RESTRICTEDWORLD TRADE
ORGANIZATIONWT/TPR/G/88
20 August 2001
(01-4049)
Trade Policy Review Body Original:  English
TRADE POLICY REVIEW
UNITED STATES
Report by the Government
Pursuant to the Agreement Establishing the Trade Policy Review Mechanism
(Annex 3 of the Marrakesh Agreement Establishing the World Trade
Organization), the policy statement by the Government of the United States is
attached.
Note: This report is subject to restricted circulation and press embargo until the end of the meeting
of the Trade Policy Review Body on the United States.United States WT/TPR/G/88
Page 3
CONTENTS
Page
I. THE UNITED STATES IN THE MULTILATERAL SYSTEM 5
II. THE UNITED STATES ECONOMIC AND TRADE ENVIRONMENT 7
III. TRADE POLICY DEVELOPMENTS, 1999-2001 9
(1) WTO AGREEMENTS AND INITIATIVES 9(2) R
EGIONAL INITIATIVES 11
(3) B ILATERAL INITIATIVES 16
(4) T RADE -RELATED CAPACITY BUILDING INITIATIVES 17
(5) L EGISLATIVE AGENDA 18
(6) L ABOR ISSUES 19
(7) E NVIRONMENTAL ISSUES 20
(8) A NTI-CORRUPTION – INITIATIVES 21
IV. OPENNESS AND ACCOUNTABILITY:  BUILDING SUPPORT FOR TRADE 21V. LOOKING FORWARD 22United States WT/TPR/G/88
Page 5
I. THE UNITED STATES IN THE MULTILATERAL SYSTEM
1. For more than 60 years, the United States has pursued a policy of trade liberalization –
seeking open markets and expanded international trade  – based on the belief that reducing trade
barriers creates jobs, advances economic reform and development, and reduces poverty worldwide.
After the Second World War, adherence to these principles guided U.S. leadership in the
establishment of a system of multilateral rules, the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT),one of the pillars of the post-World War II system.  For over a half-century, the GATT successfully
promoted economic growth, increased standards of living, and strengthened international security.
The WTO continues this work, taking the GATT system one step forward by providing a coherent
institutional apparatus to direct and oversee implementation of multilateral trade agreements as well
as a forum to further liberalize trade.
2. In the 50 years and seven additional multilateral trade rounds that followed the establishment
of the GATT, the United States joined other countries in lowering trade barriers –  expanding trade
among nations and creating opportunities for all coun tries to reap economic gains from international
commerce.  The last of these rounds, the Uruguay Round, expanded, reinforced and reformed the
multilateral trading system, liberalized agricultural and textile trade, strengthened dispute settlementprocedures, and extended new rules to trade in services and the protection of intellectual property
rights.  The United States takes satisfaction in its key role in bringing these negotiations to a
successful conclusion.
3. As the multilateral trading system enters the new millennium, the fundamental features of
U.S. trade policy continue to be the maintenance of an open, competitive market at home, compliance
with WTO obligations, and leadership in the multilateral trading system.  The United States
demonstrates leadership not only through these efforts, but also through promoting and undertakingfurther trade liberalization.  In 2000, the United States imported $1.2 trillion of goods and services –
66% of which entered the U.S. market free of duty.  The average import duty paid on all imports into
the United States in 2000 was 1.6%.  Globalization, in part through trade liberalization, has alsopromoted competitive pressures that have made the U.S. economy innovative.
4. The World Trade Organization is at the center of  U.S. efforts to open markets worldwide.  We
collaborate with our trading partners to improve the WTO and to conclude agreements that promotegreater prosperity and economic freedom, such as the Uruguay Round Agreement and the three
subsequent multilateral agreements on information technology products, financial services, and basic
telecommunications services.  These agreements are fundamentally transforming world trade.  We
have implemented our WTO commitments on schedule, and have accepted the rulings of WTO
dispute settlement panels in cases to which we are a party.  From the U.S. perspective, the world
trading system remains a work in progress; we take seriously the responsibility to continue the work
begun at Marrakesh.  High agricultural trade barriers reduce world food security.  Agricultural exportsubsidies impose especially unfair burdens on farmers in the poorest countries.  The advances in
science and technology have created new produc ts and services, as well as new methods of
conducting trade. The United States has, therefore, submitted proposals to pursue further agricultural
reform and liberalization in services, in the context of ongoing negotiations under the built-in-agenda
of the Uruguay Round.  We are committed to achieving solid gains for trade liberalization in thesenegotiations.
5. As part of its broader efforts to liberalize trade, but still within the scope of WTO rules, the
United States is also involved in several regional and bilateral initiatives for free trade areas to
complement our efforts within the multilateral trading system. By moving on multiple fronts, we spur
more rapid trade liberalization.  An important aim in these negotiations is to cut taxes on trade andreduce other barriers to competition for industrial goods, services, and agriculture.WT/TPR/G/88 Trade Policy Review
Page 6
6. The United States also is playing an important role in extending the benefits of trade
liberalization to the developing world and fosterin g their further integration into the multilateral
trading system.  In addition to providing duty-free access to our market for most products from
developing countries through unilateral preferential trade liberalization measures, such as the
Generalized System of Preferences, the African Growth and Opportunity Act , the Andean Trade
Preference Act, and the Caribbean Basin Trade Partnership Act, the United States provides more than$300 million per year for trade related capacity-building activities through bilateral and multilateral
aid programs.  In 2000 and 2001, we have provided more than $1.6 million dollars to the WTO for
technical assistance activities.  In 2001, we have supported the Integrated Framework (IF) both
through a contribution to the IF Trust Fund and parallel activities in several least developed countries.
We hope that momentum towards increased cooperation on trade capacity-building in developingcountries will continue to build.
7. In order to maintain domestic support for open trade and the multilateral trading system, the
United States provides assistance, through the Trade Adjustment Assistance program, to American
workers whose firms and industries have difficulty adjusting to increased trade.  The Administration
seeks to improve this program by emphasizing skills training for displaced workers, a constructivealternative to trade protection.
8. We believe that trade liberalization supports the protection of the environment and promotes
other social goals, through improving economic and social conditions.  This, in turn, helps countries
to improve the environment, enhance observance of labor standards, and make progress on other
critical social issues.  Trade liberalization can also support environmental initiatives directly, such as
through freer trade in environmental goods and services, and the reduction of agricultural and fish
subsidies.
9. The United States has also shown leadership in the multilateral effort to combat bribery and
corruption – practices which act as an invisible tariff on most imports and contracts.  We support such
efforts within the WTO to establish and enforce basic rules that diminish opportunities for bribery and
corruption in, for example, government procurement and customs valuation.
10. We share concerns with our trading partners about the need for increased transparency in the
multilateral trading system.  The United States has taken steps to encourage institutional
improvements to the WTO, particularly with respect to the transparency of its operations and
outreach.  We seek to establish transparency as the hallmark of all future trade negotiations and trade
agreements.
11. Consulting with those interested in trade issues is an important part of governments’
responsibility in the development of trade policy.  In support of this objective, and to provide a strong
level of domestic support for our negotiating goals, the U.S. Government has sought public advice
and comments on the current WTO negotiations on agriculture and services, on priorities for future
WTO negotiations, on possible institutional improvements, and on preparations for the Fourth
Ministerial Conference.  More recently during the negotiations for the Free Trade Area of theAmericas, the United States participated in an innovative step – agreeing to make public the
preliminary negotiating text of our agreement and to contribute to a more informed public debate.  We
believe that the WTO should follow suit by expanding public access to dispute settlement
proceedings, circulating panel decisions promptly, and encouraging more exchange with outside
groups and other international organizations.
