FTA

FOREIGN TRADE ASSOCIATION

FTA Bulletin

The voice of the Foreign Trade Association

April 2002

Volume 2, Number 1

Avenue de Janvier 5 - 1200 Brussels

Belgium

Tel : +32.2.762.05.51 - Fax : +32.2.762.75.06

e-mail : info@fta-eu.org

Contents

1

Editorial

2

FTA

3

Trade safeguard measures

4

Trade & Customs Policy

5

Environmental and Social Trade Aspects

6

Competition & Trade-Mark

7

Diary – The month ahead

8

Diary – What happened

 

Editorial

Jan Eggert

Secretary-General

What is up in trade policy for European trade?

 

Dear Reader,

 

This is the first FTA Bulletin in 2002 – time to look ahead what European trade can expect from trade policy this year.

 

The 4th WTO Ministerial in Doha decided on a new world trade round on a broad base of issues. This is a big success for the multilateral trading system after the failure of Seattle. Another success for the multilateral trading system is the positive decision on the accession of China (and Taiwan) to the WTO – a result which has not been self-evident after all the years of difficult negotiations.

 

Also the fact that the interests and needs of the developing countries have been focussed in Doha, not only in general but also in the context of many concrete issues is an important step forward. World trade can only grow if the developing countries become better integrated into the multilateral trading system responding more to their needs. This is as well the basis for growing wealth in the developing countries. No development aid can achieve for the developing world what can be achieved by market opening and the reduction of tariffs and non-tariff-barriers. This holds especially true for the sectors agriculture and textiles where developing countries normally have to offer most of their export products. So both sectors are in the focus of trade policy.

 

In textile trade policy the signs are set for the end of the year 2004 when the Agreement on Textiles and Clothing (ATC) will end and the free rules for trade in goods will also apply to textile products. Unfortunately, for the issue of textiles there has been made no progress in Doha. For European trade it would be favourable to get further rise of quota respectively abolishment of quota before the end of 2004. So we urge the European Commission to make serious efforts to bring the running bilateral negotiations to a success. But we also pledge to other trading partners like the US to prepare seriously for the end of the ATC as of January 2005. The special safeguard mechanism vis-à-vis China which has been established with the WTO accession and will be in place until 2008 is not a good sign.

 

The time to get results in the new World Trade Round is very short: The Round is designed to last until 1 January 2005. This is a very short period of time regarding the number of issues to be discussed and the fact that there are not very many agreed positions. Moreover, on difficult issues like investment, competition and environment negotiations will only start (officially) with the next WTO Ministerial which will take place in Mexico in June 2003. It is unlikely that the negotiations on these issues can be terminated in a satisfactory way until the beginning of 2005.

 

So much has to be done and all trading partners have to use the short time period as good as possible to turn the fundamental declarations and proposals from Doha into concrete agreements. The European Union as one of the biggest economic powers should play a leading role to bring the negotiations forward. The FTA will participate in the dialogue on the EU positions in a constructive way and present the views and interests of European trade.

 

 

Back to contents 

F.T.A.

 

 

Fta celebrates its 25th anniversary

 

On 5 June 2002 the FTA will celebrate its 25th anniversary in Brussels. With Trade Commissioner Pascal Lamy as one of our keynote speakers, the theme of the celebration will be “25 Years FTA – 25 Years for Free Trade”. Our guests will be representatives from the European Parliament, the Commission and the Council as well as national government officials and trade and business people from all over Europe. You will receive further information on the event within due course.

 

Back to contents

 

Trade safeguard measures

 

Bedlinen, the “neverending story”

 

Further to the publication of the Regulations that suspend the duties against India and Egypt and terminate the case against Pakistan, the FTA is currently evaluating the opportunity to plan an action for reimbursement of the duties paid.

