphosphoric acids 221 190 143 -24.7

9018.90 Instruments and appliances for medical, surgical or veterinary sciences, n.e.s.o.i., and parts and accessories 

thereof

123 142 131 -7.6

8805.10 Aircraft launching gear and parts thereof; deck-arrestors or similar gear and parts thereof 74 104 127 21.9

0713.10 Peas (pisum sativum), dried shelled, including seed 59 69 123 78.9

9030.40 Instruments and apparatus n.e.s.o.i., specially designed for telecommunications (for example, cross-talk meters, 

gain measuring instruments etc.)

86 100 115 15.5

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

109 112 109 -2.6

7602.00 Aluminum waste and scrap 90 83 103 24.0

3004.90 Medicaments, in measured doses, etc. (excluding vaccines, etc., coated bandages etc. and pharmaceutical 

goods), n.e.s.o.i.

72 80 100 24.5
Appendix A: Data Tables

340 | www.usitc.gov

Schedule B 

subheading Description 2012 2013 2014

% change 

2013–14

8409.99 Parts for use with compression-ignition internal combustion piston engines, n.e.s.o.i. 119 104 99 -5.6

8517.70 Parts of telecommunications apparatus 66 49 95 93.4

Total of items shown 11,204 11,943 11,898 -0.4

All other HTS subheadings 10,902 9,900 9,730 -1.7

Total of all commodities 22,106 21,842 21,628 -1.0

Source: USITC DataWeb (accessed February 12, 2015); data compiled from the official statistics of the U.S. Department of Commerce.

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.”
Year in Trade

U.S. International Trade Commission | 341

Table A.50: Leading U.S. general imports from India, by HTS provision, 2012–14

HTS 

provision Description 2012 2013 2014

% change 

2013–14

Million $

7102.39 Diamonds, nonindustrial, worked, including polished or drilled 5,398 7,401 7,590 2.6

3004.90 Medicaments, in measured doses, etc. (excluding vaccines, etc., coated bandages etc. and pharmaceutical goods), 

n.e.s.o.i.

3,497 3,669 3,902 6.4

2710.12 Light oils and preparations 2,405 2,825 2,697 -4.5

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.

846 1,102 1,895 71.9

0306.17 Other shrimps and prawns, cooked in shell or uncooked, dried, salted or in brine, frozen 534 970 1,270 31.0

7113.19 Jewelry and parts thereof, of precious metal other than silver 1,134 1,159 1,196 3.2

1302.32 Mucilages and thickeners, whether or not modified, derived from locust beans, locust bean seeds or guar seeds 3,373 1,615 1,190 -26.3

6302.31 Bed linen (other than printed) of cotton, not knitted or crocheted 766 850 796 -6.3

6302.60 Toilet and kitchen linen of cotton terry toweling or similar cotton terry fabrics 578 585 628 7.4

3004.20 Medicaments, in measured doses, etc., containing antibiotics, n.e.s.o.i. 377 424 442 4.3

6110.20 Sweaters, pullovers, sweatshirts, vests and similar articles of cotton, knitted or crocheted 342 399 404 1.2

7113.11 Jewelry and parts thereof, of silver 342 358 351 -1.9

7210.49 Flat-rolled iron or nonalloy steel products, not corrugated, 600 mm or more wide, plated or coated with zinc other 

than electrolytically

198 218 328 50.4

6206.30 Women's or girls' blouses, shirts and shirt-blouses of cotton, not knitted or crocheted 209 247 259 4.6

8708.30 Brakes and servo-brakes and parts thereof n.e.s.o.i., for motor vehicles 175 159 226 41.9

6205.20 Men's or boys' shirts of cotton, not knitted or crocheted 210 224 218 -2.4

0801.32 Cashew nuts, fresh or dried, shelled 264 265 214 -19.2

8701.90 Tractors, n.e.s.o.i. 196 192 210 9.2

8481.90 Parts for taps, cocks, valves and similar appliances for pipes, vats or the like, including pressure reducing and 

thermostatically controlled valves

188 188 204 8.2

2902.20 Benzene 210 213 201 -5.5

6109.10 T-shirts, singlets, tank tops and similar garments of cotton, knitted or crocheted 192 173 188 9.2

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

135 150 188 25.4

8708.99 Parts and accessories for motor vehicles, n.e.s.o.i. 196 160 183 14.3

8528.71 Reception apparatus for television, not designed to incorporate a screen or video display device 200 274 182 -33.6
Appendix A: Data Tables

342 | www.usitc.gov

HTS 

provision Description 2012 2013 2014

% change 

2013–14

8409.99 Parts for use with compression-ignition internal combustion piston engines, n.e.s.o.i. 189 154 179 16.3

Total of items shown 22,155 23,972 25,141 5.0

All other HTS subheadings 18,358 17,873 20,088 12.2

Total of all commodities 40,513 41,845 45,228 8.1

Source: USITC DataWeb (accessed February 12, 2015); data compiled from the official statistics of the U.S. Department of Commerce.

