```

[Congressional Bills 108th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 1952 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

108th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                S. 1952

  To direct the United States Trade Representative to enforce United 
 States rights under certain trade agreements with respect to Mexico, 
            pursuant to title III of the Trade Act of 1974.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                           November 25, 2003

 Mr. Grassley introduced the following bill; which was read twice and 
                  referred to the Committee on Finance

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
  To direct the United States Trade Representative to enforce United 
 States rights under certain trade agreements with respect to Mexico, 
            pursuant to title III of the Trade Act of 1974.

    Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the 
United States of America in Congress assembled, 

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``Mexican Agricultural Trade 
Compliance Act''.

SEC. 2. FINDINGS.

    Congress makes the following findings:
            (1) Section 301 of the Trade Act of 1974 provides that, if 
        the United States Trade Representative determines that the 
        rights of the United States under any trade agreement are being 
        denied, the Trade Representative shall take action to enforce 
        such rights.
            (2) The Statement of Administrative Action accompanying the 
        Uruguay Round Agreements Act provided that the United States 
        Trade Representative would base any section 301 determination 
        as to whether there has been a violation or denial of United 
        States rights under the Uruguay Round Agreements on panel or 
        Appellate Body findings adopted by the Dispute Settlement Body 
        of the World Trade Organization.
            (3) In a panel report adopted by the Dispute Settlement 
        Body on January 27, 2000, the Dispute Settlement Body 
        determined that section 301 of the Trade Act of 1974 is not 
        inconsistent with United States obligations under the Uruguay 
        Round Agreements, particularly in light of the decision of the 
        United States to use section 301 only after exhausting its 
        rights under the Dispute Settlement Understanding.
            (4) On January 28, 2000, a panel of the World Trade 
        Organization determined that Mexico's antidumping order on high 
        fructose corn syrup imported from the United States violated 
        Mexico's commitments under the Uruguay Round Agreements.
            (5) On February 24, 2000, the Dispute Settlement Body 
        adopted the report of the panel.
            (6) On April 10, 2000, the United States and Mexico agreed 
        to a September 22, 2000, deadline for Mexico to come into 
        compliance with the panel report as adopted by the Dispute 
        Settlement Body.
            (7) On September 20, 2000, just 2 days prior to the date 
        Mexico had agreed to come into compliance with the panel 
        report, Mexico issued a revised antidumping threat 
        determination in an obvious attempt to evade its commitment to 
        come into compliance with the panel report adopted by the 
        Dispute Settlement Body.
            (8) On June 22, 2001, a panel, convened pursuant to Article 
        21.5 of the Dispute Settlement Understanding, found that 
        Mexico's revised antidumping threat determination failed to 
        bring Mexico into compliance with its commitments under the 
        World Trade Organization.
            (9) On October 22, 2001, the Appellate Body affirmed the 
        ruling of the Article 21.5 panel and recommended that Mexico 
        come into compliance with its obligations under the World Trade 
        Organization.
            (10) On November 21, 2001, the Dispute Settlement Body 
        adopted the Appellate Body ruling that affirmed the findings of 
        the Article 21.5 panel.
            (11) On January 1, 2002, in a transparent attempt to evade 
        the determinations of the Dispute Settlement Body regarding 
        Mexico's antidumping order on high fructose corn syrup, and in 
        an affront to the rules-based system of the World Trade 
        Organization, Mexico imposed a de facto discriminatory 20 
        percent tax on soft drinks containing high fructose corn syrup, 
        the intent and effect of which is to continue Mexico's 
        antidumping order on United States high fructose corn syrup by 
        other means by restricting access to the Mexican market.
            (12) On April 20, 2002, with its discriminatory tax on soft 
        drinks containing high fructose corn syrup now in place, and in 
        a continuous event with the imposition of this tax, Mexico 
        lifted its antidumping order on high fructose corn syrup. 
        Importantly, Mexico lifted its antidumping order only after 
        ensuring that imports of United States high fructose corn syrup 
        would not enter the Mexican market due to the imposition of the 
        tax on soft drinks. Mexico's lifting of its antidumping order 
        enabled it to make the disingenuous claim that it had come into 
        compliance with the findings adopted by the Dispute Settlement 
        Body regarding Mexico's antidumping order.
            (13) The imposition of the tax on soft drinks and the 
        lifting of the antidumping order by Mexico are related aspects 
        of a unified effort by Mexico to deny the rights of the United 
        States with respect to the trade of high fructose corn syrup.
            (14) The effects of the import restrictions of Mexico's 
        antidumping order continue with even more egregious results 
        through the imposition of a 20 percent tax on high fructose 
        corn syrup. Imports of high fructose corn syrup from the United 
        States dropped from 110,893 metric tons in 2001 (the year prior 
        to the lifting of the antidumping order) to 4,868 metric tons 
        in 2002 (the first year of the tax).
