Peter Ungphakorn is a trade policy expert who writes for IEG Policy on agricultural trade relations between the EU and third countries, and on trade issues related to Brexit. Peter was formerly an information officer at the WTO in Geneva.
Are you sure you'd like to remove this alert? You will no longer receive email updates about this topic.
Latest From Peter Ungphakorn
The UK’s intention to simply refrain from collecting import duties on goods entering Northern Ireland across the Irish border, as announced earlier today (March 13), has sparked some lengthy debate among trade lawyers about whether, and if so how, this might violate World Trade Organization (WTO) rules.
Britain’s proposal for taking up a share of the EU’s tariff quotas is designed to ensure other countries continue with the same access to the UK’s market, prevent surges in imports and maintain a suitable balance, UK International Trade Secretary Liam Fox insisted yesterday (March 7).
World Trade Organization (WTO) members were unusually “frank and robust” in their comments and replies in a two-day meeting on US trade policy, a senior WTO official confirmed on December 19, as published statements and accounts from other sources described harsh exchanges between the US, EU and China.
Reforming dispute settlement was made a priority at the recent meeting (October 24-25) in Ottawa of 13 trade ministers on rescuing the World Trade Organization (WTO), and rightly so. But it also called for reforms in two other functions: negotiations and monitoring how WTO agreements are being implemented.
Last week 13 ministers from a group of “like-minded” countries met in Ottawa in a bid to rescue the World Trade Organization (WTO) from a growing series of crises. They set an agenda, ordered their officials to produce workable solutions and agreed little more than to meet again in January.
British politics has been fraught in recent days over transitions, backstops and no-deals, but out of the limelight some officials in Geneva have been watching with interest for an entirely different reason — the longer it takes, the less pressure is put on settling quickly the UK and EU commitments in the World Trade Organization (WTO).