Agreement Between Rumania and the United States According Most-favored-Nation-Treatment in Customs Matters

1926 ◽  
Vol 20 (S3) ◽  
pp. 114-115
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
The United States ◽  
Most Favored Nation

scholarly journals WTO Panel Rules Against U.S. Claim that Tariffs on Chinese Goods Are Justified as Necessary to Protect “Public Morals”

2021 ◽  
Vol 115 (1) ◽  
pp. 120-124
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
World Trade Organization ◽  
World Trade ◽  
The United States ◽  
Most Favored Nation ◽  
The U.S

On September 15, 2020, a World Trade Organization (WTO) panel ruled that certain tariffs the United States imposed on Chinese products violated Articles I (most-favored-nation) and II (tariff bindings) of the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT). The panel rejected the U.S. attempt to invoke a “public morals” defense pursuant to GATT Article XX, holding that although countries receive substantial deference in defining “public morals,” the United States failed to prove that the tariffs were necessary to achieve its stated public morals objective.

The American Construction of the Most-Favored-Nation Clause

1913 ◽  
Vol 7 (4) ◽  
pp. 708-723
Author(s):  
Samuel B. Crandall
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
The Netherlands ◽  
The United States ◽  
The State ◽  
Most Favored Nation ◽  
Most Favored Nation Clause

In a communication to the Congress of the Confederation, February 20, 1787, the Netherlands minister protested against an Act of the legislature of the State of Virginia, which exempted French brandies imported in French and American vessels from certain duties to which like commodities imported in vessels of the Netherlands were left liable, as in contravention of the most-favored-nation clause in Article II of the treaty of 1782. This article provided that the subjects of the Netherlands should pay in the ports of the United States no other or greater duties or imposts of whatever nature or denomination than those which the nations the most favored were or should be obliged to pay; and that they should enjoy all the rights, liberties, privileges, immunities and exemptions in trade, navigation and commerce which the most favored nations did or should enjoy. The article contained no express qualification that the favor or privilege should be extended freely if freely given or for an equivalent if conditional.

American Treaty Provisions Relating to Consular Privileges and Immunities

1926 ◽  
Vol 20 (1) ◽  
pp. 81-102
Author(s):  
Irvin Stewart
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
The United States ◽  
Most Favored Nation ◽  
History Of ◽  
Entire History ◽  
Most Favored Nation Clause

Apparently no consistent effort has been made to secure a uniform schedule of consular privileges and immunities applicable to all of the states with which the United States has entered into treaty relations. In the entire history of the United States up to the present time there have been only sixteen consular conventions. Some 109 other treaties, however, have secured consular exemptions in varying degrees from many different nations; and the popular most-favored-nation clause has extended the schedule still further. One of the first treaties the United States entered into was a consular convention, that of 1788 with France, but the second consular convention did not come until over sixty years later. During the interval many provisions in commercial treaties had extended exemptions in various countries, so that by 1853 every one of the privileges which are in effect today had been inserted in at least one treaty, and some of them had been repeated many times.

German-American Commercial Relations

1925 ◽  
Vol 19 (4) ◽  
pp. 689-701
Author(s):  
Wallace McClure
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Public Interest ◽  
The United States ◽  
Most Favored Nation ◽  
American Government ◽  
Commercial Policy ◽  
The Public ◽  
Careful Scrutiny ◽  
Important Development ◽  
Most Favored Nation Clause

In the Treaty of Friendship, Commerce and Consular Rights signed with Germany on December 8,1923, the United States inaugurated an important development of its commercial policy in conformity with the Tariff Act of 1922, Section 317 of which directs the President, if “the public interest will be served thereby,” to “specify and declare new or additional duties” upon goods imported from countries that discriminate against the commerce of the United States. Pursuant to this provision the American Government undertook the negotiation of agreements with other countries both to eliminate existing discriminations and to obtain assurances that existing equality of treatment would be maintained. Preparation for the new series of commercial arrangements included a careful scrutiny of the most-favored-nation clause as applied to customs duties.

scholarly journals Beijing's Pain Points – 2 (Glance from mid-2020)

2021 ◽  
Vol 65 (1) ◽  
pp. 70-81
Author(s):  
V. Mikheev ◽  
S. Lukonin
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Hong Kong ◽  
High Growth ◽  
The United States ◽  
Strategic Partnership ◽  
High Tech ◽  
National Committee ◽  
American Business ◽  
Negative Consequences ◽  
Most Favored Nation

In China, the topics of pandemic and economic recovery gradually lose their importance and give place to another deterioration in U.S.–China relations due to pressure from the United States on Hong Kong, Xinjiang Uygur Autonomous region, and the insufficient, according to the American side, pace of implementation of China’s first phase of commercial transactions with the United States. Beijing takes Washington’s threats to deprive Hong Kong of the status of a special customs territory in trade and economic cooperation with the U.S. quite seriously. However, Chinese experts note that the implementation of these threats will not lead to the collapse of the Hong Kong economy, since the most-favored-nation regime applies to about 5% of Hong Kong’s exports to the United States. At the same time, Beijing is trying to find an alternative to Hong Kong as a financial center in the face of Macao. However, the main characteristics of the Macao economy do not yet allow us to seriously talk about a full-fledged replacement, since most of the GDP of this special administrative region is formed by the gaming, tourism and restaurant industries. To a certain extent, the “position” of Hong Kong is claimed by Shanghai, but the extent of its claims is limited by the Chinese legal system, which is less flexible and liberal than that of Hong Kong. In May 2020, the so-called “Two sessions” were held in Beijing: the national Committee of the People’s Political Consultative Council of China (CPPCC) and the National People’s Congress (NPC). The latter presented a report on the government’s work in 2019 and the first quarters of 2020. The report contains the main guidelines and targets for the country’s socio-economic development for the current year, as well as a list of measures to support the economy in the so-called “post-crisis” period. Most of the mechanisms for stimulating growth are of a fiscal nature: the authorities do not want to inflate the amount of debt owed by public and private companies too much, and they go, first of all, for tax breaks. At the same time, the Central budget deficit is expected to increase to 3.6% due to reduced tax revenues because of quarantine measures and increased government spending to support consumer demand. At the same time, Beijing announced a reduction in spending by the central and provincial governments on “unimportant” and “non-priority items”: construction of buildings, business trips, celebrations, etc. The report on the government’s work reflected the desire of the Chinese leadership to accelerate the ongoing work on “launching” a new economic model of China’s development, aimed not at achieving high growth rates, but at quality indicators. For the first time, the NPC session did not specify the expected GDP growth rate in 2020. However, the main characteristics of this model have not yet been fully clarified. In the first approximation, it is a bet on the production of high-tech products, the implementation of traditional infrastructure projects within China and the expansion of domestic consumption – while maintaining the strategy of going outside in the format of the “Belt and Road” (or the “Silk Road Economic Belt”). The so-called “separation” of China and the United States in the financial and economic spheres, which is widely discussed in the world press, has not yet taken place. D. Trump’s “return of American business to the United States” is not yet perceived by the American private business itself, which is interested in expanding its presence in Chinese financial and other markets. China, for its part, by opening previously closed sectors of its economy is trying to provide new business opportunities to American companies in a “compromise” way, in contrast to military and political issues, where Beijing acts extremely harshly. In Russian-Chinese relations, there is still a trend to deepen strategic partnership in the military-political sphere and, if possible, in the economy – taking into account the negative consequences of the pandemic and adjusting for the scale of the Russian economy.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document