Van Hoc Duong*
Natural Resource Underpricing in WTO Subsidies Rules and Beyond: A Reflection of North-South Divide in Globalization
Suggested citation:
Duong, V. H. (2023). Natural Resource Underpricing in WTO Subsidies Rules and Beyond: A Reflection of North-South Divide in Globalization. Lex Portus, 9(2), 28–42. https://doi.org/10.26886/2524-101X.9.2.2023.3
Published online: 01.06.2023
*PhD, Can Tho University (School of Law) (Campus II, 3/2 street, Ninh Kieu district, Can Tho city, Viet Nam)
ABSTRACT
The article discusses natural resource underpricing in multilateral subsidy rules’ negotiations. It starts from the U.S. experiences to consider foreign natural resource underpricing practices under its underdeveloped subsidy rules. The United States then brought its domestic concern to the Uruguay Round establishing the World Trade Organization; however, conflicts had been shown between the industrialist countries and the resource-endowed ones regarding the ways of using natural resources as a comparative advantage. At this corner of trade rulemaking, the North’s pro-market demand was likely to collide with the South’s natural resource sovereignty. Natural resource underpricing has again taken the stage in the ongoing Doha Development Round for renegotiation of the WTO Subsidies Agreement; nevertheless, it seems to partly place this multilateral trade rulemaking under a stalemate. The crux of the subsidy debates on natural resources is how to deal with the government’s market predominance concern as to reflect the government’s roles in the natural resource sector. The European Union’s pressure on the WTO accession of several resource-endowed countries has been quite effective since the latter chose to surrender part of their natural resource sovereignty as a price of economic integration. However, the EU present anti-dumping practice against the natural resource underpricing problem seems to add fuel to the dilemma since its trade law consistency is under challenge.
Keywords: natural resource underpricing, natural resource subsidies, dual-pricing practice, the North-South divide, input subsidies, multilateral trade negotiations.
REFERENCES
Asmelash, H. (2015). Energy Subsidies and WTO Dispute Settlement: Why Only Renewable Energy Subsidies are Challenged. Journal of International Economic Law, 18, 261–285. https://doi.org/10.1093/jiel/jgv024
Beaton, C., & Clark, K. (2016, August). One Fuel, Two Prices: International experiences with dual pricing of fuel. Briefing Note. International Center for Trade and Sustainable Development. https://www.iisd.org/system/files/publications/one-fuel-two-prices-international-experiences-dual-pricing-of-fuel.pdf
Beaulieu, E., & Prévost, D. (2020). Subsidy Determination, Benchmarks, and Adverse Inferences: Assessing ‘Benefit’ in US-Coated Paper (Indonesia). World Trade Review, 19(2), 216–231. https://doi.org/10.1017/S147474562000004X
Bello, J. H., & Holmer A. F. (1984). Subsidies and Natural Resources: Congress Rejects a Lateral Attack on the Specificity Test. George Washington Journal of International Law and Economics, 18(2), 297‒330.
Bhatnagar, M., Arora, P., & Das, I. (2018). External Benchmark Choices in Anti-Dumping and Countervailing Duty Proceedings: A Battle of “Proxies”? In J. J. Nedumpara, & and W. Zhou (Eds.), Non-market Economies in the Global Trading System. The Special Case of China (pp. 155–184). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-13-1331-8_6
Cottier, T., & Oesch, M. (2011). Direct and Indirect Discrimination in WTO Law and EU Law. Working Paper No 2011/16. NCCR Trade Regulation.
Crochet, V. (2022). Trade Defense Instruments: A New Tool for The European Union’s Extractivism. European Journal of International Law, 33(2), 381–410. https://doi.org/10.1093/ejil/chac024
Du, M. (2022). From ‘Non-Market Economy’ to ‘Significant Market Distortions’: Rethinking the EU anti-Dumping Regulation and China’s State Interventionism. Yearbook of European Law, 00(0), 1–45. https://doi.org/10.1093/yel/yeac004
Espa, I. (2018). Chinese Natural Resources Disputes: A Never-Ending Story? In M. Bungenberg, M. Krajewski, C. J. Tams, J. P. Terhechte, A. R. Ziegler (Eds.), European Yearbook of International Economic Law, 9, 39–60. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/8165_2018_2
Espa, I. (2015). Fair Access to Energy Resources, Market Transfers and Climate Change in the WTO. Diritto del Commercio Internazionale, 29(1), 203–223.
