REPORT FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT, THE COUNCIL, THE EUROPEAN ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL COMMITTEE AND THE COMMITTEE OF THE REGIONS on the Implementation and Enforcement of EU Trade Policy
Date: 2023-11-15
Institutions: Directorate-General for Trade and Economic Security, European Commission
Subjects: Dispute Settlement Body, common commercial policy, international trade, small and medium-sized enterprises, third country, trade agreement, trade agreement (EU), trade dispute, trade policy, trade restriction

EN 

  EN 

   EUROPEAN COMMISSION  Brussels, 15.11.2023  COM(2023) 740 final  REPORT FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT, THE COUNCIL, THE EUROPEAN ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL COMMITTEE AND THE COMMITTEE OF THE REGIONS on the Implementation and Enforcement of EU Trade Policy                                    {SWD(2023) 740 final}  
 
 
CONTENTS 

I. 

Introduction ............................................................................................................................... 2 

I.1   Executive summary .................................................................................................................... 2 

I.2   Scope of this report .................................................................................................................... 8 

II.  Making full use of the opportunities provided by EU trade agreements ........................... 10 

II.1   Trade with preferential partners - main developments in 2022 ......................................... 10 

II.2  Advancing  implementation  of  EU  trade  agreements  in  Asia,  The  Americas,  the 
Neighbourhood and the African, Caribbean and Pacific countries ............................................ 16 

III.   Helping small and medium-sized enterprises to find their place in global trade ............. 28 

IV.   Addressing barriers and finding solutions ........................................................................... 33 

IV.1  State of play and removal of trade barriers ......................................................................... 33 

IV.2  The Single Entry Point .......................................................................................................... 41 

V. 

 Bilateral and multilateral enforcement of trade commitments: resolving disputes ......... 43 

V.1    Use of dispute settlement ....................................................................................................... 43 

1 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
I. 

Introduction 

I.1   Executive summary 

The EU’s network of 42 preferential trade agreements opens markets and opportunities for 
EU business, particularly the 670 000 small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) that export 
outside  the  EU,  to  trade  and  invest  under  more  predictable  and  transparent  commercial 
conditions. The agreements connect Europe to growth poles outside the Union where 85% of 
growth is expected to come from in 2024. EU goods trade with its 74 preferential partners1 
represents 44% of EU external trade (EUR 2 434 billion in 2022, up from EUR 1 891 billion 
the  year  before).  EU  services  trade  with  preferential  partners  reached  EUR  901  billion  in 
2021, representing 46% of total EU services trade (EUR 2 012 billion). 

EU  trade  agreements  have  a  positive  long-term  impact:  over  the  past  decade  they  have 
helped  the  bloc  maintain  a  relatively  stable  share  of  16-17%  of  world  trade  in  goods  and 
services. The EU remains the largest trading bloc, despite a changing global economy and the 
rise of China, with an unprecedented network of agreements not replicated by other developed 
economies. The difference trade agreements make can also be seen from examples in the Far 
East and Latin America.  

•  While  the  EU  was  able  to  increase  its  share  in  South  Korean  imports  as  a  result  of 
their trade agreements,  Japan continued trading  under WTO  conditions  and has seen 
its trade with South Korea decline by 8% over the past decade.  

• 

In  Latin  America,  the  EU’s  share  in  imports  of  its  preferential  partners  remained 
relatively stable (around 11%) between 1994 and 2021. This was not the case for non-
preferential partners, with whom the EU’s share fell from 35% to 20%.  

Some of the more recent EU trade agreements, such as those with South Korea, Canada and 
Vietnam, have been supporting EU export growth, with sizeable growth for some of the most 
successful sectors during their life span:   

✓  EU goods exports to South Korea have grown at a yearly average of 6% since 

2012 and cars and parts by 217% over the whole period; 

✓  EU  goods  exports  to  Canada  have  grown  at  a  yearly  average  of  7.7%  since 

2018 and dairy products by 54% over the whole period;  

1 There are more partners than agreements, given that many of them are with several countries (e.g. the EU’s 
Economic Partnership Agreements (EPAs) with the African, Caribbean and Pacific partners or the trade 
agreement with Central America; see also Commission Staff Working Document - Individual information sheets 
on implementation of EU Trade Agreements - SWD(2023) 740; https://circabc.europa.eu/ui/group/7fc51410-
46a1-4871-8979-20cce8df0896/library/e0e79f42-9797-4d5d-a5c3-f00eb26b8676/details 

2 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
✓  EU  goods  exports  to  Vietnam  have  grown  at  a  yearly  average  of  20%  since 

2020 and pharmaceuticals by 152% over the whole period.  

In  2022,  trade  between  the  EU  and  its  preferential  partners  (excluding  trade  in  energy 
products) grew faster i.e. by 21.2 % or EUR 366 billion, than EU trade with partners without 
an  agreement,  which  grew  by  18.9%.  Total  trade  with  the  top  20  EU  preferential  partners 
grew by almost  30% on average in 2022,  despite the  economic  and geopolitical  challenges. 
Preferential trade agreements are helping EU business access foreign markets. 

At  the  same  time,  EU  trade  agreements  also  help  EU  exports  become  more  resilient  to 
geopolitical  shocks  (such  as  Russia’s  unprovoked  and  unjustified  war  of  aggression  against 
Ukraine  and  resulting  decision  to  terminate  EU  dependencies  from  Russia)  by  helping 
businesses  to  diversify  and  find  new  markets.  Between  2021  and  2022,  EU  exports  of 
sanctioned goods to Russia decreased by EUR 27 billion, while EU exports of the same goods 
to  preferential  partners  increased  by  EUR  174  billion.  A  concrete  example  is  the  sector  of 
machines and mechanical appliances, where EU exports to Russia decreased by 53% or EUR 
14  billion  in  2022.  The  loss  of  the  market  was  absorbed  by  an  increase  of  EU  exports  to 
preferential partners (15% or EUR 34 billion), in particular Mexico (+32%), Türkiye (+27%) 
and Canada (+28%).  Trade agreements also reduce over-dependencies in strategic and critical 
products on any single destination. 

In addition, EU  trade  agreements  also  play  an  important  role  for  imports, by providing 
reliable  access  to  inputs  that the EU needs for its economic growth.  The implementation of 
negotiated  commitments  and  partnerships  developed  with  source  countries  help  solidify 
supply  chains  and  diversify  sources  of  imports,  thus  reducing  the  EU’s  overall 
dependencies on third countries, as is the case for critical raw materials and energy products. 
For example, EU imports from Canada increased by 25% over the past year, facilitated by the 
Comprehensive Economic and Trade Agreement (CETA) with the country, mostly covering 
raw materials and energy products that have helped the EU diversify away from Russia. EU 
imports  of  critical  raw  materials  essential  for  the  green  transition  and  European  production 
rose on average by 56%2, compared to growth of only 25% of these materials from outside the 
EU. EU imports from Canada of petroleum oils (HS 27) almost doubled from EUR 2.0 billion 
in 2021 to EUR 3.8 billion in 2022.  

The effectiveness of EU trade agreements depends in large part on their implementation and 
enforcement,  and  on  ensuring  trading  partners  respect  their  commitments.  Preventing  both 
new obstacles to trade and investment and removing existing ones remains a priority.  

In  this  regard,  early  identification  of  the  problems  stakeholders  encounter  in  third-country 
markets  is  essential.  The  creation  in  2020  of  the  Single  Entry  Point3 is  helping  businesses 
report  to  the  Commission  (alleged)  barriers  to  market  access  or  infringements  of  trade  and 
sustainable  development  commitments.  This  helps  the  Commission  to  assess  and,  where 

2 When comparing  pre-CETA (2016) to post-CETA (2022). 
3 https://trade.ec.europa.eu/access-to-markets/en/content/single-entry-point-0.  

3 

 
 
 
 
 
justified,  follow-up  with  the  respective  partner  countries  accordingly.  EU  stakeholders 
reporting an (alleged) market access barrier in a third country market or  an infringement of 
sustainability  rules related to  Trade  and Sustainable Development  or the  General  System of 
Preferences benefit from a one-stop shop. Since its launch in November 2020, this has led to 
over 90 external complaints, of which more than 30 concerned new trade barriers, which have 
since  been  registered  and  published  on  Access2Markets4 and  are  being  followed  up  by  the 
Commission with partner countries concerned. Two complaints covered alleged infringements 
of  trade  and  sustainable  development  provisions,  where  the  Commission  also  updated  its 
guidance to increase transparency and predictability for stakeholders, setting out the specific 
timelines it works with – up to 120 days – to make an initial assessment and to identify and 
pursue appropriate steps, with further clarifications who can bring complaints.  

When  tackling  obstacles  to  trade,  the  Commission  relies  on  continuous  engagement  with 
trading  partners  within  the  structures  (e.g.  committees  and  working  groups)  established 
under EU bilateral trade agreements and at the WTO. A recent example of the mobilisation of 
bilateral  structures  was  the  elimination  in  2022  of  barriers  to  the  import  of  EU 
pharmaceuticals  to  Vietnam, worth  EUR  1.5 billion a year,  achieved in close cooperation 
with  Member  States  and  EU  industry.  This  built  on  bilateral  engagement  in  the  relevant 
committees  set  up  in  the  EU-Vietnam  trade  agreement.  A  recent  example  of  barrier 
prevention by mobilising the WTO structures was Egypt’s adjustment – following discussions 
with EU  industry associations and at the WTO Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT) Committee 
– of planned rules for cosmetics, which would have created unnecessary complications for EU 
companies to enter the Egyptian market.  

While most problems are removed by bilateral engagement with the partners, 2022 once again 
saw the EU initiate legal  enforcement actions, in cases where other efforts had not yielded 
satisfactory  results.  Sometimes,  taking  the  first  steps  in  WTO  dispute  settlement  suffices  to 
focus minds  towards a mutually satisfactory solution. This was the case for the legal dispute 
the  EU  launched  in  early  2022  against  the  United  Kingdom,  challenging  the  latter’s 
discriminatory  domestic  subsidy  scheme  for  wind  energy.  The  scheme  contained  a  local 
content  criterion  favouring  products  originating  in  the  United  Kingdom  over  imported 
products  and  hence  incentivising  EU  and  UK  businesses  either  to  source  or  invest  locally. 
Only  4  months  after  the  EU  asked  for  consultations  at  the  WTO,  the  parties  struck  an 
agreement settling the dispute, securing a level playing field for EU suppliers.  

At  the  WTO,  apart  from  the  dispute  mentioned  above  with  the  United  Kingdom,  the  EU 
launched  three  other  WTO  disputes,  two  against  China,  related  to  discriminatory  trade 
practices  for  goods  and  services  from  Lithuania  and  measures  affecting  the  protection  and 
enforcement of intellectual property rights (IPR), respectively, and one against Egypt. In the 
latter case, partial progress was made as Egypt committed to improving the import registration 
process. The Commission is currently monitoring the situation. In addition, the EU prevailed 
in  four  ongoing  WTO  disputes:  the  binding  and  final  awards  in  Turkey  –  pharma  and 

4 https://trade.ec.europa.eu/access-to-markets/en/barriers  

4 

 
 
 
Colombia  –  frozen  fries  represented  a  broad  victory  for  the  EU.  The  Commission  is  now 
monitoring the losing parties’ compliance with the panel rulings. In India - ICT products and 
Indonesia  – nickel  ore export restrictions  the EU prevailed, leading  Indonesia to  appeal  the 
panel report to the non-functioning WTO Appellate Body (an approach known as an ‘appeal 
into the void’). The EU’s Enforcement Regulation was amended at the beginning of 2022 to 
address  precisely  this  type  of  situation.  It  now  enables  the  EU  to  enforce  international 
obligations to which fellow WTO members such as Indonesia and India have agreed when a 
trade  dispute  is  blocked  despite  the  EU’s  efforts  to  follow  dispute  settlement  procedures  in 
good faith.    

In 2022, the EU also prevailed in its bilateral dispute against the Southern African Customs 
Union  concerning  restrictions  on  exports  of  frozen  poultry,  and  made  progress  in  settling 
certain aspects raised in its pending bilateral dispute against Algeria on import restrictions. 

To preserve the adjudication and settlement of disputes at the WTO while the WTO Appellate 
Body remains dysfunctional, the EU successfully promoted  WTO members’ participation in 
the  Multi-Party  Interim  Appeal  Arbitration  Arrangement  (MPIA),  set  up  as  an  interim 
solution  until  the  WTO  Appellate  Body  is  functional  again.  Japan  is  the  most  recent 
participant and joined in March 2023, with the Philippines also in the process of becoming a 
member. The instrument was put to the test for the first time in the above-mentioned dispute 
against Colombia over the imposition of trade defence duties on frozen fries from Belgium, 
Netherlands and Germany.  

The  EU’s  efforts  in  tackling  market  access  barriers  in  partner  countries  have  proven  to  pay 
off:  in  2022,  EU  exports  to  third  countries  were  EUR  7  billion  higher  thanks  to  barrier- 
elimination  work  conducted  between  2017  and  2021.  The  Commission  succeeded  in 
removing  31  trade  barriers  in  19  partner  countries  worldwide,  supported  by  Member 
States and stakeholders. 

The Commission also continued to make business aware of the advantages trade agreements 
offer and how to use them, with particular focus on SMEs. The Access2Markets platform has 
attracted over five million unique visitors since its launch in October 2020. 70% of the users 
are  based  in  the  EU.  Access2Markets  has  developed  into  a  broader  platform  integrating 
several  trade  tools  –  in  addition  to  information  on  importing  and  exporting  goods,  it  also 
contains  the  new  ‘trade  assistant’  tool  dedicated  to  services  and  investment  for  Canada  and 
the United Kingdom. This has been consulted 9 000 times since its launch.  

The Commission works in close partnership with other EU institutions to raise awareness of 
trade agreements and  the actions  taken to  support their implementation  and enforcement.  In 
addition  to  the  regular  briefing  to  the  European  Parliament  on  different  aspects  of 
enforcement  and  implementation  (such  as  the  work  between  the  Commission  and  EU 
Delegations  in  third  countries  or  the  integration  of  the  TSD  review  conclusions  into 
implementation  of  existing  agreements),  several  MEPs  have  taken  steps  to  promote  market 
access work back in their home countries. Furthermore, the Commission increased concerted 
action  with  Member  States  to  reach  stakeholders  on  the  ground,  both  in  the  EU  and  in 

5 

 
 
 
partner  countries  (through  a  closer  connection  of  EU  Delegations  with  Member  State 
embassies).  As  this  report  will  show,  collective  efforts  between  the  Commission,  EU 
Delegations, Parliament and Member States not only improve the chances of removing market 
access barriers, but also prevent new ones from emerging. These joint efforts also helped to 
reach more stakeholders (in particular SMEs) and inform them on the opportunities EU trade 
agreements bring. Such opportunities relate to exports and imports at zero duty rate and with 
preferential  access  to  sectors  otherwise  off  bounds,  and  also  to  the  opening  of  services  and 
public  procurement  markets.  Joint  Market  Access  Day  events  in  2022  and  the  first  half  of 
2023 took place in Hungary, Latvia, Sweden, France, Croatia, Czechia and Italy.  

