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

Summary of Provisions
This chapter covers the protection of human, animal, or plant life or health in the parties’
territories, insofar as they directly or indirectly affect trade between them, and the
enhancement of the World Trade Organization (WTO) Agreement on the Application of
Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures (SPS Agreement). The FTA mandates no changes to
either parties SPS rules. The United States and Korea would agree to establish a Committee
on Sanitary and Phytosanitary Matters to coordinate administration of the chapter (Article
6.3). The Committee would provide a forum to help each party implement the SPS
Agreement, enhance mutual understanding of each government’s SPS measures, resolve
future bilateral SPS matters, coordinate technical assistance programs, and consult on issues
and positions in the WTO, various codex committees, and in other fora. The chapter specifies
that no party has recourse to dispute settlement under the FTA for any matter arising under
the chapter. Any SPS issue that may require formal dispute resolution would be resolved
through the formal process established under the WTO SPS Agreement.
Views of Interested Parties
In its report on the agreement, the Agricultural Policy Advisory Committee (APAC)
expressed the view that the U.S.-Korea FTA will benefit U.S. farmers and ranchers by
increasing export opportunities through the elimination of tariff and nontariff barriers. The
report said, however, that the benefits will occur for the beef industry only if meaningful
science-based trade is fully restored prior to the approval of the FTA. The report identified
three key issues that must be addressed for beef: beef plant inspection equivalency, Korean
import certification language, and Korea’s recognition of USDA Process Verified Programs
(PVPs) as approved by the Agricultural Marketing Service. 40
The National Cattlemen’s Beef Association (NCBA), in a written submission to the
Commission, said that all of Korea’s bans on U.S. beef products must be lifted by the time
the agreement is sent to Congress or it will not support the FTA. The NCBA said that SPS
and plant equivalency precedents established in recently negotiated FTAs are the only way
to assure real access to the South Korean market. 41
In its report on the FTA, the Animals and Animal Products Agricultural Trade Advisory
Committee (ATAC) indicated that the beef industry will withhold support for the U.S.-Korea
FTA until commercially viable beef trade occurs based on international recognized
guidelines established by the World Organization for Animal Health (OIE). 42 The report said,
however, that the U.S. poultry industry supports the FTA. The report noted a separate
bilateral agreement under which Korea agreed to recognize the equivalency of the U.S. food
safety inspection system for poultry and to take measures to minimize poultry trade
disruptions with respect to avian influenza. 43 According to the report, the poultry industry
is of the view that these measures, combined with the tariff provisions of the U.S.-Korea
FTA, will result in enhanced U.S.-Korea poultry trade.
40 APAC for Trade, Agricultural Policy Advisory Committee for Trade Report, April 27, 2007, 2–3.
41 NCBA, “Comments on the United States-South Korea Free Trade Agreement,” written submission to
USITC, April 27, 2006, 3.
42 ATAC for Animal and Animal Products, Advisory Committee Report, April 26, 2007, 1.
43 Ibid., 4.
5-7