In Brief

EU DROPS SALMON SAFEGUARDS BUT IMPOSES NEW DUTIES ON NORWAY

The EU on 22 April revoked the safeguard measures they imposed in February this year against imports of farmed salmon from Chile, Norway and the Faroe Islands (see BRIDGES Trade BioRes, 18 February 2005). The decision came four days after Chile had asked the WTO to establish an arbitration panel, following a failure of the two parties to resolve the issue during the two-month consultation period. However, on 22 April the EU also announced that it was imposing temporary anti-dumping duties of 16 percent on average on imports of salmon from Norway. The duties range from 6.8 to 24.5 percent and will go into effect on 27 April for last six months. During that time EU officials will fully investigate the anti-dumping allegations which, if they prove the salmon has been dumped on the EU market, could lead to an extension of the duties for as long as five years. Norwegian authorities have rejected accusations that its fish industry competes unfairly and has said that they would take up the issue at the WTO. It remains unclear whether Chile and Norway will continue to pursue their pre-existing cases at the WTO.

The EU on 4 February had put in place safeguard measures allowing only 10 percent of imports to enter the trading block at unrestricted prices and imposing a minimum price on all other salmon imports from the three countries. Chile and Norway both launched WTO challenges to the measures, submitting official requests for WTO consultations on 14 February and 3 March respectively. On 6 April, Norway notified the WTO that pursuant to Article 8.2 of the Agreement on Safeguards -- which allows for the suspension of concessions in reaction to safeguard measures -- it was increasing tariffs to as much as 100 percent on a number of fish and food products imported from the EU into Norway in retribution for the EU safeguard measures

The EU regulations can be accessed here.

"Chile: EU Will Lift Salmon Restrictions," REUTERS, 23 April 2005; "EU to apply duty on Norway's salmon," FINANCIAL TIMES, 25 April 2005; "EU innfører midlertidige antidumpingtiltak," NORWEIGAN GOVERNMENT PRESS RELEASE, 22 April 2005

EU GM CORN TEST IN PLACE, IMPORTS FROM US RESUME

The approval of a new test for GM corn strain Bt10 has led to an end of a week-long de facto ban on exports of US corn feed. A 15 April EU decision required all imports of corn feed and brewers' grains from the US to be accompanied by an analytical report issued by an accredited laboratory certifying that the import is free of Bt10, an unapproved strain of GM corn that has been unintentionally shipped into the EU from the US since 2001 (see BRIDGES Trade BioRes, 15 April 2005). However, the absence of a test to distinguish between Bt10 and Bt11 made certification impossible and resulted in a de facto ban on all corn feed imports from the US into the EU. On 25 April the EU's Joint Research Centre approved the biotech firm Syngenta's testing method for Bt10 as an accredited testing procedure and the test is now in place in US ports where trade in GM corn and brewers' grains has resumed. Japan has also expressed concern about Bt10 and asked the US Food and Drug Administration earlier this week to provide assurances that Bt10 is safe. The Japanese government is currently considering whether to begin testing for Bt10 in US corn shipments.

"EU lab OKs testing method for biotech corn," FORBES, 25 April 2005; "Syngenta EU Corn Imports Prove Free of GMO Strain," REUTERS, 27 April 2005; "US corn grower official cites Japan biotech qualms," REUTERS, 27 April 2005

NAMA NEGOTIATIONS THREATEN ENVIRONMENT, NGO SAYS

WTO Members have presented 72 notifications that challenge environmental and health standards, according to environmental group Friends of the Earth International (FOEI). According to a briefing released by the non-governmental organisation on 18 April, more than thirteen WTO Members have presented notifications as part of Non-Agricultural Market Access (NAMA) negotiations describing other countries' social, environmental or health regulations as non-tariff barriers (NTBs) that affect their exporters. The regulations referred to concern mineral products, automobiles, chemicals, electronics, environmental goods, fertilisers, fish and fish products, food, footwear, forest/wood products, mineral products and petroleum oils, textiles and leather goods.

Under paragraph 16 of the Doha mandate, the NAMA negotiations aim to reduce both tariffs and 'non-tariff barriers' (NTBs) facing non-agricultural goods. The notification of NTBs by Members is the first part of the "identification, examination, categorization, and ultimately negotiation" process on NTBs mandated by the WTO's July Package (WT/L/579). FOEI fears that Members might come under pressure to eliminate some of these regulations "during or as a result of WTO negotiations." FOEI described the "challenges" to the laws as "a breath-taking and shameful attack on social and environmental standards worldwide," noting that some of the legislation identified pertained to national standards, measures to promote local economic development, labelling and certification requirements, and restrictions on foreign investment. To date there has been little discussion in the Negotiating Group on NAMA on whether these regulations constitute NTBs since the talks have been focusing on the overall tariff-reduction formula (see BRIDGES Weekly, 27 April 2005).

FOEI's Analysis of Notifications of NTBs can be accessed here.

Information on NAMA negotiations can be accessed here.

"Environmental laws lined up for removal by new trade talks," FOEI PRESS RELEASE, 18 April 2005.