Us Free Trade Agreement Singapore

The free trade agreement between the United States and Singapore required congressional implementation as part of the Trade Promotion Authority`s expedited legislative procedures. It continues the trend towards greater trade liberalization and globalization and proposes a new approach to the imposition of sanctions in the event of intractable environmental and labour disputes; and may affect certain trade streams that, in turn, would affect U.S. companies. Title IV on page 1417/H.R. 2739 also amended the INA to Singaporean citizens as E-1 distributors and E-2 contract investors. For the United States, trade barriers are also low, with the exception of some protected sectors such as light trucks and textiles and clothing. Table 2 shows that in 2002, the United States collected $87.5 million in tariffs on Singapore`s imports amounting to US$14,115.8 million, for an average U.S. duty of 0.6%. This low average tariff is the result of a combination of low tariffs on most products and relatively high tariffs on a small number of protected products. For example, for knitted clothing, the United States collected $43.4 million for an average duty of 18.6% and $8.5 million for weaving items for an average fee of 16.3%. Average tariffs on different food products were also relatively high (7.3%) and plastics (5.4%).

For electrical machinery and installations, the tariff was only 0.3% on average and 0.1% for machines. Other duties decreased from 0.4 to 2.4%. The removal of U.S. import duties under the free trade agreement would therefore have an impact on tariffs on the importation of clothing, other food products and, to a lesser extent, plastics. The non-transposition phase [Article 20:7] of the dispute resolution procedure is somewhat different in labour and environmental cases. So much so that a dispute resolution body publishes its report but the party does not violate that report, the procedures are the same, regardless of the nature of the complaint. If the dispute resolution body finds that a party has not complied with its operating obligations [Article 17:2.1 a)] or in an environmental respect [Article 18.2.1 a], and the parties are not in a position to: (a) reach agreement on a resolution or (b) to have adopted a resolution, but the applicant considers that the other party has not complied with the terms of the agreement, the applicant party may request that the dispute resolution body be reconvened to impose an annual monetary assessment on the other party. The panel must determine the amount of the monetary assessment within 90 days of its reintroduction of up to $15 million per year (adjusted for inflation after 2004 by the U.S. producer price index). Some have argued that $15 million is too small.

Keep in mind that, for other types of litigation, monetary assessments are set at a level of 50% of the amount of benefits that the dispute resolution body has set as equivalent or, in the absence of such a finding, 50% of the level proposed by the complainant. If the monetary assessment is not paid, the complainant may suspend the tariff benefits under the agreement to the level set by the panel. In 2002, the United States collected $87.5 million in tariffs on imports from Singapore. Some of these tariffs could be reintroduced for unpaid monetary assessment. PUBLICATION USITC 3651: This publication contains the United States Harmonized Customs Plan (HTSUS) General Note containing general and specific rules of origin, a list of all products that have been released from duty upon entry into force, and the plan to extinguish duty-free goods over time. In addition, bilateral free trade agreements play a role in the process of trade liberalization. Currently, markets are open primarily through multilateral negotiations within the framework of the World Organization