India: Effects of Tariffs and Nontariff Measures on U.S. ... - USITC

More documents

Recommendations

Info

MAX SAUCUS, MONTANA. CHAIRMAN JOllN D. l3OCKtFtLLtR IU, WEST V!ItiINIA ktNICONRAD. NORTH DAKOTA CHUCKGHASSLCY, lOV/A URRlN G IIATCH. UTAH ' JEFF UISGAL~AH, NEW MEXICO OLYA!PIAJ.ShO;YE, MA.NE JOHN F. K€KRY, MASSACHUSETR BLANCHE L. LISCOLN. ARKANSAS JON KYL, ARIZONA GORDON SWTH. OREGON RON VWDFN, OREGON CHARLES E SCHUMER, NEWYORK JIM RUNNING. KENTUCKY MIKE CRAPO, IDAICO OEBDIE 8TADENOVJ, MICHIGAN PATROBEKTS, KANSAS hlARIA CANTWELL. WASHINGTON JOHN ENSIGN. NEVAUA KEN SALAZAR, COLOAAOO JOHN E. SUNUNU, NEW HAMPSHlfiE RUSSELL SULLIVAN. STAFF DIRSCTOR KOLAN DAVIS, REPUBLICAN STAFF UIRECTOR AND CHIEF COUNSEL COMMITTEE ON FfNANCE WASHINGTON, DC 20510-6200 January 12,2009 The Honorable Shara L. Aran<strong>of</strong>f Chairman US. International Trade Coinmission 500 E Street, S.W. Washington, DC 20436 Dear Chairman Aran<strong>of</strong>f, U.S. agricdhire depends on reliable access to globa1 markets. Strong economic growth in developing countries like <strong>India</strong> presents oppoiWnities for US. agricultural exports. Although the United States is globally competitive in a wide vasiety <strong>of</strong> agricultural products - ranging f2om wheat, corn, soybeans, peas, lentils, <strong>and</strong> edible oils -US. farmers only provide about 5 percent <strong>of</strong> <strong>India</strong>'s current food imports. While US. exporters can provide individual examples <strong>of</strong> trade measures that prevent their sales to <strong>India</strong>, the extent to which trade <strong>and</strong> investment measures account for the disproportionately low U.S. share <strong>of</strong> <strong>India</strong>'s agricultural imports remains largely undocumented. We are writing to request that the U.S. International Trade Commission (ITC) conduct an investigation under section 332(g) <strong>of</strong> the Taxiff Act <strong>of</strong> 1930 (1 9 U.S.C. 1332(g)) regarding the effects <strong>of</strong> tariff <strong>and</strong> non-tariff measures on U.S. agricultural exports to <strong>India</strong>. The report should cover the period 2003-2008, or the period 2003 to the Iatest year for which data are available. To the extent possible, the report should include the following: an overview <strong>of</strong> the <strong>India</strong>n agricultural market, including recent trends in consumption, imports, <strong>and</strong> domestic supply; a description <strong>of</strong> the principal measures affecting <strong>India</strong>n agricultural imports, including tariffs, sanitary <strong>and</strong> phytosanitary measures, food regulations, packaging <strong>and</strong> labeling requkements, pricing policies, intellectual property policies, <strong>and</strong> customs procedures; information on <strong>India</strong>n government regulations, including state regulations, covering agricultural markets <strong>and</strong> foreign direct investment affecting US. agricultural products in <strong>India</strong>; A-3
Page 1 and 2:
United States International Trade C
Page 3 and 4:
U.S. International Trade Commission
Page 5:
Abstract This report describes <str
Page 8 and 9:
TABLE ES.1 India:
Page 10 and 11:
U.S. agricultural products face str
Page 12 and 13:
U.S. Foreign Direct Investment U.S.
Page 15 and 16:
CONTENTS Page Abstract ............
Page 17 and 18:
CONTENTS―Continued Chapter 6 <str
Page 19 and 20:
CONTENTS―Continued Figures 1.1. <
Page 21 and 22:
ACRONYMS AND TERMS AAY Antodaya Ann
Page 23:
ACRONYMS AND TERMS—Continued RGGV
Page 26 and 27:
TABLE 1.1 India: A
Page 28 and 29:
FIGURE 1.1 India:
Page 30 and 31:
India’s central
Page 32 and 33:
Despite their weak economic pr<stro
Page 34 and 35:
Approach Current India</str
Page 36 and 37:
Bibliography Birner, Regina, Surupt
Page 38 and 39:
World Bank. Agriculture for Develop
Page 40 and 41:
FIGURE 2.1 India:
Page 42 and 43:
TABLE 2.1 India: A
Page 44 and 45:
FIGURE 2.3 India:
Page 46 and 47:
premium); (2) India</strong
Page 48 and 49:
include government export restricti
Page 50 and 51:
TABLE 2.3 India: A
Page 52 and 53:
FIGURE 2.6 India:
Page 54 and 55:
Exports by Major Trading Partner <s
Page 57 and 58:
CHAPTER 3 Domestic Consumption Over
Page 59 and 60:
TABLE 3.2 India: P
Page 61 and 62:
more likely to have been exposed to
Page 63 and 64:
BOX 3.3 Indian Con
Page 65 and 66:
TABLE 3.3 India: T
Page 67 and 68:
are expected to see income growth <
Page 69 and 70:
Food Preferences India</str
Page 71 and 72:
Regional Variation Geographic <stro
Page 73 and 74:
CCC. “Know India
Page 75 and 76:
CHAPTER 4 Indian A
Page 77 and 78:
For most crops, however, In
