Non-Discrimination under GATT Article III:2, first sentence

Here's the third non-discrimination post of the day.  Looking over the U.S. responses to the Panel's questions in Philippines - Spirits (DS396/403), it was striking how little discussion of intent/effect issues there was, in comparison with Clove Cigarettes and Tuna, the subject of several recent posts.  Instead, the focus in Spirits, which is an Article III:2 tax case, was on likeness and competitiveness/substitutability of the products (with the exception of Question 61, which dealt with the relevance of government officials' statements).  The language of Article III:2 is different, of course, but the same issues are still lurking around in there.  This was just the first set of questions; I'm hopeful that the next round will address some of the other points.  The issues are even more difficult under Article III:2, first sentence, in my view, than they are under Article III:4.