JC posted this at MW great read and some hope maybe??? for the optimist
http://www.mwforums.com/fusetalk/messageview.cfm?catid=22&threadid=103781&STARTPAGE=1
Inside U.S. Trade
An Inside Washington Publication
An exclusive weekly report on major government and industry trade action
Vol. 22, No. 32 - August 6, 2004
World Trade Organization members are beginning to question whether a dispute between the U.S. and Antigua and Barbuda over the ability of the latter to provide on-line gambling services in the U.S. could have a wider impact on the Doha round’s services talks by forcing countries to adopt a standard approach when making services concessions.
According to informed sources, some believe that if an interim dispute settlement ruling in the U.S.-Antigua case is upheld, it could make some countries far more reluctant to schedule new services commitments because they would have less flexibility in excluding sectors from liberalization obligations.
This new fear has cropped up in the wake of a March interim panel ruling that found that the U.S. had written its services schedule in a way that would permit the cross-border supply of gambling services, such as Internet casinos based in Antigua, and that the U.S. could not bar them from the U.S. market. The U.S. strongly opposed this decision, and said it made it explicitly clear that it was using a modified classification system that excluded any commitments on gambling services. The interim panel ruling ultimately rejected this argument by saying members do not have the flexibility to alter classification systems in this way.
In part because of this decision, the U.S. has sought a negotiated solution with Antigua. Resolving the dispute would ensure that the ruling would never be made final or public. Specifically, the interim ruling upheld Antigua’s claim that the U.S. implicitly undertook a commitment on gambling services in its services schedule because the U.S. schedule was based on a classification system known as the “W/120,” which was developed by the secretariat of the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade during the Uruguay Round negotiations. That system references the United Nations’ Central Product Classification (CPC) system, and specifically section 964 of that system, which incorporates gambling as part of a larger sector entitled “Other Recreational Services (except sporting).”
The U.S. argued during the case that its schedule contained no references to the UN classification system, in contrast to the schedules of some WTO members. However, the panel appears to have ruled that in using the W/120 to schedule its services commitments, the U.S. is not free to simply ignore the corresponding references to the CPC that are contained within the W/120, a Geneva delegation source said.
For the U.S., Geneva sources said the issue goes beyond the idea that the U.S. could be forced to take on board a services commitment it believed it did not negotiate as part of the Uruguay Round. One delegation source said if the U.S. believed the case would only affect its commitments on gambling, the U.S. would not be so eager to seek a negotiated solution to the dispute.
More broadly, Geneva sources believe that the ultimate effect of the case could be that the U.S. and all WTO members would no longer be free to rely on their own definitions of what constitutes a market opening in certain sectors. For example, these sources noted that in its initial services offer tabled last year, within the category covering telecommunications services, the U.S. included a new category covering information services that does not correspond even to the W/120 system. Subsequently, it is difficult to decipher the true impact of that commitment if it cannot be read in conjunction with other agreed classification systems.
This source said the U.S. would have the most to lose if countries were constrained in their ability to depart from the W/120 and the CPC. The source noted that the current U.S. services offer does not contain any reference to the CPC, although it does contain descriptions of certain service sectors that match language in the CPC.
One developing country Geneva delegation source added that countries believe the U.S. information services commitment actually rescinds existing market access, but said those complaints are always rebuffed by the U.S. which claims it is able to schedule its commitments however it wants. “ A lot of people want to see this report,” the source said, referring to the interim panel decision.
Current negotiating flexibility allows a country to make a sectoral opening while at the same time shielding sensitive areas within that sector from liberalization, one developing country source argued. That possibility was echoed by a U.S. business source, who said the effect of the ruling would be that countries would be much more cautious in scheduling new services commitments.
On the other hand, one source said developing countries already fear that the complicated nature of the services talks handicaps them and opens them to a challenge to provide market access in an area in which they thought they made no commitments. The Antiguan ruling could limit countries’ “margin of maneuver” and ensure that what one country schedules, closely match what others have scheduled, the source said.
As an aside, one source said countries could use the report, were it to be adopted by the WTO, in a two-pronged fashion against the United States. First, they could attack the current U.S. services schedule using the logic in the panel if countries felt they were being denied access, and secondly, the panel would serve as a defensive mechanism that would limit the options countries have in scheduling services commitments.
As part of the Doha negotiating framework WTO members agreed to this week, countries set a deadline of May 2005 for the submission of revised services offers and called on those countries that had not submitted initial offers to do so as soon as possible. The interim decision on gambling was released to the parties involved in the dispute in March.
Meanwhile, the U.S. and Antigua are expected to meet on Aug. 10 in Washington to discuss possible solutions to the dispute which Antigua would ideally like to get settled by gaining access to the U.S. market, a trade diplomat said.