In  June  2022,  the  Commission  concluded  its  Trade  and  Sustainable  Development  (TSD) 
review5, which brings strengthened implementation and enforcement of TSD provisions in 11 
EU  trade  agreements  with  18  partner  countries,  which  have  a  TSD  chapter..  The  TSD 
Communication  identifies  policy  priorities  and  key  action  points  to  further  enhance  the 
effectiveness of the current engagement-based approach to TSD, grounded in the international 
framework  and  standards,  with  stronger  implementation  and  enforcement.  In  particular,  the 
new approach includes the use of trade sanctions for breaches of core TSD provisions. This 
will be applied to future negotiations and to ongoing negotiations as appropriate. 

In Latin America, for example, this new approach, together with a series of missions to the 
partner  countries  and  regions,  has  enabled  deeper  and  more  direct  engagement  with  the 
partners concerned and led Colombia and Peru to revise their respective labour codes.  

Over  the  reporting  period,  among  others,  core  International  Labour  Organization  (ILO) 
conventions were ratified and entered into force in Japan on the Abolition of Forced Labour 
(No  105)  and  South  Korea  (on  Freedom  of  Association  and  Protection  of  the  Right  to 
Organise  (No  87),  the  Right  to  Organise  and  Collective  Bargaining  (No  98)  and  on  Forced 
Labour (No 29).  

Implementation of TSD commitments also meant further alignment of domestic legislation in 
partner  countries  with  international  norms. Here, the EU’s work with  Vietnam triggered an 
ongoing broader  reform  of  the  Labour  Code to allow the setting-up of independent trade 
unions,  while  the  EU’s  work  with  Japan  helped  shape  Japan’s  guidelines  on  human  rights 
due diligence, notably increasing the extent to which Japanese companies source responsibly 
and in line with international standards.  

Domestic Advisory Groups (DAGs) established under the more recent EU trade agreements 
continued advising the Commission on the situation on the ground in partner countries. This 
enabled the Commission inter alia to flag and follow up on Ecuador restrictions hindering the 
work of trade unions in the banana sector. In the case of South Korea, the DAG brought the 
Commission’s  attention  to  alleged  discrimination  in  South  Korea  against  delivery  workers. 
The Commission then raised this issue with South Korea in the context of the implementation 
of the expert panel’s report in its bilateral dispute on labour. 

5 https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX%3A52022DC0409  

6 

 
 
 
 
Over the reporting period, DAGs continued to provide input to inform implementation work 
through desk  studies,  researching  issues  of  fair  trade  in  the  Andean  region  and  the 
institutional protection of platform work in South Korea.  

The  Commission  finalised  its  preliminary  analysis  of  the  first  formal  complaint  on  trade 
and sustainable development received by the Single Entry Point. The complaint was filed 
by  the  Dutch  NGO  CNV  Internationaal  on  behalf  of  trade  union  organisations  in  Colombia 
and Peru. The complaint concerns labour rights in the mining sector in Peru and Colombia. 

As is the case for market access, the Commission, in the implementation and enforcement of 
sustainability  commitments,  maintains  a  fruitful  dialogue  with  the  EU  institutions  and 
Member States. In October 2022 the European Parliament adopted a Resolution6 on the TSD 
review, which welcomes the Commission Communication and takes note with satisfaction of 
the  Commission’s  intention  to  reinforce  TSD  chapters  of  EU  trade  agreements.  The 
Commission  is  also  stepping  up  its  engagement  with  its  TSD  Expert  Group  with  Member 
States.  

The Commission also continued, at a senior level, to engage with the Economic and Social 
Committee,  particularly  given  the  latter’s  role  in  supporting  the  DAGs.  The  third  all-EU 
DAG meeting of 17 April 2023 involved 130 participants from 11 EU DAGs. 

Last by not least, there were important developments in the completion of the EU’s legislative 
toolbox. The EU in  2022  adopted  three new  autonomous  instruments  with  an impact  on 
trade. While these are not themselves tools to enforce negotiated commitments on trade, they 
allow  the  Union  to  act  more  effectively  against  economic  coercion  (the  anti-coercion 
instrument)  and  to  ensure  or  restore  a  level  playing  field  (the  International  Procurement 
Instrument and Foreign Subsidies Regulation), filling a gap in the international rulebook.  

•  On  6  June  2023,  Parliament  and  the  Council  reached  an  agreement  on  an  anti-
coercion instrument7. The new regulation will protect the interests of the EU and 
Member  States  in  case  of  economic  coercion  –  namely  when  a  third  country 
pressures the EU or a Member State into a particular choice, in any areas of their 
competence, through measures affecting trade or investment. A major objective of 
the  regulation  actually  is  to  deter  and  prevent  economic  co-ercion.  The  new 
regulation  also  provides  for  international  cooperation  with  regard  to  economic 
coercion. The new regulation is expected to enter into force in the fourth quarter of 
2023. 

6  Resolution of the European Parliament of 6 October 2022: https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-
content/EN/TXT/HTML/?uri=CELEX:52022IP0354  
7 https://policy.trade.ec.europa.eu/enforcement-and-protection/protecting-against-coercion/qa-political-
agreement-anti-coercion-instrument_en  

7 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
•  The  Regulation  on  the  International  Procurement  Instrument 8  entered  into 
force  on  29  August  2022  and  will,  after  an  investigative  stage,  enable  the  EU  to 
restrict access to the EU’s procurement markets of suppliers from countries where 
similar access to their procurement does not exist. The Commission has published 
on the Access2Markets platform an online form  Member States and industry can 
use  to  lodge  complaints  and,  in  the  Official  Journal,  guidelines  for  contracting 
authorities  and  contracting  entities  on  how  to  apply  International  Procurement 
Instrument measures.    

•  The Foreign Subsidies Regulation9 entered into force on 12 July 2023, putting in 
place  a  new  and  comprehensive  set  of  rules  to  address  distortions  generated  by 
foreign subsidies granted to companies competing in the internal market or bidding 
for  public  sector  tenders.  This  closes  a  regulatory  gap  in  the  EU’s  competition, 
public procurement and trade rules.  

I.2 

Scope of this report 

This  is  the  third  consolidated  annual  report 10 on  trade  implementation  and  enforcement 
actions  to  ensure  implementation  and  enforcement  of  multilateral  commitments  (WTO)  and 
commitments enshrined in preferential bilateral trade agreements. It provides an overview of 
the main activities and achievements, steered by the Commission’s Chief Trade Enforcement 
Officer (CTEO)11 in 2022 and the first quarter of 2023.  

The  accompanying  staff  working  document12 contains  additional  information  completing 
Section II.2 of the report on 39 of the EU’s major preferential bilateral agreements.  

The Commission website13 has information complementary to this report on: (i) the evolution 
of EU trade with preferential partners in 2022; (ii) the use of tariff preferences by EU exports 
and imports per preferential trading partner, both for the EU and Member States; and (iii) the 
fill rates of tariff rate quotas. 

While this report focuses on implementation and enforcement under EU trade agreements, it 
should also  be seen in  a broader context  of economic security and enforcement activities in 
specific areas on which the Commission reports separately:  

8 https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=celex%3A32022R1031   
9 https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX%3A32022R2560&qid=1673254237527  
10 The  second  report  was  published  on  11  October  2022  and  is  available  here:  Register  of  Commission 
Documents - COM(2022)730 (europa.eu)  
11 Information about the role of the CTEO can be accessed here:  https://policy.trade.ec.europa.eu/enforcement-
and-protection/chief-trade-enforcement-officer_en 
12  Commission  Staff  Working  Document  -  Individual  information  sheets  on  implementation  of  EU  Trade 
Agreements 
https://circabc.europa.eu/ui/group/7fc51410-46a1-4871-8979-
20cce8df0896/library/e0e79f42-9797-4d5d-a5c3-f00eb26b8676/details 
13

enforcement 
https://policy.trade.ec.europa.eu/enforcement-and-protection/implementing-and-enforcing-eu-trade-
agreements_en 

Commission/DG 

implementation 

SWD(2023) 

TRADE; 

page: 

740 

and 

- 

8 

 
 
 
 
 
 
• 

the use of trade  defence  instruments (anti-dumping, anti-subsidies and safeguards), 
covered by the Commission’s annual trade defence reports14; 

•  monitoring  and  tackling  of  counterfeiting,  piracy  and  other  infringements  of 
intellectual property rights (IPR), covered by the Commission’s alternating biennial 
publications of the IPR Report15 and the Piracy Watchlist16; 

• 

the  screening  of  foreign  direct  investments  and  the  control  of  dual  use  exports, 
which constitute the EU’s strategic trade and investment controls for security (STICS), 
and which are covered by the Commission’s annual reports on FDI screening17 and on 
the Export Control Regulation (EU) 2021/82118;  

• 

the application of the EU General Scheme of Preferences (GSP) regime19,  covered 
by the Commission’s GSP reports. 

and 

staff  working 

14  41st  Commission  report  on  trade  defence,  adopted  6 September  2023:  https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-
content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX%3A52023DC0506&qid=1694161661994 
document: 
https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX%3A52023SC0287&qid=1694161661994  
15 The last report on the  protection and enforcement of intellectual property rights (IPR) in third countries was 
published on 17 May 2023 and is available here: https://policy.trade.ec.europa.eu/news/commission-releases-its-
report-intellectual-property-rights-third-countries-2023-05-17_en 
16  The  latest  Counterfeit  and  Piracy  Watchlist  was  published  on  1 December  2022  and  is  available  here: 
https://policy.trade.ec.europa.eu/news/commission-publishes-latest-counterfeit-and-piracy-watch-list-2022-12-
01_en 
17 Third Annual Report on the screening of foreign direct investments into the Union and staff working 
document of 19 October 2023: https://ec.europa.eu/transparency/documents-
register/detail?ref=COM(2023)590&lang=en  
18 Statistical update on dual-use export control (2021): COMMISSION-STAFF-WORKING-DOCUMENT-
Statistical-update-on-dual-use-export-control-2021-2.pdf (europeansanctions.com)   
19 The last report on the application of the GSP Regulation: JOIN(2023) 34.  

9 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
II.  Making  full  use  of  the  opportunities  provided  by  EU  trade 

agreements 

II.1  Trade with preferential partners – main developments in 2022 

In 2022, 44% of EU trade took place under preferential trade agreements… 

EU trade in goods with  its 74 preferential partners amounted to  EUR 2 434 billion in 2022, 
covering 44% of total EU external trade20. EU exports to preferential partners reached  EUR 
1 254 billion and EU imports from the same set of countries amounted to EUR 1 180 billion. 
Adding  agreements  in  the  process  of  being  adopted  or  ratified  (3.6%)21,  the  share  of  EU 
preferential trade would rise to more than 47%. 

Figure 1: EU external trade (2022)  

Trade agreements in 
place - Preferential
43,6%

Other partners
52,7%

Trade agreements 
under adoption or 
ratification
3,6%

Source: Eurostat, Comext (extraction made in April 2023).  

As  shown  by  Figure  2  below,  the  United  Kingdom  remains  the  EU’s  largest  preferential 
partner,  accounting  for  22.5%  of  EU  trade  with  the  74  preferential  partners,  followed  by 
Switzerland (13.7%), Norway (9.4%), Türkiye (8.1%) and Japan (5.8%). Together, these five 
partners accounted for close to 60% of EU preferential trade in 2022.  

20 The 44% (blue slice in the graphic) also includes Mexico and Chile, with whom the EU applies the existing 
trade agreements, pending the ratification of the modernised agreements. 
21In addition to New Zealand and the Mercosur partners (Argentina, Brazil, Paraguay and Uruguay) these are: 
Benin, Burkina Faso, Burundi, Cabo Verde,  The Gambia, Guinea, Guinea-Bissau, Haiti, Kenya, Liberia, Mali, 
Mauritania,  Niger,  Nigeria,  Rwanda,  Senegal,  Sierra  Leone,  Tanzania,  Togo  and  Uganda,  see: 
https://policy.trade.ec.europa.eu/eu-trade-relationships-country-and-region/negotiations-and-agreements_en. 

10 

 
 
 
 
 
 
Figure 2: EU trade in goods by preferential partner (2022) 

Other preferential 
partners
23,7%

United Kingdom
22,5%

Ukraine
2,4%

Vietnam
2,6%

Canada
3,2%

Mexico
3,2%

South Korea
5,4%

Switzerland
13,7%

Japan
5,8%

Türkiye
8,1%

Norway
9,4%

Source: Eurostat, Comext (extraction made in April 2023).  

Looking  at  EU  trade  with  the  rest  of  the  world  in  2022,  the  United  Kingdom  remained  the 
third  largest  trading  partner  overall,  behind  the  US  and  China,  while  Switzerland  comes 
fourth,  followed  by  Russia.  Norway,  Türkiye,  Japan,  South  Korea  and  India  are  in  sixth  to 
tenth place, ahead of Ukraine (the EU’s 15th largest trading partner overall).  

EU  exports  to  Russia between 2021 and 2022 dropped by 38% in value terms (down from 
EUR 89 billion to EUR 55 billion) but were halved in terms of volume (down from 16 to 8 
million  tonnes).  Over  the  same  period,  EU  imports  from  Russia  increased  by  24%  in  value 
terms due to the strong increase in energy prices, while dropping by 33% in terms of volumes 
(down from 386 to 258 million tonnes). At the same time, imports of important inputs such as 
energy products and raw materials from EU preferential and other trading partners increased. 
For example, in the first quarter of 2023, Russia’s share in EU imports of energy products was 
less than a quarter of the combined share of Norway, the United Kingdom and the US. 

11 

 
 
 
 
 
EU goods trade with preferential partners continued to grow more strongly than EU trade 
overall, when excluding energy products 

As was the case for the period 2020-2021, between 2021 and 2022 trade between the EU and 
preferential  partners  grew  more  strongly  by  value  (by  21.2%)  than  EU  trade  with  non-
preferential partners (18.9%) and with all trading partners (19.9%), when energy products are 
excluded.  

Figure 3: Annual growth of EU goods trade by type of partner (2021-2022), excluding energy 

25,6%

19,9%

15,2%

Imports

Exports

Total trade

27,6%

21,2%

16,5%

24,1%

18,9%

14,1%

All trading partners

Preferential partners

Non-FTA partners

Source: Eurostat, Comext (extraction made in April 2023).  

