UNITED STATES – SUBSIDIES AND OTHER DOMESTIC SUPPORT FOR CORN AND OTHER AGRICULTURAL PRODUCTS
Document: Request to Join Consultations Communication from Brazil
Date: 23 January 2007
Document codes: WT/DS357/4; WT/DS357/1
Complainant: Canada
Respondent: U.S.
Third parties: Argentina, Australia, Chile, EU, India, Japan, Mexico, New Zealand, Nicaragua, South Africa, Taiwan, Thailand, Turkey, Uruguay
Dispute stage: Panel
Agreements cited: Art. 10.1, 8  AgricultureArt. 3.1(a), 3.2  Subsidies and Countervailing Measures (SCM)Art. 3.2  Agriculture

UNITED STATES – SUBSIDIES AND OTHER DOMESTIC SUPPORT
FOR CORN AND OTHER AGRICULTURAL PRODUCTS

Request to Join Consultations

Communication from Brazil

 The following communication, dated 19 January 2007, from the delegation of Brazil to the
delegation of the United States, the delegation of Canada and to the Chairman of the Dispute
Settlement Body, is circulated in accordance with Article 4.11 of the DSU.

 With reference to the request by Canada fo r consultations with the United States concerning
United States – Subsidies and Other Domestic Suppor t for Corn and Other Agricultural Products
(, circulated on 11 January 2007), I hereby wish to convey the request of the
Government of Brazil, pursuant to Article 4.11 of the Understanding on Rules and Procedures
governing the Settlement of Disputes ("DSU"), to be joined in these consultations.

 Brazil has a substantial trade interest in th e issues under consultation, as explained below.

 First, with regard to the so-called "first part " of Canada's request, Brazil recalls that it is the
third major world producer and exporter of corn. In 2005/6, Brazilian production was of
approximately 42 million metric tons or about 6% of total world production for the period.
1 Brazilian
exports, in turn, amounted to 4 million metric tons in the same period. 2 The United States itself
acknowledges the role of Brazil as a ma jor participant in the corn market.3 Further, as also recognized
by the United States – "the world's dominant corn exporter"4 –, "corn prices are largely determined by
supply-and-demand relationships in the US market, and the rest of the world must adjust to prevailing
US prices". 5 Under these circumstances, Brazil's substantia l interest in the present consultations is
more than well-founded.

1 The two major producers – the United States and China – responded for approximately 42% and 19%
of total world production, respectively.
2 See "World Agricultural Supply and Demand Estimates" (issued on January 12, 2007), pages 442-22
and 442-23, available at www.usda .gov/oce/commodity/wasde/latest.pdf. The same level of exports was
recorded in 2006. See http://aliceweb.desenvolvimento.gov.br/default.asp.
3 "... Brazil is expected to remain a significant net exporter of corn because of attractive world prices
and niche marketing." See "Baseline Projections for World F eed Grains Trade", available at
www.ers.usda.gov/Briefing/Corn/2005baseline.htm.
4 See www.ers.usda.gov/Briefing/Corn/trade.htm.
5 See www.ers.usda.gov/B riefing/Corn/trade.htm. In this respect, the United States singles out Brazil
and some other countries in stating that, "Several countries – including Brazil, Ukraine, Romania, and South
Africa – have had significant corn exports when crops were large or international prices attractive." Idem.

 Second, concerning the "second part" of Canada 's request, Brazil has a clear and undeniable
substantial interest in these consultations. The export credit guarantee programs challenged by Canada
have been subject of a complaint by Brazil in the context of the dispute United States – Subsidies on
Upland Cotton (WT/DS267), currently being examined by a DSU Article 21.5 compliance panel.
6 As
the United States is fully aware, in the cotton dispute the original panel found, and the Appellate Body
confirmed, that Brazil's case included export credit guarantees to all eligible agricultural
commodities.7

 Finally, with reference to the "third part" of Canada's request for consultations, Brazil's role as
one of the major producer and exporter of various agricultural products and our strong engagement in
multilateral debates about the rules of the Agreement on Agriculture prove Brazil's substantial interest
and call for the US agreement on Brazil being joined in the consultations at issue. In addition, Brazil
recalls that all the measures cited by Canada‘s request were also subject of the cotton dispute.

 Brazil considers that the reasons hereby provide d, taken individually or collectively, make it
clear that Brazil has satisfied the requirements under DSU Article 4.11. Therefore, Brazil would
appreciate being informed of the date and venue of consultations.

 A copy of this letter is being served on Canada and the Chairman of the Dispute Settlement
Body ("DSB").

Brazil notes that Canada listed these two documents in the statement of available evidence attached to

7 Appellate Body Report, US – Upland Cotton (WT/DS267/AB/R), paras. 291 and 294. Panel Report,
US – Upland Cotton (WT/DS267/R), paras. 7.65 and 7.69