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.” 
Year in Trade

U.S. International Trade Commission | 343

Appendix B

Additional Tables Corresponding to 

Figures in the Report

Year in Trade

U.S. International Trade Commission | 345

In compliance with Section 508, an amendment to the United States Workforce Rehabilitation 

Act of 1973, alternative text is used by screen readers to provide people with disabilities text 

equivalent for non-text elements. The tables in this appendix are referenced in the alternative 

text for the figures contained in this report. 

Table B.1: U.S. trade balance in goods and services, 1995–2014

Year Services Goods

1996 86,935 -191,000

1997 90,155 -198,428

1998 82,081 -248,221

1999 73,011 -336,171

2000 69,038 -445,787

2001 59,505 -421,276

2002 57,059 -474,491

2003 49,425 -540,409

2004 58,150 -663,507

2005 72,106 -780,730

2006 82,401 -835,689

2007 122,158 -818,886

2008 131,770 -830,109

2009 124,637 -505,910

2010 145,830 -645,857

2011 192,020 -740,646

2012 204,490 -742,095

2013 225,276 -701,669

2014 231,076 -735,787

Source: USDOC, BEA, “U.S. International Transactions,” various issues, 1996–2014.

Note: Merchandise trade data are on a balance-of-payments basis.
Appendix B: Additional Tables Corresponding to Figures in the Report

346 | www.usitc.gov

Table B.2: U.S. merchandise trade with major trading partners, 2010–14

Country/region Trade flow 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014

Billion $

EU

Total exports 239.9 269.6 265.7 262.2 276.7

General imports -319.6 -368.9 -382.2 -387.6 -417.8

Merchandise trade balance -79.7 -99.3 -116.5 -125.4 -141.1

Canada

Total exports 249.3 281.3 292.7 301.6 312.1

General imports 277.6 315.3 324.3 332.6 346.1

Merchandise trade balance -28.4 -34.0 -31.6 -30.9 -33.9

China

Total exports 91.9 104.1 110.5 121.7 124.0

General imports 365.0 399.4 425.6 440.4 466.7

Merchandise trade balance -273.0 -295.2 -315.1 -318.7 -342.6

Mexico

Total exports 163.7 198.3 215.9 226.1 240.3

General imports 230.0 262.9 277.6 280.5 294.2

Merchandise trade balance -66.3 -64.6 -61.7 -54.4 -53.8

Japan

Total exports 60.5 65.8 70.0 65.2 67.0

General imports 120.6 128.9 146.4 138.6 133.9

Merchandise trade balance -60.1 -63.1 -76.5 -73.4 -67.0

Korea

Total exports 38.8 43.5 42.3 41.7 44.5

General imports 48.9 56.7 58.9 62.4 69.6

Merchandise trade balance -10.1 -13.2 -16.6 -20.7 -25.1

Brazil

Total exports 35.4 43.0 43.8 44.1 42.4

General imports 24.0 31.7 32.1 27.6 30.3

Merchandise trade balance 11.5 11.3 11.7 16.5 12.1

Taiwan

Total exports 26.1 25.9 24.3 25.5 26.8

General imports 35.8 41.4 38.9 37.9 40.6

Merchandise trade balance -9.8 -15.5 -14.5 -12.5 -13.7

India

Total exports 19.2 21.5 22.1 21.8 21.6

General imports 29.5 36.2 40.5 41.8 45.2

Merchandise trade balance -10.3 -14.6 -18.4 -20.0 -23.6

World

Total exports 1,278.5 1,482.5 1,545.7 1,579.6 1,623.4

General imports 1,913.9 2,208.0 2,276.3 2,268.3 2,345.2

Merchandise trade balance -635.4 -725.4 -730.6 -688.7 -721.7

Source: USITC DataWeb (accessed February 12, 2015); data compiled from the official statistics of the U.S. Department of 

Commerce

Note: Because of rounding, figures may not add up to totals shown.
Year in Trade

U.S. International Trade Commission | 347

Table B.3: U.S. private services trade with major trading partners, 2010–14

Country/region Trade flow 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014

