05.04.2013 Views

U.S.-Korea Free Trade Agreement: Potential Economy-wide ... - USITC

U.S.-Korea Free Trade Agreement: Potential Economy-wide ... - USITC

U.S.-Korea Free Trade Agreement: Potential Economy-wide ... - USITC

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.

Box 4.5 U.S. legal services trade with <strong>Korea</strong> and the climate for opening the <strong>Korea</strong>n market for legal services<br />

In 2005, U.S. cross-border exports of legal services to unaffiliated consumers in <strong>Korea</strong> amounted to $102 million, while<br />

U.S. imports of such services from unaffiliated suppliers in <strong>Korea</strong> totaled $21 million. <strong>Korea</strong> accounted for 2 percent<br />

of the total value of both U.S. exports and imports of legal services in 2005.<br />

The European Union Chamber of Commerce in <strong>Korea</strong> stated that <strong>Korea</strong> is the last economy in northeast Asia<br />

(including North <strong>Korea</strong>) and one of the last in the world to partially open its legal services market to foreign<br />

participation. About 8,000 <strong>Korea</strong>-licensed lawyers serve the market, or one lawyer for every 6,100 people, compared<br />

to one lawyer per 268 people in the United States. <strong>Korea</strong>n law offices are generally smaller than those in the United<br />

States. The largest <strong>Korea</strong>n law firm, Kim & Chang, employs 300 lawyers, tax lawyers, accountants, and patent and<br />

trademark attorneys. The firm states that many of its attorneys practiced previously with major law firms abroad and<br />

graduated from foreign universities. Only a few <strong>Korea</strong>n law firms reportedly have experience serving multinational<br />

clients, resulting in a shortage of legal expertise relative to demand for the execution of large and complex financial<br />

and corporate transactions. The shortage of legal expertise often compels multinational clients to absorb the additional<br />

costs of engaging both <strong>Korea</strong>n and non-<strong>Korea</strong>n law firms in connection with such transactions. Such inefficiency and<br />

cost duplication likely place <strong>Korea</strong> at a comparative disadvantage relative to other Asian economies in meeting <strong>Korea</strong>’s<br />

policy goal of attracting significantly higher FDI.<br />

About 400 foreign lawyers are employed in <strong>Korea</strong> as consultants by <strong>Korea</strong>n law firms, supplementing <strong>Korea</strong>n-licensed<br />

practitioners. Foreign lawyers, however, rarely pass the difficult <strong>Korea</strong>n bar examination required of anyone seeking<br />

to practice law in <strong>Korea</strong>. Likewise, few U.S. law firms have long-term experience serving clients in <strong>Korea</strong> because<br />

<strong>Korea</strong>n law prohibits non-<strong>Korea</strong>n law firms from establishing an office in <strong>Korea</strong> or entering into partnerships with or<br />

hiring <strong>Korea</strong>n-licensed lawyers. Accordingly, a small number of U.S. and other non-<strong>Korea</strong>n law firms serve <strong>Korea</strong>n<br />

clients from offices in Japan, Hong Kong, China, or elsewhere, which reportedly inflates U.S. and other non-<strong>Korea</strong>n<br />

law firms’ costs substantially. To minimize such cost effects and serve clients faster, U.S. law firms such as Paul,<br />

Hastings, Janofsky & Walker LLP, DLA Piper, and Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld LLP reportedly plan to open<br />

foreign legal consultant (FLC) offices rapidly upon the FTA’s entry into force. Certain other U.S. law firms with <strong>Korea</strong>n<br />

clients, such as Orrick, Herrington & Sutcliffe LLP, reportedly are likely to defer a decision on opening an FLC office<br />

in <strong>Korea</strong> because <strong>Korea</strong> is only gradually opening its legal services market, and more substantial trade opportunities<br />

for U.S. lawyers and law firms exist elsewhere in Asia, especially in China.<br />

Sources: Elinson, “<strong>Trade</strong> Pact News Spurs U.S. Law Firms' Interest in South <strong>Korea</strong>,” April 6, 2007; European<br />

Union Chamber of Commerce in <strong>Korea</strong>. “Legal Services Committee, Overview,” 2006; European Union Chamber<br />

of Commerce in <strong>Korea</strong>. “Legal Services Committee, Press Conferences 2006,” 2006; Hogarth, “Expansion-Minded<br />

Law Firms Look to <strong>Korea</strong>,” March 17, 2006; Kim and Chang (law firm), “Firm Profile,” 2007; Pettersson, “Seoul<br />

Poised to Admit Foreign Law Offices,” November 8, 2006; USDOC, BEA, “U.S. International Services:<br />

Cross-Border <strong>Trade</strong> in 2005 and Sales Through Affiliates in 2004”; and Yoo, “<strong>Korea</strong>, U.S. Grapple with Sensitive<br />

FTA Issues,” July 12, 2006.<br />

To facilitate these activities, the annex would commit the parties to establish a Professional<br />

Services Working Group, 82 comprising representatives of both parties, which is to meet by<br />

mutual consent within 1 year of the FTA’s entry into force. The Working Group would<br />

consider issues pertaining to professional services generally as well as individual<br />

professional services. The scope of work would include developing procedures to encourage<br />

mutual recognition arrangements and model procedures for licensing and certification,<br />

addressing regional-level government measures inconsistent with market access and national<br />

treatment, and discussing other mutual interests affecting the supply of professional services.<br />

The Working Group must consider bilateral, plurilateral, and multilateral agreements related<br />

to professional services. Within 2 years after the FTA’s entry into force, the Working Group<br />

must report on progress, including any recommendations on promoting mutual recognition<br />

82 USTR, “Final Text of the U.S.-Australia <strong>Free</strong> <strong>Trade</strong> <strong>Agreement</strong>,” 2007. The U.S.-Australia <strong>Free</strong> <strong>Trade</strong><br />

<strong>Agreement</strong> provided for a similar working group on professional services.<br />

4-17

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!