WTO rules in favor of U.S. over India in poultry dispute
October 14, 2014 | 06:53 PM
U.S. Trade Representative Michael Froman announced today that a World Trade Organization dispute settlement panel has found in favor of the United States in a case challenging a ban India placed on various U.S. agricultural products — such as poultry meat, eggs, and live pigs — on the grounds that it was needed to protect against avian influenza.
“This is a major victory for American farmers,” Froman said. “The WTO panel agreed with the U.S. case that India lacks any scientific basis to restrict U.S. agricultural products, including U.S. poultry products.”
“Our farmers produce the finest — and safest — agricultural products in the world,” he said. “This victory affirms the administration’s commitment to ensuring WTO members play by the rules, and that America’s farmers, workers and businesses get the fair shot they deserve to sell made-in-America goods under WTO rules.”
“Our farmers and producers deserve a level playing field — and this dispute reflects that we will accept nothing less,” added Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack. “USDA will work in close partnership with USTR to ensure that U.S. poultry producers and processors have access to this important market.”
The announcement provided a rare bipartisan moment in the election season.
I“This is a great victory for the United States and Georgia poultry, in particular,” said Sen. Johnny Isakson, R-Ga. “I have been working to open up India to U.S. poultry since this issue was brought to my attention.”
“I thank USTR, USDA, my colleagues in Congress and U.S. poultry producers for working toward this important decision,” Isakson said. “I am pleased that the WTO panel affirmed that measures to ensure food safety must be based on science and not a desire to restrict market access. Georgia is the fourth largest poultry-producing region in the world, so this means a great deal to our state economy.”
“Today’s announcement sends a strong message that the United States will demand a level playing field for U.S. grown and made products in the international marketplace and that the WTO will not tolerate member countries imposing artificial trade barriers,” said Rep. Bob Goodlatte, R-Va., a former House Agriculture Committee chairman who now chairs the House Judiciary Committee.
“American agriculture is dependent on access to global markets and a vibrant trade policy,” Goodlatte said.
“This ruling opens the door for increased market access of U.S. livestock products, including poultry, which plays a key role in Virginia’s economy. I look forward to seeing the positive economic impact of this ruling.”
“This is good news for Delaware,” said Rep. John Carney, D-Del., a member of the House Chicken Caucus.
“The poultry industry is a critical piece of Delaware's economy, and open markets are key to our farmer's ability to grow their businesses. Delaware is well-positioned to take advantage of India's growing market.”
The USA Poultry & Egg Export Council (USAPEEC) and the National Chicken Council (NCC) praised the ruling.
“India’s ban was thinly veiled protectionism,” said USAPEEC President James Sumner and National Chicken Council President Michael Brown. “This ruling should send a signal to India and other countries that have placed similar bans on U.S. poultry that they are inconsistent with WTO rules and with guidelines established by the World Organization for Animal Health (OIE).
“Our industry believes that free and fair trade — particularly with food — should never be used as a political bargaining chip,” the poultry leaders said.
“Indian consumers deserve access to affordable and safe protein, which the U.S. has the ability to provide. We thank (former) USTR Ron Kirk for initiating the complaint against India, and (current) Ambassador Michael Froman for continuing to pursue the case for a favorable outcome.”
Today's ruling does not give the United States automatic access to India's market, which is estimated to be approximately 2.6 million metric tons of U.S. chicken annually, and is growing at a rate of 8 percent to 10 percent per year, the poultry groups noted.
“We recognize that work remains to open India’s market — but this ruling is an important step toward securing that objective,” Sumner and Brown concluded. “We hope that the new Indian administration will be amenable to working with the U.S. government and industry to remove all restrictions and allow access for U.S. poultry in the near future.”
USTR pointed out that under WTO rules, either party may request adoption of the panel report by the WTO within 60 days of the release of the report, and the report would be adopted unless an appeal is filed.
If the report is appealed, WTO rules provide that the WTO Appellate Body must issue its report within 90 days of the filing of the appeal.
In a background statement, USTR noted that over seven years, India claimed it needed to restrict various U.S. agricultural products, including poultry meat, eggs, and live pigs, supposedly to prevent entry of avian influenza into India.
The United States, however, has not had an outbreak of high pathogenic avian influenza (HPAI) since 2004, while during that same interval India has had more than 90 HPAI outbreaks.
The only other type of avian influenza detected in the United States since 2004 is low pathogenic avian influenza (LPAI) — an often symptomless disease that the United States can find because it maintains a state-of-the-art surveillance system to detect animal diseases. The United States has consistently explained to India that, as reflected in relevant international standards, there is no scientific basis to ban imports of U.S. agricultural products, USTR said.
USTR also noted that “the U.S. poultry industry, which directly employs over 350,000 workers and consists of nearly 50,000 family farms, has been particularly affected by India’s restrictions.”
“The industry estimates that U.S. exports to India of just poultry meat alone could easily exceed $300 million a year once India’s restrictions are removed — and are likely to grow substantially in the future as India’s demand for high quality protein increases.”
In its report, the panel that India breached its obligations under the WTO agreement on the application of sanitary and phytosanitary measures.
The announcement occurred in the midst of other trade tensions with India, which has been insisting that it will not allow a WTO trade facilitation agreement to go forward without an agreement that it can continue to hold food stocks.
USTR also announced today that this fall it would initiate an “out of cycle review” (OCR) of whether U.S. engagement with India on India’s intellectual property protection and enforcement is leading to any progress.
USTR said it is commencing the OCR by publishing in the Federal Register a request for the public to provide all necessary information for identifying and assessing the quality of engagement with the Government of India on IP-related issues of concern.