Agri-food  trade  with  preferential  partners  remains  a  strong  pillar  of  the  bloc’s  global 
position as a top trader  

The  EU  remains  the  number  one  trader  worldwide  in  agri-food  products,  with  EUR  171 
billion  of  imports  and  EUR  229  billion  of  exports  in  2022.  Despite  global  price  increases, 
volumes  of  agri-food  products  traded  generally  did  not  decrease  in  2022  and  occasionally 
even  increased.  The  EU’s  broad  network  of  trade  agreements  contributed  to  this 
development.    

In 2022, EU agri-food trade with the 74 preferential partners grew by 21.2%. This was at the 
same rate as EU overall trade in goods (energy excluded), at a similar rate to agri-food trade 
between the EU and all trading partners, which grew by 22.2%, and at a lower rate than agri-
food trade between the EU and non-trade agreement partners (23.3%). 

Exports of agri-food products to preferential partners rose more strongly (by 17.5%) than 
exports of EU agricultural food products to all trading partners, which rose by 15.8% over the 
same  period,  and  at  a  higher  rate  than  exports  to  non-preferential  partners,  which  also 
increased  substantially,  but  by  13.5%.  The  agri-food  sectors  driving  this  trend  were  cereals 
and cereals preparations, followed by dairy products. 

12 

 
 
 
 
 
The United Kingdom remained the number one destination for EU agri-food exports among 
preferential  partners22 as  well  as  overall 23,  representing  over  one  fifth  (21%)  of  total  EU 
exports. The United Kingdom was also the export destination where EU exports experienced 
the  strongest  growth  in  2022  (i.e.  +EUR  5.9  billion  by  value,  or  +14  %),  followed  by  the 
United  States  and  Morocco.  The  United  States  remained  the  number  two  export  destination 
for EU agri-food products overall by value, after the United Kingdom, followed by China and 
Switzerland.  

In 2022, the percentage rise in EU imports of agri-food products from preferential partners 
was slightly lower for  preferential  partners (i.e. 28%) when compared to  the rise  in  imports 
from all partners (32%) and when compared to the rise in imports from non-trade agreement 
partners (37.1%). The lower increase for preferential partners is likely linked to the respective 
composition  of  imports.  For  example,  EU  imports  of  oilseed  (e.g.  soybeans)  products  and 
coffee, two key import commodities for which prices (and thus import values) have increased 
the most, come almost entirely from non-preferential countries (i.e. Brazil, Argentina and the 
United States).  

The  United  Kingdom  was  also  the  number  one  source  of  EU  agri-food  imports  overall 
(9%  of  total  imports),  with  an  increase  by  28.4%  (in  line  with  average  growth  from  all 
preferential  partners).  This  was  a  reverse  of  the  situation  in  2021,  when  imports  suffered  a 
decrease by 24.5%. This is also an indication that UK traders have become accustomed to the 
plant  and  animal  health  (SPS)  checks  and  inspections  applied  by  the  EU  including  on  agri-
food consignments since January 2021. 

In 2022, Ukraine was the second largest source of EU agri-food imports among preferential 
partners (with 8% of imports). 

EU trade agreements also facilitate diversification and helped to improve food security  

In  2022,  EU  trade  agreements  supported  diversification  of  EU  agri-food  trade  away  from 
Russia towards other trading partners and helped overcome  food security challenges both in 
the  EU  and  partner  countries  following  Russia’s  unprovoked  and  unjustified  war  of 
aggression against Ukraine: 

•  Ukraine has overtaken the United States in 2022 as the third largest import source 

for agri-food products overall (after Brazil and the United Kingdom). 

• 

In  line  with  its  commitment  to  global  food  security,  which  has  been  affected  by 
Russia’s  unprovoked  and  unjustified  the  war  of  aggression  against  Ukraine,  the 
EU in 2022 increased its wheat exports to the Southern Neighbourhood, notably to 
Algeria (4.9 million tonnes), Morocco (4.1 million tonnes) and Egypt (2.9 million 

22 Switzerland, the destination of 5% of EU exports in 2022, and Japan (4%) were second and third respectively 
among EU preferential partners. 
23 The United States ranked second, with 13% of EU exports in 2022, followed by China with 7% of total EU 
agri-food exports. 

13 

 
 
 
 
 
tonnes).  This  was  facilitated  by  the  association  agreements  between  the  EU  and 
these partners. 

Unlike  in  total  trade,  the  EU  still  retained  a  surplus  in  goods  trade  with  preferential 
partners, although the surplus is decreasing 

In 2022, in contrast to total trade, the EU registered a surplus of EUR 73 billion in its goods 
trade  with  preferential  partners.  This  was  a  decrease  of  EUR  131  billion  compared  to  EUR 
204 billion in 2021. Over 60% of the EU’s surplus with preferential partners can be attributed 
to agri-food.  

By contrast, EU goods trade with the rest of the world saw a deficit of EUR 432 billion, down 
from a surplus of EUR 55 billion in 2021 and reaching its lowest level since 2002. This was 
due in particular to a steep rise in the value of energy products, which started towards the end 
of 2021 and continued through 2022. Imports of energy products jumped by 113.5% in value 
when compared to 2021. This represented an additional amount of EUR 443.3 billion, half of 
the total increase in EU imports.  

In  2022,  the  Commission,  as  required  by  the  respective  EU  regulations,  again  monitored 
imports into the EU of certain industrial products and agri-food products… 

Specific  monitoring  obligations  on  goods  trade  with  South  Korea  and  Latin  American 
partners 

The  Commission,  as  required  by  Regulation  (EU)  No  511/2011 24 ,  monitored  South 
Korea’s  imports  of  key  car  parts  and  electronics  from  the  most  important  suppliers 
outside  the  EU.  In  2022,  South  Korea’s  imports  of  combustion  engines  (gasoline  and 
diesel) and parts slightly increased compared to 2021 (+8%), as did imports of core car 
parts (+11%).  Based on these trade statistics, it is not possible to establish a link between 
the  allowance  of  duty  drawback  under  the  trade  agreement  with  South  Korea  and  the 
increase in EU imports of cars (by 29%) from South Korea. 

Imports  into  the  EU  of  fresh  bananas  from  Colombia,  Ecuador  and  Peru  and  from 
Central America were also monitored by the Commission, as required by EU Regulation 
No  19/201325 and  No  20/201326.  A  comprehensive  report27 on  the  functioning of  the EU 
banana market after  the expiry of  the banana stabilisation  mechanism was presented to 
the European Commission on 29 August 2022. The report confirmed that EU trade policy 
struck  the  right  balance  between  different  objectives  by  respecting  international 
obligations while meeting the increased levels of EU consumption. In 2022, EU imports of 

(OJ  L  145,  31.5.2011,  p.  19);   https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-

24  Regulation 
content/en/ALL/?uri=CELEX:32011R0511. 
25

(EU)  No  511/2011 

(EU)  No 19/2013 

 Regulation 

(OJ  L  17,  19.1.2013,  p.  1);  https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-

content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX%3A32013R0019. 
26

(EU)  No  20/2013 

 Regulation 

(OJ  L  17,  19.1.2013,  p.  13);  https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-

content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX%3A32013R0020 
27https://data.consilium.europa.eu/doc/document/ST-11960-2022-INIT/en/pdf. 

14 

 
 
 
 
 
 
fresh bananas from Colombia increased by 1.6%, while imports from Ecuador and Peru 
declined by 11% and 20% compared to 2021. The Commission will continue to carry out 
its regular analysis of the state of the market and of the EU banana producers and, if need 
be, examine the situation together with Member States and stakeholders. 

Trade  in  services  increased  and  the  EU  maintained  a  surplus  with  both  preferential 
partners and the rest of the world 

Trade in services with all 74 preferential partners in 2021 (latest figures available) amounted 
to EUR 925 944 million (46% of total EU services trade). The figure increased by 6.7%, i.e. 
at a lower level than EU trade in services with the rest of the world, which increased by 10%, 
and trade with non-preferential trade partners, which increased by 13%.  

The  EU  surplus  in  trade  in  services  increased  in  2021,  both  with  preferential  partners  (a 
rise  of  EUR  57  billion  from  EUR  79  billion  in  2020  to  EUR  136  billion  in  2021)  and  all 
trading partners. For the latter group, the jump was even bigger, albeit starting from a lower 
level (i.e. a rise of EUR 112 billion from EUR 9 billion in 2020 to EUR 121 billion in 2021).   

Figure 4: EU trade in services by preferential partner, 2021 (top 10 partners) 

Switzerland; 22%

Vietnam; 
1%

Other FTA 
countries; 4%

Ukraine; 1%

Mexico; 2%

South Korea; 3%

Canada; 4%

Norway; 4%

Japan; 6%

Singapore; 7%

Source: Eurostat, Balance of Payments (BOP_ITS6_DETextraction made in April 2023). 

United Kingdom; 
46%

15 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Total EU services trade reached EUR 2 trillion in 2021, representing a third of total EU trade 
in 202228. The EU is the world’s largest exporter of services, with 26% of global exports.  

II.2   Advancing implementation of EU trade agreements in Asia, 
The Americas, the Neighbourhood and the African, Caribbean 
and Pacific countries 

This  subsection  focuses  on  the  implementation  and  enforcement  of  bilateral  EU  trade 
agreements. It illustrates how the Commission has been working, on the one hand, to ensure 
companies learn about the opportunities trade agreements offer and, on the other, to monitor 
partner  countries’  implementation  of  the  respective  commitments.  Where  needed,  the 
Commission has stepped up enforcement. In this context, the early identification, prevention 
and  removal  of  market  access  barriers  and  infringements  of  trade  and  sustainable 
development  provisions  remained  a  priority  and  was  pursed  in  close  cooperation  with 
Member States and stakeholders. EU Delegations29 play a key role in supporting this effort.   

A.  Communicating  and promoting the benefits of trade agreements 

Helping businesses to learn about trade agreements remains a priority   

The Commission continued efforts to raise awareness of EU trade agreements and advantages 
for EU companies when competing in third-country markets. This is essential in particular for 
SMEs.  This  was  pursued  via  guides  on  new  and  existing  agreements  and  their  specific 
elements, as well as via events supported by EU-funded projects.  

Examples included: 

•  A  joint  event  in  September  2022  to  mark CETA’s  fifth  anniversary,  with  90 
participants in attendance. This was co-organised by the Commission and EUCCAN, 
the European Union Chamber of Commerce in Canada. 

•  Detailed guides for existing agreements, such as the guide for EU suppliers on 

government procurement in Japan30. The guide is designed to assist companies in 
the EU that seek to supply work, goods or services to public entities in Japan through 
public procurement or similar processes. 

28  The latest figures for services trade are those for 2021, extracted from Eurostat’s BoP statistics: 
https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/databrowser/view/BOP_ITS6_DET__custom_6174487/default/table; data for  
29 DG TRADE has more than 200 staff in more than 50 EU Delegations working on trade issues. 
30 The guide explains the main changes in the scope of the government procurement activities introduced by the 
EU-Japan Economic Partnership Agreement (EPA) and provides an overview of the strengthened transparency-
related rules: https://trade.ec.europa.eu/access-to-markets/en/country-assets/tradoc_159028.pdf  

16 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
•  A wealth of material to alert stakeholders and help them prepare ahead of new 

agreements pending their entry into force. For example, in December 2022, when the 
EU concluded negotiations with Chile on an advanced framework agreement, it took 
action of this kind, including the publication of factsheets and infographics. A similar 
effort was made when the EU concluded negotiations in June 2022 on its future state-
of-the art trade agreement with New Zealand, and again for the agreement’s signature 
a year later on 9 July 2023. Materials produced for these occasions included a fact 
sheet, infographics and an FAQ document31. 

B.  Implementing EU bilateral trade agreements  

Throughout the lifecycle of bilateral EU trade agreements, the Commission uses institutional 
structures  for  a  multitude  of  different  objectives,  ranging  from  barrier  prevention  and 
removal to  cooperation  with  partner countries  and negotiations  on additional  market  access. 
Good  progress  was  achieved  over  the  reporting  period,  as  the  following  section  will  show, 
including with the help of individual examples. 

The  Commission  continued  to  engage  with  partner  countries  in  joint  trade  committees  to 
increase market access for EU exports 

For  example,  on  30  November  2022  the  EU-South  Korea  Trade  Committee  adopted  a 
decision  adding  another  44  EU  and  41  South  Korean  geographical  indications  (GIs)  to  be 
covered by the EU-South Korea trade agreement from 1 January 2023.  

On  20  December  2022,  the first  EU-Singapore  Customs  Committee  meeting  decided  to 
replace  the  system  of  ‘approved  exporters’  by  ‘registered  exporters’  (by  amending  the 
respective protocol)32. This change means EU exporters of beer can access tariff preferences 
more easily from 1 January 2023.  

The committee structures also helped identify and prevent barriers at an early stage 

•  For  example,  engagement  under  the  EU-Andean  trade  agreement  helped  the 
Commission  to  prevent  two  barriers  in  Colombia:  the  first  concerned alcoholic 
beverages  that  would  otherwise  have  required  exporters  to  provide  additional  Good 
Manufacturing  Practices  certificates.  Colombia  agreed  to  modify  its  legislation  in 
order to remove this requirement and Commission continues monitoring the situation. 
Pending the adoption of the new law, an interim solution has been found. The second 
concerned  requirements  on  the  use  of fortified  flour,  including  for  products  with 
low flour content, which would have hampered EU imports.  

31 EU-NZ Trade Agreement: Unlocking sustainable economic growth (europa.eu)  
32 Protocol 1 of the EU-Singapore trade agreement concerns the definition of ‘originating products’ and methods 
of administrative cooperation. 

17 

 
 
 
  
 
  
 
 
Bilateral engagement under the EU Association Agreement with Tunisia in 2022 helped the 
EU side avert increased most –favoured nation (MFN) customs duties laid down in a new 
finance law of December 2021 that would have affected a number of industrial products from 
the EU33.  

Committees were also instrumental in getting barriers removed, notably in the sector most 
affected, agri-food.  

For  example,  following  intense  discussions  in  the  relevant  CETA  committees,  on  30  June 
2022 Canada finally eliminated the federal excise duty exemption for local (Canadian) wines. 
In  the  past,  local  wines,  unlike  wines  imported  from  the  EU,  were  exempt  from  a  measure 
equivalent to an ad valorem behind the border tax of more than 9%.  