 

As you may recall, the Council of the European Union imposed in 1997 a definitive anti-dumping duty on imports of cotton-type bedlinen originating in Egypt, India and Pakistan. In 2001, the Dispute Settlement Body of the World Trade Organisation adopted an Appellate Body report. The Commission reassessed findings by taking account of the recommendations set out in the Reports on the basis of information which was collected in the original investigation that took place in 1996/97.

 

As a result of this reassessment:

 

Duties on imports from INDIA have been suspended (since August 14th 2001).

A request for a partial interim review has been published on the OJ C39/17.  The Commission has also given notice that, unless an expiry review is initiated, the duties will expire on 5th December 2002.

This rather complicated legal structure may also lead, before the expiry of the duties, i.e. in December 2002, to the opening of a so-called “sunset review”. The Commission may thus be able to re-enforce antidumping duties on bedlinen imported from India; duties that are currently suspended and that must remain suspended all along the review period, pursuant to the wording of the Regulation that implemented the WTO panel results.

 

Duties on imports from EGYPT were suspended in January 2002 and expired on 28th February 2002.

 

The case against PAKISTAN has been terminated in January 2002.

 

The “Shoe case”: the EC Court dashes the importers expectations

 

More than three years after the case was filed with the EC Court of First Instance, the Court finally rendered its judgment in the case concerning the AD duties on shoes imported from China. (Case T-598/97, BSC and others vs. Council of the European Union).

 

The Court has decided not to divert from the path traced by the previous jurisprudence, and has dismissed the application as inadmissible.

 

The Judges observe that the applicants (European Importers) do not belong to any of the three categories which are recognized in the case-law as having a direct right of action against regulations imposing an anti-dumping duty. According to the Court, the applicants are “unrelated importers” and it is clear from the contested regulation that the existence of dumping was established not by reference to their resale prices but by reference to the prices actually paid or to be paid on export.

 

The Court also recalls that the jurisprudence may provide a basis for the applicants' case only if they had established the existence of a set of factors constituting a situation peculiar to them and distinguishing them, as regards the measure in question, from all other traders. In the present case, the Court points out firstly that the applicants, even when taken collectively, accounted for only approximately 9.5% of all imports of the product at issue and secondly that, although expressly invited to do so by the Court in written questions and also at the hearing, the applicants have not proved that they were affected to any substantial degree by the contested regulation.

 

According to the Court, the applicants have not proved that the contested regulation affected them other than in their objective capacity as importers of the products in question, just as it did any other trader finding himself in the same situation. On those grounds the Court has dismissed the application as inadmissible

 

This recent judgment confirms the unacceptable status provided by the European Institutions to the trade community. The wording of the verdict reflects a limitative approach to the defence of the importers’ rights. In order to be able to contest the Commission findings, the importer must be in a “unique position”, which distinguish him from the other importers.

 

The Trade sector and the antidumping legislation

 

The Statistical Office of the European Communities has recently published a comprehensive study on the European distribution sector.

With around 5 million enterprises in the EU and more than 22 million people employed in 1999, the distributive trades sector plays an important role in the economy. In the EU, the distributive trades accounted for about 13% of total value added in 1997 and employed nearly 16% of total employment.

In 1999, retail trade accounted for almost 60% of all businesses in the distributive trades, half of all jobs, and around 30% of total turnover. Wholesale trade represented 27% of all businesses, one third of total employment but was the most important activity with regard to turnover (around 55% of the total). Within the distributive trades, retailing is the activity that records the highest level of self-employment: 27.1% in the EU in 1999. In retail trade, the proportion of self-employment varied strongly among the Member States between 12.2% in Denmark to 58.9% in Italy and 60.2% in Greece.

These figures confirm the key role of the distribution sector within the European economy and are of utmost importance in our combat for a better representation of the interests of the sector in the antidumping procedure.

