8 - The United States' experience and practice in suspending WTO obligations

Summary

Introduction

Despite being one of the most active and successful complaining parties in the history of the WTO dispute settlement, the United States has suspended concessions in only two disputes – both against the European Communities (EC) in the Bananas and Hormones disputes. Set out below is a description of the legal and procedural framework used by the United States to suspend concessions in those two disputes. Various reasons that could explain the United States' limited resort to this implementation-forcing mechanism are also offered below.

US procedures for suspension of concessions

The United States Trade Representative (USTR) is granted the authority to suspend concessions following multilateral determinations of noncompliance with WTO rulings and recommendations under section 407 of the Trade and Development Act 2000 which amended the Trade Act 1974. As the suspension of concessions practice has developed since the mid-1990s, the first step is for the USTR to request public comment on a broad preliminary list of products. This generally occurs shortly after the expiration of the reasonable period of time if, in the USTR's view, the losing member has not fully implemented the rulings and recommendations. After analysing those comments and consulting internally within the US government, the USTR then requests public comment on a narrow final list of products. Products chosen for this smaller (final) retaliation list, pursuant to section 407 of the Trade and Development Act 2000, must include, where possible, at least some reciprocal goods of the industries affected by the failure of the foreign country or countries to implement the recommendation.