With Ecuador, in the respective committees of the EU-Andean trade agreement,  the EU side 
pushed  forward  and  achieved  the  removal  of  two  barriers  hampering  the  potential  of  EU 
exports in the agricultural sector: 

•  One concerned Ecuador’s protectionist import regime for agricultural products, 

which used non-automatic licences based on the assessment of national production and 
consumption, creating unnecessary delays and uncertainty for trade in agriculture 
products 34. Repeated discussions with Ecuador and the EU Delegation, supported by 
Member States and business, led to Ecuador adopting a new system on 22  November 
2022, establishing a predictable and market-oriented system.  

•  The second issue concerned a longstanding barrier banning the import of powdered 
milk products from the EU for a 10-year period, which appeared to be in breach of 
the EU-Andean trade agreement. Here again, the Commission, through the EU 
Delegation in Quito, closely coordinated its intervention with Member States and 
industry, leading the competent authorities to request a legal opinion (from the 
Attorney General). The opinion confirmed that the ban breached Ecuador’s 
commitments and led the Agricultural Ministry to issue new non-automatic import 
licences for EU powdered milk products. 

Agricultural  issues  were  by  no  means  the  only  ones  solved  in  2022.  Other  cases  concerned 
discriminatory regulations imposed on industrial products and services,  e.g. medical devices 
in Japan and Israel and the retail sector in Moldova. 

33 While the overall measure went ahead, some products of strong export interest for the EU were removed from 
the list. 
34 The EU side intervened, as this regime was neither aligned with the EU-Andean trade agreement nor the WTO 
rules and had affected the use of EU tariff rate quotas. 

18 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
• 

In  the  first  case,  close  teamwork  between  the  EU  Delegation  and  Japanese  business 
associations concerned helped improve burdensome Japanese legislation on medical 
devices with unique labelling requirements. Since 31 July 2023, the new provisions 
apply,  reducing  the costs for EU businesses on an estimated six to  nine billion  EUR 
worth of trade. 

•  Another case concerned the authorisation of medical devices in Israel. Following 
intense discussions with the relevant authorities,  Israel agreed to also recognise as 
eligible for the fast-track authorisation procedure35 products from Luxembourg and  
Member States that acceded to the Union in 2004. This means that exporters from 
these countries will now also be able to have their medical devices authorised much 
quicker, ending discrimination between Member States. While this is currently 
ensured via a pilot project, the final legislative amendment is still outstanding. EU 
exports of medical devices to Israel were in the order of EUR 409 million in 2022.  

•  The third example concerned Moldova’s Domestic Trade Law, which required 
retailers to display at least 50% of Moldovan origin food products in stores, in 
contradiction of the principle of non-discrimination for imported products, both under 
the EU-Moldova Deep and Comprehensive Trade Area (DCFTA) and under the WTO 
regime. Following high-level engagement through the DCFTA, in August 2022 
Moldova removed the above-mentioned obligation on retailers, with effect from 
26 February 2023.  

•  The fourth case concerned Peruvian licensing and qualification requirements in the 

field of services. The requirements consisted in technical analysis and testing of food 
and feed for export, which were not objective, transparent, and discriminated against 
foreign non-established companies. Following the EU side’s engagement with the 
Peruvian authorities concerned in the relevant committees of the EU-Peru Trade 
Agreement, Peru amended its legislation and now has objective and non-
discriminatory licensing and qualification requirements. 

The EU’s network of trade agreements also enhanced cooperation on a multitude of issues, 
ranging from regulatory and standards issues to raw materials 

Using  the  institutional  structures  of  EU  trade  agreements  as  a  platform,  the  Commission  in 
2022 continued its cooperation  with  developed  partners across the geographical spectrum 
on  a  wide  range  of  issues  of  mutual  interest,  facilitated  by  the  respective  trade  agreements. 
Examples of this are set out below. 

35 Recognition is on a pilot project, which will continue until the legislative amendment is adopted and enters 
into force. 

19 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
•  Digital partnerships, concluded in 2022 with Japan and South Korea and in early 

2023 with Singapore, to enhance cooperation on digital infrastructure, skills, digital 
transformation of businesses and digitisation of public services. Building on these 
digital trade principles, the EU launched negotiations on binding rules on digital trade 
with Singapore on 20 July 202336. 

•  Cooperation with South Korea 

o  On  a  Green  Partnership,  established  on  22  May  2023,  with  the  aim  to 
strengthen  bilateral  cooperation  and  exchanging  best  practices  on  climate 
action,  clean  and  fair  energy  transition,  protection  of  the  environment,  and 
other fields of the green transition; 

o  on e-certification and harmonisation of health certificates to further facilitate 
trade  of  several  processed  agri-food  products.  Discussions  on  updating  the 
trade  agreement  annexes  on  cars  and  electronics  also  continued,  and  the  EU 
and  South  Korea  also  discussed  how  to  ensure  a  level  playing  field  for 
manufacturers in the sector irrespective of their origin, as both sides introduce 
policies related to subsidising electronic vehicles. 

•  Cooperation with Japan on standardisation and certification requirements and rules 
related to offshore wind energy tendering, with the help of three studies37 making 
recommendations on how to alleviate restrictions on foreign vessels’ access to 
offshore wind energy projects. These studies support Japan as it seeks to reach its 
goals to increase the proportion of renewables in its energy mix and achieve climate 
neutrality by 2050. 

•  Cooperation with Canada on the environment and raw materials, through the 

continuation in 2022 and early 2023 of a series of joint events launched at the 2021 
EU-Canada summit38, including a strong exchange on trade and climate with the civil 
society representatives. Among those joint ventures were four workshops to promote 
sustainability, environmental stewardship and climate action in agriculture. Another 
summit outcome, the EU-Canada Strategic Partnership on Raw Materials, 
complementing the annual bilateral dialogue on raw materials, aims at diversifying 

36 https://policy.trade.ec.europa.eu/news/joint-statement-launch-negotiations-eu-singapore-digital-trade-
agreement-2023-07-20_en  
37 Offshore wind: 
https://www.eeas.europa.eu/sites/default/files/documents/Japanese%20OWP%20Tenders_Aquilo%20Energy%2
0GmbH_publication102022.pdf; Maritime cabotage: 
https://www.eeas.europa.eu/sites/default/files/documents/Japanese%20OWP%20Cabotage_Aquilo%20Energy%
20GmbH_publication102022.pdf; Standards, technical regulation and conformity assessment in the Japanese and 
European offshore wind power 
market:https://www.eeas.europa.eu/sites/default/files/documents/OWP%20Study%20-%20DTU-
REI_publication_EN_0.pdf 
38 https://www.consilium.europa.eu/en/meetings/international-summit/2021/06/14/  

20 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
sources of important green and digital economy inputs away from less like-minded 
producers to foster competitive EU-Canada supply chains. 

•  Cooperation with Switzerland on utilisation of trade agreements, comparing notes on 
trade statistics, preference utilisation rates of trade agreements and rules of origin. 
Cooperation was informed by EU research and a study39 by the Swiss State Secretariat 
for Economic Affairs (SECO), which aims to estimate the economic potential from 
creating a cumulation zone between preferential trade partners of both Switzerland and 
the EU. Moreover Switzerland applies the same security and safety measures as those 
in force in the EU. As active participant in the EU's Import Control System 2 since the 
amendment of the customs security agreement in March 2021, legitimate trade flows 
even more smoothly and a high level of security is applied to the supply chain. 

EU trade agreements also continued to offer a forum for development cooperation in Latin 
America and in Africa 

In 2022, supported by its regional cooperation programmes, the EU continued its cooperation 
with partners in Latin America and in Sub-Saharan Africa on sustainability issues and good 
governance.  This  cooperation  also  comes  with  strong  civil  society  involvement  and 
participation, including at local level in partner countries. Recent examples include:   

•  Cooperation with Chile, supported by the EU’s regional programmes to assist the 

country’s move towards a more sustainable and environmentally friendly economy, 
including topics such as sustainable mining, the fight against antimicrobial resistance, 
the promotion of responsible business conduct and the adoption of low carbon and 
circular economy business actions. Furthermore, a new Chile-only project was 
launched by the Commission in 202240, aimed at supporting fair and sustainable trade 
between the EU and Chile, which helps to highlight the role of trade to support 
environmental and social goals. The project produced inter alia studies on organic 
production in Chile and on fair trade and included regional workshops in all 16 
regions, a high-level conference with international experts and an online B2B 
platform41 to match Chilean producers with EU buyers. 

•  Cooperation with Ghana under the ‘Compete Ghana’ project 42 'to support 

implementation of the interim economic partnership agreement (EPA) between 

39 The study and the report on the results of the company survey on the use of free trade agreements by Swiss 
exporters can be found at: 
https://www.seco.admin.ch/seco/en/home/Aussenwirtschaftspolitik_Wirtschaftliche_Zusammenarbeit/Wirtschaft
sbeziehungen/Freihandelsabkommen/nutzung_freihandelsabkommen.html 
40 https://eurochile.cl/es/documents/proyecto-comercio-justo-y-sostenible-entre-la-union-europea-y-chile/  
41 https://www.eeas.europa.eu/delegations/chile/se-lanza-plataforma-%C2%A1conecta-tu-
negocio%E2%80%9D-en-el-marco-del-proyecto-%E2%80%9Capoyo-al_es?s=192  
42 The  project  does  not  target  any  particular  sector,  instead  focusing  on  building  up  Ghana’s  capacity  to 
implement  the  EPA  and  to  work  on  EPA-related  matters,  on  improving  competitiveness  at  firm  level  and  on 
mainstream regional policies in favor of industrial competitiveness. 

21 

 
 
 
 
 
 
the EU and Ghana' (EUR 4.1 million, 2020-2024). The project aims to improve 
economic governance and the business environment and to maximise the benefits of 
the EPA for Ghana. Among the most relevant outcomes in 2022 are the completion of 
communication material (e.g. an interim EPA handbook and a two-page leaflet on the 
interim EPA for public- and private-sector awareness), training sessions offered to the 
EPA Secretariat Staff, the logistical support to the Commission/DG TAXUD for the 
capacity building training on offered to 40 Ghanaian customs officials, as well as a 
report on trade reforms derived from the interim EPA.  

Many agreements with developing countries, such as the EPAs with ACP countries, have a 
strong development dimension and provide incentives for reform which development 
cooperation and in particular Aid for Trade (AfT) can leverage to support a more open 
trading environment, promote the utilisation of the agreements and advance on Trade and 
Sustainable Development (TSD) priorities. The EU Aid for Trade Progress Report 202243 
shows that the EU with its Member States was the world’s largest provider of AfT, 
accounting for over 40 percent of global flows in 2020, corresponding to EUR 22.9 billion. A 
large share of this went to countries that have preferential access to the EU market. For 
example, EU AfT to ACP countries totaled EUR 7.2 billion in 2020. The report also contains 
further information and examples on the Commission’s and Member States’ AfT, e.g. in 
supporting SMEs’ uptake of trade agreement opportunities and the improvement of TSD 
issues. The website on EU AfT has an interactive mapping 44 on beneficiary countries with 
context-specific examples of AfT projects.  

The EU continues  to advance technical cooperation with preferential  partners  to improve 
conditions for doing business  

For example, the Commission advanced the roll-out of its IP Key South East Asia project, 
which started on 1 April 2022, establishing systems to facilitate high-quality and expeditious 
processes  for  registering  and  effectively  enforcing  intellectual  property  rights  (IPR).  The 
project  supports  the  implementation  of  IPR  provisions  with  preferential  partners  in  the 
ASEAN  region,  notably  Singapore  and  Vietnam,  and  assists  them  in  their  accession  to 
relevant international agreements. 

The  Commission/DG  TAXUD  also  provided  technical  assistance  to  the  Southern  African 
Development Community (SADC) Economic Partnership Agreement States to help speed 
up  the  implementation  of  the  EPA rules  of  origin.  Topics  addressed  in  2022  included 
capacity  training  on  diagonal  cumulation  between  the  SADC  EPA  States  to  speed  up  the 
implementation of diagonal cumulation between the SADC EPA States and enhance regional 
integration within the SADC region.   

In 2022, the EU also continued  deployment of the  EU-South Africa Partners for Growth 
programme  to  maximise  bilateral  trade  under  the  SADC  EPA,  by  removing  technical 
barriers   to  trade  and  fostering  global  value  chains.  In  this  context,  the  EU  continued 

43 https://op.europa.eu/en/publication-detail/-/publication/c2814529-8fce-11ed-b508-01aa75ed71a1/language-en  
44 Economic integration, trade and connectivity (europa.eu) 

22 

 
 
 
 
collaboration  with  the  South  African  Association  of  Cotton,  Wool  and  Mohair,  bringing 
together  growers,  buyers,  equipment  suppliers  and  commodity  associations  throughout  the 
sustainable  textile  value  chain  to  explore  possibilities  for  knowledge  sharing,  technical 
exchanges and trade. 

Another  example  is  the  EU’s  close  cooperation  with  all  its  partners  within  the pan-Euro-
Mediterranean  (PEM)  area,  in  developing  a  common  platform  dedicated  to  the  use  of 
electronic  proofs  of  origin  and  electronic  means  of  administrative  cooperation  (e-PoC 
initiative).  

C.   Trade and sustainable development in focus 

On  22  June  2022,  the  Commission  concluded  its  review  of  its  trade  and  sustainable 
development policy, which culminated in the publication of a communication45 entitled The 
power  of  trade  partnerships:  together  for  green  and  just  economic  growth 46 .  The 
communication  is  providing  fresh  impetus  to  the  implementation  of  existing  EU  trade 
agreements  with  TSD  chapters,  specifically  11  trade  agreements  covering  18  partner 
countries. 

The Commission stepped up action, making its 2022 TSD review operational 

In  line  with  the  conclusions  of  the  trade  and  sustainabale  development  review,  the 
Commission made good on its promise to better involve civil society in implementation and 
enforcement. 

•  The improved complaints mechanism regarding alleged TSD violations submitted to 
the  Commission’s  Single  Entry  Point  (SEP)  includes  specific  timelines  for  the 
Commission to react (see further below).  

•  The Commission has  also launched work on identifying country-specific priorities, 
with  close  involvement  of  EU  domestic  advisory  groups  (DAGs).  The  aim  is  to 
make implementation of TSD commitments more effective.  

The  Commission  also  took  concrete  steps  to  engage  partner  countries  who  subscribed  to 
TSD commitments. In 2022, the TSD committees within EU trade agreements were used to: 

•  engage  partners  on  key  substantial  elements  of  the  TSD  review,  notably  on  the 
implementation of occupational safety and health (OSH) standards  in view of a safe 
and healthy working environment becoming a new fundamental principle and right at 

45 https://circabc.europa.eu/ui/group/8a31feb6-d901-421f-a607-ebbdd7d59ca0/library/8c5821b3-2b18-43a1-
b791-2df56b673900/details.  
46 For a summary of the main conclusions of the TSD review see also the 2022 annual report on implementation 
and enforcement: Register of Commission Documents - COM(2022)730 (europa.eu). 

