US ROK FTA - Third Round Score Card
The third round is now over, and depending who you talk to little or  
no progress was made. However due to all the press reports, we can  
now construct a scorecard on what was wanted, and how much progress  
was made. Lets look at things by sector. Please excuse the lack of  
links.
Negotiation Tactics
Before the details, I want to give my thoughts on the negotiation  
tactics being used by the both sides. I think part of the reason for  
the significant impasses in part have to do with the fact that both  
sides seem to have different styles. The Korean side seems to want to  
keep negotiations compartmentalized. Korea says “we talk about  
agriculture now, that’s it”, so compromises are to be very narrow in  
their view. The US side meanwhile seems to want to make compromises  
on a broad level, e.g. “We accept your position on Textiles, and you  
accept our position on Automobiles.”
Agriculture
Little progress was made, and I do mean little. The little progress  
is mainly due to both are still talking about it and the Korean  
government seems to agree that their list of agricultural goods could  
be revised by mid-September. It is a ray of light, but who knows if  
its light at the end of the tunnel, or an on rushing train.
To clarify the current status is the US wants every agricultural good  
to be imported freely by opening up the market in stages lasting 10  
years. Korean meanwhile wants to protect 280+  items (284 says  
Joongang, 288 says Chosun) and lift what is not included in stages of  
15 years.
Of those items not on the 280+ list, little of it makes sense that  
will take 15 years to be tariff free; there is not much sanity in my  
opinion. Accordingly to the Dong-A two items in debate in this area  
are corn and beans for animal feed. What makes Korea’s resistance a  
little odd is that Korea produces negligible amounts anyway. So  
eliminating this tariff right away will not impact farmers one iota.
Textiles
This is something the US is being hard on (perhaps to mirror Korea’s  
stonewalling on agriculture). Korea wants the US to eliminate all  
tariffs on textiles. The US basically agrees, but wants them to be  
phased out in 10 years (similar to their agricultural proposal,  
reinforcing my mirror idea). Korea finds this unacceptable and wants  
them phased out much faster.
For some reason the Textile issue has seemed to fixate the media.  
This is somewhat puzzling to me since China, India, and others are  
(or are set) to become booming textile importers to the US in their  
own right. Granted it is a big industry for Korea, but their face a  
very competitive market in the future in the US.
Automobiles
Basically, no change. The US wants cars to be subject to a lower  
tariff and a revision to the engine displacement taxes. Korea is  
holding firm. Korea though seems to be offering a compromise on the  
initial tariff and giving a two-year grace period on emissions. What  
this last part means is not described, however clearly Korea is  
holding firm in my opinion.
Despite initial word that foreign nameplate cars will be excluded  
from the talks, some news reports says this issue is still up in the  
air. Out of curiosity, I wonder how a Hyundai made at their new  
factory in Alabama will be taxed if brought back to Korea.
Anti-Dumping
One of Korea’s more interesting issues is their worries about US Anti- 
dumping and other trade protection measures. The US is firm this is  
not to be discussed. I wonder if again this is firmness to mirror  
Korean firmness in other areas.
Backing up this theory is I wonder if some of these measures can  
actually be placed from the executive to judicial branch of the US  
government. Currently once a firm is found by the Executive branch as  
dumping product, companies involved can sue to get compensation. Why  
not in turn just leave the determining and compensation to the court  
system? Also it the companies could conceivably be protected by anti- 
trust statues (granted though after Matsushita v. Zeinth this can be  
dicey). Anyway, there is a fall back position to this for the US  
which can be a good compromise.
On the other hand, the US may be linking this issue to the use of  
government owned banks to subsidize Korean companies. Recently  
government subsidies given to Hynix Semiconductor were found to  
violate WTO rules. Part of the Hynix case was the company was allowed  
to dump (sell below cost to gain market share) memory chips on the US  
market because of these subsidies. Perhaps if Korea would agree to  
change its banking sector, including the somewhat controversial Korea  
Development Bank, a compromise can be found here.
Finally, the time difference may make this negotiation moot. The Dong- 
A reports that the US side has to make reports to congress about  
changes in anti-dumping policy six month before signing. Keeping in  
mind the March to June deadline for signing (I forget the exact  
date), this means that an agreement on this area must be reached in  
the next couple months. If no progress is made the next round in  
Jeju, this may be a dead issue.
Pharmaceuticals
As you may recall, some progress was made in a special session in  
Singapore regarding Korea’s “positive list” system. In short the US  
was willing to accept it if other concessions were made in areas such  
as intellectual property rights, testing and access in relation to  
pharmaceuticals. This seemed to get a positive reaction initially  
from the Korean side.
The US likely came into Seattle ready to put this to rest.  
Unfortunately this was not to be so. As further details came out from  
both sides, negotiations seemed to have stalled. Or perhaps somebody  
added more restrictions. It is unclear from the media what exactly  
happened, but this can was kicked down the road.
Something left out of this reporting that concerns me is there is no  
talk of medical devices and such being included in this. Many of the  
complaints about barriers, such as regulation, testing, and even the  
positive list system (as I recall) also applies to medical devices.  
Is the lack of discussion simply an omission and press shorthand or  
does it show a quiet compromise on the issue?
Television Market
It seems some progress was made in the TV market. The US has seemed  
to have won some concession on laws limiting foreigners to a minority  
share of cable TV channels.
Intellectual Property
Both countries have made the obligatory pledge to respect and enforce  
IPR rights. Meanwhile the US has requested Korea to extend the time  
of copyright protection from 50 to 70 years. It is expected this will  
be a big issue the US will raise in the future.
Gaesong Industrial Complex
It stands as it always did, the US saying “Over my cold dead body!”




0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home