The diplomat said the two sides are not currently close to a solution, but said both countries assume that they will meet an agreed Aug. 23 deadline for finding one.
http://www.mwforums.com/fusetalk/messageview.cfm?catid=22&threadid=103781&STARTPAGE=1
Inside U.S. Trade
An Inside Washington Publication
An exclusive weekly report on major government and industry trade action
Vol. 22, No. 32 - August 6, 2004
World Trade Organization members are beginning to question whether a dispute between the U.S. and Antigua and Barbuda over the ability of the latter to provide on-line gambling services in the U.S. could have a wider impact on the Doha round’s services talks by forcing countries to adopt a standard approach when making services concessions.
According to informed sources, some believe that if an interim dispute settlement ruling in the U.S.-Antigua case is upheld, it could make some countries far more reluctant to schedule new services commitments because they would have less flexibility in excluding sectors from liberalization obligations.
This new fear has cropped up in the wake of a March interim panel ruling that found that the U.S. had written its services schedule in a way that would permit the cross-border supply of gambling services, such as Internet casinos based in Antigua, and that the U.S. could not bar them from the U.S. market. The U.S. strongly opposed this decision, and said it made it explicitly clear that it was using a modified classification system that excluded any commitments on gambling services. The interim panel ruling ultimately rejected this argument by saying members do not have the flexibility to alter classification systems in this way.
In part because of this decision, the U.S. has sought a negotiated solution with Antigua. Resolving the dispute would ensure that the ruling would never be made final or public. Specifically, the interim ruling upheld Antigua’s claim that the U.S. implicitly undertook a commitment on gambling services in its services schedule because the U.S. schedule was based on a classification system known as the “W/120,” which was developed by the secretariat of the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade during the Uruguay Round negotiations. That system references the United Nations’ Central Product Classification (CPC) system, and specifically section 964 of that system, which incorporates gambling as part of a larger sector entitled “Other Recreational Services (except sporting).”
The U.S. argued during the case that its schedule contained no references to the UN classification system, in contrast to the schedules of some WTO members. However, the panel appears to have ruled that in using the W/120 to schedule its services commitments, the U.S. is not free to simply ignore the corresponding references to the CPC that are contained within the W/120, a Geneva delegation source said.
For the U.S., Geneva sources said the issue goes beyond the idea that the U.S. could be forced to take on board a services commitment it believed it did not negotiate as part of the Uruguay Round. One delegation source said if the U.S. believed the case would only affect its commitments on gambling, the U.S. would not be so eager to seek a negotiated solution to the dispute.
More broadly, Geneva sources believe that the ultimate effect of the case could be that the U.S. and all WTO members would no longer be free to rely on their own definitions of what constitutes a market opening in certain sectors. For example, these sources noted that in its initial services offer tabled last year, within the category covering telecommunications services, the U.S. included a new category covering information services that does not correspond even to the W/120 system. Subsequently, it is difficult to decipher the true impact of that commitment if it cannot be read in conjunction with other agreed classification systems.
This source said the U.S. would have the most to lose if countries were constrained in their ability to depart from the W/120 and the CPC. The source noted that the current U.S. services offer does not contain any reference to the CPC, although it does contain descriptions of certain service sectors that match language in the CPC.
One developing country Geneva delegation source added that countries believe the U.S. information services commitment actually rescinds existing market access, but said those complaints are always rebuffed by the U.S. which claims it is able to schedule its commitments however it wants. “ A lot of people want to see this report,” the source said, referring to the interim panel decision.
Current negotiating flexibility allows a country to make a sectoral opening while at the same time shielding sensitive areas within that sector from liberalization, one developing country source argued. That possibility was echoed by a U.S. business source, who said the effect of the ruling would be that countries would be much more cautious in scheduling new services commitments.
On the other hand, one source said developing countries already fear that the complicated nature of the services talks handicaps them and opens them to a challenge to provide market access in an area in which they thought they made no commitments. The Antiguan ruling could limit countries’ “margin of maneuver” and ensure that what one country schedules, closely match what others have scheduled, the source said.
As an aside, one source said countries could use the report, were it to be adopted by the WTO, in a two-pronged fashion against the United States. First, they could attack the current U.S. services schedule using the logic in the panel if countries felt they were being denied access, and secondly, the panel would serve as a defensive mechanism that would limit the options countries have in scheduling services commitments.
As part of the Doha negotiating framework WTO members agreed to this week, countries set a deadline of May 2005 for the submission of revised services offers and called on those countries that had not submitted initial offers to do so as soon as possible. The interim decision on gambling was released to the parties involved in the dispute in March.
Meanwhile, the U.S. and Antigua are expected to meet on Aug. 10 in Washington to discuss possible solutions to the dispute which Antigua would ideally like to get settled by gaining access to the U.S. market, a trade diplomat said.
The diplomat said the two sides are not currently close to a solution, but said both countries assume that they will meet an agreed Aug. 23 deadline for finding one.
