Concluding remarks by the Chairperson

The United States' 15th Trade Policy Review has provided an important and unique opportunity to examine and better understand the full range of U.S. trade policies and practices since its last Review in 2018. Developments in U.S. trade and related polices have been significant during the review period and this examination has been timely given the continued economic recovery from the COVID-19 pandemic and the current geopolitical situation that continues to impose challenges. The review has been conducted with the active participation of the U.S. delegation, headed by H.E. Ambassador María Luisa Pagán, Deputy United States Trade Representative, the insightful comments provided by our discussant, H.E. Ambassador Miss Cheryl K. Spencer, Permanent Representative of Jamaica to the WTO, and 66 delegations. I would like to thank them all for their contribution to this exercise.

Members stressed that the importance of the United States to world trade and economic prosperity could not be underestimated. As the world's largest single-country importer, the United States accounted for about 17.6% of global imports of goods and services, and 13.6% of exports in 2021. Many Members stated that the United States was one of their top trading partners, and often their main export market. A similar situation presented itself with respect to foreign direct investment (FDI) in which the United States was a leading provider and recipient.

Despite the tendencies to revert to protectionist measures during times of crises, the United States was complimented for keeping trade and investment channels open during the COVID‑19 pandemic. Its ability to recover quickly or lead the economic recovery was appreciated as this had knock-on effects on many other economies. While real GDP growth had reached 5.7% in 2021, high inflation had thereafter ensued and remained a concern. Some Members also commented on U.S. monetary policies and their impact on trade.

Over the two-day meeting there were numerous statements recognizing U.S. leadership in the multilateral trading system and many reiterated the importance for this to continue. The United States had a defining role in shaping the global trading system and further leadership in its ongoing reform was crucial. Members recognized that the United States had played a critical role in securing important outcomes at MC12. Its record on notifications and participation in all the various WTO fora was appreciated, including in several Joint Statement Initiatives (JSIs). Several Members suggested further engagement by the United States in all JSIs. The majority of Members noted that the impasse with respect to the Appellate Body was jeopardizing the judicial function of the WTO and they were hopeful that the United States would lead the reform efforts so that a fully functional dispute settlement system would be operational by 2024.

Some Members observed that U.S. trade policy had moved to a worker-centric trade approach during the review period through its "Build Back Better" agenda. Addressing areas such as social and environmental issues through trade policy was part of this agenda and it was hoped this would benefit trading partners as well as the United States. Members emphasized the importance of keeping open, transparent, and non-discriminatory trade policies, as well as of supporting capacity building and development initiatives that were of particular importance to developing countries.

Many Members appreciated the fact that United States' tariffs remained low with a simple average of 4.8% and were essentially unchanged from the previous review. Other Members commented on their long-standing preferential arrangements that were an important vehicle for expanding bilateral and regional trade with the United States. Further, many developing countries raised the importance of unilateral preferences, in particular the Generalized System of Preferences (GSP), Caribbean Basin Initiative (CBI), and the African Growth and Opportunity Act (AGOA), and requested the renewal of the lapsed GSP programme. Recent U.S. initiatives in certain regions, for example, the Indo-Pacific Economic Framework for Prosperity (IPEF) and the Americas Partnership for Economic Prosperity (APEP) were appreciated as important trade initiatives by those partners concerned.

Members expressed varying degrees of concern regarding recently adopted trade policies and measures, as well as longstanding legislation and instruments that determine the effective access of trading partners to the U.S. market, including maritime transport restrictions, investment screening, and export controls. They noted that the Inflation Reduction Act (IRA) included several important elements such as the need to lower inflation and accelerate carbon reduction, but also raised concerns regarding subsidies and the treatment of domestic versus foreign entities. Members hoped to engage more with the United States in this important area. The issue of subsidies extended beyond the IRA to other areas including agriculture and fisheries. Trade distorting support, ad hoc measures, a high aggregate measurement of support "Amber" box, and box shifting were some of the issues mentioned in respect of agriculture.

Many participants pointed out that the United States remained a significant user of trade remedies. Although anti-dumping duties, counter-vailing measures and safeguards remained legitimate trade instruments, their prolonged usage under sunset reviews and the use of certain methodologies drew concerns by many Members. The resort to other trade remedies, such as Section 232 of the Trade Expansion Act of 1962 and Section 301 of the Trade Act of 1974, were also raised as concerns by several Members. The direction taken in the area of government procurement due to Buy American policies as well as Made in America initiatives was worrying to some Members.

During the discussions, adapting to the new world realities was recognized as an important theme, both for the United States' trade policies but also systemically for the WTO. Addressing issues related to climate change, sustainable supply chains, environmental standards, and digital and technological developments was important, and the United States had shown it stood ready to take on these challenges.

It is clear that the U.S. delegation places a high value on the Trade Policy Review Mechanism and the Multilateral Trading System with its engagement over the two-day meeting and its ability to respond to a very high number of advance written questions. With a large number of questions submitted within the established deadline, as well as after the deadline or in follow-up, the United States has received well over 2,000 written questions in total. This reflects the importance of the United States in the multilateral trading system and the interest of Members in engaging with the United States on its trade and related policies.

The above points are some of the key issues that emerged in our discussion over the past days. I hope that the U.S. delegation will consider and further reflect on these issues and on the many constructive comments that it received during the Review.Members look forward to receiving answers to outstanding and follow-up questions within the customary one month.