•HCON 290 IH 
sumer prices for items such as home heating oil and gas-
oline, and continued price volatility; 
Whereas rising oil prices greatly harm consumers, farmers, 
small businesses, and manufacturers, increase the likeli-
hood of inflation, increase the cost of conducting inter-
state and international commerce, and pose a strong 
threat to continued economic growth; 
Whereas article XI of the General Agreement on Tariffs and 
Trade (GATT 1994) prohibits members of the World 
Trade Organization (WTO) from setting quantitative re-
strictions on the import or export of resources or prod-
ucts across their borders; specifically the language reads: 
‘‘No prohibitions or restrictions other than duties, taxes 
or other charges, whether made effective through quotas, 
import or export licenses or other measures, shall be in-
stituted or maintained by any contracting party on the 
importation of any product of the territory of any other 
contracting party or on the exportation or sale for export 
of any product destined for the territory of any other 
contracting party.’’; 
Whereas the precise meaning of this provision was spelled out 
in a GATT panel report issued in 1988 entitled 
‘‘Japan—Trade in Semi-conductors’’, which noted, ‘‘. . . 
this wording [in article XI] was comprehensive: it applied 
to all measures instituted or maintained by a contracting 
party prohibiting or restricting the importation, expor-
tation or sale for export of products other than measures 
that 
take 
the 
form 
of 
duties, 
taxes, 
or 
other 
charges. . . . This wording indicated clearly that any 
measure instituted or maintained by a contracting party 
which restricted the exportation or sale for export of
•HCON 290 IH 
products was covered by this provision, irrespective of the 
legal status of the measure.’’; 
Whereas oil production restrictions clearly qualify as a 
‘‘quantitative restriction’’ based on the original WTO 
rules and the 1988 GATT panel report, which certify 
that only ‘‘duties, taxes or other charges’’ are allowable, 
not pacts among countries to limit production of a prod-
uct for export; 
Whereas article XX of GATT 1994, which sets out a series 
of exceptions to article XI, notes that none of the excep-
tions are valid if they are ‘‘applied in a manner which 
would constitute . . . a disguised restriction on inter-
national trade’’, a phrase which describes OPEC’s pro-
duction restrictions; 
Whereas of the 11 OPEC countries, 6 are members of the 
WTO (Kuwait, Indonesia, Nigeria, Qatar, Venezuela, and 
United Arab Emirates), 2 have observer status and have 
applied to join the WTO (Saudi Arabia and Algeria), and 
only 3 have no relationship with the WTO (Libya, Iran, 
and Iraq); 
Whereas of the remaining large oil-producing countries, Mex-
ico and Norway are members of the WTO, and Russia 
and Oman have applied for membership; and 
Whereas given the substantial WTO membership and pending 
membership of oil-producing countries, filing a complaint 
would likely have an immediate impact on the current 
and future behavior of these countries: Now therefore be 
it
Resolved by the House of Representatives (the Senate 
concurring), That the Congress strongly urges the Presi-
dent to instruct the United States Trade Representative
•HCON 290 IH 
to file a complaint in the World Trade Organization 
against oil-producing countries for violating their obliga-
tions under the rules of that organization.
Æ