12. Trade is a priority in the President's overall economic program.  President George W. Bush
outlined the principles underlying U.S. participation in the multilateral trading system in April 2001:United States WT/TPR/G/88
Page 7
“Open trade fuels the engines of economic growth th at create new jobs and new income.  It applies
the power of markets to the needs of the poor.  It spurs the process of economic and legal reform.  It
helps dismantle protectionist bureaucracies that stifle incentive and invite corruption.  And open trade
reinforces the habits of liberty that sustain democracy over the long term.”
13. The United States strongly supports the work of the WTO as an institution for on-going
negotiations and consultations.  In this respect, we  agree that regular ministerial-level meetings to
consider, adjust, and expand the WTO's program of work are critical.  We see an emerging consensusamong countries at various levels of development on the importance of further trade liberalization and
adherence to WTO rules.  In addition, we have learned that some of the agreements we negotiate are
complicated and difficult to implement. We are comm itted to doing more to have concurrent technical
assistance and capacity building to enable countries to participate more effectively in the process.
14. The United States is committed to a successful launch at the Doha Ministerial of a new Round
of multilateral trade negotiations that will offer bene fits to all countries and will ensure that the WTO
can meet the challenges of the 21st century.  Much is at stake for the WTO, the international trading
system, and its members, including the United States.  The current global economic slowdown makesit all the more important that we press forward, to continue the work begun so long ago with the
establishment of the GATT system.
II. THE UNITED STATES ECONOMIC AND TRADE ENVIRONMENT
Trade Policy
15. The United States is committed to an open market policy at home.  The current U.S.
trade-weighted average tariff is just under 3% on a legally bound basis under the WTO and will fall
below 2% after full implementation of Uruguay Round commitments in 2004. Last year 66% of all
U.S. imports was duty-free. Our services markets are open to foreign competition and our regulatory
processes are transparent and accessible to the public.  The United States accounted for 31% of global
import growth (excluding intra-EU  trade) between 1998 and 2000. In nominal terms, U.S. imports of
goods and services rose by $340 billion in the last two years, to a level of $1.44 trillion in 2000,
continuing to make the United States the world’s largest importer.  Also the U.S. goods and servicestrade deficit more than doubled from $167 billion in 1998 to $376 billion in 2000.
16. We are committed to a strong trading system: we are implementing our Uruguay Round
commitments in tariffs, textiles, agriculture and other areas on time and in full; and, we use the WTO
dispute settlement mechanism to address differences and respect the results of its panels.
Growth
17. Real gross domestic product (GDP) growth increased slightly from an annual average of 4.4%
for the period of the previous review, 1996-1998, to 4.6% for the period of the current review,
1998-2000.   For the GDP price deflator, the average annual increase grew from 1.6% in the period of
the earlier review to 1.8% in the period of the cu rrent review.  At the same time, a strong economy,
combined with sustained budgetary discipline, resu lted in a $125 billion budget surplus in FY 1999 to
a $236 billion budget surplus in fiscal year 2000.  This compares to a deficit of $22 billion in FY 1997and a $69 billion surplus in FY 1998.
Savings
18. Fiscal improvement helped sustain the U.S. rate of gross saving in the face of declining
personal savings.  The gross savings rate averaged 18.4% of GDP in 1997-1998 and 18.4% of GDP in
1999-2000.  Averaging $259.2 billion, or 3% of GDP, in 1997-1998, personal saving declined to
$147.6 billion in 1999 (1.6% of GDP) and  $-8.5 billion in 2000.WT/TPR/G/88 Trade Policy Review
Page 8
Labor Markets
19. Improvements in the labor market during the review period were also notable.  In the
1998-2000 period, employment increased by 3.7 million j obs or 2.8%.  The U.S. unemployment rate,
which had averaged 4.7% in 1998-1999, dropped to an average 4.1% in 1999-2000.
Productivity
20. In 1996-1998, output per hour worked (business sector) rose at a 2.5% annual rate; in
1998-2000, the rate of increase rose to 3.5%.  (In manufacturing alone, productivity increased at an
annual rate of 5.7% in 1998-2000.)  The strengthening of productivity growth overall contributed to
annual increases in measured real worker compensation of 2.0% per year in 1998-2000 compared to
2.4% increases in 1996-1998.
Business Investment
21. The growth of business investment played an important role in the economic expansion: much
of it fuelled by business demand for computers, telecommunication equipment, and other productivity
enhancing durable equipment.  From the previous to the current review periods, the rate of growth of
real non-residential fixed investment decreased from 12.6% per year to 11.3% per year.  As a share of
real GDP,  non-residential fixed investment reached 15.2% in 2000.
Import and Export Growth
22. Strong growth in GDP and even stronger growth in domestic demand contributed to rapidly
increasing imports.  Real imports of goods and services increased at an average annual rate of
12.1% in 1999-2000, compared to 12.8% in 1996-98 (as reported in the U.S. national income and
product accounts).  Goods and services imports reached 14.7% of nominal GDP in 2000.
23. Export growth, however, slowed.  Growth of r eal exports of goods and services dropped from
an average of 7.1 % per year in 1997-1998 to 5.9 % in 1999-2000.  Goods and services exportsreached 11.0% of nominal GDP in 2000.
Trade Balance
24. The U.S. nominal deficit in goods and services trade rose in 2000 to $371 billion, or 3.7% of
GDP.  This is up from 1.1% in 1997, 1.7% in 1998 and 2.7% in 1999. The increase in the U.S. trade
deficit continued into the first few months of 2001.  These global adjustment forces assured that theU.S. capital account surplus would expand and that the U.S. current account deficit would increase.
The United States has remained essentially open to imports.
Conclusion
25. In reviewing the U.S. experience over of the last two years, we find confirmation that open,
competitive markets – both internally and at the border – have contributed to our economic efficiencyand prosperity.  Our open trade policies and adherence to WTO disciplines have contributed to new
job opportunities and higher standards of living for Americans, as well as to the creation of an open
and healthy economy which offers opportunity to our trading partnersUnited States WT/TPR/G/88
Page 9
III. TRADE POLICY DEVELOPMENTS, 1999-2001
(1) WTO AGREEMENTS AND INITIATIVES
(i) Implementation of Existing Agreements
26. Since entry into force of the Uruguay Round Agreements in 1995, a central theme of U.S.
policy has been to ensure the effective and timely  implementation of both the multilateral agreements
and the decisions of the Dispute Settlement Body.  We have begun, of course, by rigorouslyimplementing our own commitments, in full and on sc hedule, and by respecting the results of Dispute
Settlement decisions including those which are adverse to the United States.