23 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
work,  and  open  a  dialogue  with  certain  partners  on  the  corresponding  International 
Labour Organization (ILO) Conventions (C155 and C187);  

•  advocate for more transparency in regard to process, in particular the composition of 
partner  countries’  domestic  advisory  groups  (DAGs),  supporting  contacts  between 
DAGs and with civil society at large; 

• 

increase  partners’  understanding  of    recently  enacted  or  proposed  EU  legislation  on 
sustainability  (e.g.  EU  Regulations  on  deforestation  and  carbon  border  adjustment, 
and also the proposal for aForced Labour Regulation) and address partners’ concerns 
about the impact on trade relations with the EU.   

The  first  formal  complaint  on  TSD  was  received  and  the  preliminary  assessment 
concluded47 

The  complaint  concerns  labour  rights  in  the  mining  sector  in  Peru  and  Colombia.  The 
Commission informed the complainant, Dutch NGO CNV International, on 13 January 2023 
of  the  results  of  its  preliminary  assessment.  The  Commission  also  informed  Peru  and 
Colombia  and  published  information  about  this  alleged  situation  on  its  website 48 .  The 
preliminary assessment identified potential shortcomings in the enforcement of labour laws in 
both  countries.  The  Commission  is  now  engaging  with  them  further  to  follow  up  on  the 
identified potential shortcomings.  

The  Commission  made  full  use  of  the  trade  agreement,  in  particular  the  provisions  on 
dialogue and cooperation on trade and sustainable development matters, and of other available 
channels. The Commission is also engaging with the ILO on this matter.  

In June 2022, the Commission published revised operating  guidelines for the Single Entry 
Point.  The  revised  guidelines  provide  increased  transparency  and  predictability  for 
stakeholders  reporting  alleged  TSD  infringements,  while  also setting  out  timelines with 
which  the  Commission  works  when  handling  TSD  complaints:  10  working  days  to 
acknowledge receipt of a complaint, 20 for a first follow-up with the complainant, and up to 
120 working days to finalise the preliminary assessment (depending on the complexity of the 
case).   

Solid progress was made over the reporting period on implementing TSD commitments on 
labour  

In the area of labour, progress was registered in the ratification and entry into force of core 
ILO conventions in several partner countries: 

47 In 2022 the Single Entry Point received a second formal complaint on alleged TSD infringements; this, 
however, could not be processed since the complainant was not an EU entity.  
48 https://circabc.europa.eu/rest/download/c872c7cb-a0da-46dc-8b03-8144bf2f0436 

24 

 
 
 
 
 
 
•  Japan ratified  ILO  Convention  (No)  C105  on  the  Abolition  of  Forced  Labour.  The 
convention  entered  into  force  in  July  2023.  Japan  remains  committed  to  make 
continued  progress  with  ratification  of 
the  outstanding  ILO  Convention  on 
discrimination  (C111)  though  more  concrete  actions  and  timeline  need  to  be  still 
spelled out. 

• 

• 

In Central  America,  Panama  ratified  core  International  Labour  Conventions  on 
labour  inspections  and  maternity  and  the  2014  protocol  to  the  Forced  Labour 
Convention.  

In South Korea, three core conventions entered into force in April 2022, notably the 
convention the  Freedom of Association  and Protection of the Right to  Organise  (No 
87),  on  the  Right  to  Organise  and  Collective  Bargaining  (No  98)  and  on  Forced 
Labour  (No  29).  Some  progress  was  also  registered  towards  the  ratification  of 
convention  (No)  105  on  the  Abolition  of  Forced  Labour:  in  2022,  South  Korea 
published a study that identified the domestic provisions that need to be amended in 
order to comply with the ILO Convention. In September 2022, the Commission hosted 
a  stakeholder  meeting  with  South  Korean  civil  society  and  is  conducting  a  separate 
study  to  validate  the  South  Korean  study.  The  EU  side  continued  to  raise  this  issue 
with South Korea at all levels. 

With  the  first  step  (ratification)  completed,  the  focus  of  implementation  has  shifted  from 
ratification  towards trading  partners’  implementation  and  application  of  core  ILO 
conventions, with the Commission continuing to monitor this carefully.  

In  this  context,  some  reassuring  trends  and  developments  were  observed  in  2022,  as 
the domestic framework for labour is being reviewed and improved in a number of partner 
countries as they implemented their TSD commitments. 

•  For example, a broader reform of the labour code is underway in Vietnam (including 
work  on  a  decree  to  allow  the  establishment  of independent  trade  unions).  Once 
completed, this is likely to also have a positive impact on the Vietnam DAG, which 
should be extended to include independent workers’ organisations. 

•  The EU’s work with Japan on due diligence legislation carried forward at TSD 

committees and inter-sessional technical meetings helped to shape Japan’s guidelines 
on human rights due diligence, published in September 2022. The guidelines address 
the same labour standards as in the EPA’s TSD chapter and aim, among others, to 
increase the degree to which Japanese companies source responsibly and in line with 
international standards. 

•  Singapore indicated it is taking steps to enact legislation to prohibit discrimination 

in the workplace (so far only addressed by voluntary frameworks). 

•  Georgia has established a fully-fledged labour inspection service with an extended 

mandate. 

25 

 
 
 
 
 
 
  
 
 
 
 
•  Following discussions in the TSD committees and with stakeholders on the ground, 
Colombia and Peru identified gaps in the labour framework and decided to launch 
revision of their respective labour codes. 

TSD provisions in preferential trade agreements on the environment and labour gave rise 
to more targeted cooperation between parties 

saw  gradual  progress  on 
On environmental  protection, 
the implementation  of  multilateral  environmental  agreements and  in  the  ecological 
transition through circular economy approaches. For example, Vietnam has been engaging in 
a dialogue  with  the EU  on   circular  economy  ,  with  the TSD chapter  and the  EU-  Vietnam 
trade agreement as a whole playing an instrumental role in this.  

reporting  period 

the 

The Commission  remains  heavily  invested  in cooperation  to  implement environmental 
provisions  in  its  trade  agreements,  including  with  developed  trading  partners  in  South  East 
Asia. This included the Commission advancing cooperation with Singapore on technologies 
to support the green and digital transition (informed by the DAGs’ joint workshop on “Digital 
economy and its connections to Sustainability” of 24 March). 

The EU funded technical cooperation supporting sustainability objectives in 2022 

• 

• 

In  Central  America,  cooperation  projects  are  supporting  reform  processes  and 
capacity building to help partners implement their commitments on labour. One such 
example  is  an  EU-funded  ILO  programme  for  Guatemala  implementing  an  ILO 
roadmap on freedom of association and collective bargaining.  

In Vietnam, the EU-Vietnam Decent Work Promotion Programme, with a budget of 
EUR13.5 million over 6 years, helps address industrial relations, freedom of 
association and collective bargaining, as well as the establishment and operation of 
independent trade unions and labour inspections. 

Domestic advisory groups have again contributed significantly to advancing TSD objectives 
under 11 EU trade agreements covering 18 countries 

Contributions  by  DAGs,  who  monitor  the  situation  on  the  ground  in  partner  countries, 
reinforce the Commission’s position when following up on TSD commitments:  

•  For instance, in Ecuador, joint submissions from civil society representatives in 2021 
highlighted  difficulties  in  the  registration  as  a  trade  union of one of the workers’ 
triggered  enforcement  action.  The 
this 
organisations 
Commission took the issue up and voiced concerns about the violation of core labour 
commitments and recalled the recommendations issued by the ILO. The Commission 
has continued to engage with the unions in Ecuador, notably in the banana sector, and 
support their case in discussions with the Ecuadorian government. 

the banana  sector; 

in 

•  The EU South Korea DAG in 2021 brought to the Commission’s attention a case of 
alleged discrimination in South Korea against delivery workers, concerning  the 
recognition of their right to collective bargaining. The Commission has continued to 

26 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
follow up on this issue with South Korea  in the context of the implementation of the 
expert panel report . 

•  More recently, the EU United Kingdom DAG drew the Commission’s attention to a 
number of compliance-related issues, which have been raised in discussions with the 
UK in the relevant institutional bodies. These included a reduction in labour 
inspections in the UK related to the UK’s commitment to maintain an effective system 
of domestic enforcement. This point was raised in the Trade Specialised Committee 
(TSC) on the level playing field, based on the EU DAG’s concerns. 

DAGs also continued to provide input on topics of mutual interest and concern to the parties 
of  EU  trade  agreements  through  research  on  trade  and  sustainable  development themes. 
These  include   studies  commissioned  by  EU-  and  partner  country  DAGs, which  inform 
cooperation and mutual understanding between the parties on sustainability issues. Examples 
include a study on ‘Fair trade between EU and Andean region’ and a desk study on ‘Platform 
work  and  Institutional  Protection  with  a  Specific  focus  on  South  Korea  and  the  EU’, which 
was published mid-March 2022.  

In  addition,  EU  DAGs  in  2022  continued  their  active  engagement  with  civil  society  in 
partner  countries.  Engagement  by  EU  DAGs  with  civil  society  on  the  ground  (including 
through civil society forums or other similar settings established under EU trade agreements) 
also  helped  advance  trade  and  sustainability  issues,  even  in  cases  where  shortcomings 
remained in the practical set-up of third-country DAGs. For example: 

• 

• 

In  Vietnam,  engagement  on  the  ground  by  the  EU  Vietnam  DAG  and  the  EU 
Delegation  helped to set in motion a process leading to Vietnam’s establishment of a 
domestic  advisory  group  (DAG)  in  the  autumn  of  2021,  and  the  increase  in  its 
membership and from three to seven in 2022.  

In Japan, the EU DAG’s engagement with some of the Japanese participants in the 
Joint Dialogue with Civil Society resulted in a number of key cooperation topics being 
identified, namely responsible business conduct, due diligence and ratification of ILO 
conventions. This created positive dynamics.  

•  Pro-active engagement by the EU Andean DAG succeeded in mutually supported 
individual declarations by the Colombian DAG, Ecuadorian DAG and Peruvian 
shadow DAG at the Civil Society Forum on 28 October 2022. 

The  Commission  in  2022  secured  ongoing  financial  support  for  the  work  of  DAGs: 
The EUR 3 million project contracted by the Commission in 2018 to support civil society in 
the framework of trade agreements has been extended to the end of 2024 and is in the process 
of being extended until end-2026. 

27 

 
 
 
  
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
D.  Evaluation of the impact of trade agreements to inform implementation work49 

The Commission continued over the reporting period to consider the findings of the study in 
support of the ex post evaluation of the EU-Andean trade agreement50.  

September 2022 saw the publication of the final report of the study in support of the ex post 
evaluation  of  the  EU-Central  America  trade  agreement,  with  the  Commission  issuing  its 
main  report  (staff  working  document)  in  June  2023.  The  Commission  is  now  assessing  the 
report and preparing its staff working document to conclude the ex post evaluation.  

Both evaluations shed light on the situation in terms of the agreements’ implementation and 
their impact on the EU and partner countries, looking at economic, social and environmental 
aspects. They confirm the Commission’s approach to implementation with Latin and Central 
American  partners  and  provide  further  input  to  further  refine  its  implementation  and 
enforcement strategy. 

In  parallel,  work  on  the  ex  post  evaluation  of  the  deep  and  comprehensive  free  trade  areas 
with Georgia  and  Moldova continues, with  the  staff  working  document  currently  under 
preparation.  

Finally, work has begun on an ex post evaluation of the EU-SADC  Economic  Partnership 
Agreement. 

III.  Helping small and medium-sized enterprises find their place 
in global trade 

The advantages of EU trade agreements are particularly relevant for SMEs (which represent 
93% of EU exporters) when looking for new business opportunities abroad. Even where they 
do  not  trade  with  third-country  markets  directly,  the  negotiated  commitments  also  benefit 
SMEs  due  to  their  role  in  the  global  supply  chain,  e.g.  when  acting  as  suppliers  to  larger 
firms. In 2022, the Commission continued its efforts to help SMEs become aware of and use 
the advantages of EU trade agreements.   

A.  Upgrading and promoting Access2Markets 

The  Access2Markets  platform  launched  in  October  2020  includes  comprehensive  practical 
information  businesses  need  when  doing  business  abroad,  including  tariffs,  taxes  and 
procedures for 135 export and all source markets. The platform has had over 5 million users51, 
and  the  Commission  has  trained  more  than  9 000  SMEs  on  the  platform.  In  addition  to 

49 https://policy.trade.ec.europa.eu/analysis-and-assessment/ex-post-evaluations_en  
50 For more detailed findings of the study see also country sheet for the EU-Andean Trade Agreement: see also 
Commission Staff Working Document SWD (2023) 740; https://circabc.europa.eu/ui/group/7fc51410-46a1-
4871-8979-20cce8df0896/library/e0e79f42-9797-4d5d-a5c3-f00eb26b8676/details 
51 Overall searches in MyTradeAssistant only in 2022 were 11 336 170. 55.6% of searches related to export, 
37.5% to import and 6.8% were about the EU market. 

28 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
organising virtual training seminars on a quarterly basis, with interpretation from English to 
EU  languages,  the  Commission/DG  TRADE  supported  30  training  events  organised  by 
Member States and industry. These include the 2022 EU Africa Summit, the Access2Markets 
training organised in  collaboration with  the  French Presidency of the Council, training with 
the  EU-Japan  Centre  for  Industrial  Cooperation,  the  EU  Canadian  Chamber  of  Commerce, 
and training at the 2022 Enterprise Europe Network Annual Conference.  

Access2Markets and its main tools were again upgraded in 2022: 

•  The Rules of Origin self-assessment tool  (ROSA) is being used around 470 times a 
day.  Its  coverage  was  further  expanded  in  2022: ROSA  now  includes  31  EU  trade 
agreements,  covering  in  total  119  partner  countries  (including  the  65  developing 
countries benefitting from the Generalised Scheme of Preferences for their exports to 
the EU).  Moreover, as  of June 2023, the EU-Canada  Comprehensive Economic and 
Trade  Agreement  (CETA),  the  EU-United  Kingdom  Trade  and  Cooperation 
Agreement  (TCA), 
the 
Generalised  Scheme  of  Preferences  are  available  in  all  EU  languages.  The  new 
version  of  the  Rules  of  Origin  self-assessment  tool  was  launched  for  most  EU  free 
trade  agreements.  ROSA  has  been  completely  revamped  with  a  new  interface 52 
(ROSA  2)  and  more  streamlined  questions,  shortening  the  time  companies  need  to 
complete their self-assessment and further simplifying the process for users. 

the  EU-Japan  Economic  Partnership  Agreement  and 

•  The Access2Procurement tool (A2P) launched in September 2021 helps business 
establish whether a specific procurement is covered by international commitments 
taken by Canada and Japan in their bilateral trade agreements with the EU. Since the 
tool’s launch, 5 395 assessments have been carried out by users, with around 270 
monthly assessments in 2022. The addition of the United States to 
Access2Procurement was completed and officially launched on 4 July 2023. Next to 
be added is the United Kingdom. 