European Commission. (2008). The Raw Materials Initiative – Meeting our critical Needs for Growth and Jobs in Europe. COM (2008) 669 Final.
Gagné, G., & Roch, F. (2008). The US‒Canada Softwood Lumber Dispute and the WTO Definition of Subsidy. World Trade Review, 7(3), 547–572. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1474745608003972
General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT). (1987). Submission from the United States, MTN.GNG/NG3/W/2.
General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT). (1988a). Subsidies and Other Non-Tariff Support Programs Affecting Market Access in World Minerals, Metals and Energy Trade ‒ Submission from Australia, MTN.GNG/NG3/W/12.
General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT). (1988b). Natural Resource-Based Products: Two-Tier Pricing Issue ‒ Submission from the United States, MTN.GNG/NG3/W/13.
General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT). (1989a). Proposals on Behalf of the Least-Developed Countries, MTN.GNG/NG3/W/29.
General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT). (1989b). Elements of the Framework for Negotiations ‒ Submission by the United States, MTN.GNG/NG10/W/29.
General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT). (1990a). Submission by the European Communities: Natural Resource-based Products, MTN.GNG/NG3/W/37.
General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT). (1990b). Meeting of 21 June 1990 ‒ Note by the Secretariat, MTN.GNG/NG10/20.
General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT). (1990c). Draft Text by the Chairman, MTN.GNG/NG10/W/38/ rev.3 (Cartland Draft Text IV).
General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT). (1990d). Subsidies and Countervailing Measures ‒ Communication from the Permanent Delegation of Mexico, MTN.TNC/W/38.
Giesen, H.-M. (1985). Upstream Subsidies: Policy and Enforcement Questions after the Trade and Tariff Act of 1984. Law & Policy in International Business, 17, 241‒325.
Hillman, J. A., & Crowley, M. A. (2018). Slamming the Door on Trade Policy Discretion? The WTO Appellate Body’s Ruling on Market Distortions and Production Costs in EU – Biodiesel (Argentina). World Trade Review, 17, 195–213. https://scholarship.law.georgetown.edu/facpub/2063
Huber, B. R. (2015). The Fair Market Value of Public Resources. California Law Review, 103(6), 1515–1560. http://dx.doi.org/10.15779/Z388Z79
International Court of Justice (ICJ). (2005). Case Concerning Arm Activities on the Territory of Congo (Congo v. Uganda). Judgement.
International Energy Agency (IEA). (2019, June 13). Fossil Fuel Consumption Subsidies Bounced Back Strongly in 2018. https://www.iea.org/commentaries/fossil‒fuel‒consumption‒subsidies‒bounced‒back‒strongly‒in‒2018
Marhold, A. (2016, October 5). Subsidy regulation in WTO Law: Some implications for fossil fuels and renewable energy. In L. Hancher, & A. De Hauteclocque (Eds.), State Aid in the Energy Sector (Hart Publishing, 2017), Tilburg Law School Research Paper No. 20/2016, TILEC Discussion Paper No. 2016–022, http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2848191
Permanent Sovereignty over Natural Resources, 1962. UN General Assembly resolution 1803 (XVII). https://legal.un.org/avl/ha/ga_1803/ga_1803.html
Qin, J. Y. (2019). Market Benchmarks and Government Monopoly: The Case of Land and Natural Resources under Global Subsidies Regulation. University of Pennsylvania Journal of International Law, 40(3), 575–642.
Ripisnky, S. (2004). The System of Gas Dual Pricing in Russia: Compatibility with WTO Rules. World Trade Review, 3(3), 463–481.
Ruta, M., & Venables, A. J. (2012). International Trade in Natural Resources: Practice and Policy. Annual Review of Resource Economics, 4, 331–352.