Page 79 and 80:
The Farm Sector soybeans 29 —but
Page 81 and 82:
Food processing in India</s
Page 83 and 84:
BOX 4.1 The Central Government’s
Page 85 and 86:
BOX 4.2 Does the Minimum Support Pr
Page 87 and 88:
August 3, 2009, New Delhi announced
Page 89 and 90:
known as zamindars, have doubled or
Page 91 and 92:
that the PFA Act was strictly enfor
Page 93 and 94:
———. Bharat Nirman: A Time-Bo
Page 95 and 96:
Organisation for Economic Co-operat
Page 97 and 98:
CHAPTER 5 TARIFFS Overview
Page 99 and 100:
sensitive. They include vegetable f
Page 101 and 102:
wholly milled rice and</str
Page 103 and 104:
The Indian governm
Page 105 and 106:
India also reporte
Page 107 and 108:
Reference Prices Reference prices,
Page 109 and 110:
Landing Fees <stro
Page 111 and 112:
Simulated Effects
Page 113 and 114:
and nuts” by $0.
Page 115 and 116:
5-19 TABLE 5.4 India</stron
Page 117 and 118:
Bibliography Acharya, Keya. “Thor
Page 119 and 120:
Indian Express.com
Page 121 and 122:
CHAPTER 6 Nontariff</strong
Page 123 and 124:
foreign sources. 6 For example, SPS
Page 125 and 126:
BOX 6.1 Milk and M
Page 127 and 128:
BOX 6.2 Wheat—Continued Yet, <str
Page 129 and 130:
perpetuated continuously. The impor
Page 131 and 132:
notices that must be integrated wit
Page 133 and 134:
import corn under the TRQ is too bu
Page 135 and 136:
Customs Procedures India</s
Page 137 and 138:
Corruption Interests within <strong
Page 139 and 140:
TABLE 6.2 India: E
Page 141 and 142:
Bibliography American Apparel <stro
Page 143 and 144:
Mattson, Jeremy W., Won, W. Koo, <s
Page 145:
———. 2009 National Trade Esti
Page 148 and 149:
TABLE 7.1 India: C
Page 150 and 151:
First Point of Sal
Page 152 and 153:
Private mandis Som
Page 154 and 155:
approximately 65 million households
Page 156 and 157: 7-10 TABLE 7.2 India</stron
Page 158 and 159: poor communications infrastructure
Page 160 and 161: limited popularity with farmers bec
Page 162 and 163: The lack of infras
Page 164 and 165: found that 39 percent of</s
Page 166 and 167: Bibliography Banerjee, A. Dairying
Page 168 and 169: Tiwari, Shri Rajendra Kumar. “Pos
Page 170 and 171: FDI Regulations and</strong
Page 172 and 173: TABLE 8.2 India: A
Page 174 and 175: Food Processing and</strong
Page 176 and 177: There is not necessarily a strong l
Page 178 and 179: For processing of
Page 180 and 181: BOX 8.3 Restrictions on Foreign Joi
Page 182 and 183: Under certain circumstances, FDI ca
Page 184 and 185: commenced. States tend to be quick
Page 186 and 187: Bibliography Bahn, Niti, an
Page 188 and 189: International Center for Alcohol Po
Page 190 and 191: Structure of the <
Page 192 and 193: BOX 9.1 The UPOV System for Plant V
Page 194 and 195: that the public sector in I
Page 196 and 197: Whether this situation will soon ch
Page 198 and 199: The U.S.-India Bus
Page 200 and 201: eggplant, which began field trials
Page 202 and 203: Maskus, Keith E. “Intellectual Pr
Page 205: APPENDIX A REQUEST LETTER
Page 209: APPENDIX B FEDERAL REGISTER NOTICE
Page 212 and 213: Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 29
Page 215 and 216: CALENDAR OF PUBLIC HEARING Those li
Page 217: APPENDIX D SUMMARY OF VIEWS OF INTE
Page 220 and 221: The ABC further noted that the succ
Page 222 and 223: Cargill Incorporated 7 In a written
Page 224 and 225: National Confectioners Association
Page 226 and 227: negotiating process, claiming that
Page 228 and 229: stated that U.S. exports of
Page 230 and 231: streamline regulation are commendab
Page 232 and 233: Wine Institute et al. 28 In his dir
Page 235 and 236: Many factors make India</st
Page 237 and 238: E-5 TABLE E.1 India</strong
Page 239 and 240: E-7 TABLE E.1 India</strong
Page 241: TABLE E.1 India: U
Page 245 and 246: Indian Agricultura
Page 247 and 248: The Indian milling
Page 249 and 250: Yellow peas can serve as a low-cost
Page 251 and 252: trend toward healthier eating, <str
Page 253 and 254: processed (into other dairy product
Page 255 and 256: Per capita meat consumption has bee
Page 257 and 258:
vegetables than fruit, and<
Page 259 and 260:
some are altered to fit Ind
Page 261 and 262:
Bibliography Amul India</st
Page 263:
———. India:
Page 267 and 268:
Indian Legal Struc
Page 269 and 270:
Himachal Pradesh (date amended: 05/
Page 271:
APPENDIX H ANALYTICAL FRAMEWORK AND
Page 274 and 275:
GTAP sectors in table H.1. Second,
Page 276 and 277:
FIGURE H.1 Partial equilibrium mode
Page 278 and 279:
Model Limitations Simulated effects
Page 280 and 281:
Yet, 2007 was not a representative
Page 282 and 283:
TABLE H.3 India: E
Page 284:
Narayanan, B., and
show all

India: Effects of Tariffs and Nontariff Measures on U.S. ... - USITC

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?