Billion $

EU

Exports 177.9 197.6 197.9 204.3 217.6 

Imports 131.9 144.7 147.2 153.8 160.0 

Trade balance 46.0 52.9 50.7 50.5 57.5 

Canada 

Exports 52.7 57.9 61.2 62.9 62.5 

Imports 26.9 30.2 30.5 30.2 30.3 

Trade balance 25.7 27.7 30.7 32.7 32.3 

China

Exports 22.3 28.2 32.8 37.4 41.1 

Imports 10.5 11.7 13.3 14.3 14.6 

Trade balance 11.8 16.5 19.5 23.2 26.5 

Mexico

Exports 24.4 26.1 27.8 29.5 29.3 

Imports 13.8 14.5 15.3 17.6 20.1 

Trade balance 10.5 11.6 12.5 11.8 9.2 

Japan

Exports 42.8 43.2 46.0 45.8 46.3 

Imports 22.2 22.1 24.5 27.4 28.3 

Trade balance 20.6 21.1 21.5 18.4 18.0 

Korea

Exports 15.2 16.5 17.7 20.6 20.3 

Imports 6.7 7.2 7.9 8.2 7.9 

Trade balance 8.5 9.2 9.8 12.3 12.3 

Brazil

Exports 18.3 23.1 24.8 26.4 27.6 

Imports 5.1 6.9 7.5 7.3 8.5 

Trade balance 13.2 16.2 17.3 19.1 19.1 

Taiwan

Exports 9.2 10.4 11.2 11.2 11.8 

Imports 5.6 6.2 6.9 7.0 7.3 

Trade balance 3.7 4.3 4.3 4.2 4.5 

India

Exports 10.1 11.6 12.1 13.2 14.3 

Imports 14.7 17.3 18.4 19.0 20.3 

Trade balance (4.5) (5.7) (6.3) (5.8) (6.0)

World

Exports 491.4 542.9 603.4 630.6 662.9 

Imports 355.3 377.4 404.5 422.5 436.8 

Trade balance 136.1 165.5 199.0 208.1 226.1 

Source: USDOC, BEA, U.S. International Transactions Accounts Data, tables 1.2 and 1.3, March 19, 2015.

Note: Because of rounding, figures may not add up to totals shown.
Appendix B: Additional Tables Corresponding to Figures in the Report

348 | www.usitc.gov

Table B.4: U.S. real gross domestic product, percent change, 2005–2014

Year Real GDP % change

2005 3.1

2006 2.7

2007 1.9

2008 -0.3

2009 -3.1

2010 2.4

2011 1.8

2012 2.8

2013 2.2

2014 2.4

Source: USDOC. http://www.bea.gov/national/xls/gdpchg.xls (accessed March 19, 2015).

Table B.5: U.S. merchandise trade with selected major trading partners and the world, 2014

Major trading partner

U.S. total 

exports

U.S. general 

imports

Share of total 

exports

Share of total 

imports 

Million $ Percent

EU28 276,698 417,837 17.0 17.8

Canada 312,125 346,063 19.2 14.8

China 124,024 466,656 7.6 19.9

Mexico 240,326 294,157 14.8 12.5

Japan 66,964 133,939 4.1 5.7

Korea 44,544 69,606 2.7 3.0

Brazil 42,418 30,337 2.6 1.3

Taiwan 26,836 40,572 1.7 1.7

India 21,628 45,228 1.3 1.9

All others 467,880 500,793 28.8 21.4

All partners 1,623,443 2,345,187

Source: USITC DataWeb (accessed February 12, 2015); data compiled from the official statistics of the U.S. Department of 

Commerce

Note: Because of rounding, figures may not add to totals shown.
Year in Trade

U.S. International Trade Commission | 349

Table B.6: U.S. private services trade with major trading partners and the world, 2014

Major trading partners U.S. exports U.S. imports

Share of U.S. 

exports

Share of U.S 

imports 

Million $ Percent

EU-28 217,557 160,014 31.7 35.2

Canada 62,537 30,284 9.1 6.7

Japan 46,280 28,262 6.8 6.2

China 41,139 14,629 6.0 3.2

Mexico 29,291 20,061 4.3 4.4

Brazil 27,610 8,537 4.0 1.9

India 14,283 20,272 2.1 4.5

Korea 20,259 7,941 3.0 1.7

Australia 18,756 6,679 2.7 1.5

Taiwan 11,806 7,307 1.7 1.6

Singapore 12,161 5,385 1.8 1.2

All other 183,901 145,126 26.8 31.9

World 685,580 454,497

Source: USDOC, BEA, “U.S. International Transaction Accounts Data: Table 3.1,” March 19, 2014.