[Congressional Bills 108th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 1952 Introduced in Senate (IS)]
108th CONGRESS
1st Session
S. 1952
To direct the United States Trade Representative to enforce United
States rights under certain trade agreements with respect to Mexico,
pursuant to title III of the Trade Act of 1974.
_______________________________________________________________________
IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES
November 25, 2003
Mr. Grassley introduced the following bill; which was read twice and
referred to the Committee on Finance
_______________________________________________________________________
A BILL
To direct the United States Trade Representative to enforce United
States rights under certain trade agreements with respect to Mexico,
pursuant to title III of the Trade Act of 1974.
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the
United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.
This Act may be cited as the ``Mexican Agricultural Trade
Compliance Act''.
SEC. 2. FINDINGS.
Congress makes the following findings:
(1) Section 301 of the Trade Act of 1974 provides that, if
the United States Trade Representative determines that the
rights of the United States under any trade agreement are being
denied, the Trade Representative shall take action to enforce
such rights.
(2) The Statement of Administrative Action accompanying the
Uruguay Round Agreements Act provided that the United States
Trade Representative would base any section 301 determination
as to whether there has been a violation or denial of United
States rights under the Uruguay Round Agreements on panel or
Appellate Body findings adopted by the Dispute Settlement Body
of the World Trade Organization.
(3) In a panel report adopted by the Dispute Settlement
Body on January 27, 2000, the Dispute Settlement Body
determined that section 301 of the Trade Act of 1974 is not
inconsistent with United States obligations under the Uruguay
Round Agreements, particularly in light of the decision of the
United States to use section 301 only after exhausting its
rights under the Dispute Settlement Understanding.
(4) On January 28, 2000, a panel of the World Trade
Organization determined that Mexico's antidumping order on high
fructose corn syrup imported from the United States violated
Mexico's commitments under the Uruguay Round Agreements.
(5) On February 24, 2000, the Dispute Settlement Body
adopted the report of the panel.
(6) On April 10, 2000, the United States and Mexico agreed
to a September 22, 2000, deadline for Mexico to come into
compliance with the panel report as adopted by the Dispute
Settlement Body.
(7) On September 20, 2000, just 2 days prior to the date
Mexico had agreed to come into compliance with the panel
report, Mexico issued a revised antidumping threat
determination in an obvious attempt to evade its commitment to
come into compliance with the panel report adopted by the
Dispute Settlement Body.
(8) On June 22, 2001, a panel, convened pursuant to Article
21.5 of the Dispute Settlement Understanding, found that
Mexico's revised antidumping threat determination failed to
bring Mexico into compliance with its commitments under the
World Trade Organization.
(9) On October 22, 2001, the Appellate Body affirmed the
ruling of the Article 21.5 panel and recommended that Mexico
come into compliance with its obligations under the World Trade
Organization.
(10) On November 21, 2001, the Dispute Settlement Body
adopted the Appellate Body ruling that affirmed the findings of
the Article 21.5 panel.
(11) On January 1, 2002, in a transparent attempt to evade
the determinations of the Dispute Settlement Body regarding
Mexico's antidumping order on high fructose corn syrup, and in
an affront to the rules-based system of the World Trade
Organization, Mexico imposed a de facto discriminatory 20
percent tax on soft drinks containing high fructose corn syrup,
the intent and effect of which is to continue Mexico's
antidumping order on United States high fructose corn syrup by
other means by restricting access to the Mexican market.
(12) On April 20, 2002, with its discriminatory tax on soft
drinks containing high fructose corn syrup now in place, and in
a continuous event with the imposition of this tax, Mexico
lifted its antidumping order on high fructose corn syrup.
Importantly, Mexico lifted its antidumping order only after
ensuring that imports of United States high fructose corn syrup
would not enter the Mexican market due to the imposition of the
tax on soft drinks. Mexico's lifting of its antidumping order
enabled it to make the disingenuous claim that it had come into
compliance with the findings adopted by the Dispute Settlement
Body regarding Mexico's antidumping order.
(13) The imposition of the tax on soft drinks and the
lifting of the antidumping order by Mexico are related aspects
of a unified effort by Mexico to deny the rights of the United
States with respect to the trade of high fructose corn syrup.