27. At the same time, we feel it is important not only for American trade interests but for the
WTO system as a whole, to ensure that all Members meet their commitments.  The various
manifestations of this policy range from constructive participation in the deliberations of WTOcommittees and councils to the active use of the WTO’s dispute settlement mechanism.  Where WTO
Members have been slow to implement their Uruguay Round obligations, the United States has been
quick to draw attention to such inaction.  Where pr oblems have arisen in the systemic implementation
of the Uruguay Round’s results, the United States has worked constructively with others to try to
remedy the difficulties.  And where obligations have been ignored or side-stepped, the United Stateshas initiated actions under the Dispute Settlement Understanding
28. U.S. trade policy seeks to support and advance the rule of law, both by faithfully and
promptly implementing obligations undertaken by the United States, and by ensuring the enforcement
of trade agreements and U.S. rights in the tr ading system.  Since 1999, the United States has
continued to be the most active participant in the WTO dispute settlement process.
29. The central role of the WTO in U.S. economic policy is also reflected in the resources which
the United States devotes to the negotiations with the large number of countries seeking to accede tothe WTO.  In these negotiations, American insistence on accession only on viable commercial terms
has set a standard which upholds the objectives and integrity of the WTO system.
(ii) Built-in-Agenda Negotiations in Agriculture and Services
WTO Negotiations on Agriculture
30. Article XX of the WTO Agreement on Agricultu re mandates that WTO members continue the
reform process initiated in the Uruguay Round. The mandated negotiations began in early 2000.  The
United States submitted a comprehensive framework proposal for the Agricultural Negotiations at the
June 2000 WTO Committee on Agriculture Special Session.  The proposal received strong support
from the U.S. industry and bipartisan support in the U.S. Congress.  The U.S. proposal builds on the
structure of existing WTO disciplines for agriculture, and sets out clear, attainable goals forfar-reaching, ambitious reforms. The objective of the United States is to substantially reduce high
levels of protection and trade-distorting support that disadvantage competitive farmers, ranchers and
processors and that distort international markets.
31. While preserving a legitimate role for governme nts to invest in their agricultural and rural
economies, the U.S. proposal calls for removal of a major source of trade distortion that somedomestic farm programs cause. The U.S. proposal includes a new approach to domestic support that
simplifies the current green, blue, and amber box structure by creating two categories of support –
trade distorting and non-trade distorting –  and establishes a ceiling on trade distorting support that
applies proportionately to all countries.  The U.S. proposal calls for substantial reductions orWT/TPR/G/88 Trade Policy Review
Page 10
elimination of all tariffs without exception, using a methodology that would reduce or eliminate tariff
disparities.  By improving access to food and freeing the flow of trade in agricultural goods and
products, the U.S. proposal will enhance the security of the global food supply, likewise strengthening
the food security of nations still struggling to attain  that goal. The United States also addresses the
special challenges and needs of developing and least developed countries in its proposal by ensuring
those further reforms take into account their circumstances.  Specific provisions in the U.S. proposalfor developing countries include market access, domestic support, and technical assistance.
32. Additional key points of the U.S. proposal include: substantial increases in all tariff-rate
quotas, elimination of export subsidies, disciplines on the use of export restrictions, disciplines on
single-desk state trading enterprises, the option for sectoral initiatives, and recognition of the special
circumstances in developing countries and the importance of enhancing food security through a rangeof reform efforts.
33. There are three main themes in the reforms that the United States proposes.  The first theme is
that there can be no product exemptions in a meaningful negotiation. For example, the United States
envisions tariff cuts, in-quota and out-of-quota, and quota-growth for all products.  The second theme
of the U.S. proposal is that these negotiations must substantially reduce or eliminate existingdisparities in WTO schedules that allow some countries to levy high tariffs or provide
disproportionate levels of support.  The third th eme is that meaningful, balanced progress can be
achieved by focusing efforts on the most trade-distorting policies  even as we continue to support our
farmers and rural development.
34. Article XIX of the General Agreement on Trade in Services (GATS) mandates that WTO
members work to apply the GATS framework agreement more fully and broadly to achieve "effective
market access.” The mandated negotiations began in early 2000.  The United States submitted the firstcomprehensive negotiating proposal in July 2000.  To complement and elaborate on the U.S. July
submission, in December 2000, the United States presented more specific views on interests and
objectives in eleven individual service sectors and one GATS "mode of delivery" (movement of
natural persons, or "mode four"):
accountancy services
audiovisual and related services
distribution services
education and training services
energy services
environmental servicesexpress delivery services
financial services
legal services
telecommunications, value-added network, and complementary services
tourism services
35. Generally, each submission proposes negotiation in the WTO of the different aspects of an
open, well-regulated regime in the particular sector or mode.  This would typically entail countries
agreeing to apply existing GATS market access and national treatment disciplines, as well as include
negotiation of additional GATS disciplines addressing  sector- or mode-specific regulatory issues,
including transparency and access to networks.  Wh ile the proposals vary somewhat in their formats,
each seeks to identify significant restrictions faced by service providers in the sectors and mode.  In
this way, the proposals identify common problems that discourage the growth of trade in services andrestrict access for foreign providers.United States WT/TPR/G/88
Page 11
36. Consistent  with these disciplines, under these proposals, governments nevertheless would
retain the right to regulate in order to meet domestic policy objectives.  Moreover, in sectors such as
express delivery, education and training, and energy services, the submissions recognize that in some
countries, including the United States, governments will  continue to play important roles as suppliers
of public services.
37. Open, well-regulated service industries are at the core of a competitive, outward-oriented
economy.  International trade in services forms the link between consumers and producers at home
and abroad; services help ensure that exports arrive at their destination and that producers have access
to inputs to maintain their competitive edge.  Thes e are among the reasons that the U.S. considers the
current services negotiations in the WTO to be of importance to all WTO members.
(2) REGIONAL INITIATIVES
38. Regional integration agreements that are fully consistent with WTO rules and compatible
with its objectives can both support and complement the rules-based and trade-expanding orientation
of the multilateral trading system.  With this in mind, and in order to capture and multiply the benefits
of an expanding global trading system, the United States is actively embarked on an agenda of greater
commercial interaction in emerging markets.
39. U.S. efforts in this regard focus on the negotiation of new trade agreements, on compliance
with current agreements (including WTO agreements) and regional trade expansion with Asia, the
Western Hemisphere, Europe, the Middle East, and Africa.  Such regional initiatives include the
NAFTA, the FTAA, APEC, the AGOA, the CBI, and the ATPA.  At the same time, we seek to
cultivate our economic ties and cooperation with Europe through the Transatlantic Economic
Partnership Initiative.
40. Without exception, the regional initiatives in which the United States is involved look to the
WTO as a solid foundation upon which to build and further liberalize trade regionally.  Indeed, the
WTO recognizes the desirability of increasing freedom of trade by development, through voluntary
agreements, of closer integration between the econom ies of the countries party to such agreements, as
long as the agreements do not result in increasing the external barriers of the parties.  Such
agreements challenge the multilateral system to keep pace with the interests and needs of Members,and to contribute to the WTO system by introducing innovation and strengthened disciplines.  These
agreements can become models for future multilateral  liberalization in new areas, such as agriculture,
services, investment, and environmental and labor st andards.  The following regional initiatives are
each examples of this potential.