Under the Community interest heading (Article 21), the Antidumping Basic Regulation states that the Community institutions have to balance the interests of all market players: the complainants, other Community producers, users, consumers, importers and traders and the like.  Users of the allegedly dumped imports - who will end up paying a higher price if AD duties are imposed - have an important role to play here.   Measures, as determined on the basis of the dumping and injury found, may not in fact be applied, where the authorities, on the basis of all the information submitted, can clearly conclude that it is not in the Community interest to apply such measures

On the basis of the figures above, the FTA considers that the practical application of the rules which is currently made by the EU institutions, mainly the Commission and the Court of Justice, is far from being acceptable. While the Commission shall perform a wider effort to keep into account the distribution sector concerns in the opening of a new proceeding and in the determination of the Community interest, the European Judges shall find the audacity to amend its current approach, finally allowing the importers to challenge antidumping duties before the Court. (For a sample of the current EU Court approach, see above, “the shoe case”).

 

Thailand challenges EU Preference Scheme

 

Thailand has requested consultations with the EU with regard to the latter’s Generalized System of Preferences (GSP) scheme. The scheme contains a special regime that extends market access benefits beyond the ordinary GSP concessions to countries fighting illegal drugs production and exports. According to Thailand, the program unfairly affects Thai exports and violates GATT Article III (most-favored-nation treatment) and the Enabling Clause, i.e. 1979 GATT Decision on Differential and More Favorable Treatment of Developing Countries, which requires GSP benefits to the ‘generalized’ and ‘non-discriminatory’ and ‘not to raise undue difficulties for trade of any other contracting parties’. Costa Rica, Guatemala, Honduras, Nicaragua and Colombia have requested to be joined in the consultations as third parties.

 

If the dispute settlement procedure concludes, it would be the first time that the WTO would have ruled on the compatibility of any Member’s GSP with global trade rules. Many countries have preferential programs that contain conditionalities and whose benefits can be unilaterally granted, as well as withdrawn. In July 2001, the EU settled a similar case with Brazil, which had alleged that its soluble coffee exports to European markets had been adversely affected by the preferences extended to countries of the Andean Community and the Central American Common Market under the drug fighting program. Pakistan was admitted to the scheme in December 2001.

 

 

EU adopts temporary measures to guard against floods of US steel imports

 

The Bush administration has rebutted The Bush administration has rebutted EU demands for immediate compensation from the United States for imposing new tariffs on steel imports. President Bush decided on 5 March to impose temporary tariffs of up to 30 percent on some imports to give the U.S. steel industry time to restructure. Immediately following Bush's announcement, the EU signaled it could seek compensation or retaliate under WTO rules. The EU argued that the U.S. was violating the WTO Safeguards Agreement by not demonstrating how either an absolute or relative increase in steel imports injured or threatened U.S. industry. 

 

On 27 March the EU adopts safeguard measures on steel. The measures have been drawn up with scrupulous attention to WTO rules. The safeguard establishes a generous level of imports - within which the measures will not apply - based on the highest recent level of imports (2001).  Beyond these levels, tariffs will apply varying from 14.9% to a maximum 26%. These temporary measures, due to enter into force in the coming days, will last for a maximum of 6 months. During this time, a thorough investigation of the effects of the US measures will be carried out. Developing countries will be effectively excluded from the measures, in line with WTO rules.

 

 

EU vs US extraterritorial income exclusion act

 

The arbitrator’s decision on the amount of trade sanctions the EU may impose on the United States in the corporate tax regime dispute is due on 29 April. The EU has estimated the damage caused to member countries’ economies at US $ 4.043 billion, while the US claims the proper amount to be US $ 956 million. Bush administration officials have now admitted that a significant reform of the tax system is likely to be only way of complying with the WTO ruling although this opinion presents serious political difficulties.

 

The FTA recalls that the history of this case goes back to 1971, and successive US export promotion schemes. The FSC scheme's predecessor, the Domestic International Sales Corporation (DISC) scheme, was declared an illegal export subsidy by a GATT panel in 1976 (the GATT adopted the panel ruling in 1981). The US replaced the DISC with the FSC in 1984. The EU contested the legality of the FSC when it was adopted, but did not pursue it at the time due to the opening of the Uruguay Round trade negotiations.

