U.S. and Macau (2001)

OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES TRADE REPRESENTATIVE
Executive Office of the President
Washington, D.C. 20508
April 30, 2001

USTR RELEASES REPORTS EMPHASIZING ENFORCEMENT PRIORITIES

Today the Office of the United States Trade Representative (USTR) released three reports on activities that are an integral part of the Bush Administration's ambitious trade agenda: (1) the "Super 301" report discussing the Administration's trade expansion priorities, (2) the "Special 301" report on protection of intellectual property rights abroad, and (3) the "Title VII" report on foreign government procurement practices.

[ ...Intervening Text... ]

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

These reports reflect the importance President Bush assigns to trade at an opportune moment to reassert America's leadership in setting trade policy and to build a post-Cold War world on the cornerstones of freedom, security, democratic values, open trade, and free markets.

"Super 301" Report

The Super 301 report identifies U.S. trade expansion priorities, highlights the positive results we have obtained through vigorous enforcement of our trade agreements and trade laws, and focuses attention on significant trade barriers that the Administration is closely monitoring.

[ ...Intervening Text... ]

-- telecommunications trade barriers in Taiwan and Mexico;

[ ...Intervening Text... ]

-- non-transparent pharmaceutical pricing policies in Korea and Taiwan;

[ ...Intervening Text... ]

"Special 301" Report

The Special 301 report reflects the Administration's continued commitment to aggressive enforcement of intellectual property rights. Intellectual property protection standards and enforcement have improved as a result of implementation of the WTO Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS Agreement), and due to our active Special 301 program. This year's report:

[ ...Intervening Text... ]

-- describes progress made in a number of economies over the past year to resolve many long-standing problems involving intellectual property protection, including Italy, Turkey, Spain, Peru, Moldova, Guatemala, Ecuador, China, Hong Kong, Macau, Malaysia, and Taiwan;

-- reports on the successful resolution of WTO disputes with Denmark, Greece, and Ireland regarding their conformity with TRIPS obligations, and on progress made toward resolution of a WTO dispute with Argentina;

-- describes USTR's monitoring of China and Paraguay under Section 306 of the 1974 Trade Act which permits USTR to move directly to trade sanctions if there is slippage in either country's enforcement of bilateral agreements on intellectual property protection.

[ ...Intervening Text... ]

The Special 301 report places the following 16 trading partners on the Priority Watch List for intellectual property protection: Argentina, Costa Rica, Dominican Republic, EU, Egypt, Hungary, India, Indonesia, Israel, Korea, Lebanon, Malaysia, Philippines, Russia, Taiwan, and Uruguay; and announces that there will be an "out-of-cycle" review scheduled for Malaysia. In addition, it places 32 other trading partners on the Watch List, and schedules an out-of-cycle review of Lithuania. Although not listed, out-of-cycle reviews will also be conducted on Japan, Georgia, the Kyrgyz Republic, and the Bahamas, as warranted.

Examples of key issues discussed in this year's Special 301 report are: (1) failure of numerous economies, including Brazil and Taiwan, to take effective enforcement action that provides adequate deterrence against commercial piracy and counterfeiting; (2) failure of the European Union to provide national treatment for the protection of geographical indications for agricultural products and foodstuffs; (3) failure by Argentina, Hungary and Israel, among others, to provide adequate protection for the confidential test data of pharmaceutical and agricultural chemical companies; (4) the insufficient term of protection for patents in trading partners such as the Dominican Republic and India ; (5) the inadequate protection for pre-existing works in numerous trading partners, particularly in Armenia, Azerbaijan, Belarus, Kazakhstan, Tajikistan, Turkmenistan, and Uzbekistan; (6) the failure of the Philippines to provide adequate enforcement, including making available ex parte search remedies; and (7) lax border enforcement against pirate and counterfeit goods in many of our trading partners.

Title VII Report

A longstanding objective of U.S. trade policy has been to open opportunities for U.S. suppliers to compete on a level playing field for foreign government contracts. The Administration continues to push for the reciprocal removal of discriminatory government procurement practices in a wide range of global, regional and bilateral fora. As a result of our efforts, the 34 countries of the Americas that are participating in negotiations to create a Free Trade Area of the Americas (FTAA) have agreed that the FTAA will provide for openness and transparency of government procurement processes and non-discrimination in tendering procedures within a scope to be negotiated. The Administration is also urging the early conclusion of an Agreement on Transparency in Government Procurement that would apply to all 140 members of the WTO. Within the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) forum, the United States and other countries in the region are pushing for concrete steps that will build on the progress APEC has made in developing non-binding principles on government procurement.

The Title VII report describes a number of foreign procurement practices in several of our trading partners that are of significant concern to U.S. exporters:

[ ...Intervening Text... ]

-- Taiwan: Certain discriminatory practices and procedural barriers;

The United States is working actively in a range of bilateral and global fora to resolve these issues. As a result of recent bilateral consultations with Germany, this year's report announces that our concerns relating to the use of "sect filters" in Germany appear to have been resolved. In addition, significant progress has been made in bilateral negotiations regarding barriers to Taiwan's government procurement market.

(end text)