North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA)
41. In January 1994, the United States began to implement the NAFTA, the world's largest free
trade area.  Built on the U.S.-Canada Free Trade Agreement (CFTA) of 1989, NAFTA includes over
400 million people producing more than $11 trillion worth of goods and services.  NAFTA increases
opportunities for all three partners – Mexico, Canada, and the United States – to expand trade and
enhance growth.  Countries outside the free-trade area benefit as well from stronger growth in NorthAmerica, as the Agreement acts to enhance the size of the NAFTA market and purchasing power of
NAFTA countries.  Since the Agreement's entry into force, the United States has worked to ensure
that its provisions are implemented swiftly; indeed, the results of three rounds of negotiations to
accelerate tariff reductions with NAFTA partners have already been implemented.  The three
governments also implemented agreements on labor and environmental cooperation along with the
NAFTA.WT/TPR/G/88 Trade Policy Review
Page 12
42. Trade among the three NAFTA Parties has soared during the first seven years of the
Agreement, and continues to set new records. Canada  is the United States largest trading partner and
Mexico became its second largest single-country trading partner in 1999.  Exports to these two North
American trading partners, combined, account for approximately 37% of th e U.S. global exports.
January 1, 2001 marked the eighth consecutive year of  tariff reductions.  In addition to following
procedures set out in the NAFTA, the United States, Canada, and Mexico concluded a  third NAFTAtariff acceleration exercise on January 1, 2001. In the third round of tariff acceleration, the early
elimination of tariffs on a variety of products affected nearly $1 billion in trade. The NAFTA
countries will continue to consider additional tariff acceleration requests, to be implemented onJanuary 1, 2002.
Free Trade Area of the Americas (FTAA)
43. At the April 20-22, 2001 Summit of the Americas in Quebec, Canada, the leaders of the
United States and the other 33 democratically elected governments in the Western Hemisphere
provided momentum to the FTAA process by agreeing to conclude FTAA negotiations no later than
January 2005 and seek the Agreement’s entry into force as soon as possible thereafter, but in any caseno later than December 2005.  The FTAA will create a free trade area throughout North America,
South America, and the Caribbean Basin – encompassing nearly 800 million people.  The leaders also
endorsed the FTAA trade ministers’ decision to publicly release the FTAA draft consolidated texts.
The leaders also endorsed the FTAA trade ministers’ decision to publicly release the FTAA draft
consolidated texts.  These texts are being released on the official FTAA website in the four officiallanguages of the FTAA: English, Spanish, French, and Portuguese.
44. At the sixth trade Ministerial meeting held in Buenos Aires, Argentina, on April 7, 2001 the
FTAA trade ministers formally received the consolidated draft Agreement texts prepared by the nineFTAA Negotiating Groups and directed the groups to intensify their efforts to eliminate brackets in
those texts to the maximum extent possible prior to the next Ministerial to be held in October 2002 in
Ecuador.  They established a fixed deadline of no later than April 1, 2002, for preparing the technical
guidelines under which the detailed work of negotiating market access – in merchandise trade
(industrial and agricultural goods), services, gove rnment procurement, and investment – will proceed.
They directed  that product- and sector-specific market access negotiations on the basis of the agreed
guidelines will begin no later than May 15, 2002. The leaders also advanced transparency and the
participation of civil society in the FTAA process by directing that the contributions of civil society
should be provided directly to FTAA negotiators.  Ministers discussed the views of civil society and
stressed the importance of ongoing communication between civil society and the FTAA process.Trade ministers also welcomed a report from the Joint Government-Private Sector Committee of
Experts on Electronic Commerce with recommendations  on how to increase and broaden the benefits
of e-commerce throughout the FTAA.  They committed to forward the Joint Committee’s
recommendations to competent government authorities and make them available to the wider public,
instructed the Joint Committee to delve further into its review of specific issues on its agenda, andidentified new issues related to e-commerce, incl uding mechanisms for reducing the digital divide
between countries of the hemisphere.
45. The FTAA will support and enhance our commitment to the multilateral system.  It is
premised on the success of the Uruguay Round, and on further contributions and commitments to the
multilateral system.  In April 2001, the trade ministers from throughout the hemisphere reiterated their
pledge that the FTAA will be a balanced, comprehensive agreement that is consistent with the rules
and disciplines of the WTO, and improve upon those rules and disciplines wherever possible and
appropriate, taking into account the full implications of the rights and obligations of countries asmembers of the WTO. The increase in economic growth and improved access to new ideas resulting
from liberalized trade brought about by the FTAA will also reinforce democratic principles in the
region.United States WT/TPR/G/88
Page 13
Asia Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC)
46. The United States has continued its active involvement in the Asia Pacific Economic
Cooperation (APEC) Forum.  Founded in 1989, APEC is  a unique combination of the world's biggest
existing and emerging markets.  The organization now counts 21 member economies on both sides of
the Pacific, and accounts for over half of world trade and a growing proportion of world output.  The
United States considers APEC an important vehicle for building a regional economic structure toensure prosperity and stability over the long term.  In the past few years, APEC has made concrete
progress toward its objectives of advancing economic cooperation and trade and investment
liberalization and facilitation, and toward the long term goal of “free and open trade and investment”
in the region.
47. APEC leaders met in Bogor, Indonesia, in 1994 and agreed to dismantle, over the next 25
years, barriers that impede trade and investment between their economies.  In the 1999-2001 period,
important activity has taken place at all levels of APEC, from the Leaders and Ministerial Agreements
to the work of Senior Officials and the Committee on Trade and Investment, to give effect to APEC’s
vision of free and open regional trade and invest ment.  APEC’s Committee on Trade and Investment
and its sub-fora have developed specific work programs in fifteen substantive issue areas: tariffs,non-tariff measures, services, investment, government procurement, standards and conformance,
customs, competition policy, deregulation, intellectual property rights, dispute mediation, mobility of
business people, rules of origin, information gathering, and analysis and implementation of the
Uruguay Round.  In addition, in 2000,  APEC  launched a broad based Action Agenda on the New
Economy to ensure that APEC members used advances in information technology to boost
productivity and stimulate economic growth in the region.   In June 2001 APEC Trade ministers met
in Shanghai, China, to continue their discussions on trade and investment liberalization, economic andtechnical cooperation of APEC, and new economy a nd regional macro-policy dialogue, with the aim
of preparing for the 9th APEC Economic Leaders Meeting and the 13th Ministerial Meeting which are
being held in October 2001 in China.  An important  concession drawn by the Trade Ministers was the
importance of securing the launch of a new round at Doha.
Transatlantic Economic Partnership (TEP)
48. The United States-European Union relationship, one of the most durable in the world, is
further strengthened by the New Transatlantic Agenda (NA), an initiative which seeks to deepen
transatlantic relations by initiating specific, joint U.S.-EU actions to address global economic,
political, humanitarian and environmental challenges more effectively.  This is a key component of
U.S. efforts to meet the challenges posed by the post-Cold War reality, including the need to build astrong transatlantic community of democratic, free market economies.  The 1995 NA Action Plan
included a commitment on the part of the United States and the EU to expand bilateral trade through
an initiative called the New Transatlantic Marketplace   (which later evolved into the Transatlantic
Economic Partnership).
49. At  the June 24, 2001 U.S.-EU Summit in G öteborg, Sweden, President Bush and EU Leaders
agreed to strengthen their transatlantic bond.  The Transatlantic Economic Partnership (TEP)
initiative, which seeks to deepen and systematize the cooperation in trade, was launched under the
New Transatlantic Agenda process in 1995.  In the TEP, the two sides have identified seven broadareas in which they committed to work together to increase trade, avoid disputes, address
disagreements, remove barriers and achieve mutual interests.  These areas are: technical standards,
agriculture, intellectual property, government procurement, services, electronic commerce,
environment, and labor.  In addition, the United States and EU agreed to put an emphasis throughout
the initiative on shared values, i.e. they agreed to more fully involve citizens and civil society on bothWT/TPR/G/88 Trade Policy Review
Page 14
sides of the Atlantic in trade policy so as to strengthen the consensus for open trade.  Cooperation
under the TEP occurs with respect to bilateral matte rs  as well as in the context of multilateral
activities such as in the WTO.  The TEP Action Plan, lays out specific goals under each of the above
categories which the two sides hope to achieve as soon as possible.