 

EU Concerned about US decision to impose protective duties in uranium

The EU expressed its serious concern over the United States International Trade Commission (ITC) decision on 21 January to impose definitive duties on EU exports of enriched uranium. The ITC argued that EU imports were causing injury to the US petitioner, United States Enrichment Company (USEC). It ignored evidence and arguments that the EU and the European industry put forward during the investigation. EU exports worth $ 500 million would be heavily hit by duties once this measure is implemented.

The FTA recalls that on 27 December 2000, the US Department of Commerce (DOC) initiated an anti-dumping and countervailing duty investigation against imports of low enriched uranium from France, Germany, Netherlands and UK. This followed a complaint lodged by the recently privatised United States Enrichment Company. Following the initiation, the DOC conducted an investigation, which led to the preliminary countervailing findings on 7 May 2001, and anti-dumping findings on 7 July 2001. On 14 December 2001, DOC issued its definitive findings. The International Trade Commission found in January 2002 that the exports are causing injury and the DOC will shortly impose definitive duties at the level of the dumping and subsidisation found - 32.78% for France and 2.26% for Germany, Netherlands and UK.

 

Back to contents

 

Trade & Customs Policy

 

Doha Round negotiating structure

 

On 3 February 2002, WTO Members reached agreement on how to conduct the negotiations launched at the Doha Ministerial Conference in November 2001. The Trade Negotiations Committee (TNC), whose role is to ‘monitor and supervise the negotiations’, will be chaired by the WTO Director-General in his official capacity, i.e. Mike Moore until September 2002 and his successor Panitchpakdi Supachai until the end of his term in 2006. The TNC will, however, remain under the authority of the General Council, the chair of which rotates on an annual basis between Geneva-based ambassadors from developed and developing countries.

 

New negotiating groups were established on WTO Rules (i.e. anti-dumping and subsidies as well as regional trade agreements) and market access for non-agricultural goods.

Negotiations on agriculture and services will continue in Special Sessions of the Committee on Agriculture and Council for Trade in Services. Special Sessions were also agreed for the following:

 

 

The chairmanship of existing WTO bodies has been split into two: one for the regular sessions and another for the special negotiating sessions. The former will rotate annually according to standard WTO practice while the latter will stay in their posts until the fifth WTO Ministerial Conference, when their terms may be extended.

 

The schedule of the regular and special sessions has been finalised at the end of March 2002.

 

 

The Cotonou Waiver: An unlikely Doha deal maker

 

An unexpected deal-breaker arose at the Doha WTO Ministerial Meeting with the surprise inclusion on the agenda of the ACP-EU Partnership Agreement’s waiver request. The final consensus to grant the waiver, after more than a year’s delay and arduous negotiations in Doha, is seen as a significant victory for the ACP (African, Caribbean and Pacific) group. Although the actual trade gains remain elusive, the success of the ACP countries in obtaining the waiver illustrates their political ‘coming of age’ as trade negotiators. The ACP arrived in Doha significantly better prepared than in previous WTO Ministerial Meetings. From now on, their challenge will be to capitalise on their weight as a group within the WTO, and begin to actually influence the making of global rules.

 

The FTA recalls that unilateral preferences granted by the EU to its ACP partners – which include 77 developing countries, 54 of which are WTO Members – have been an essential pillar of their co-operation for over 25 years. Under the ACP-EU Partnership Agreement (commonly referred to as the Cotonou Agreement) signed in June 2000, preferences were extended until the beginning of 2008, at which time they should be replaced by new WTO-compatible trade arrangements between ACP and the EU.