▪ World Trade Organization — India: Measures Concerning the Importation of Certain Agricultural Products
▪ — Addendum
“This is a major victory for American farmers,” Froman said. “The WTO panel agreed with the U.S. case that India lacks any scientific basis to restrict U.S. agricultural products, including U.S. poultry products.”
“Our farmers produce the finest — and safest — agricultural products in the world,” he said. “This victory affirms the administration’s commitment to ensuring WTO members play by the rules, and that America’s farmers, workers and businesses get the fair shot they deserve to sell made-in-America goods under WTO rules.”
“Our farmers and producers deserve a level playing field — and this dispute reflects that we will accept nothing less,” added Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack. “USDA will work in close partnership with USTR to ensure that U.S. poultry producers and processors have access to this important market.”
The announcement provided a rare bipartisan moment in the election season.
I“This is a great victory for the United States and Georgia poultry, in particular,” said Sen. Johnny Isakson, R-Ga. “I have been working to open up India to U.S. poultry since this issue was brought to my attention.”
“I thank USTR, USDA, my colleagues in Congress and U.S. poultry producers for working toward this important decision,” Isakson said. “I am pleased that the WTO panel affirmed that measures to ensure food safety must be based on science and not a desire to restrict market access. Georgia is the fourth largest poultry-producing region in the world, so this means a great deal to our state economy.”
“Today’s announcement sends a strong message that the United States will demand a level playing field for U.S. grown and made products in the international marketplace and that the WTO will not tolerate member countries imposing artificial trade barriers,” said Rep. Bob Goodlatte, R-Va., a former House Agriculture Committee chairman who now chairs the House Judiciary Committee.
“American agriculture is dependent on access to global markets and a vibrant trade policy,” Goodlatte said.
“This ruling opens the door for increased market access of U.S. livestock products, including poultry, which plays a key role in Virginia’s economy. I look forward to seeing the positive economic impact of this ruling.”
“This is good news for Delaware,” said Rep. John Carney, D-Del., a member of the House Chicken Caucus.
“The poultry industry is a critical piece of Delaware's economy, and open markets are key to our farmer's ability to grow their businesses. Delaware is well-positioned to take advantage of India's growing market.”
The USA Poultry & Egg Export Council (USAPEEC) and the National Chicken Council (NCC) praised the ruling.
“India’s ban was thinly veiled protectionism,” said USAPEEC President James Sumner and National Chicken Council President Michael Brown. “This ruling should send a signal to India and other countries that have placed similar bans on U.S. poultry that they are inconsistent with WTO rules and with guidelines established by the World Organization for Animal Health (OIE).
“Our industry believes that free and fair trade — particularly with food — should never be used as a political bargaining chip,” the poultry leaders said.
“Indian consumers deserve access to affordable and safe protein, which the U.S. has the ability to provide. We thank (former) USTR Ron Kirk for initiating the complaint against India, and (current) Ambassador Michael Froman for continuing to pursue the case for a favorable outcome.”
Today's ruling does not give the United States automatic access to India's market, which is estimated to be approximately 2.6 million metric tons of U.S. chicken annually, and is growing at a rate of 8 percent to 10 percent per year, the poultry groups noted.
“We recognize that work remains to open India’s market — but this ruling is an important step toward securing that objective,” Sumner and Brown concluded. “We hope that the new Indian administration will be amenable to working with the U.S. government and industry to remove all restrictions and allow access for U.S. poultry in the near future.”
USTR pointed out that under WTO rules, either party may request adoption of the panel report by the WTO within 60 days of the release of the report, and the report would be adopted unless an appeal is filed.
If the report is appealed, WTO rules provide that the WTO Appellate Body must issue its report within 90 days of the filing of the appeal.
In a background statement, USTR noted that over seven years, India claimed it needed to restrict various U.S. agricultural products, including poultry meat, eggs, and live pigs, supposedly to prevent entry of avian influenza into India.
The United States, however, has not had an outbreak of high pathogenic avian influenza (HPAI) since 2004, while during that same interval India has had more than 90 HPAI outbreaks.
The only other type of avian influenza detected in the United States since 2004 is low pathogenic avian influenza (LPAI) — an often symptomless disease that the United States can find because it maintains a state-of-the-art surveillance system to detect animal diseases. The United States has consistently explained to India that, as reflected in relevant international standards, there is no scientific basis to ban imports of U.S. agricultural products, USTR said.
USTR also noted that “the U.S. poultry industry, which directly employs over 350,000 workers and consists of nearly 50,000 family farms, has been particularly affected by India’s restrictions.”
“The industry estimates that U.S. exports to India of just poultry meat alone could easily exceed $300 million a year once India’s restrictions are removed — and are likely to grow substantially in the future as India’s demand for high quality protein increases.”
In its report, the panel that India breached its obligations under the WTO agreement on the application of sanitary and phytosanitary measures.
The announcement occurred in the midst of other trade tensions with India, which has been insisting that it will not allow a WTO trade facilitation agreement to go forward without an agreement that it can continue to hold food stocks.
USTR also announced today that this fall it would initiate an “out of cycle review” (OCR) of whether U.S. engagement with India on India’s intellectual property protection and enforcement is leading to any progress.
USTR said it is commencing the OCR by publishing in the Federal Register a request for the public to provide all necessary information for identifying and assessing the quality of engagement with the Government of India on IP-related issues of concern.
▪ World Trade Organization — India: Measures Concerning the Importation of Certain Agricultural Products
▪ — Addendum