50. In the 1999-2001 period the US and EU agreed to try to utilize the TEP mechanisms to carry
out part of a joint effort to identify – and hopefully defuse – potential trade problems at an early stage.Under the TEP in 2000, the United States and EU also agreed to establish a project to examine the
regulatory processes on each side connected with the issue of biotechnology. The two sides worked to
develop common guidelines for regulatory cooperation and transparency – an area increasingly seen
by the business community as impacting the furthe r deepening of transatlantic commercial ties. In
addition, under TEP auspices, the United States and EU will begin negotiating new agreements andother forms of cooperation for mutual recognition of regulatory processes in various industrial and
services sectors.
51. The United States and the EU have supplemented the TEP and NA through the establishment
of a series of private dialogues between European and American businesses, labor organizations and
environmental and consumer groups.  The first of these to be established, the Transatlantic BusinessDialogue (TABD), is a forum in which top Amer ican and European business leaders can meet to
discuss ways to reduce barriers to United States-E uropean trade and investment.  Additional dialogues
– the Transatlantic Labor Dialogue (TALD), the Transatlantic Consumer Dialogue (TACD), the
Transatlantic Environmental Dialogue (TAED) and the Transatlantic Legislative Dialogue (TLD) –
start from a similar premise, i.e. that corresponding organizations on both sides of the Atlantic should
share views and, where possible, present joint recommendations to the United States and the EU on
how to improve transatlantic relations and elevate the debate among countries in multilateral fora.The United States is committed to full participatio n of civil society in the trade policy process and
intends to cooperate closely with all the dialogue groups as it works to implement the TEP initiative.
African Growth and Opportunity Act (AGOA)
52. In May 2000, the Trade and Development Act of 2000 containing the African Growth and
Opportunity (AGOA) was passed by the Congress  and signed into law. AGOA establishes a new
framework for U.S. trade, investment, and development policy for sub-Saharan Africa.  The Bush
Administration plans to fully implement AGOA and to broaden and deepen U.S. relations with the
countries of sub-Saharan Africa.
53. AGOA seeks to offer support for economic re forms underway in the region and the full
integration of Africa into the multilateral trading system, enhanced U.S.–Sub-Saharan African tradeand investment ties, and support for sustainable economic development.
54. AGOA  has a number of key economic benefits and incentives to promote economic reform
and trade expansion in sub-Saharan Africa.  It offers beneficiary sub-Saharan African countries
duty-free U.S. market access for essentially all products under the Generalized System of Preferences
(GSP) program.  It eliminates the GSP competitive need limitation for beneficiary sub-SaharanAfrican countries.  It provides additional security for investors and traders in beneficiary sub-Saharan
African countries by ensuring duty-free benefits for eight years. It lifts all existing quotas on apparel
products from sub-Saharan Africa from countries that are determined to have an effective
anti-transshipment regime in place.  It extends duty/quota free U.S. market access for sub-Saharan
African apparel made in beneficiary sub-Saharan African countries from yarns and fabrics not
produced in commercial quantities in the United States, including silk, velvet, and linen.  It extends
duty/quota free treatment for apparel made in Africa from U.S. yarn and fabric and for knit-to-shapeUnited States WT/TPR/G/88
Page 15
sweaters made in Africa from cashmere and some me rino wools.  It extends duty-free and quota-free
U.S. market access for apparel made in beneficiary sub-Saharan African countries with regional fabric
and yarn, subject to a cap (limit) ranging from 1.5 to 3.5% of the multibillion dollar U.S. apparel
import market, over an 8-year period.  It provides an average 17.5% duty advantage on apparel
imports in the U.S. market and promotes economic development and diversification in Africa's
poorest countries through a special provision in the cap which allows beneficiary sub-Saharan Africancountries with an annual GNP of under $1,500 ("lesser developed beneficiary countries”) to use third
country fabric inputs for four years.  On December 21, 2000, 1,835 products were added to the GSP
program for AGOA beneficiaries. As of July 1, 2001, thirty-five countries had been designated as
AGOA beneficiary countries.
55. In considering the eligibility of sub-Sahara n African countries for AGOA beneficiary status,
AGOA required consideration of countries on the basis of existing criteria under the GSP program, as
well as new AGOA criteria.  These criteria include progress towards a market-based economy, the
rule of law, elimination of barriers to US. trade and investment, economic policies to reduce poverty,
the protection of internationally recognized workers rights, and a system to combat corruption.
Additionally, countries (1) cannot engage in activities  that undermine U.S. national security or foreign
policy interests, (2) cannot engage in gross viola tions of internationally-recognized human rights,
(3) cannot provide support for acts of international terrorism, and (4) must have implemented their
commitments to eliminate the worst forms of child labor.
56. AGOA also provides for the esta blishment of a U.S.-Sub-Saharan Africa Trade and Economic
Cooperation Forum to discuss expanding trade and investment relations between the United States
and sub-Saharan African countries, and implementa tion of the AGOA. The inaugural meeting of the
Forum, which is being hosted by the Secretaries of State, Treasury, Commerce, and the United StatesTrade Representative, for their counterparts in AGOA beneficiary countries, will be held in
Washington in October 2001.
57. Trade  agreements are an important element of AGOA.  The United States currently has
bilateral Trade and Investment Framework Agreements (TIFAs) with South Africa, Ghana, and
Nigeria. The Administration also will consider the potential for such agreements with Africaneconomic regional organizations , such as SADC, COMESA, and WAEMU, which are in the process
of or are planning to implement free trade agreements among their members.  TIFAs institutionalize
dialogue on trade and investment liberalization, regulatory and judicial reforms, intellectual property
rights, and other measures to enhance bilateral trade and investment flows.
58. AGOA also reflects a U.S. commitment to work towards greater African integration into the
global economy by helping African nations and their regional organizations strengthen their capacity
to trade and attract investment. The United States has a technical assistance mechanism, the Africa
Trade and Investment Policy (ATRIP) program that supports the goals of the AGOA.  ATRIP
provides assistance to sub-Saharan African countries to encourage international trade and investment,
build local capacity, and improve participation in the multilateral trading system.  In the last threeyears, ATRIP has extended $75 million to projects in 31 African countries.  Among its efforts, U.S.
technical assistance programs assist African nations in compliance with WTO requirements in
agriculture and other areas, alert African governments to the opportunities created by the U.S.
Generalized System of Preferences, help develop regulatory mechanisms in telecommunications, and
assist African governments and businesses in entering electronic commerce.WT/TPR/G/88 Trade Policy Review
Page 16
The Caribbean Basin Initiative (CBI)
59. The trade programs known collectively as the Caribbean Basin Initiative (CBI) remain an
important part of U.S. economic relations with its neighbours in Central America and the Caribbean.