            (15) The United States has exhausted proceedings under the 
        Dispute Settlement Understanding, and the Dispute Settlement 
        Body has on more than 1 occasion adopted findings adverse to 
        Mexico.

SEC. 3. DEFINITIONS.

    In this Act:
            (1) Appellate body.--The term ``Appellate Body'' means the 
        Appellate Body established under Article 17.1 of the Dispute 
Settlement Understanding.
            (2) Dispute settlement body.--The term ``Dispute Settlement 
        Body'' has the meaning given that term in section 121(5) of the 
        Uruguay Round Agreements Act (19 U.S.C. 3531(5)).
            (3) Dispute settlement panel; panel.--The terms ``dispute 
        settlement panel'' and ``panel'' mean a panel established 
        pursuant to Article 6 of the Dispute Settlement Understanding.
            (4) Dispute settlement understanding.--The term ``Dispute 
        Settlement Understanding'' means the Understanding on Rules and 
        Procedures Governing the Settlement of Disputes referred to in 
        section 101(d)(16) of the Uruguay Round Agreements Act (19 
        U.S.C. 3511(d)(16)).
            (5) GATT 1994.--The term ``GATT 1994'' has the meaning 
        given such term in section 2(1)(B) of the Uruguay Round 
        Agreements Act (19 U.S.C. 3501(1)(B).
            (6) Uruguay round agreements.--The term ``Uruguay Round 
        Agreements'' has the meaning given such term in section 2(7) of 
        the Uruguay Round Agreements Act (19 U.S.C. 3501(7).
            (7) World trade organization.--The term ``World Trade 
        Organization'' means the organization established pursuant to 
        the WTO Agreement.
            (8) WTO agreement.--The term ``WTO Agreement'' means the 
        Agreement Establishing The World Trade Organization entered 
        into on April 15, 1994.

SEC. 4. ENFORCEMENT OF UNITED STATES RIGHTS UNDER THE URUGUAY ROUND 
              AGREEMENTS AND OTHER TRADE AGREEMENTS WITH RESPECT TO 
              HIGH FRUCTOSE CORN SYRUP EXPORTED TO MEXICO.

    (a) Determination.--Congress determines that--
            (1) the rights of the United States under the Uruguay Round 
        Agreements are being denied by Mexico in connection with the 
        imposition by Mexico of a 20 percent tax on soft drinks 
        containing high fructose corn syrup, an extension by other 
        means of Mexico's unjustified antidumping order on high 
        fructose corn syrup from the United States;
            (2) the United States has exhausted proceedings under the 
        Dispute Settlement Understanding;
            (3) Mexico's imposition of a tax on high fructose corn 
        syrup, an extension by other means of its unjustified 
        antidumping order on high fructose corn syrup from the United 
        States--
                    (A) constitutes an act, policy, or practice by 
                Mexico that is unjustifiable and burdens or restricts 
                United States commerce for purposes of section 
                304(a)(1) of the Trade Act of 1974 (19 U.S.C. 
                2414(a)(1)); and
                    (B) denies rights to which the United States is 
                entitled under existing trade agreements with Mexico 
                for purposes of such section 304; and
            (4) unless, a certification described in subsection (b) is 
        submitted, the United States Trade Representative shall take 
        appropriate action under subsection (c).
    (b) Certification.--The certification described in this subsection 
means a certification from the United States Trade Representative 
submitted to Congress not later than 30 days after the date of 
enactment of this Act that states that Mexico has eliminated its tax on 
soft drinks containing high fructose corn syrup and is taking 
satisfactory measures to preserve the rights of the United States under 
all applicable trade agreements with respect to high fructose corn 
syrup.
    (c) Action To Be Taken by USTR.--If a certification is not made 
under subsection (b), the United States Trade Representative, not later 
than 60 days after the date of enactment of this Act and after 
consultation with the Committee on Finance of the Senate and the 
Committee on Ways and Means of the House of Representatives, shall, 
pursuant to section 301(c)(1) (A) and (B) of the Trade Act of 1974 (19 
U.S.C. 2411(c)(1) (A) and (B))--
            (1) suspend, withdraw, or prevent the application of, 
        benefits of trade agreement concessions to carry out a trade 
        agreement with Mexico; or
            (2) impose duties or other import restrictions on the goods 
        of Mexico, including agricultural products imported from 
        Mexico, and notwithstanding any other provision of law, fees or 
        restrictions on the services of, Mexico for such time as the 
        Trade Representative determines appropriate.
                                 <all>
```