The Office of the U.S. Trade Representative (USTR) released its 2019 annual report on Friday 29 March on the state of barriers to US trade and investment around the world.
On the subject of EU-US trade relations, "the largest economic relationship in the world” is marred by “persistent barriers" in the European market against US operators, the USTR report begins by noting.
These barriers "have contributed to annual US trade deficits with the EU", the report says.
Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT): The United States faces a "proliferation" of TBTs in the EU, attributed in part to the European legislative process, which “lacks clarity and efficiency”, particularly in terms of notifications, the report says.
Standards: the USTR is highly critical of unnecessary normative requirements, which are more onerous for foreign producers than for their European counterparts. The EU also seeks to propagate its standards to its trading partners, creating a “challenging” environment for US exporters. The USTR also regrets that US operators cannot influence the content of EU technical regulations. As for sanitary and phytosanitary measures (SPS), the report is concerned about the many measures that "unnecessarily restrict trade”. It also complains about the treatment of GMOs.
Public procurement: the lack of transparency in some Member States continues to be an obstacle to the participation of US companies. The report also points out that "the value of direct cross-border public procurement, even between Member States, is very low".
Agricultural products: the list of complaints is particularly long here, including on agricultural product quality systems.
The USTR takes this opportunity to highlight the heterogeneous application of EU customs legislation.
Certification: requirements often appear to be “incompatible with international standards” and are implemented “without scientific evidence”; they limit US agricultural exports.
The USTR also bemoans increasingly restrictive policies for the authorisation of certain substances contained in agricultural chemicals, due to “arbitrary criteria”.
Geographical Indications (GIs): the EU system provides them with overly broad protections, which has a negative impact on the protection of US trademarks and market access.
Subsidies: some financial transactions and equity investments in the EU "raise questions about the role of public funding in supporting or subsidising private or quasi-private organisations". (Original version in French by Hermine Donceel)