•  A trade assistant tool dedicated to services and investment (‘My Trade Assistant for 
Services and Investment’) was added to the platform in 2022, so far covering two 
countries, Canada and the United Kingdom, and three sectors, legal, accounting and 
maritime transport services. The tool has been consulted 9 000 times since launch. 
Information is gradually being added for more than 90 services sectors in four export 
markets – Canada, Japan, Switzerland and the UK.  

•  Services statistics are being gradually integrated into Access2Markets: these are based 
on the Eurostat ‘Bop-Its6’ datasets and cover the following sectors: manufacturing 
services, maintenance and repair services, transport, travel, construction, insurance 

52 https://trade.ec.europa.eu/access-to-markets/en/news/rosa-2-launches-beta-version  

29 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
and pensions, financial services, telecoms, computer and information services, other 
business services, and personal, cultural and recreational services. 

B.  Catering  to  specific  needs  of  SMEs:  SME  chapters  in  trade  agreements  and 

centres in Japan and China 

A number of EU trade agreements in place have dedicated SME provisions53 to help SMEs 
access  key  information  needed  when  accessing  each  other’s  markets.  The  EU-Canada 
Comprehensive Economic and Trade Agreement (CETA) has a recommendation on SMEs54, 
while  the  EU-Japan  Economic  Partnership  Agreement  (EU-Japan  EPA)  and  the  EU-United 
Kingdom TCA have SME chapters. Contact points on each side ensure that SMEs’ interests 
are taken into account during the agreement’s implementation and that SMEs have access to 
the latest information. In this context, SME contact points established under CETA in March 
2023 organised a dedicated webinar to exchange experience and information on each other’s 
policy  initiatives  and  programmes  helping  SMEs  internationalise.  Over  the  life  span  of 
CETA, the number of SMEs exporting to Canada has increased by 43%. SME contact points 
established under the EU-Japan EPA met in June 2022 to outline the activities taken by each 
side to implement the SME chapter and published their latest joint activity report55 in March 
2023.  

In 2022, the Commission continued to assist SMEs through dedicated SME centres in Japan 
and China, helping SMEs to navigate these markets. 

The  EU-Japan  Centre  for  Industrial  Cooperation 56,  with  the  help  of  its  dedicated  EPA 
Helpdesk57, carried out activities including: 

• 
training for 77 EU managers (‘Get Ready for Japan’, World Class Manufacturing’); 
•  41 webinars or podcasts about doing business in Japan, with over 1 200 participants; 
•  20 market intelligence reports accessible free of charge for European businesses;  
•  28  B2B  events  that  facilitated  over  830  meetings  between  European  and  Japanese 

companies58, producing 15 partnership agreements.  

53A SME recommendation has been agreed with Canada, while the EU-Japan EPA and the EU-UK TCA have 
SME  chapters,  as  do  the  agreements  concluded  with  New  Zealand,  Mercosur,  Chile  and  Mexico.  An  SME 
chapter is also part of ongoing negotiations with India and Indonesia.  
54 https://trade.ec.europa.eu/access-to-markets/en/country-assets/tradoc_157417.pdf  
55 relations-negotiations-and-agreements - Library (europa.eu) 
56 https://www.eu-japan.eu/ 
57 https://www.eu-japan.eu/epa-helpdesk 
58 The centre, in its role as Enterprise Europe Network contact point for Japan, facilitates matchmaking between 
European and Japanese SMEs.  

30 

 
 
 
 
 
  
 
 
 
 
The  EU  SME  Centre  in  China59 advises  business  stakeholders  on  developing  a  commercial 
presence  on  the  Chinese  market  and  supports  the  exchange  of  best  practices.  In  2022,  its 
activities included: 

•  37 training sessions/webinars in China and the EU for over 3 000 EU SMEs; 
•  22 advocacy activities, including policy meetings and lobbying actions with Chinese 

and European government officials, think-tanks and business associations; 

•  10 export guidelines, sector report and business articles; 
•  specific technical assistance to EU SMEs in more than 300 cases. 

C.  Cooperation with the Enterprise Europe Network (EEN) to assist SMEs 

The Commission/DG TRADE continues to deepen its engagement with the Enterprise Europe 
Network60 (‘the network’), as relaunched under the EU’s Single Market Programme. Network 
partners have a specific mandate to promote EU trade agreements. The terms of reference of 
the  latest  call  for  proposals  for  the  network  specifies  that  network  partners  have  to  ‘help 
SMEs make the most out of EU Free Trade Agreements (trade agreements) in force with third 
countries’. The available budget of the call is an impressive EUR 164.5 million for the period 
1 January  2022  to  30  June  2025.  Network  advisers  are  also  expected  to  report  the  impact 
generated  for  European  businesses  following  the  delivery  of  trade  advisory  services  (i.e. 
advisory achievements).   

EEN structures are increasingly catering to promote EU trade agreements  

the  network established 

(‘Thematic  Group 
In  2022, 
Internationalisation’) concerned  with  topics  related  to  SME  internationalisation,  its  work 
being  followed  by  290  network  advisers.  A  dedicated  contact  person  was  put  in  charge  of 
raising  network  advisers’  capacity  to  help  their  business  clients  exploit  the  opportunities  of 
EU trade agreements.  

a  dedicated expert  group 

With fresh calls for proposals and expressions of interest launched in 2022,  the network has 
been  expanding  outside  the  EU’s  borders,  adding  network  nodes  in  EU  trading  partner 
countries with whom the EU has a bilateral trade agreement or customs union in place  (e.g. 
Türkiye, Singapore, South Korea).  

59 https://www.eusmecentre.org.cn/ 
 60 Information on the EEN is available here: https://een.ec.europa.eu/.  The network, co-financed by the EU 
COSME programme, is active in more than 60 countries and brings together 3 000 experts from 600 member 
organisations. Its objective is to help small and medium-sized businesses in their international activities. 

31 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
A wealth of network activities target SME access to the advantages trade agreements offer 

Via  its  outreach  to  500  leading  business  support  organisations  in  Europe,  the  Network 
continues  to  multiply  DG  TRADE’s  training  efforts  on  EU  trade  agreements  and 
Access2Markets.  In  2022,  the  Network  again  carried  out  a  wealth  of  additional  promotion 
activities,  helping  SMEs  to  learn  about,  navigate  and  compete  in  foreign  markets.  These 
activities include: 

•  a  workshop  on  EU  trade  agreements  and  Access2Markets  at  the  Annual  EEN 
conference in  Prague  in  October 2022, with  the participation  of  40 network advisers 
onsite and about 60 online; 

•  a train-the-trainer session in November 2022 with external consultants, with the help 
of hands-on case studies. Participants have been asked to replicate the session and 
disseminate the content to their national networks within 6 months;  

•  a bi-monthly trade agreement regulars’ table kicked off in early 2023; here, external 
trade experts advise network advisers on how to solve concrete problems their clients 
face when importing and/or exporting outside the EU. 

D.  Cooperation with trade promotion organisations  

The Commission continues to engage with Member States’ TPOs to update them on EU trade 
agreements and Access2Markets. In 2022, the Commission also continued its exchange with 
Trade Promotion Europe (‘TPE’)61, which brings together 27 TPOs from 17 Member States.  
With its broad network of over 170 offices in the EU and over 400 outside the EU, TPE has 
an important multiplier role. The Commission has been supporting TPE’s efforts to raise  its 
members’ awareness of EU preferential trade agreements and their advantages. This support 
included organising a series of  specialised  training sessions such as the  export management 
masterclass programme launched in March 202362. 

E.  Activities to support SMEs at multilateral level (WTO) 

The EU in 2022 continued its support for the implementation of the 2020 MSME Package63, 
reporting to the WTO Secretariat on the status of the EU’s implementation of the package. In 
this context, the EU regularly sends tariff and non-tariff data feeding into the two information 
platforms under the package (the Global Trade Helpdesk and WTO Integrated Database). The 
EU  also  provided  feedback  and  support  on  several  occasions  for  information-sharing 

61 https://tradepromotioneurope.eu/ 
62 https://tradepromotioneurope.eu/trade-promotion-europes-export-management-masterclass-kicks-off/   
63https://www.wto.org/english/news_e/news20_e/msmes_11dec20_e.htm 

32 

 
 
 
  
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
initiatives  by  the  WTO  Secretariat,  including  on  how  to  improve  MSME  provisions  in  the 
Regional Trade Agreements database64.  

IV.  Addressing barriers and finding solutions 

IV.1   State of play and removal of trade barriers  

In  2022,  the  global  trade  environment  remained  complex.  Russia’s  unprovoked  and 
unjustified war of aggression against Ukraine had a significant impact on international trade, 
following concerted pressure from allied countries and others to restrict Russia’s capacity to 
pursue its aggression, while others took steps to protect their domestic markets. Protectionist 
policies and practices that  peaked during the  COVID period also  persisted in  some regions, 
creating  challenges  for  businesses  operating  in  those  markets.  Hence  the  importance  of 
continuing efforts to detect, raise and resolve trade barriers.  

A. Stock of registered trade & investment barriers as of 31 December 2022 

As  the  below  table  shows,  by  the  end  of  2022  a  total  of  448  active  trade  and  investment 
barriers in 64 third countries were included in the Commission’s Access2Markets database. 

Type of measure 

Number of 
barriers 

Sanitary and phytosanitary measures (SPS) 

Technical barriers to trade (TBT) 

Tariffs and equivalents and quantitative restrictions 

Administrative procedures 

Other measures* 

Services & investment 

Intellectual property rights (IPR) 

Public procurement 

Exports taxes and restrictions 

Total 

99 

79 

79 

37 

37 

36 

36 

29 

16 

448 

* Other measures include barriers related to trade defence instruments (TDIs) and to subsidies and measures 
affecting competition. 

64 https://www.wto.org/english/tratop_e/msmesandtra_e/msmesandtra_e.htm  

33 

 
 
 
 
 
 
The number of trade and investment barriers EU companies face when exporting outside the 
Union has thus remained stable compared to 2021, when 455 barriers were on the books. 

Looking  at  the registration  date of trade barriers registered  by the end  of  2022, 34% were 
registered in the past 5 years (as can be seen from Figure 5 below), 38% are between 6 to 10 
years old, while 27% of all barriers have been on the list for more than a decade.  

Figure 5: Number of barriers as per registration date 

180
160
140
120
100
80
60
40
20
0

M O R E   T H A N   1 0

B E T W E E N   5   A N D   1 0

5   A N D   L E S S

The average “age” of barriers with China, Russia, India and the United States (i.e. the largest 
non-preferential  partners)  is  10  years:  103  out  of  117  barriers  for  these  countries  were 
registered before 2019. By contrast, for barriers registered in other countries, the average age 
is approximately 8.7 years.  

In  some  of  these  cases,  business  found  alternative  routes  to  navigate  the  barriers,  or  simply 
decided to focus on other markets. At the same time, the information on Access2Markets on 
the  existence  of  these  barriers  is  still  valuable  to  companies  when  doing  business  in  the 
countries  concerned.  The  Commission  is  gradually  revisiting  the  stock  of  older  barriers  per 
country and sector, in cooperation with Member States and stakeholders concerned. Section C 
below has some recent examples of how the Commission managed, in tandem with Member 
States and business, to resolve barriers that had been affecting EU exports for more than 10 
years. 

Looking at the types of barriers prevalent in 2022, as can be seen from Figure 6 below, SPS 
measures remained the largest category of trade barriers (99), accounting for almost a quarter 
of all recorded barriers. This was followed by TBT measures (79 barriers) and tariff measures 
and  quantitative  restrictions  (79  barriers).  Together,  these  three  categories  of  trade  barriers 
accounted for almost  60% of  all active barriers,  mirroring the trend observed between 2020 
and 2021.   

36 barriers registered are in the area of services, concerning 20 different third countries. The 
biggest services sector affected is transport – with 10 barriers registered, followed by financial 
services,  energy,  postal  services,  business,  construction,  recreational,  distribution  and  other 
services. 

34 

 
 
 
 
 
Figure 6: Types of barriers in 2022 

Exports taxes and restrictions
4%

SPS
22%

Government 
Procurement
6%

IPR
8%

Services & Investment
8%

Other measures
8%

Administrative 
procedures
8%

TBT
18%

Tariffs and equivalents 
and quantitative 
restrictions
18%

Figure  7  below  shows  the  trading  partners  where  most  barriers  were  registered  in  2022: 
China continued to  have  the most  registered barriers at  38, followed by Russia  (32), India 
(29), the United States (24) and Indonesia (21).  

Figure 7: Stock of barriers per trading partner in 2022

35 

 
 
 
 
 
 
This mirrors the situation in 2021, except that India has switched place with the United States.  
With China, one trade barrier was removed. 

The map in Figure 8 below illustrates the geographical spread of barriers by the end of 2022. 
Except for those mentioned above, third countries with 10 or more barriers in 2022 included 
Brazil (19), South Korea (18), Australia (16), Algeria (13), Mexico (12), Egypt (11), Malaysia 
(10) and Vietnam (10). This mirrors the situation in 2021, except  that Australia and Algeria 
have one more barrier each. 

Figure 8: Geographic spread of barriers per trading partner (end of 2022) 

B. The evolution of trade & investment barriers in 2022 

The  prevailing  types  among  new  barriers  were  sanitary  and  phytosanitary  (SPS)  barriers 
and tariffs and equivalents and quantitative restrictions (three new registered barriers for 
each type), followed by technical barriers to trade (TBT) and IPR measures. In 2022, the 
number of new SPS barriers remained at a relatively low level (3), similarly as was the case in 
202165 (2), when compared to new SPS barriers registered in 2020 (13). 

In terms of numbers  of  new  barriers, 10 barriers were registered in 2022, 6 fewer than in 
2021.  The  declining  trend  thus  continued,  albeit at  a  less  dramatic  level  than  between  2020 
and 2021 (from 41 to 16). This decrease started in 2021, partly due to the consequences of the 
COVID  pandemic.  The  decrease  in  registration  of  new  barriers  may  also  be  connected  to 
increased scrutiny since the launch of the Single Entry Point in 2020 of issues before they are 
registered (see Section IV.2 below). 

65 The decline in 2021 was partly attributed to a lack of outbreaks of major pests like ASF and more generally to 
businesses struggling with the consequences of COVID-19.  

