I want to come back to this most interesting Brazil – Tyres case that Joel and Julia already referred to.  Three things struck me: 1. Brazil essentially lost the case because it should have been MORE trade restrictive. The Panel basically found (under the chapeau of Art. XX) that if Brazil

In its first decision, U.S. - Gasoline, the Appellate Body famously (relatively speaking) said: One problem with the [panel's] reasoning ... is that the Panel asked itself whether the "less favourable treatment" of imported gasoline was "primarily aimed at" the conservation of natural resources, rather

If you missed the conference on "Developing Countries in the WTO Legal System" at the University of Minnesota in late May, you can now see most of the proceedings on-line.  The draft papers are available there too.

An interesting NYT article today reports that due to using conventional trade statistics, “Even though Chinese workers contribute only about 1 percent of the value of the iPod, the export of a finished iPod to the United States directly contributes about $150 to our bilateral trade deficit with the Chinese.

In a submission from June 1, the U.S. made its case in the Negotiating Group on Rules for amending WTO rules to allow "zeroing": ... the Appellate Body reports are contrary to what many have long understood to be consistent with the text of the AD Agreement.  The

In a comment on one of Sungjoon's recent posts, I said the following in response to an earlier comment: ... while a WTO agreement on currencies would be difficult, I think some rules could be worked out on what constitutes "manipulation" or "misalignment." As to

A disturbing and recurring theme in WTO Panel proceedings is the accusation that panelists are "making the case" for one of the parties. This is a serious accusation and panelists try to avoid it by repeating the mantra that they are aware of their limits. This mantra however

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