In an earlier post, Joel and Simon commented on the importance of the Panel decision in the Brazil–Tyres case and indicated that there would be much more to discuss, especially how the Panel treated Brazil’s obligation under Mercosur. Here are some of my thoughts to share. I believe

To one’s (yet another) disappointment on the Doha round talks, the Fantastic 4 (the U.S., the EU, Brazil, and India) failed to hammer out a framework deal in Potsdam, Germany yesterday. Such a deal was badly needed to complete the negotiation by the end of this year. It

China’s central bank (People’s Bank of China) reacted to the IMF’s recent new surveillance mechanism allegedly targeted for China’s currency intervention (or manipulation, if you like). China emphasized that any solution for this problem should be based on “mutual understanding and respect” rather than being imposed.

Choose the title you like.  Here is today's statement from the U.S.: Postdam, Germany- Statement from USTR Ambassador Susan C. Schwab and USDA Secretary Mike Johanns on Doha Round: The United States is deeply disappointed with the outcome of this week’s negotiations. For the past six

China has announced that it will cut back on rebates of its export tax (which is designed to replicate its value added tax).  Rebates of indirect taxes are OK under WTO law (see item (g) of the Illustrative List in Annex 1 of the SCM Agreement), but it would seem

The NAFTA Chapter 11 arbitral award on UPS v. Canada is out. Of particular interest is the difference of opinion on the relation between Canada's "Publications Assistance Program" and the Cultural Industries exception of Article 2106 NAFTA (Tribunal majority: it's a carve out, and

The IMF has announced to overhaul its international surveillance system which has been in operation since 1977. The new surveillance system will impose more rigorous obligations on Members to protect the stability of international financial system. It seems no coincidence that this decision has been made amid the high-profile debate

Eric Reinhardt, Greg Shaffer and I recently completed a survey of WTO members.  One of the questions we asked each delegation concerned the sources of advantage in dispute settlement for the most powerful members. Fully 88 percent of the respondents answered that the advantage held by the largest members in