deborah elms september 2012 [email protected] 1

21
Deborah Elms September 2012 [email protected] 1

Upload: gabriella-webster

Post on 27-Mar-2015

215 views

Category:

Documents


1 download

TRANSCRIPT

Page 1: Deborah Elms September 2012 isdelms@ntu.edu.sg 1

Deborah ElmsSeptember 2012

[email protected]

1

Page 2: Deborah Elms September 2012 isdelms@ntu.edu.sg 1

Eleven countries, three continents, diverse levels of economic development◦ Australia, Brunei, Canada, Chile, Malaysia, Mexico,

New Zealand, Peru, Singapore, United States, Vietnam

“High quality, 21st century” agreement Accession clause

◦ Open to new members, especially from APEC Fourteen formal negotiating rounds held,

starting in March 2010 Canada and Mexico join in 15th round, Dec

‘122

Page 3: Deborah Elms September 2012 isdelms@ntu.edu.sg 1

1. Substantial scope◦ Including “behind the border” measures

2. Depth◦ Limited sensitivities

3. Shared set of norms and commitments Beyond bilateral arrangements

◦ Address noodle bowl problems of overlapping PTAs

Attractive to developed and developing country members

Note: 21st century, high quality has not been defined by government negotiators

3

Page 4: Deborah Elms September 2012 isdelms@ntu.edu.sg 1

Section 1: Origins of the TPP◦ P4 agreement, US templates, development◦ Historical review of negotiations (thru Nov 2011)

Section 2: Details of agreement◦ What would a high quality deal look like anyway?◦ How close does the TPP appear to come to ideal?◦ Chapters cover: market access in goods, ROOs,

services, investment, IPR, regulatory coherence, labor, environment, potential export rules

Section 3: Connection of TPP to other PTAs◦ Latin America, APEC, ASEAN, WTO, Regionalism

4

Page 5: Deborah Elms September 2012 isdelms@ntu.edu.sg 1

Existing, overlapping, FTAs pose major problems: most serious in goods

Has severely complicated negotiations over both tariff reductions and over ROOs

Complex structural negotiating positions ◦ United States and Peru◦ Rest in a “plurilateral” offer on goods

Officially, no exclusions Ten-year timeline At end of 10 years, may be all sorted

5

Page 6: Deborah Elms September 2012 isdelms@ntu.edu.sg 1

6

Page 7: Deborah Elms September 2012 isdelms@ntu.edu.sg 1

Specific areas of concern◦ Dairy◦ Sugar◦ Textiles◦ Footwear◦ Tobacco◦ Autos?

Quantitative restrictions (TRQs): not yet dealt with (complicated because also in PTAs)

Rules of origin◦ Product-specific ROOs so far◦ Yarn-forward likely for most textiles

7

Page 8: Deborah Elms September 2012 isdelms@ntu.edu.sg 1

Deadline of 2012 not going to be met Perhaps APEC, November 2013?

◦ Depends in part on Canada, Mexico◦ Japan?

Political level decisions needed Tensions within agreement-managing

strategic and economic needs Accession procedures into TPP in future? Status as a “living” agreement High quality: compared to what

benchmark?

8

Page 9: Deborah Elms September 2012 isdelms@ntu.edu.sg 1

For market access in goods◦ No exclusions, including sensitive products in

agriculture◦ No special provisions for textiles◦ Phase out of quantitative restrictions?

Liberal Rules of Origin criteria In services

◦ Liberalize on basis of negative list◦ Modest sensitivities allowed

New topics, new ideas brought to table

9

Page 10: Deborah Elms September 2012 isdelms@ntu.edu.sg 1

Market Access-Goods State-Owned Enterprises

Agriculture

Textiles Technical Barriers to Trade

Rules of Origin

Sanitary, Phytosanitary

Measures

Customs Cooperation Investment

Services Financial Services Telecommunications

E-Commerce Business Mobility Government Procurement

Competition Intellectual Property Labor

Environment Capacity Building Trade Remedies

10

Page 11: Deborah Elms September 2012 isdelms@ntu.edu.sg 1

TPP members committed to including “new” issues—21st century topics

Several topics lumped into horizontal basket◦ Small and medium enterprise (SME) support◦ Regulatory coherence◦ Competitiveness◦ Supply chain management◦ Development

As negotiations continue, innovative features increasingly watered down

11

Page 12: Deborah Elms September 2012 isdelms@ntu.edu.sg 1

12

Page 13: Deborah Elms September 2012 isdelms@ntu.edu.sg 1

13

Page 14: Deborah Elms September 2012 isdelms@ntu.edu.sg 1

14

Page 15: Deborah Elms September 2012 isdelms@ntu.edu.sg 1

15

Page 16: Deborah Elms September 2012 isdelms@ntu.edu.sg 1

Regulatory coherence◦ Especially focused on TBT issues◦ Single regulatory agency?◦ Binding?

Small and medium enterprises◦ Folded into competitiveness and business

facilitation Development

◦ Timelines◦ Capacity building◦ Financing

16

Page 17: Deborah Elms September 2012 isdelms@ntu.edu.sg 1

Maintain own labor laws as per 1998 ILO Declaration

Not core ILO provisions Will apply to EPZs and free trade zones How to handle complaints? Connection between TPP and previous FTA

commitments on labor Dispute settlement?

17

Page 18: Deborah Elms September 2012 isdelms@ntu.edu.sg 1

How to push conservation—at TPP or national level?

Uphold commitments under signed MEAs Conservation of natural resources and

wildlife◦ Includes fish, logging, trade in wildlife, CITES

TPP and climate change Public participation? Dispute settlement?

18

Page 19: Deborah Elms September 2012 isdelms@ntu.edu.sg 1

State-owned enterprises Export competition

◦ Agricultural subsidies and food aid programs E-commerce rules

◦ Cross-border data flows and storage facility locations

Extent of dispute settlement◦ Sanitary and phytosanitary (SPS) rules?◦ Investor-state?

Government procurement Trade remedies

19

Page 20: Deborah Elms September 2012 isdelms@ntu.edu.sg 1

TPP is farthest reaching IP FTA yet◦ Much more intrusive than TRIPS in WTO

Access to medicines issues◦ Data exclusivity, patent linkage, patent term

extensions (access window)◦ Biologics◦ Drug pricing and reimbursement programs

Copyright Trade secrets Local content requirements (for broadcast)

20

Page 21: Deborah Elms September 2012 isdelms@ntu.edu.sg 1

Geographical indications◦ Third-party FTA commitments◦ Compound names

Enforcement◦ “Commercial scale”◦ “Willful” infringement◦ ACTA vs. TPP provisions

Internet service providers◦ 3 step test◦ Fair use exceptions◦ Retransmission

21