INT’L TRADE LAW:INT’L TRADE LAW:SINGAPORE ISSUES, SINGAPORE ISSUES, COMPETITION POLICY COMPETITION POLICY

& INVESTMENT& INVESTMENT

Prof David K. Linnan

USC LAW # 665

Unit Eleven

BEYOND WTO IECONOMIC ORGANIZATION ARGUMENTS

PAST 25+ YEARS

1. Uruguay Round ending in 1994 part of globalization & trade liberalization (US policies), but by far not the only

argument re economic organization

2. Structural impediments initiative of late 1980s-early 1990s (Kodak-Fuji disputes date back), arguments about Japan Inc & alternative forms of capitalism

BEYOND WTO IIECONOMIC ORGANIZATION ARGUMENTS PAST 25+ YEARS

(CONT’D)

3. With developing countries, idea of Washington Consensus via IFIs going back to Latin American

Financial Crisis of 1970s-80s, highly visible post-1997 Asian Financial Crisis

4. Post-USSR, most of Eastern Europe doctrinaire in terms of privatization, etc., but rest of world not necessarily with arguments mid-1990s about East Asian Miracle

CAN WE REVISIT THE ECONOMIC ORGANIZATION QUESTION VIA CLAIMS ABOUT US CAR MAKERS BEING DISADVANTAGED VIA EMPLOYER PROVIDED HEALTH BENEFITS?

DOHA DEC CONTENTWORKING THROUGH DOHA DECLARATION AREAS IN NEXT

MONTH

1. Trade Liberalization-Agriculture (two weeks ago)

2. Trade Liberalization-Services (last week)

3. TRIPS & Singapore Issues (this week)

4. Anti-Dumping & Counterveiling Duties (next week)

5. Trade & Environment (plus dispute resolution; April 12)

DID WE MAKE THE NEGOTIATING DEADLINE? SO WHAT?

COMP & INVESTMENTECONOMIC ORGANIZATION PECULIARITIES

1. What has changed in the nature of where you plan, produce and sell goods and services in international

trade?

2. How do these changes in the organization of production relate to topics like competition & investment in an economic sense?

3. How do the topics of competition & investment relate to the traditional legal structures of GATT/WTO (Kodak-Fuji example)?

COMP POLICYCOMPETITION POLICY PECULIARITIES

1. In terms of trade liberalization, remember that in practice foreign competitor via trade traditionally cracks local monopolies-oligopolies in many countries (why developing countries leery in part)? What of national champions and agents of development arguments (often SOEs)?

2. But what is the proper relationship between competition policy at the government level (including non-feasance claims) and a large local private competitor?

3. How broad does the Kodak-Fuji nullification claim reach when the USTR argued that trade liberalization was undone by collusive govt non-enforcement of competition law? Can you state a narrower claim, and is it enough to counter that there are some (small) domestic competitors who would be equally disadvantaged?

INVESTMENT POLICYINVESTMENT POLICY PECULIARITIES

1. How has MNC production been reorganized (think supplier chains & regional export locations), and is there a legal right to invest overseas?

2. What are the opposing interests in countries, for example, conditioning investment permits on export performance (building a factory more as export platform abroad rather than to supply domestic market abroad)?

3. Is the TRIMs type argument really about rights to invest generally, or only about impermissible conditions related to trade? Is this a distinction without a difference, and why?

EXAMPLESCOMPETITION & INVESTMENT POLICY IN

ACTION

1. Look at Indonesian car case for investment policy example

2. Look at Kodak-Fuji case for competition policy example

HOW DO YOU EXPECT TWO AREAS TO BE RESOLVED EVENTUALLY IN DOHA ROUND?

TRIPS IWHERE TRIPS COMES FROM

1. Idea of TRIPs in part as assertion of intellectual property rights by developed countries (but think Bollywood)

2. Are there limits (think anti-viral drug patent protection HIV developing country fight)?

3. Why bother putting intellectual property into TRIPs or trade framework, as was 1994 WTO case (domestic lobbying vs economic specialization as with growing services importance in developed economies, but why into trade law)?

TRIPS IIWHERE TRIPS IS GOING

1. Idea of TRIPs now not purely developed countries, witness Chinese software, etc.

2. Some pressure from developing countries to soften up even 1994 phased in obligations (after 10 years, local law IP upgrading essentialy mandatory)

3. What of arguments about misallocation of prosecutorial resources (why chase IP pirates vs murderers)?

COVERAGE IN COLLEAGUES’ PRESENTATION OF SOME MOST PRESSING AREAS (HIV DRUG CONTROVERSEY)

AD & CV NEXT • Read Bahala pages 817-90, 1045-92• Read On the Spread and Impact of Anti-dumping

(NBER)• http://www.nber.org/digest/apr00/w7404.html?

tools=printit• Read the following documents on the WTO website:• Understanding the WTO: Antidumping, Subsidies,

Safeguards: Contingencies, etc.• http://www.wto.org/english/thewto_e/whatis_e/tif_e/

agrm8_e.htm• Explore the Anti-dumping page• http://www.wto.org/english/tratop_e/adp_e/adp_e.htm• Explore the Sudsidies and counterveiling measures

page• http://www.wto.org/english/tratop_e/scm_e/

scm_e.htm