36 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
The table below shows 2022 compares to the situation in 2021. 

Type of measure 

New 
barriers66 

2022 

New barriers 
2021 

SPS 
TBT 
Tariffs and equivalents and quantitative 
restrictions 
Administrative procedures 
Services & investment 
Other measures67 
IPR 
Public procurement 
Exports taxes and restrictions 
Grand total 

3 
2 
3 

0 
0 
 0 
2 
0 
0 
10 

2 
6 
2 

 1 
1 
 2 
0 
2 
0 
16 

In  terms  of  the  main  sectors  affected  by  new  barriers,  the  situation  in  2022  mirrors  2021: 
agriculture and fisheries came out again as the largest category, with five new barriers.  

Type of sector 

Number of new barriers 

Agriculture and fisheries 
Horizontal 
Wines and spirits 
Other industries 
Total 

5 
3 
1 
1 
10 

In  terms  of  the  geographical  spread  of  new  barriers,  the  largest  number  were  in  the 
Southern Neighbourhood (4), followed by Latin America (2), South and South East Asia (3) 
and North America (1). 

C. Barriers resolved in 2022 

In  2022,  31  barriers  were  removed  in  19  partner  countries  (eight  fewer  than  in  2021).  A 
combination  of  different  strategies  and  instruments  were  used,  including  diplomatic 

66  New barriers are those registered in Access2Markets in 2022. 
67  Other measures include barriers related to trade defence instruments (TDIs) and to subsidies, measures 
affecting competition, and other measures non-classifiable in previous categories. 

37 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
engagement  and  the  institutional  framework  under  bilateral  trade  agreements  and  the 
WTO.  

Type of measure 

Resolved 
barriers 2022 

Resolved 
barriers 2021 

SPS 
TBT 
Tariffs and equivalents and quantitative restrictions 
Administrative procedures 
Services & investment 
Other measures* 
IPR 
Public procurement 
Exports taxes and restrictions 
Total 

14 
4 
4 
1 
3 
3 
0 
1 
1 
31 

15 
6 
6 
3 
2 
1 
3 
1 
2 
39 

In 2022, SPS barriers again accounted for the biggest category with 14 barriers solved.  

These solved barriers had a direct  positive effect for EU exporters in  many sectors, notably 
the food sector.  

•  For example, after having been closed for  24 years to imports of EU sheep and goat 
meat, the USA  finally amended the import conditions for sheep and goat products to 
bring them in  line with  international  standards. This  allowed a gradual  restart  of EU 
exports.  

•  A 10% tax affecting EU beverages (in particular beer) in Costa Rica was removed by 

the latter in February 2023, following continuous bilateral engagement in the 
institutional bodies established under the EU-Central America Association. EU beer 
exports to Costa Rica were EUR7 million in 2020, the 10% potentially representing 
EUR0.7 million68.  

The  second  most  common  types  of  trade  barriers  resolved  in  2022  were  those  related  to 
technical  barriers  to  trade  (TBT)  and  tariffs  and  equivalents  and  quantitative 
restrictions.  

•  Among the resolved barriers in the TBT category was the longstanding barrier linked 
to technical specifications applied to public light buses by Hong  Kong starting from 
2015,  de  facto  blocking  exports  of  Euro  VI  light  buses  from  the  EU.  Following 
intensive  bilateral  contacts,  including  in  the  EU-Hong  Kong  Structured  Dialogue 
meetings,  the  Road  Traffic  Regulation  was  amended  in  September  2022,  opening  a 
market for EU manufacturers in the order of EUR200 million. 

68 Source: European Commission, DG AGRI. 

38 

 
 
 
 
 
 
• 

In the category of tariffs and equivalent barriers were the discriminatory practices 
faced by the EU wines and spirits sector in Mozambique. Mozambique had introduced 
in 2022 an obligatory control stamp regime, with imported alcoholic products having 
to pay a higher cost for the stamp than domestic products. After intense advocacy 
work by the Commission (in coordination with Member States and business) the 
prices for the stamps were set in May 2022 at the same level for both domestic and 
imported products.   

In terms of geographical coverage (i.e. the number of barriers resolved per trading partner), 
Figure 9 below shows that full or partial solutions covered 19 of the EU’s trading partners. In 
contrast  to  the  situation  in  2021,  when  South  Korea,  Egypt  and  Canada  were  the  top  three 
countries  with  most  barriers  resolved  (trade  agreement  partners),  in  2022  India,  the  United 
States  and  Venezuela  (countries  with  whom  the  EU  has  not  concluded  a  preferential  trade 
agreement) were at the top of the list.  

Figure 9: Number of barriers resolved by partner (2022) 

4
3
2
1
0

Figure  10  below  shows  the  wide  set  of  sectors  benefitting  from  the  efforts  to  strengthen 
market  access  for  EU  businesses  in  third  countries.  The  sector  that  experienced  the  most 
resolved  trade  barriers  was  agriculture  and  fisheries,  accounting  for  45%  of  all  resolved 
barriers. Six of the solved barriers were in the ‘horizontal’ category (i.e. concerning products 
across  more  than  one  sector,  which  thus  cannot  be  attributed  to  one  alone),  while  three 
concerned the services sector. This division largely mirrors the situation in 2021. 

39 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Figure 10: Number of barriers resolved per sector (2022) 

The Market Access Partnership and its impact in 2022 

When  tackling  barriers,  the  Commission  cooperates  closely  with  Member  States  and  EU 
stakeholders. This  is  done within the Market  Access  Partnership, which remains a central 
strand of the strategy  for  battling barriers. The partnership brings  together the Commission, 
Member States and  EU  business  associations on a  regular basis, in different  configurations. 
The  Trade  Policy  Committee  regularly  considers  implementation  and  enforcement  issues, 
including  on  barriers  to  provide  the  necessary  impulse  and  direction  and  a  shared 
understanding between the Commission and Member States of priorities, of what needs to be 
done and of where efforts should be focused69. 

The partnership’s  work  over the past  5  years again  resulted in  unleashing  EU  exports  in  a 
significant  manner.  Overall,  econometric  analysis  carried  out  by  DG  TRADE  showed  that 
thanks to the removal of a number of barriers between 2017 and 2021, exports from the EU in 
2022  were  EUR7  billion  higher  than  they  would  have  been  if  the  barriers  had  still  been  in 
place. 

69 See also the Commission non-paper on the implementation and enforcement of EU trade policy: 
https://circabc.europa.eu/ui/group/7fc51410-46a1-4871-8979-20cce8df0896/library/7103f3c9-2dc5-4bc5-be52-
210c133802ca/details?download=true. 

40 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
IV.2  

The Single Entry Point 

Rationale and process  

When  DG  TRADE  launched  the  Single  Entry  Point  on  16  November  2020,  it  was  with  a 
twofold  purpose.  The  first  aim  was  to  make  it  easier  for  EU  stakeholders  to  raise  new 
potential trade barriers or breaches of sustainability commitments with the Commission. With 
the  Single  Entry  Point,  there  is  now  one  point  of  contact  for  stakeholders  to  report  such 
issues  to  the  Commission  and  guidance  on  the  information  needed  from  complainants  to 
establish whether there is a barrier and decide on the follow-up. The second aim was to make 
the assessment of new issues and  the follow-up  process  more effective  and efficient.  Under 
the  guidance  of  the  Chief  Trade  Enforcement  Officer  (CTEO),  the  Single  Entry  Point 
coordinates the assessment  of complaints and sets up Commission ‘case teams’  made up  of 
relevant experts.     

The process is illustrated by a recent example of a complaint on import restrictions applied by 
Egypt. 

SEP complaint regarding Egypt – Letter of credit 

In March 2022, the Single Entry Point received a complaint on the mandatory use of a letter of credit 
(L/C)  as  a  prior  payment  condition  for  imports  into  Egypt  of  a  wide  range  of  goods.  The  measure 
enabled the Central Bank of Egypt to control the supply of foreign currency for imports by delaying 
the  issuing  of  the  L/Cs.  Accordingly,  several  economic  operators  in  different  EU  industry  sectors 
were  experiencing  considerable  delays  in  the  issuing  of  their  L/Cs.  This  new  measure  increased 
administrative  burden  and  costs,  delayed  the  import  process,  and  de  facto  limited    import  volumes 
given the limited foreign currency made available to importers.  

Upon  receipt  of  the  complaint,  the  Single  Entry  Point  set  up  a  case  team  of  experts,  which  also 
involved the EU Delegation in Cairo, to assess the complaint in detail. As the assessment concluded 
that the measure was incompatible with the GATT 1994 and the EU-Egypt Association Agreement, 
the barrier was registered in Access2Markets. Thereafter, the Commission engaged directly with the 
Egyptian government at various levels (e.g. WTO forums and bilateral contacts under the Association 
Agreement)  to  ensure  the  barrier’s  swift  removal.  As  a  result,  in  January  2023  Egypt  removed  the 
mandatory requirement to use an L/C as a prior payment condition for imports into the country. The 
EU  is  currently  monitoring  whether  the  removal  of  the  L/C  requirement  is  fully  applied  on  the 
ground. 

The  Single  Entry  Point’s  work  is  facilitated  by  online  complaint  forms  –  one  for  market 
access  issues  and  one  on  TSD/GSP-related  issues.  Both  are  available  on  Access2Markets70. 
These forms are designed to provide DG TRADE with enough information to conduct a first 
assessment  of  the  issue  at  stake  and  consider  follow-up.  Potential  complainants  may  be 
uncertain about the information required, the process, or whether they can complain without 
providing full information. To assist them, the SEP operating guidelines71 on DG TRADE’s 
website  provide  stakeholders  with  guidance  how  to  submit  a  complaint.  In  addition,  the 

70 https://trade.ec.europa.eu/access-to-markets/en/contact-form?type=COMPL_MA 
71 https://trade.ec.europa.eu/access-to-markets/en/form-assets/operational_guidelines.pdf  

41 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Commission/TRADE  offers  pre-submission  meetings  with  potential  complainants,  and 
follows  up  with  them  once  the  complaint  has  been  submitted,  as  necessary.  Once  sufficient 
information  is  available,  the  case  team  members  will  assess  the  complaint  and  suggest 
appropriate  follow-up  to  solve  the  issue.  The  Commission  can  also  take  action  of  its  own 
initiative in situations where no formal complaints are submitted on a given barrier.  

The Single Entry Point in numbers 

In 2022, its second full year of operation, the Single Entry Point: 

•  was  contacted  71  times,  mainly  about  potential  market  access  barriers  (66)  but  also 

potential breaches of third countries’ sustainability commitments (5);  

• 

received  a  total  of  48  external  complaints  from  EU  stakeholders  through  the 
Access2Markets portal (two on TSD and the remainder on market access issues) and 
initiated six ex officio complaints (on market access issues); 

•  has engaged in a number of pre-notifications related to sustainability, of which three  

have resulted in official complaints in 2022. 

Out  of  the  48  external  complaints  the  vast  majority  (42)  were  brought  by  industry:  23 
complaints  were  launched  by  EU  companies,  16  by  European  trade  associations,  and  3  by 
national trade associations. The 6 remaining complaints were launched by Member States.  
In  addition,  the  Commission  initiated  6  complaints  of  its  own  initiative  on  perceived  trade 
barriers. 

With  regard  to  the  number  of  contacts  and  complaints  received,  increases  of  5  and  15 
respectively were registered compared to 2021. As for the origin of complaints, the situation 
in  2022  largely  mirrors  that  in  2021:  EU  business  stakeholders  remained  the  number  one 
category  of  complainants,  while  complaints  launched  by  Member  States  doubled,  albeit 
from a low level (from 3 in 2021 to 6 in 2022). 

As can be seen from Figure 11 below, in terms of third countries concerned, the Single Entry 
Point  received  complaints  about  barriers  encountered  in  22  partner  countries,  covering  all 
geographic regions. 

42 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Figure 11: Complaints received by the Single Entry Point in 2022, per region 

10%

8%

9%

4%

15%

31%

23%

African, Caribbean and Pacific

Europe and Eastern Neighbourhood

Far East

Latin America

South and South East Asia, Australia
and New Zealand

Southern neighbours,  Middle East,
Turkey, Russia and Central Asia

US, Canada

In line with the trend observed in 2021, in 2022 again the highest number of complaints 
concerned trading partners in the Southern and Eastern Neighbourhood (12), which, together 
with Türkiye (3) made up 33% of all complaints (slightly down from 37% in 2021), followed 
by South and South East Asia (including Australia, India) with three complaints and Latin 
America in the third place with two complaints. The SEP only received one complaint on 
North America. 

V.  Bilateral 
commitments: resolving disputes72 

and  multilateral 

enforcement 

of 

trade 

The Commission’s approach to implementation and enforcement  is focused around work on 
implementation, on pre-empting potential barriers and on tackling actual barriers before they 
become  entrenched.  To  be  at  its  most  effective,  this  upstream  work  is  backed  up  by  the 
Commission’s readiness to purse legal disputes, when necessary.  

V.1  Use of dispute settlement 

A.   WTO dispute settlement  

Even with the WTO’s Appellate Body still blocked, the EU’s WTO dispute settlement 
activity continued… 

72 For a detailed summary of, in particular, WTO cases involving the EU as complainant or respondent and cases 
under the EU’s bilateral agreements, see the most up-to-date edition of the ‘Overview of the EU’s active dispute 
settlement  cases’,  published  on  DG  TRADE’s  website 
(https://ec.europa.eu/trade/policy/accessing-
markets/dispute-settlement/ ).   

43 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Despite the blockage since 2019 of the WTO Appellate Body, the EU successfully advanced a 
growing number of WTO disputes during the reporting period, using the Multi-Party Interim 
Appeal  Arbitration  Agreement  (MPIA) 73  as  well  as  ‘ad  hoc’  appeal  arbitration 
agreements74 based on the MPIA model. At the end of April 2023, 53 out of the 164 WTO 
members  were  covered  by  the  26  MPIA  participants.  Japan  is  the  most  recent  participant, 
having joined in March 2023. The first MPIA award was issued in December 2022 in DS591 
(Colombia – Frozen Fries). 

As of mid-April 2023, the EU had launched 110 of the 616 disputes brought before the WTO 
since  1995.  Among  the  offensive  WTO  disputes  advanced  by  the  EU  over  the  reporting 
period were the following75: 

•  US  –  ripe  olives  (DS577)  –  This  dispute  concerns  countervailing  duties  applied  on 
imports of ripe olives from Spain put in place during the previous US administration 
in 2018, considered illegal, the ruling becoming binding in December 2021. The EU 
believes  that  the  United  States  failed  to  comply  with  the  panel’s  findings  by  the 
mutually agreed deadline of 14 January 2023, especially with regard to its finding of 
pass-through. Lacking progress to reach a mutually agreed solution, on 28 April 2023 
the EU requested consultations with the US in the context of a compliance proceeding 
under Article 21.5 of the Dispute Settlement Understanding. As consultations failed to 
solve  the  issue,  on  14 July  2023  the  EU  requested  that  the  Dispute  Settlement  Body 
establish a compliance panel to rule on the United States’ implementation of the pass-
through finding in the December 2021 ruling. 