As for all trade preferences discriminating between Members, a WTO ‘waiver’ is necessary to maintain preferences that violate the non-discrimination obligation under GATT Article I. A request for such a waiver was put by the EU to the WTO’s Council on Trade in Goods in March 2000 (the previous waiver for the Lomé Convention had expired on 29 February 2000). For over a year, Latin American banana producing countries effectively blocked consideration of the waiver, on largely procedural grounds due to their objections to the EU’s proposed new banana import regime.

 

 

EU tables proposals on access to medicines for developing countries with no drug production

 

On 5 March the EU tabled its first proposals in Geneva on ensuring access to medicines in developing countries with no domestic drug production. At a meeting of the WTO Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property rights (TRIPS) Council, the EU put forward options to address a key issue that remained unresolved with the landmark Declaration on TRIPS and Public Health at the World Trade Organisation (WTO) Ministerial last November in Doha. Now negotiators under the auspices of the WTO need to work out how to make sure that countries which cannot themselves produce essential drugs may still fully benefit from the TRIPS Agreement. The EU believes the issue can be solved within a year.

 

 

EU and Russia talks on WTO accession of Russia

 

As announced at the EU/Russia summit in October 2001, the EU has now put all its negotiating positions on the table for discussion with Russia. They reflect the market access interests of the EU but take account of the progress of economic reform in Russia. Where Russia has specific concerns, for example about structural adjustment or the pace of Russia's future implementation of its economic reform programme, the EU is prepared to discuss timing aspects for the implementation of Russia's WTO obligations. The EU welcomes the progress already made, for example in the area of negotiations on industrial tariffs and the adoption of new legislation covering Intellectual Property Rights. More efforts are needed in other areas, such as services, to ensure that they also reach a level commensurate with the rights and obligations of existing WTO Members.

 

The FTA recalls that for WTO accessions negotiations are held both multilaterally and bilaterally, e.g. with the European Union, the United States, etc. When joining the WTO each candidate country benefits from a number of important rights vis-à-vis all existing Member of the organisation. At the same time, like other WTO Members, it undertakes a number of obligations. Accession negotiations cover both aspects and ensure that all sides are satisfied with the terms of entry. The results of this work are then codified in a multilaterally agreed set of terms and conditions for accession in the Protocol of Accession and Working Party Report. The EU is taking a leading role in both exercises.

 

 

WTO and international agencies boost technical assistance budget

 

The WTO’s General Council approved the organisation’s most ambitious budget to date and established the Doha Development Agenda Global Trust Fund with a proposed core budget of 15 million Swiss francs. The fund will serve for the implementation of commitments on technical assistance as mandated in the Doha Ministerial Declaration.

 

The UN Conference on Trade and Development (UNCTAD) has launched a capacity-building and technical assistance programme, which the organisation’s Executive Secretary Rubens Ricupero called ‘demand driven’ and tailor-made’, based on consultations with developing countries. Among other assistance, UNCTAD stands ready to support the active participation of developing countries in issues such as trade, debt and finance as well as trade and technology transfer, on which WTO working groups were established in Doha.

 

In addition to that, the six core international agencies (ITC, IMF, UNCTAD; UNDP, World Bank and WTO) agreed at a meeting in Washington in February 2002 to provide support to help Developing and Least-Developed Countries (LDCs) take part in the current trade negotiations and draw on the benefits of the open trading system.

 

 

Restart negotiations for EU-GCC Free Trade Agreement

 

In March 2002, the EU restarted the negotiations on a Free Trade Agreement between the EU and the countries of Gulf Co-operation Council (GCC). The proposed agreement would provide for a progressive and reciprocal liberalisation of trade aiming at assuring a comparable level of market access opportunities, consistent with the relevant provisions of the WTO and taking into account the level of development of the GCC countries. The Free Trade Agreement therefore ultimately aims at fostering economic integration between the parties, with a view to diversifying and increasing the mutual trade in a sustainable manner.

