At the risk of overdoing it with NAFTA Chapter 19 here on this blog, another question just occurred to me. The bi-national panel system for reviewing domestic AD/CVD decisions started in the Canada - U.S. FTA, and was then brought into NAFTA.  But it has never been used

From the Institute for International Law and Justice, NYU School of Law: The IILJ is co-organizing a conference in Buenos Aires, on 12 December 2017 on: “Thinking a Global Trade Governance for the 21st Century: Challenges and Opportunities on the Eve of the WTO´s 11th Ministerial Conference.” Abstracts

This is from the WSJ: President Donald Trump said his administration would take its time in making a long-awaited decision on whether to block steel imports, saying “we don’t want to do it at this moment.” Mr. Trump and his Commerce Secretary, Wilbur Ross, had earlier this year

This is from blog reader and occasional commenter Adrián Vázquez Benítez, a Mexican trade lawyer: AFTER CHAPTER 19 NAFTA ELIMINATION: WHO WILL DEFEND US? USTR recently announced its objectives regarding the renegotiation of NAFTA, one seeking to remove Chapter 19 "Review and Dispute Settlement in Antidumping and Countervailing Duty

This is from Chad Bown: Figure 1 illustrates the United States’ use of [trade remedies] over the NAFTA period of 1994–2016, as well as a projection for potential use in 2017 (more on this below). Each line represents the share of US imports from a different foreign source that

Here are some excerpts from an old law review debate about the constitutionality of CUSFTA Chapter 19: Alan Morrison of Public Citizen: If the meaning and applicability of the laws of the United States dealing with antidumping and countervailing duties are enunciated and given legally binding effect in decisions directly

In a recent post here, I commented on the absence of Fair and Equitable Treatment and protection against expropriation from the text on investment in the recently released (thought not finalized) Japan-EU Economic Partner Agreement (JEEPA), speculating that this might be seen as a shift to a focus on

USTR has just published the Trump administration's NAFTA negotiating objectives here. Many of them will look familiar, as they are a standard part of U.S. trade negotiations.  Here are some examples: Investment - "Secure for U.S. investors in the NAFTA countries important rights consistent with U.

This is from the Trade and Sustainable Development chapter of the Japan-EU Economic Partnership Agreement (JEEPA), circulated by the EU last week: Article 4 Multilateral environmental agreements ... 4. The Parties reaffirm their commitment to achieving the ultimate objective of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC). The

How much does ISDS litigation on tobacco regulation cost?  And who has to pay? This was from the Philip Morris v. Uruguay tribunal: 588. In view of the outcome of the case and the significant disproportion between the Parties’ respective costs, the Tribunal deems it fair and reasonable that the