•  Turkey  –  pharma  (DS583)  –  This  dispute  concerns  the  EU’s  challenge  of  certain 
Turkish  measures  affecting  imports  of  pharmaceutical  products.  All  claims  were 
decided in the EU’s favour in the panel report of 28 April 2022. Türkiye appealed on 
25 April 2022. The appeal arbitration proceedings pursuant to Article 25 of the DSU 
were based on an ad hoc appeal arbitration agreement between the EU and Türkiye. In 
July  2022,  the  appeal  arbitrators  broadly  confirmed  the  panel’s  ruling,  in  particular 
that  Türkiye  must  remove  its  discriminatory  practices  (localisation  and  prioritisation 
measures) in the pharmaceutical sector. Following the expiry on 25 April 2023 of the 
reasonable time period agreed with Türkiye, the EU is now monitoring Türkiye’s steps 
towards compliance. 

73 This  arrangement,  notified  to  the  WTO  in  April  2020,  ensures  that  even  though  the  work  of  the  Appellate 
Body is paralysed, the WTO members participating in the arrangement continue to benefit from binding, two-tier 
and independent adjudication under WTO rules in any disputes between them. Any WTO member may join the 
MPIA as long as the Appellate Body remains unable to function fully.  
74 If a WTO member with whom the EU has a WTO dispute chooses not to participate in the MPIA (as was the 
case, for example, for Türkiye in two WTO disputes, DS583 and DS595, see below). 
75 For a detailed summary of, in particular, WTO cases involving the EU as complainant or respondent and cases 
under the EU’s bilateral agreements, see the most up-to-date edition of the ‘Overview of the EU’s active dispute 
settlement cases’, published on DG TRADE’s website: Circabc (europa.eu) 

44 

 
 
 
 
 
•  Colombia  –  frozen  fries  (DS591).  This  dispute  concerned  definitive  anti-dumping 
measures  imposed  by  Colombia  in  November  2018  on  imports  of  frozen  fries  from 
Belgium, Germany and the Netherlands. Following a report in the EU’s favour by the 
WTO  Panel,  Colombia  appealed  under  the  Multi-Party  Interim  Appeal  Arbitration 
Arrangement  (MPIA).  The  final  and  binding  award  of  the  Appeal  Arbitrators  of 
13 December  2022  sided  with  the  EU.  On  14 March  2023,  the  parties  agreed  on  a 
reasonable  period  of  time  for  Colombia  to  implement  the  recommendations  of  the 
Award of the Arbitrators, which expired on 5 November 2023.  

•  Egypt – import registration (DS609). This dispute concerns registration requirements 
imposed by Egypt on 29 categories of goods including agricultural and food products, 
cosmetics, toys, textiles, garments, household appliances, furniture and ceramic tiles. 
These  requirements  appear  to  be  inconsistent  with  Egypt’s  commitments  under  the 
WTO Agreements on Tariffs and Trade (GATT 1994), on Agriculture and on Import 
Licensing  Procedures.  On  26  January  2022,  the  EU  requested  WTO  consultations, 
following  which  Egypt  committed 
introducing  and  applying  significant 
to 
improvements  to  the  registration  process.  The  EU  side  is  currently  monitoring  the 
functioning  of  the  adjusted  registration  system  to  verify  whether  it  will  allow  trade 
flows into Egypt to resume and is making the necessary contacts with Egypt.   

•  China  –  goods  and  services  (DS610).  This  dispute  concerns  discriminatory  trade 
practices which China has been applying against Lithuania since December 2021. The 
measures  at  stake  include  rejections  of  Lithuanian  imports  by  Chinese  customs 
authorities, import restrictions affecting multinational companies that use inputs from 
Lithuania and a cut in Chinese exports to Lithuania. The EU considers these measures 
to  be  discriminatory  and  illegal  under  WTO  rules.  China  also  put  in  place  complete 
import bans on alcohol,  beef, dairy, logs  and peat  shipped from  Lithuania as part of 
the same group of measures, allegedly on phytosanitary grounds. The measures affect 
intra-EU trade and intra-EU supply chains, and impact the functioning of the internal 
market,  including  by  forcing  market  adjustments.  The  EU  repeatedly  reached  out  to 
China  to  remove  the  restrictions  on  Lithuania’s  exports  to  China  and  restore  normal 
trade flows,  but  to  no  avail. Following consultations held  on  15 and 16  March 2022 
between  the  parties,  which  failed  to  bring  a  satisfactory  solution,  the  EU  on 
7 December 2022  EU requested  a WTO panel,  which  was established  on 27 January 
2023. The panel composition process is ongoing. 

•  China – anti-suit injunctions (DS611). This dispute mainly concerns Chinese measures 
adversely  affecting  the  protection  and  enforcement  of  intellectual  property  rights. 
Since August 2020, Chinese courts have been issuing decisions – known as ‘anti-suit 
injunctions’  –  to  prevent  EU  companies  holding  standard  essential  patents  from 
rightfully  enforcing  their  rights  outside  China.  Chinese  courts  also  use  the  threat  of 
heavy fines to  deter European companies from  going  to  foreign  courts. This  has left 
European  high-tech  companies  at  a  significant  disadvantage  when  enforcing  their 
rights. Consultations between the EU and China took place in April 2022 but failed to 

45 

 
 
 
 
 
• 

• 

reach  a  mutually  satisfactory  solution.  A  panel  was  established  on  27  January  2023 
and composed on 28 March 2023. 

India – tariffs on ICT products (DS582). This dispute concerns tariffs applied by India 
on  information  and  communications  technology  (‘ICT’)  products.  The  tariffs  have 
been  progressively  established  since  2014,  although  India  had  committed  to  a  duty-
free regime with its WTO bound schedule as a translation of its ITA-1 commitments. 
The panel report was circulated to all WTO members and published on 17 April 2023. 
In this report, the panel found that India’s tariffs, of up to 20%, violate the most basic 
rules  of  the  WTO,  i.e.  India’s  tariff  commitments,  and  thus  are  illegal.  The  panel 
report upheld all of the EU’s claims in this dispute and should in principle be adopted 
by the Dispute Settlement Body within 60 days from circulation to all WTO members.  

Indonesia’s  nickel  ore  export  ban  (DS592).  This  dispute  concerns  an  export  ban 
imposed  by  Indonesia  on  nickel  ore  and  domestic  processing  requirements  affecting 
nickel ore and iron ore. The EU challenged the measure before the WTO, requesting 
the establishment of a panel in January 2021. On 30 November 2022, the panel found 
that  Indonesia’s  export  ban  and  domestic  processing  requirement  on  nickel  ore 
violated  WTO  rules  and  were  not  justified  by  any  of  the  available  exceptions, 
upholding all of the EU’s claims. On 8 December 2022, Indonesia appealed the panel 
report  ‘into  the  void’,  i.e.  to  the  non-operational  Appellate  Body.  Indonesia  did  not 
agree to any arrangement for working around the absence of a functioning Appellate 
Body to  hear its appeal,  such as joining  the MPIA or concluding with  the EU an  ad 
hoc  appeal  arbitration  agreement  pursuant  to  Article  25  of  the  Dispute  Settlement 
Understanding,  despite  sustained  outreach  at  all  levels  over  the  course  of  2022. 
Following the findings of the WTO panel and Indonesia’s appeal to the currently non-
operational Appellate Body, de facto blocking the final and binding resolution of the 
dispute,  the  Commission  is  considering  applying  appropriate  and  proportionate 
countermeasures  in  response  to  Indonesia’s  breach  and  has  launched  a  public 
consultation on the possible use of the Enforcement Regulation to assist it in assessing 
the necessity and parameters of possible commercial policy measures. 

Over the reporting period the EU also  continued  to  advance  on  defensive  WTO  disputes 
brought by other parties against the Union, including the following:  

•  Turkey – steel safeguards (DS595). This dispute concerns the steel safeguard measure 
imposed by the EU in February 2019. The panel report of 29 April 2022 confirmed the 
availability  of  the  safeguards  instrument  as  a  response  to  the  global  steel  crisis,  but 
found  that  the  EU  safeguard  measure  on  three  points  lacked  sufficient  justification. 
Following adoption of the final report on 31 May 2022, the EU and Türkiye agreed on 
a  reasonable  period  time  for  compliance  and  on  16  January  2023  and  the  EU 
submitted a status  report informing the WTO Membership  about  the adoption of the 
measure necessary to comply with the recommendations and rulings in this dispute.  

46 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
• 

Indonesia  (DS593 ) – palm oil and Malaysia – palm oil (DS600): Both disputes, 
which were initiated separately by Indonesia (December 2019) and Malaysia (January 
2021) respectively, take issue with certain measures adopted by the EU and certain 
Member States in the context of the EU Biofuels directives, as the latter affect palm 
oil and oil palm crop-based biofuels from these countries. Malaysia and Indonesia 
claim that these measures at issue are inconsistent with the WTO Agreements on 
Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT), Tariffs and Trade (GATT) and Subsidies and 
Countervailing Measures (SCM). In both cases, panels were established and 
proceedings are ongoing. 

•  South  Africa  –  citrus  fruit  (DS613).  This  dispute  concerns  the  EU’s  phytosanitary 
regime governing imports of citrus fruit from South Africa. South Africa claims that 
the  EU’s  measures  appear  inconsistent  with  the  WTO  SPS  Agreement  and  some 
provisions of the GATT 1994. On 22 July 2022, South Africa requested consultation 
with the EU at the WTO. The consultation took place on 15 and 16 September 2022 
but failed to produce a satisfactory solution. The process is ongoing.  

B.  

Bilateral dispute settlement  

The EU did not launch any new bilateral disputes in 2022, but continued to monitor trading 
partners’ compliance with expert panel reports and negotiated settlements... 

•  South Korea – labour commitments. Further progress was made by South Korea in 
implementing  the  January  2021  experts  panel  ruling76 issued  in  accordance  with  the 
‘Trade  and  Sustainable  Development’  chapter  of  the  EU-South  Korea  Trade 
Agreement. Three core conventions entered into force in South Korea in 2022, notably 
the convention on the Freedom of Association and Protection of the Right to Organise 
(No 87), on the Right to Organise and Collective Bargaining (No 98) and on Forced 
Labour (No 29). For more detail see Section II.2, point C above.  

•  Southern African Customs Union (SACU) – safeguard measures on poultry. This 
dispute was governed by the dispute settlement  provisions of the bilateral Economic 
Partnership  Agreement  between 
the  SADC  (Southern  African 
the  EU  and 
Development  Community)  states.  It  concerned  the  imposition  by  SACU  (South 
Africa, Botswana, Namibia, Eswatini and Lesotho) in September 2018 of a safeguard 
measure  on  exports  of  frozen  bone-in  chicken  cuts  from  the  EU  that  had  led  to  a 
significant reduction in the exports of EU poultry to SACU. The arbitration panel, in 
its  final  report  of  4 August  2022,  ruled  in  favour  of  the  EU  and  found  that  the 
safeguard  measure  was  not  proportionate  and  went  beyond  what  was  needed  to 
remedy or prevent any serious injury or disturbances. Moreover, the delay between the 
investigation and the adoption of the safeguard measure was excessive and not in line 
with the EU-SADC EPA. Although the safeguard measure expired in March 2022, the 
panel  report  sets  a precedent  to  be followed by SACU  and prevented the latter  from 
extending the duration of the safeguard at stake.  

76 The panel report was issued on 20 January 2021 and is available here: Circabc (europa.eu) 

47 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
•  Algeria – several trade-restrictive measures. On 24 June 2020, the EU initiated a 

dispute settlement case against Algeria under the EU-Algeria Association Agreement 
challenging five measures (illegal safeguard duties, import ban on cars, import 
licensing scheme, custom duties on 129 products and payment restrictions in the 
maritime transport sector). As a result of the EU’s efforts to find a negotiated solution 
during consultations, three of the five measures challenged have been removed 
(customs duties, illegal safeguard duties, and payment restrictions). In December 
2022, Algeria withdrew the illegal import duties (DAPS) for all products covered by 
the EU-Algeria Association Agreement. Moreover, in November 2022 Algeria 
modified the legal framework and relating to car imports. In the meantime, Algeria has 
also put in place a new authorisation regime for imports, which is designed as a rolling 
import ban that currently applies to a list of almost half a million products, and other 
sectoral trade barriers (e.g. new halal requirements for agri-food products) disrupting 
trade flows across sectors. Further measures that restrict trade and investment are 
adopted on a regular basis, rendering the business environment on the ground 
unpredictable and non-transparent. The Commission is closely monitoring the 
situation and remains concerned by developments regarding the introduction of new 
measures during 2022 and the first part of 2023. 

•  Finally,  Russia’s  unprovoked  and  unjustified  war  of  aggression  against  Ukraine 
affected its  ability to comply with the arbitration panel’s ruling in a bilateral dispute 
under  its  Association  Agreement  with  the  EU  concerning  a  Ukrainian  ban  on  the 
export of certain types of timber.  

V.2  Renewal of pools of adjudicators for disputes under EU agreements 

In  December  2020,  there  was  a  public  call  for  applications  over  the  renewal  of  the  pool  of 
arbitrators  and  separate  pool  of  experts  in  trade  and  sustainable  development  (TSD)  for 
dispute settlement panels under trade agreements to which the EU is a party. As part of the 
call  process,  a  selection  panel  of  experienced  international  judges  and  academics  examined 
the  candidates  to  confirm  their  suitability  for  appointment.  The  successful  candidates  were 
informed  in  May  2022  and  the  new  pools  of  eligible  candidates  were  published  in  June 
202277. The Commission will draw on these new pools to make proposals for the appointment 
of  arbitrators  and  TSD  experts  in  specific  cases,  or  for  pre-agreed  lists  (rosters)  under  the 
relevant bilateral agreements with third countries. The Council will make the final decision on 
such  rosters.  In  line  with  the  Commission’s  adherence  to  the Equal  Representation  in 
Arbitration  Pledge,  the  Commission  will  seek  to  ensure  gender  balance  as  regards 
appointments to rosters or specific disputes and will encourage its trading partners to do the 
same. 

77https://circabc.europa.eu/ui/group/7fc51410-46a1-4871-8979-20cce8df0896/library/3b8c3460-b8f5-4bd2-
8e32-08b68cf4d834 

48