Mercedes Botto Andrea Carla Bianculli - Flacso

what was called the Final Regime towards a Common Customs Union (RAFUA/Régimen Final
hacia la Unión Aduanera), which established an extra period – a unique and maximum closing date
of four years – for certain sectors and products. These were given some extra time to restructure
themselves. This meant that they could keep the national tariffs within the intra-zone trade, but
these would have to disappear gradually and automatically until 199939. Argentina included 221
products under this regime, basically those regarding the steel and iron sectors, textiles, footwear,
and paper, all of which still continue to be exempted.
The textile sector constitutes a paradoxical case40. Apart from including this sector in the RAFUA
and creating a special committee aimed at elaborating a proposal for an intra-zone regulatory policy,
the member states agreed on exempting it from the customs union as well. Hence, the current
national schemes would be applied to the textile sector, which in Argentina reached the
consolidated schedules of the WTO. Thus, in practice, Argentina maintained its policy of charging
specific duties to those textile products coming from third countries, and exempted Mercosur
countries, even when these were included in the RAFUA. It is noteworthy that all Mercosur
partners adhered to the textile and clothing agreement established within the WTO in order to
allow for the application of safeguards clauses to these products imports.
In sum, the four countries got to Ouro Preto with a CET and four exception lists, each of which
had a particular mechanism for its future elimination. The first of these lists contained the exclusion
of the CET for those products already under the RAFUA, while the second list included the
national lists of specific exceptions to the customs union – such as textiles and sugar. Both the third
and fourth lists were sectoral lists regarding capital, and computer and telecommunications goods,
where Brazil, under the request of Argentina, committed itself to the reduction of the aliquota
before 200641. 39 Some of the products included under this regime – namely, the steel sector – were also subject to quotas,
while others – such as sugar and automotive – were not included in the intra-Mercosur trade liberalization
scheme. This was due to the considerable divergences member countries exhibited, especially Argentina and
Brazil, in terms of their national policies towards these sectors. A so called Grupo Ad Hoc was commissioned
the definition of a regime that should adequate the sugar sector to the customs union – the CET and the free
trade zone – while an Ad Hoc Technical Committee was requested to elaborate before June 1, 1995, a proposal
for a Common Car Regime that should come into force on January 1, 2000.
40 When discussing this tariff, Argentine negotiators found that the sector relied on very specific and high
rights, and protection regimes quite different from those of other countries. In June 1994, after different
analyses and studies had been carried out, the government established a maximum tariff of 20% for the
confection, 16 to 18% for fabrics, and 12 to 14% for spun. In December 1994, and given the great pressure
exercised by the textile sector, a final decision was made: the sector would be excluded from the CET and
each country would keep its own tariff policy for textiles.
41 While the average level of the CET was fixed at approximately 11%, tariff levels were allowed to vary
between 0 and 20% across industries: the lowest tariffs were allocated to input and materials, intermediate
tariffs were charged on semi-finished industrial goods, and the highest tariffs were assigned to final
manufactures. Following the pattern of intra-Mercosur tariffs, exceptions were also granted. Thus, certain
imports would enjoy tariff rates different from the CET. Nevertheless, it was agreed that the import taxes for
these exempt products would converge linearly and automatically toward the CET by the year 2001, and by
the year 2006 for those exempt products coming from Paraguay. In addition, exceptions to the CET were
granted for capital goods imports – namely, machines and equipment – computers, and telecommunications.
A CET was also established for textiles, but the four partners agreed that this would not be put into practice
immediately. However, and in spite of these exceptions, in 1996 on average countries were quite close to the
32