Initially launched in 1983 through the Caribbean Basin Economic Recovery Act (CBERA), the CBI
provides 24 beneficiary countries with duty-free access to the U.S. market for most goods.  In 1990,
the CBERA was amended to increase modestly market access to the United States and was madepermanent.
60. In May 2000, the United States enacted a further expansion of the CBI through the
U.S.-Caribbean Basin Trade Partnership Act (CBTPA).  The CBTPA provides preferential access for
products previously excluded from the CBI.  The enhanced benefits include duty-free and quota-free
treatment for most apparel assembled from U.S. yarns and fabrics, as well as a quantity-limitedallowance for apparel assembled in CBI beneficiary countries from fabric knit in the CBI region from
U.S. yarns.  In addition, other previously-exclude d products (including canned tuna, certain footwear,
and petroleum products) are now eligible to enter the United States at duty rates equivalent to those
extended to Mexican products under the NAFTA.  The United States intends to request any WTO
waivers which may be necessary for the enhanced benefits of the CBTPA.
61. The CBERA and CBTPA impose conditions that countries must meet to be designated and to
maintain beneficiary status.  These criteria include protection of intellectual property rights and
worker rights, internationally recognized worker rights, implementation of WTO obligations, and
transparency in government procurement practices.
62. In 2000, the U.S. imports under the provisions of the CBERA totalled $2.635 billion.  Imports
under the CBTPA (which was implemented on October 1, 2000) totalled $157 million.
The Andean Trade Preferences Act (ATPA)
63. The Andean Trade Preferences Act (ATPA) was en acted in 1991 as a U.S. trade policy tool in
our efforts to combat illegal drug production and trafficking in the Andean region.  The Act provides
trade benefits for the licit economies of Colombia, Peru, Ecuador, and Bolivia.  ATPA has had a
positive impact on U.S. trade with the four countries, with total two-way trade nearly doubling during
1991-1999, and it has generated significant job opportunities in the Andean region in a variety ofsectors, including cut flowers, non-traditional fruits and vegetables, jewelry, and certain electronic
products.  In 2000, the United States imported nearly $2 billion worth of goods from the Andean
region under the provisions of ATPA.  The President’s trade agenda calls for the extension of ATPA
and an expansion of its benefits.
(3) B
ILATERAL INITIATIVES
64. Bilateral trade agreements that are fully cons istent with WTO rules and compatible with its
objectives can also support and complement the rules-based and trade-expanding orientation of the
multilateral trading system.   The United States is presently seeking to encourage further trade
liberalization through the pursuit of several bilateral agreements.  Such initiatives include the U.S.–
Jordan FTA and negotiations of free trade agreements with Chile and Singapore.
U.S.-Jordan Free Trade Agreement
65. The Administration hopes to secure passage through Congress of the U.S.-Jordan Free Trade
Agreement (FTA) which was signed October 24, 2000.  The Agreement eliminates virtually all tariffs
on industrial goods and farm products, as well as commercial barriers to bilateral trade in goods andUnited States WT/TPR/G/88
Page 17
services originating in the United States and Jordan .  Provisions address intellectual property rights
protection, balance of payments, rules of origin, safeguards, labor, environment, electronic commerce,
and procedural matters such as consultations and dispute settlement.  The agreement builds on other
U.S. initiatives in the region designed to encourage economic development, integration, and peace.
U.S.-Chile Free Trade Agreement Negotiations
66. On April 16, 2001, Presidents Bush and Lagos announced their intention to complete
negotiations, by the end of the year, of a comprehensive U.S.-Chile Free Trade Agreement which had
been launched in Washington in December 2000.  The negotiating schedule for 2001 has been
established to accomplish this goal. The United States is Chile=s top trading partner.  The U.S.-Chile
negotiation exemplifies the U.S. commitment to developing closer economic ties with its neighbors in
the Western Hemisphere.
U.S.-Singapore Free Trade Agreement Negotiations
67. The United States and Singapore agreed to launch negotiations for a comprehensive bilateral
free trade agreement in November 2000.  Four rounds of negotiations have already been held with a
fifth scheduled for September 2001.  Although no deadline for the negotiations has been set, both
sides are working as hard and fast as possible to achieve a strong, precedent setting agreement.  Theagreement is expected to have significant commercial benefits, as Singapore is the United States
largest trading partner in Southeast Asia with two-way trade approaching $40 billion.
(4) T
RADE -RELATED CAPACITY BUILDING INITIATIVES
68. The United States believes that it is important to extend the benefits of trade liberalization to
the developing world, thereby integrating these count ries more effectively into the global economic
system.  In order to help developing nations realize these benefits,  the United States has been helping
them to expand their capacity to take part in tr ade negotiations, assisting them in the implementation
of complex trade agreements and addressing “behind the border” constraints to the capacity of their
economies to respond to trade opportunities.  In FY 1999 and FY 2000 period, the U.S. Government
spent over $619 million on trade-related technical assistance towards strengthening the trade capacity
of developing countries and transitional economies.1
69. The United States Government has trade-related capacity building (TCB) programs and
activities in every region of the developing world.  The volume of assistance as given in
FY 1999-2000 figures is similar across the regions: Sub-Saharan Africa, $100.9 million;  North Africa
and the Middle East, $91.1 million; Latin America and the Caribbean, $100.3 million; Asia,
$88.6 million; Central and Eastern Europe, $113.3 million; and the New Independent States,
$90.3 million. The programs, however, differ significantly in content, reflecting the diversity of needsin developing countries.  Among several common themes across the regions is a focus on WTO
accession and compliance. This includes organizing seminars and training on the TRIPS agreements,
assistance to help countries implement the Customs Valuation Agreement, and projects to aid
countries adjusting to the Sanitary and Phytosanitary Agreement, including compliance in export
markets.
70. In addition to these bilateral initiatives, the United States has been supporting multilateral
efforts to build trade capacity. In November 2000, the United States  provided a grant of $650,000 to
the WTO Global Trust Fund for Technical Assistance to conduct educational workshops on trade
policy and WTO rules for countries in Africa, and develop computer-based training modules on WTO
                                                     
1 www.usaid.gov/economic_growth/egad/usg-assistWT/TPR/G/88 Trade Policy Review
Page 18
Agreements which will be available on CD-ROM and accessible on the Internet.  In May 2001, the
United States announced a $1 million contribution to the WTO Global Trust Fund for Technical
Assistance to help developing countries meet their Uruguay Round commitments and participate more
fully in the international trading system. This money will provide trade officials from developing
nations with new technological tools as well as specialized seminars and workshops offered by WTO
officials.2
71. In May 2001, the United States announced a $200,000 contribution to the IF Trust Fund pilot
program to support the Integrated Framework for Trade-related Technical Assistance to Least
Developed Countries  which coordinates the trade assistance programs of six core international
organizations (the International Monetary Fund, the International Trade Center, the United Nations
Conference on Trade and Development, the United Nations Development Program, the World Bank,and the WTO).  In support of the IF, the United States has undertaken activities in Zambia to help
mainstream trade into its development agenda and is currently providing $500,000 to undertake
similar efforts in Mali and Mozambique, where it already has trade capacity building activities. The
United States provided over $84.2 million from 1999-2001 to least-developed countries for trade
related capacity building.
3
(5) LEGISLATIVE AGENDA
72. President Bush’s 2001 legislative agenda for international trade reflects his commitment to
open markets around the world and to provide lower prices and greater choices for U.S. consumers
and industries.   It also reflects the President’s commitment to work with the Congress to rebuild the
bipartisan consensus for American leadership in the trade arena.