(14) The effects of the import restrictions of Mexico's
antidumping order continue with even more egregious results
through the imposition of a 20 percent tax on high fructose
corn syrup. Imports of high fructose corn syrup from the United
States dropped from 110,893 metric tons in 2001 (the year prior
to the lifting of the antidumping order) to 4,868 metric tons
in 2002 (the first year of the tax).
(15) The United States has exhausted proceedings under the
Dispute Settlement Understanding, and the Dispute Settlement
Body has on more than 1 occasion adopted findings adverse to
Mexico.
SEC. 3. DEFINITIONS.
In this Act:
(1) Appellate body.--The term ``Appellate Body'' means the
Appellate Body established under Article 17.1 of the Dispute
Settlement Understanding.
(2) Dispute settlement body.--The term ``Dispute Settlement
Body'' has the meaning given that term in section 121(5) of the
Uruguay Round Agreements Act (19 U.S.C. 3531(5)).
(3) Dispute settlement panel; panel.--The terms ``dispute
settlement panel'' and ``panel'' mean a panel established
pursuant to Article 6 of the Dispute Settlement Understanding.
(4) Dispute settlement understanding.--The term ``Dispute
Settlement Understanding'' means the Understanding on Rules and
Procedures Governing the Settlement of Disputes referred to in
section 101(d)(16) of the Uruguay Round Agreements Act (19
U.S.C. 3511(d)(16)).
(5) GATT 1994.--The term ``GATT 1994'' has the meaning
given such term in section 2(1)(B) of the Uruguay Round
Agreements Act (19 U.S.C. 3501(1)(B).
(6) Uruguay round agreements.--The term ``Uruguay Round
Agreements'' has the meaning given such term in section 2(7) of
the Uruguay Round Agreements Act (19 U.S.C. 3501(7).
(7) World trade organization.--The term ``World Trade
Organization'' means the organization established pursuant to
the WTO Agreement.
(8) WTO agreement.--The term ``WTO Agreement'' means the
Agreement Establishing The World Trade Organization entered
into on April 15, 1994.
SEC. 4. ENFORCEMENT OF UNITED STATES RIGHTS UNDER THE URUGUAY ROUND
AGREEMENTS AND OTHER TRADE AGREEMENTS WITH RESPECT TO
HIGH FRUCTOSE CORN SYRUP EXPORTED TO MEXICO.
(a) Determination.--Congress determines that--
(1) the rights of the United States under the Uruguay Round
Agreements are being denied by Mexico in connection with the
imposition by Mexico of a 20 percent tax on soft drinks
containing high fructose corn syrup, an extension by other
means of Mexico's unjustified antidumping order on high
fructose corn syrup from the United States;
(2) the United States has exhausted proceedings under the
Dispute Settlement Understanding;
(3) Mexico's imposition of a tax on high fructose corn
syrup, an extension by other means of its unjustified
antidumping order on high fructose corn syrup from the United
States--
(A) constitutes an act, policy, or practice by
Mexico that is unjustifiable and burdens or restricts
United States commerce for purposes of section
304(a)(1) of the Trade Act of 1974 (19 U.S.C.
2414(a)(1)); and
(B) denies rights to which the United States is
entitled under existing trade agreements with Mexico
for purposes of such section 304; and
(4) unless, a certification described in subsection (b) is
submitted, the United States Trade Representative shall take
appropriate action under subsection (c).
(b) Certification.--The certification described in this subsection
means a certification from the United States Trade Representative
submitted to Congress not later than 30 days after the date of
enactment of this Act that states that Mexico has eliminated its tax on
soft drinks containing high fructose corn syrup and is taking
satisfactory measures to preserve the rights of the United States under
all applicable trade agreements with respect to high fructose corn
syrup.
(c) Action To Be Taken by USTR.--If a certification is not made
under subsection (b), the United States Trade Representative, not later
than 60 days after the date of enactment of this Act and after
consultation with the Committee on Finance of the Senate and the
Committee on Ways and Means of the House of Representatives, shall,
pursuant to section 301(c)(1) (A) and (B) of the Trade Act of 1974 (19
U.S.C. 2411(c)(1) (A) and (B))--
(1) suspend, withdraw, or prevent the application of,
benefits of trade agreement concessions to carry out a trade
agreement with Mexico; or
(2) impose duties or other import restrictions on the goods
of Mexico, including agricultural products imported from
Mexico, and notwithstanding any other provision of law, fees or
restrictions on the services of, Mexico for such time as the
Trade Representative determines appropriate.
<all>