1. National Treatment Presenters: Mikhail Lee & Jeong-Gon Kim
Date: 2nd of April, 2008
Class: Case Analysis on International Trade Disputes

2. What is National Treatment?
Most-Favoured-Nation
(MFN)
Non-Discrimination
at the Border
Equal Treatment b/w
WTO Members’
Products
GATT Art. I
(GATS Art. II,
TRIPS Art. 4)
National Treatment
(NT)
Non-Discrimination
Inside the Border
Equal Treatment b/w
Imported and
Domestic Products
GATT Art. III
(GATS Art. XVII,
TRIPS Art. 3)
Local Content Requirement
Discrimination by Laws
NT under the GATT:
Tax discrimination

3. GATT Art. III:1 (General Principle)
The contracting parties recognize that internal taxes and other internal charges, and laws, regulations and requirements affecting the internal sale, offering for sale, purchase, transportation, distribution or use of products, and internal quantitative regulations requiring the mixture, processing or use of products in specified amounts or proportions, should not be applied to imported or domestic products so as to afford protection to domestic production.
Ad Art. III (Internal Measures at the Border)
Any internal tax or other internal charge, or any law, regulation or requirement of the kind referred to in paragraph 1 which applies to an imported product and to the like domestic product and is collected or enforced in the case of the imported product at the time or point of importation, is nevertheless to be regarded as an internal tax or other internal charge, or a law, regulation or requirement of the kind referred to in paragraph 1, and is accordingly subject to the provisions of Article III.

4. GATT Art. III:2 (Tax Discrimination)
First Sentence (Tax Discrimination of Like Product)
The products of the territory of any contracting party imported into the territory of any other contracting party shall not be subject, directly or indirectly, to internal taxes or other internal charges of any kind in excess of those applied, directly or indirectly, to like domestic products.
Second Sentence (Tax Discrimination of Directly Competitive or Substitutable Products)
Moreover, no contracting party shall otherwise apply internal taxes or other internal charges to imported or domestic products in a manner contrary to the principles set forth in paragraph 1.
Internal measures should not be applied to imported or domestic products so as to afford protection to domestic production.
Ad Art. III:2
A tax conforming to the requirements of the first sentence of paragraph 2 would be considered to be inconsistent with the provisions of the second sentence only in cases where competition was involved between, on the one hand, the taxed product and, on the other hand, a directly competitive or substitutable product which was not similarly taxed.

5. Consistency with GATT Art. III:2 (Tax Discrimination)
Art. III:2, First Sentence
Two-tiered test (Canada-Periodicals )
(1) whether imported and domestic products are like products; and
(2) whether the imported products are taxed in excess of the domestic products.
Art. III:2, Second Sentence
Three-tiered test (Japan-Alcoholic Beverages II)
(1) whether the imported products and the domestic products are directly competitive or substitutable products which are in competition with each other;
(2) whether the directly competitive or substitutable imported and domestic products are not similarly taxed; and
(3) whether the dissimilar taxation of the directly competitive or substitutable imported domestic products is applied so as to afford protection to domestic production.

6. Consistency with GATT Art. III:2 (Tax Discrimination)
Art. III:2, 1st Sentence
Art. III:2, 2nd Sentence
“like product”
“directly competitive or substitutable product”
“in excess of”
“not similarly taxed”
non-relevance of Art. III:1 (“so as to afford protection”)
relevance of Art. III.1 (“so as to afford protection”)
“We believe the first sentence of Article III:2 is, in effect, an application of this general principle [in Article III:1].”(Japan-Alcoholic Beverages)

7. “Like Product” & “Directly Competitive or Substitutable Product”
Directly Competitive/Substitutable Product
Korea-Alcoholic Beverages:
- “Like” products are a subset of directly competitive or substitutable products: all like products are … directly competitive or substitutable products, whereas not all “directly competitive or substitutable” products are “like”.
- “Like product” is a narrower concept than “directly competitive or substitutable product”.
- While perfectly substitutable products fall within Article III:2, first sentence, imperfectly substitutable products can be assessed under Article III:2, second sentence.
Basic criteria:
- The properties, nature and quality of products
- The end-uses of products
- Consumers’ tastes and habits
Tariff classification of products
Japan-Alcoholic Beverages II:
“The concept of ‘likeness’ is a relative one that evokes the image of an accordion.”
Basic criteria + competitive relationship
“It does not seem inappropriate to look at competition in the relevant markets as one among a number of means of identifying the broader category of products that might be described as ‘directly competitive or substitutable’.” (Japan-Alcoholic Beverages II)
Relevant factors, (Korea-Alcoholic Beverages):
- channels of distribution
- price relationships(cross-price elasticities etc.)

8. “In Excess of” & “Not Similarly Taxed”
Japan-Alcoholic Beverages II:
“Not similarly taxed” is less strict than “in excess of”.
“In excess of” => De minimis tax differential is not allowed.
“Not similarly taxed” => De minimis tax differential is allowed.
De minimis amount is determined on a case-by-case basis.

9. GATT Art. III:4 (Domestic Laws Discriminating against Foreign Goods)
The products of the territory of any contracting party imported into the territory of any other contracting party shall be accorded treatment no less favourable than that accorded to like products of national origin in respect of all laws, regulations and requirements affecting their internal sale, offering for sale, purchase, transportation, distribution or use.
“[T]he product scope of Article III:4, although broader than the first sentence of Article III:2, is certainly not broader than the combined product scope of the two sentences of Article III:2 of the GATT 1994.” (EC-Asbestos)
The provisions of this paragraph shall not prevent the application of differential internal transportation charges which are based exclusively on the economic operation of the means of transport and not on the nationality of the product.

10. Consistency with GATT Art
Consistency with GATT Art. III:4 (Domestic Laws Discriminating against Foreign Goods)
Three-tiered test (Korea – Various Measures on Beef)
(1) Whether imported and domestic products are “like products”;
(2) whether the measure at issue is a “law, regulation, or requirement affecting their internal sale, offering for sale, purchase, transportation, distribution, or use”; and
(3) whether the imported products are accorded “less favorable” treatment than that accorded to like domestic products.

11. GATT Art. III:5 (Local Content Requirement)
No contracting party shall establish or maintain any internal quantitative regulation relating to the mixture, processing or use of products in specified amounts or proportions which requires, directly or indirectly, that any specified amount or proportion of any product which is the subject of the regulation must be supplied from domestic sources. Moreover, no contracting party shall otherwise apply internal quantitative regulations in a manner contrary to the principles set forth in paragraph 1.

12. Main NT Exceptions Marrakesh Agreement Art. IX:3 GATT Art. III:8(a)
Waiver
GATT Art. III:8(a)
Government Procurement
GATT Art. XX
General Exception
GATT Art. XXI
Security Exception
GATT Art. III:8(b)
Production Subsidies
GATT Art. III:3
“Grandfathering”
GATT Art. III:10 and Art. IV
Cinematographic films: “screen quota”