 

Discussions covered all aspects of the future agreement, with a view to finding a common understanding of the nature and level of commitments in the FTA. Discussions on concessions on both sides on the level of customs duties and market access are foreseen to follow in consequent negotiation rounds that will address specific areas of the FTA. The Commission expects rapid progress now that the timetable for the future meetings can be set and the draft for an agreement have been put on the negotiating table. The next full negotiating round is foreseen to take place in Riyadh in May.

 

 

Euro-Mediterranean Ministerial Conference on Trade

The first meeting of the Euro-Mediterranean Ministers for Trade, held on 29 May 2001 in Brussels, gave a new impetus to the regional dimension of the trade aspects of the Barcelona process. The Ministers for Trade recognised the need to intensify efforts in the economic and trade fields of the partnership in order to complete the establishment of the Euro-Mediterranean Free Trade Area and to contribute to the sustainable development of the region. At Toledo, Euromed Trade Ministers met for the second time on 19 March 2002. They noted that important progress had been made since their last meeting and that the pragmatic approach they had adopted was fruitful. Concrete results in the field of rules of origin were obtained within a few months time. They thus decided to pursue further their strategy of developing concrete measures complementary to tariff dismantling aimed at achieving an effective Euro-Mediterranean Free Trade Area.

The Ministers stressed the very positive signal for the Barcelona process that the grid of Association Agreements between the EU and its Mediterranean partners was about to be completed with the exception of Syria with which negotiations are still ongoing. Important steps were indeed accomplished. The Association Agreement with Egypt was signed in June 2001, while that with Algeria was initialled in December 2001 and that with Lebanon in January 2002. The Agreements with Algeria and Lebanon should be signed at the Valencia Conference of Euromed Foreign Affairs Ministers in April. Association Agreements are now in force with Cyprus, Israel, Malta, Morocco, Tunisia, as well as a customs union with Turkey and an Interim Co-operation Agreement with the Palestinian Authority. The entry into force of the Association Agreement with Jordan is expected in the coming weeks as well as the signature of an interim agreement with Lebanon.

 

Back to contents

 

Environmental and Social Trade Aspects

 

 

 

         The environmental significance of the Doha Declaration

 

The Doha Ministerial Declaration contains far more language regarding the environment than was predicted a week before the meeting. There are two key environmental achievements. First, the Declaration designates environment as an agenda item in the new trade round. Second, the ministers are encouraging efforts to promote co-operation between the WTO, the UN Environment Programme (UNEP) and other international environmental and development organisations. This may set in motion a WTO contribution to the World Summit on Sustainable Development, to be held in September in Johannesburg.

 

 

Sustainability challenges of paragraph 51 of the Doha Declaration

 

In the adopted Doha Ministerial Declaration, WTO ministers reaffirmed their commitment to the objective of sustainable development as contained in the Preamble to the 1994 Marrakesh Agreement. In what could be a significant first step to the realisation of this commitment, paragraph 51 of the Declaration requires that the WTO Committee on Trade and Development and the Committee on Trade and Environment “shall, within their respective mandates, each act as a forum to identify and debate development and environmental aspects of the negotiations, in order to help achieve the objective of having sustainable development appropriately reflected”.

 

The FTA states that with the adoption of this paragraph, the WTO has, for the first time, put in place a mechanism to evaluate the negotiation of trade rules and their possible impacts on the environment and development. While the paragraph could contribute to the integration of social and environmental concerns into the trade regime and thus contribute to sustainable development, the real indicator of progress lies in the process that will be adopted by the two committees in carrying out their new mandate.