73. The President has requested Congress to re-authorize the U.S. Generalized System of
Preferences (GSP) program, which offers preferential market access on a wide variety of products fordeveloping countries, reauthorize the Andean Trade Preferences Act which offers preferential
treatment trade benefits to most imports from Bolivia, Colombia, Ecuador, and Peru, and pass
legislation providing similar trade benefits for the nations of southeast Europe.  These programs are
important because they allow us to help developing countries and emerging markets begin the process
of integrating themselves into the world trading system.
74. The Administration is also working with Congress to implement or expand several regional
initiatives that would offer substantial additional market access and deeper relationships with
developing country trading partners.  The President’s agenda asks the Congress to implement three
commercial agreements – a bilateral free-trade agr eement with Jordan and bilateral trade agreements
with Vietnam and Laos, respectively.  Last year, the Congress enacted the African Growth andOpportunity Act (AGOA) to encourage and promot e economic growth and reform in sub-Saharan
Africa. This legislation holds real promise for helping to integrate African economies into the world
trading system.
4
75. President Bush has placed enactment of U.S. Trade Promotion Authority at the top of his
trade legislative agenda.  As part of this,  an outline has been prepared which presents a conceptualframework that distils those principles the President believes should shape a renewed grant of trade
negotiating authority.  Central to this approach is flexibility for the President to take full advantage of
the market-opening opportunities that may present themselves  in the coming years, while maintaining
the closest possible consultation and collaboration with the Congress. The formal legislative process
                                                     
2 www.ustr.gov/releases/2001/5-28.pdf.
3 www.usaid.gov/economic_growth/trade-capacity-5-1-01.htm.
4 www.ustr.gov/agenda.pdf.United States WT/TPR/G/88
Page 19
has begun with the introduction in Congress of a Trade Promotion Authority (TPA) bill, which would
give the President the necessary authority to pursue the negotiating objectives set forth in his 2001
International Trade Legislative Agenda.  As an important complement to the grant of Trade
Promotion Authority (TPA), the Administration s eeks to improve the Trade Adjustment Assistance
program for workers by emphazing improvements in skills training.
(6) LABOR ISSUES
76. Participation in the global economy through international trade is the primary avenue for
growth and development today.  International trad e also increases opportunities for workers to expand
their earnings and employment options.  The challenge for governments is to ensure that citizens
benefit from globalization while minimizing the economic and social costs of adjustment.  It is now
widely recognized that respect for and adherence to  internationally recognized core labor standards is
an important element in responding to this challenge.
77. As part of the Trade Promotion Authority (TPA) framework that was released as part of
the 2001 trade agenda, the Bush Administration released an illustrative “toolbox” of actions that the
United States could take in combination with trade negotiations to promote the protection of children
and adherence to core labor standards.  For example, the toolbox states that one method of promotingadherence to core labor standards is through the use of existing and proposed preferential trade
programs, such as the Generalized System of Pr eferences, the African Growth and Opportunity Act
(AGOA), the Andean Trade Preferences Act, the Caribbean Basin Trade Partnership Act, and the
Southeast Europe Trade Preference Act.
78. WTO Ministers renewed their commitment to the observance of internationally recognized
core labor standards in the 1996 Singapore Declaration.  Recognizing that there is a connection
between labor standards and trade issues, we believe that the subject of implementation of core laborstandards is relevant for TPRM reviews. In reviews of other countries, the United States has raised
questions about the application of core labor standards. In that spirit, we are including, in this
statement, relevant information on U.S. labor law and practice as it relates to fundamental workers'
rights.
79. The 1998 ILO Declaration on Fundamental Principles and Rights at Work affirms an
obligation to adhere to the principles concerning the following fundamental rights:  (1) freedom of
association and the effective recognition of the right to collective bargaining;  (2) the elimination of
all forms of forced or compulsory labor;  (3) th e effective abolition of child labor;  and (4) the
elimination of discrimination in respect of employment and occupation.  This Declaration has been
endorsed by virtually all WTO governments in their capacity as members of the ILO.
United States Labor Law and Practice
80. U.S. labor law is consistent with the principles underlying fundamental workers' rights.  For
example, the right of freedom of association is assured by the U.S. Constitution.  National legislation,
including the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA) of 1935 and the Railway Labor Act of 1926,
provides the right to organize and bargain collectively.  Section 7 of the NLRA guarantees that"[e]mployees shall have the right to self organization, to form, join, or assist labor organizations, to
bargain collectively through representatives of their own choosing. ..."
81. The Thirteenth Amendment of the United States Constitution, ratified in 1865, provides that
"[n]either slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for crime whereof the party shall
have been duly convicted, shall exist within the United States, or any place subject to their
jurisdiction."  Implementing federal legislation prohibits forced or compulsory labor.WT/TPR/G/88 Trade Policy Review
Page 20
82. The United States applies and seeks to enforce prohibitions against harmful child labor.
The United States has also ratified the ILO Worst Forms of Child Labor Convention (1999)
(Convention 182).  The Fair Labor Standards Act prohibits "oppressive child labor" and the interstate
transportation of products made with child labor.  Similarly, U.S. laws - both Federal and State -
prohibit discrimination with respect to occupation and employment on the grounds of race, creed,
national origin, or gender.  Such laws are vigorously enforced in both the public and private sectors toassure non-discrimination at work.
(7) E
NVIRONMENTAL ISSUES
83. The United States believes that international trade, complemented by appropriate national
environmental policies, can make an important contribution to environmental protection.  Such
policies can serve the purpose by reducing market dist ortions that interfere with cost internalization,
thus alleviating poverty; helping governments generate the resources that they need to address
environmental challenges; and creating markets for environmental goods, services, and technologies.
84. We attach great importance to the work of the WTO in addressing the linkages between trade
and environment in support of our shared commitment to sustainable development, as reflected in the
Preamble to the WTO Agreement.
85. We believe it is important to identify and pursue areas where trade liberalization holds
particular promise for yielding both trade and environmental benefits.  Three areas that hold such
promise are the reduction or elimination of trade distorting measures in the agriculture sector, the
elimination of subsidies that contribute to over-fishing, and opening markets for environmental goods
and services.
86. The President's 2001 International Trade Agenda identifies several ways in which trade and
environmental protection can be mutually reinforcing.  As a general matter, trade helps create theeconomic wealth needed to build and sustain support for improved environmental standards around
the world.  Trade agreements are a means both to accelerate trade liberalization and to enhance the
relationship between trade and effective environmental protection.  Trade Promotion Authority
(TPA), which authorizes the President to negotiate  trade agreements in accordance with specified
guidelines, should be used to achieve this goal.  Outside specific trade negotiations, the United Stateswill seek to strengthen the ties between trade and environmental protection through a "toolbox" of
measures, ranging from cooperation and support for multilateral institutions to focusing U.S. aid and
trade promotion programs on projects that encourage and are consistent with environmentally sound
policies.
87. In April 2001, as part of efforts to make trade and environmental policies mutually
reinforcing, the Bush Administration reaffirmed its  support for the environmental reviews of major
trade agreements and announced that it would proceed with an environmental review of the
negotiations on agriculture and services currently underway in the WTO and in the FTAA, Chile and
Singapore negotiations  The environmental review po licy began in 1992 with the review of the North
American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA).
