Content area
Full text
1.
Introduction
In August 2012, the United States, European Union, and Japan requested separate consultations with Argentina concerning certain measures imposed on the importation of goods (Argentina-Import Measures).1The dispute involved two measures:
1.. Since February 2012, all imports into Argentina were subject to a pre-registration and pre-approval regime, called the Advance Sworn Import Declaration or 'Declaración Jurada Anticipada de Importación' (DJAI).
2.. Since 2009, Argentina has imposed on importers and other economic operators one or more of the following restrictive trade-related requirements (TRRs):
(a). Offsetting the value of their imports with, at least, an equivalent value of exports (one-to-one requirement);
(b). Reaching a certain level of local content in their domestic production (local content requirement);
(c). Limiting their imports, either in volume or in value (import reduction requirement);
(d). Making investments in Argentina (investment requirement);
(e). Refraining from repatriating profits from Argentina (non-repatriation requirement).
According to the complainants, these measures were part of Argentina 'managed trade' policy ('comercio administrado'), meant to advance the Argentine government's stated policies of re-industrialization, import substitution, and elimination of trade balance deficits. 2The complainants argued that DJAI is inconsistent with Article XI:1 of the GATT, because it constitutes a non-automatic import licensing measure, which creates uncertainty as to whether importation will be allowed, does not allow companies to import as much as they desire, and imposes a significant burden on importation. 3Concerning the TRRs, the complainants argued that Argentine authorities systematically impose them as a condition for obtaining the import licenses, failing to issue DJAI approvals in a timely manner and withholding DJAI approvals from firms that have declined to comply with the restrictions. They described the TRRs as a single measure, which restricts the automatic importation of goods and is thus inconsistent with Article XI:1. The local content requirement is also inconsistent with Article III:4 of the GATT.
Argentina rejected the complainants' claims. It argued that the DJAI procedure is a customs or import formality subject to Article VIII of the GATT and therefore not subject to Article XI:1 of the GATT or the Import Licensing Agreement. With respect to the TRRs, it argued with the Panel that the complainants did not produce evidence of the existence of a single 'overarching' measure...