 

 

ILO World Commission on the social dimension of globalisation

 

On March 1 2002, the International Labour Organisation (ILO) announced the establishment of a World Commission on the Social Dimension of Globalisation, which is to ‘examine ways in which all international organisations can contribute to a more inclusive globalisation process that is acceptable and fair to all’. The blue-ribbon Commission is seen as a compromise solution for addressing, inter alia, the relationship between trade liberalisation and core labour standards, which developing countries have staunchly resisted in the context of WTO talks. Dutch Minister for Development Co-operation Evelyne Herfkens, former Uruguayan President Julio Sanguinetti and Nobel Prize winning economist Joseph Stiglitz are among the eminent personalities who make up the 21-member body, which will be jointly chaired by President Tarja Halonen of Finland and Benjamin Mkapa of Tanzania. All will act on their personal capacities.

 

Back to contents

 

Competition & Trade-Mark law

 

 

 Revision of the rules on car sales

 

The European Commission has recently proposed new competition rules for the motor vehicle sector. The new draft regulation is designed to increase competition and bring tangible benefits to European consumers for both vehicle sales and servicing. The regulation will open the way to greater use of new distribution techniques such as Internet sales. It will lead to more competition between dealers, make cross-border purchases of new vehicles significantly easier, and lead to greater price competition.

The proposal is intended to replace the regime established in 1995, which is due to expire on 30 September 2002 (Regulation 1475/95). If the Commission simply let this Regulation lapse, the car sector would automatically fall under the general competition rules for distribution agreements.

The new Regulation will be applicable to the sale and after-sales services of all motor vehicles (passenger cars, light commercial vehicles, trucks and buses).

 

Set a part the technical legislative details, this proposal contain provisions that may lead to important development for the retail sector. Studies have shown that many consumers would value the in-store choice and comparability available in multi-brand outlets. This "multi-branding" reinforces dealers' commercial independence vis-à-vis their suppliers and also enables dealers in sparsely populated areas to keep their businesses profitable. The new draft regulation therefore gives retailers a genuine choice as to whether they sell more than one brand.

 

Moreover, whereas under the current system, every car dealer is forced to invest in facilities to carry out repairs and maintenance on the vehicles they sell, under the new draft, dealers may choose whether they wish to carry out repairs themselves, or sub-contract them to another authorised member of the manufacturer's network, be it another dealer/repairer or a repairer only. This provision may easily allow superstores to become cars retailers, without being obliged to invest in highly expensive after-sales facilities.

 

Under Regulation 1475/95, when a consumer wants to buy a car cheaply in another Member State, it is mainly up to the individual concerned or his intermediary to try to locate dealers willing to sell to this person. The new draft Regulation not only makes shopping abroad easier, but also contains measures to allow those dealers who wish to sell to consumers in other areas of the European Union to be more pro-active. Dealers may set up a secondary sales outlet or a delivery point in another part of their own country or in another Member State of the European Union.

 

The draft regulation will now be submitted to the Advisory Committee on Restrictive Practices and Dominant Positions and sent for consultation to the European Parliament and the Economic and Social Committee. After its discussion in the Advisory Committee, the draft will then be published in the Official Journal in order to give interested parties the opportunity to comment. After further consideration by the Commission of all the views expressed during the consultation period, the draft will be submitted to the Advisory Committee once more and should formally be adopted by the Commission before the summer break. The new regulation is to come into force on 1 October 2002. There will be a transition period (probably one year) during which all distribution agreements existing as of that date will have to be brought in line with the new rules.

 

Trademark Exhaustion

 

As announced in our previous Bulletin, the E.P. draft Report (“the Mayer Report”) issued in February 2001 perfectly represented the FTA position. The Draft Report advocated a properly thought out transition from Community-wide exhaustion to international exhaustion, and called on the Commission to submit legislative proposals to this effect.

 

Unfortunately, the European Parliament was not in a measure to adopt a clear final position, in favor or against, on the current legislation. The Final Report, adopted in October 2001 on the basis of a compromise amendment, asks the Commission to deepen the question of trademark exhaustion through the elaboration of different studies analyzing the possibilities and the consequences of a modification of the current system.  The Commission is called to produce and to submit to the Parliament, by 31 December 2002, a detailed study of the implications of a possible transition to the principle of international exhaustion for European manufacturers and consumers as well as for jobs.