88. More generally, we think that it is vitally important that trade and environmental officials
work together closely with respect to the agendas of both the WTO and international environmental
fora.  We are committed to ensuring such coordination within the United States and believe it is
important to the effective functioning of the WTO that all members ensure that such coordination
takes place.United States WT/TPR/G/88
Page 21
(8) ANTI-CORRUPTION – INITIATIVES
89. Recognizing that bribery and corruption can subvert political processes, stifle efficient
markets, and act as an invisible tariff on most imports and contracts, the United States has taken a
number of steps to combat such practices.
90. In April 1999,  the signatories to the OECD Convention on Bribery of Foreign Officials in
International Business Transactions began the first phase of monitoring the implementation of theAgreement, which had entered into force in February 1999, by reviewing the adequacy of
implementing legislation. The Convention requires parties to criminalize bribery of foreign officials in
executive, legislative, and judicial branches; levy significant penalties on those who bribe; and
implement adequate accounting procedures to make it harder to conceal illegal payments.  Thirty-one
of the thirty-four signatories have adopted legislation to implement the Convention and, of these, theimplementing laws of twenty–nine countries have been reviewed. The second phase – the evaluation
of structures and methods of enforcement will begin later this year.  The OECD also has
recommended that member countries reexamine their tax laws to eliminate tax deductibility of bribes.
All thirty-four signatories have agreed to implement this recommendation.
91. In September 2001, the United States became a party to the Inter-American Convention
Against Corruption, which was negotiated under the auspices of the Organization of American States
(OAS). With the assistance of the United States, the States Parties, in June 2001, agreed to establish a
mechanism to promote implementation of Convention.
92. The United States has actively supported the WTO’s opening efforts to establish and enforce
basic rules that diminish opportunities for bribery and corruption by promoting, for example,
transparency in government procurement and implementation of the Agreement on customs valuation.
IV. OPENNESS AND ACCOUNTABILITY:  BUILDING SUPPORT FOR TRADE
93. Building support for trade among our diverse domestic constituencies and the international
community is one of the most important challenges the WTO and its members face.  Improving the
transparency and openness of the organization and our individual domestic processes, and ensuring
that we hear the concerns of stakeholders are among the keys to meeting this challenge.  These issues
are of great importance in the United States and are fundamental to the way our government operatesand interacts with the American citizenry.  We think it important that other WTO Members know
more about how our system works, as they consider  how best to build support for trade in their own
countries and as we collectively explore how to  address the same issues for the WTO.
The U.S. System
94. Consulting with those interested in and affected by issues is an important part of any
government’s responsibility, and is a hallmark of the U.S. system.  Advice from stakeholders is both a
critical and integral part of the trade policy process.  The United States government consults with
interested parties on a regular basis through a variety of mechanisms, both formal and informal.
Soliciting Public Comment
95. U.S. Government agencies regularly solicit public comment on trade issues. The United
States has issued Federal Register notices seeking public comment on the mandated negotiations on
agriculture,  services, the priorities for future market access negotiations on industrial goods5,
                                                     
5 Federal Register, Vol. 65, No. 60, Tuesday, March 28, 2000.WT/TPR/G/88 Trade Policy Review
Page 22
institutional improvements to the WTO particularly with respect to the transparency of its operations
and outreach6, and preparations for the WTO Fourth Ministerial Conference, including the possibility
of launching a new round of multilateral trade negotiations.7
Advisory Committee Process
96. The U.S. Congress established the private sector advisory committee system in 1974 to ensure
that U.S. trade policy and trade negotiation objectives adequately reflect U.S. commercial andeconomic interests.  Congress expanded and enhanced the role and objectives of this system in three
subsequent Trade Acts.  This system is arranged in three tiers: the President’s Advisory Committee
for Trade Policy and Negotiations (ACTPN);  seven policy advisory committees;  and 25 technical,
sectoral, and functional advisory committees.  As trade has developed and broadened, the composition
of these official bodies has grown to better reflect society’s interests in the trading system.
97. The President appoints 45 ACTPN members for two-year terms; membership must broadly
represent key economic sectors affected by trade.  The committee considers trade policy issues in the
context of the overall national interest.  Representatives are drawn from the agriculture, business,
labor, environmental, and consumer communities.
98. The policy advisory committees are the Intergovernmental Policy Advisory Committee
(IGPAC), Trade Advisory Committee on Africa (TACA), Agricultural Policy Advisory Committee
(APAC), Labor Advisory Committee (LAC), Defense Policy Advisory Committee on Trade
(DPACT), and Trade and Environment Policy Advisory Committee (TEPAC).  Each committee
provides advice based upon the perspective of its specific sector or area.
99. Finally the 26 sectoral, functional, and techni cal advisory committees are organized in two
areas:  industry and agriculture.  Each sectoral or technical committee represents a specific sector or
commodity group (such as textiles or dairy products) and provides specific technical adviceconcerning the effect that trade policy decisions may have on its sector.  The four functional advisory
committees provide cross-sectoral advice on customs, standards, intellectual property, and electronic
commerce issues.
V. LOOKING FORWARD
100. The United States will continue to pursue open trade because we believe that removing
barriers enhances higher-wage job creation, incomes, living standards, and growth potential for the
United States and for its trading partners.   We believe that the best way to do this is through
strengthening the existing multilateral trading system embodied in the WTO through the launch of a
new Round of multilateral trade negotiations at Doha.
101. The President’s 2001 Trade Agenda calls for advancing free trade by simultaneously pursuing
multilateral, regional, and bilateral trade agreements. Our aim in all these negotiations will be to
reduce trade barriers in order to increase economic growth and development for all countries in the
system.   We plan to help launch a new round of global trade negotiations in the World Trade
Organization later this year.  The results of the trade rounds conducted under the auspices of the
GATT 1947, including the Uruguay Round, clearly demonstrate the value of this process.   At thesame time, we will pursue regional agreements such as the Free Trade Area of the Americas and
bilateral agreements with countries, including Chile and Singapore.
                                                     
6 Federal Register, Vol. 65, No. 111, Thursday, June 8, 2000.
7 Federal Register, Vol. 66, No. 66, Tuesday, April 5, 2001.United States WT/TPR/G/88
Page 23
102. The United States will encourage increased trade by developing countries through our
preferential trade measures, such as the Generalized System of Preferences, the African Growth and
Opportunity Act, the Andean Trade Preference Act, and the Caribbean Basin Trade Partnership Act.
The United States will also place more emphasis on  trade capacity building activities to assist
developing countries who have difficulty adjusting to the changes unleashed by technology, trade, and
other forces by providing them improved assistance, training, and placement.  The United States maytake actions to promote adherence to core labor standards and environmental protection, as illustrated
in the “toolbox” released as part of the 2001 Trade Policy Agenda.  The United States will further
increase its efforts to encourage transparency domestically, in its trading partners, and in the WTO.
This will help to enhance the credibility of the multilateral trading system in public opinion.
103. By undertaking these various elements – forging global, regional, and bilateral trade
agreements; encouraging developing countries’ multilateral integration; building support for open
trade; encouraging sustainable development and core labor standards;  and fostering greater
transparency – the United States will continue to play  its traditional leadership role in promoting trade
liberalization and developing a trading system of benefit to all.
__________