Wto Agreement On National Treatment

The assessment of whether imported goods benefit from less favourable treatment requires careful consideration “based on a detailed examination of the fundamental orientation and effect of the measure itself”, including the impact of the measure on the conditions of competition between imported and like domestic products. That analysis does not fail to be based on empirical evidence of the actual impact of the measure at issue on the internal market of the Member State concerned. Of course, there is nothing to prevent a panel from examining such evidence of actual impact. At the end of the Uruguay Round, developing countries were ready to assume most of the commitments required of developed countries. But the agreements have given them transition periods to adapt to WTO rules that are more unfamiliar and perhaps more difficult, especially for the poorest and least developed countries. A ministerial decision adopted at the end of the round stipulates that the most axciated countries should accelerate the implementation of market access obligations for goods exported by the least developed countries and calls for increased technical assistance. Recently, developed countries have begun to allow duty-free and quota-free imports for almost all products from least developed countries. In all of this, the WTO and its members are still going through a learning process. The current Doha Development Agenda is concerned about the difficulties they face in implementing the Uruguay Round agreements. Nor do we accept Honduras` argument that the bonding obligation grants “less favourable treatment” to imported cigarettes because domestic cigarette sales are higher than those of imported cigarettes on the Dominican Republic market, the unit costs of the bond obligation for imported cigarettes are higher than for domestic products.

In Korea — Various Measures in Favour of Beef, the Appellate Body pointed out that imported products are treated less favourably than like products if a measure alters the conditions of competition in the relevant market to the detriment of imported products. However, the existence of an adverse effect on a particular imported product resulting from a measure does not necessarily mean that that measure confers less favourable treatment on imports where the adverse effects are explained by factors or circumstances not adverse to the foreign origin of the product, such as.B. the market share of the importer in the present case. .