 

The FTA wishes to express its complete availability to assist the Commission in the drafting of this new Report. The new document, which will serve as a basis for the final decision of the European Institutions on this delicate subject, shall consider the needs, the experience and the knowledge of Traders, and shall take into account the specific characteristics of a market that is quickly evolving.

 

Back to contents

 

 

Diary - The months ahead

 

9 – 10 April 2002

Málaga (Spain)

Euromed: “Innovation and competitiveness in the Mediterranean region” Conference of industry ministers

10 April 2002

Brussels (Belgium)

European Policy Center: “Competition: US and EC Competition Law – are there more differences than we care to admit?”

15 – 16 April 2002

Trier (Germany)

ERA Conference: “Free Movement of Services: ‘Third Generation’ Case Law

22 – 23 April 2002

Valencia (Spain)

Euromed Conference

29 April – 1 May 2002

Geneva (Switzerland)

WTO Symposium: “The Doha Development Agenda and Beyond”

7 – 10 May 2002

Brussels (Belgium)

EuroConference: “The Challenge of Change in EU Business Associations”

9 May 2002

Brussels (Belgium)

Europe Day: EU-wide events to mark the anniversary of French Foreign Minister Robert Schuman’s landmark speech which layed the foundations of the European Union (www.europa.eu.int).

13 – 15 May 2002

Geneva (Switzerland)

WTO General Council

16 – 17 May 2002

Maastricht (Netherlands)

European Institute of Public Administration: “A Roadmap for Candidate Countries; How to steer Eurozone Integration economically”

17 – 18 May 2002

Madrid (Spain)

EU-Latin America-Caribbean Summit

23 – 24 May 2002

Maastricht (Netherlands)

European Institute of Public Administration: “The Presidency Challenge – The Presidency of the Council of the EU: Practical and Managerial Aspects”

5 June 2002

Brussels (Belgium)

25th Anniversary Celebration of the FTA

6 – 7 June 2002

Lanzarote (Canaries)

Asia-Europe Ministerial

6 – 8 June 2002

Brussels (Belgium)

European Business Summit: “Entrepreneurship and Sustainable Development in an Enlarged Europe”

 

Back to contents

 

 

Diary - What happened

 

TRADE SAFEGUARD MEASURES

Lifting of AD duties on fax machines (FTA Circ. N°7)

Review of the AD duties on bedlinen from India (FTA Circ. N°6)

Termination of the AD duties on bedlinen from Egypt (FTA Circ. N°6)

Antidumping on microdisks from Hong Kong, Korea Japan, China and Taiwan (FTA Circ. N°5)

Expiry of the AD duties on Footwear from China and Indonesia (FTA Circ. N°4)

 

FOREIGN TRADE LAW AND CUSTOMS POLICY

 

Escalation of steel dispute between the US and the EU (FTA Circ. N°8)

FTA talks with Commissioner Pascal Lamy about ‘Trade Facilitation’ (FTA Circ. N°8)

Transfers of quantitative limits (textile and clothing) from China (FTA Circ. N°7)

Vietnam – dramatic quota utilisation concerning Cat. 4 and Cat. 6 (FTA Circ. N°7)

GSP rules of origin for Cambodia, Laos and Nepal (FTA Circ. N°5)

Bangladesh – Remission / Repayment of duties at importation (FTA Circ. N°5)

 

COMPETITION AND TRADE MARK LAW

National customs blocking DVD-players from China (FTA Circ. N°6)

SEB buys Moulinex (FTA Circ. N°2)

 

 

ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL STANDARDS:

Exchange of views on Green Paper concerning ‘Corporate Social Responsibility’ (FTA Circ. N°6)

Ban of dangerous substances – Azo-Dyes (FTA Circ. N°6)

 

Back to contents