Table 2 presents average applied MFN tariffs for our sample of countries for three key years chosen to reveal the impacts of important institutional milestones arising across three decades: 1993, 2003, and 2013.<sup>21</sup> The table also provides information on when (if ever) the country became a member of the GATT, as well as when (if ever) the country became a member of the WTO.

For countries that were members of the GATT, the 1993 data in Table 2 reflects their applied MFN GATT tariffs _before_ they implemented any changes resulting from the Uruguay Round of negotiations that ushered in the WTO. By 2003, the countries that joined the WTO at its 1995 inception had phased in most of their Uruguay Round tariff liberalization commitments; thus a comparison of 1993 and 2003 for such countries provides a first-order assessment of the impact of the Uruguay Round on average applied MFN tariffs. For countries that acceded to the WTO somewhat later, comparisons of the tariff data can provide information on pre-WTO and post-WTO accession applied MFN tariffs.

The Table 2 evidence on changes to applied MFN tariffs for the G20 high-income economies over this extended period is mixed. Long-standing GATT/WTO members such as the European Union, Japan and the United States already had relatively low MFN applied rates at the end of the GATT period in 1993 at 7.0, 4.4, and 5.6 percent, respectively. These economies cut their average applied tariffs by another 1 to 3 percentage points as a result of the Uruguay Round; and, given their low initial applied levels, low tariff bindings, and resulting lack of overhang (see again Table 1), applied MFN tariffs for these economies were virtually unchanged between 2003 and 2013. For Australia and Canada, average applied MFN tariff cuts over the 20 year period have been larger. Korea’s average applied MFN import tariff is actually higher in 2013 than it was in 1993. Finally, Saudi Arabia’s tariff by 2013 is roughly one third of its 1993 level, which largely reflects the commitments it undertook as part of its 2005 WTO accession.

Table 2 reveals even more heterogeneity in the changes in average MFN applied tariffs across the G20 emerging economies taking place between 1993 and 2013. China and India began the early 1990s with extremely high applied tariffs that still averaged 56.3 and 39.1 percent, respectively. These countries subsequently underwent tariff liberalization reforms; by 2013, their MFN applied rates has been reduced to only 9.6 and 13.3 percent, on average. Indonesia, Mexico, and South Africa also had much lower applied MFN tariffs in 2013 relative to 1993. On the other hand, Argentina, Brazil, and Turkey began the period with mid-range applied MFN tariffs that have not changed much since. Finally, while Russia’s applied MFN import tariffs were also mostly

> 21We examine this particular period for two reasons. First, we are interested in the highest quality (across country) data on MFN applied tariffs for a consistent classification scheme, and the Harmonized System (HS) went into effect in 1988. Thus any attempts to assess changes in tariffs for a period before and after 1988 will have to confront serious concordance issues that will differ country-by-country, but which will make averaging or examining product level changes nontrivial. Second, despite the HS beginning in 1988, data for many countries in our sample does not become routinely available until the early 1990s. Nevertheless, picking 1993 as a common starting point does miss out on some countries’ substantial tariff liberalization periods that may have already begun in the early 1990s (India), 1980s (Argentina, Brazil, Colombia, Mexico), or even earlier. Furthermore, applied MFN tariff data is not available for all countries in all years in the sample. Finally, the data for 2013 in Table 2 may differ from Table 1 as we are now limiting our consideration of products to which the tariff is applied on an ad valorem basis, so as to focus on policy changes and not changes in ad valorem equivalent rates that may arise for specific duties due to changes in underlying prices.

13