Shaffer, G. (2021). Governing the Interface of U.S.-China Trade Relations. American Journal of International Law, 115(4), 622–670. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/ajil.2021.36
The Natural Resource Subsidy Debate: A Critique of Proposed Legislative Action. (1987). The International Lawyer, 21(1), 285–302. http://www.jstor.org/stable/40706817
United Nations Development Program (UNDP). (2021). Fossil Fuel Subsidy Reforms: Lessons and Opportunities.
United States Court of International Trade (USCIT). (1985). Carbot Corp. v. United Sates, 620F. Supp. 722 (Ct. Intl. Trade 1985).
United States Department of Commerce (USDOC). (1982a). Notices of Initiation of Investigations: Certain Steel Products from France (47 Fed. Reg. 5739); Germany (Republic) (47 Fed. Reg. 5741); Belgium (47. Fed. Reg. 5744).
United States Department of Commerce (USDOC). (1982b). Final Determinations: Certain Steel Products from France (47 Fed. Reg. 39339); Germany (Republic) (47 Fed. Reg. 39351); Belgium (47. Fed. Reg. 39308).
United States Department of Commerce (USDOC). (1983). Countervailing Duties: Softwood Products from Canada. 48 Feb. Reg. 24167.
U.S. Trade Agreements Act of 1979. https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/STATUTE-93/pdf/STATUTE-93-Pg144.pdf
World Trade Organization (WTO). (1994a). Agreement on Subsidies and Countervailing Duties, in the Results of the Uruguay Round of Multilateral Trade Negotiations. The GATT Secretariat.
World Trade Organization (WTO). (1994b). Agreement on Implementation of Article VI of the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade 1994 (Anti-dumping Agreement). The GATT Secretariat.
World Trade Organization (WTO). (2001). Ministerial Declaration, WT/MIN(01)/DEC/W/1.
World Trade Organization (WTO). (2002a). Communication for the United States ‒ Basis Concepts and Principles of the Trade Remedy Rules, TN/RL/W/27.
World Trade Organization (WTO). (2002b). Energy Taxation, Subsidies and Incentives in OECD Countries and Their Economic and Trade Implications on Developing Countries, in Particular Developing Oil Producing and Exporting Countries ‒ Submission by Saudi Arabia, WT/CTE/W/215 ‒ TN/TE/W/9.
World Trade Organization (WTO). (2003). Communication for the United States – Subsidies Disciplines Requiring Clarification and Improvement, TN/RL/W/78.
World Trade Organization (WTO). (2004). United States ‒ Final Countervailing Duty Determination with Respect to Certain Softwood Lumber from Canada (Softwood Lumber IV). Appellate Body Report WT/DS257/AB/R.
World Trade Organization (WTO). (2005). Report of the Working Party on the Accession of Saudi Arabia, WT/ACC/SAU/61.
World Trade Organization (WTO). (2008). Working Document from the Chairman (Annex B), TN/RL/W/232.
World Trade Organization (WTO). (2011a). Communication from the Chairman, TN/RL/W/254.
World Trade Organization (WTO). (2011b). Report of the Working Party on the Accession of the Russian Federation, WT/ACC/RUS/70. 17.
World Trade Organization (WTO). (2014). United States ‒ Countervailing Measures on Certain Hot-Rolled Carbon Steel Flat Products from India (US – Carbon Steel (India)). Appellate Body Report WT/DS436/AB/R.
World Trade Organization (WTO). (2019). Ukraine – Anti-dumping Measures on Ammonium Nitrate. Appellate Body Report WT/DS493/AB/R.
World Trade Organization (WTO). (2020). European Union – Cost Adjustment Methodologies and Certain Anti-Dumping Measures on Imports from Russia – (Second complaint). Panel Report WT/DS494/R.
Zhang, Y., & Li, Y. (2005). Valuing or pricing natural and environmental resources? Environmental Science & Policy, 8(2), 179–186. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envsci.2004.09.005
Zheng, W. (2010). The Pitfalls of the (Perfect) Market Benchmark: The Case of Countervailing Duty Law. Minnesota Journal of International Law, 19(1). http://scholarship.law.ufl.edu/facultypub/222
