Aggies for WTO Reform

The U.S. Agriculture Coalition for WTO Reform supports reform of the World Trade Organization (WTO) and improved U.S. engagement. The U.S. food and agriculture sector supports 40 million American jobs and contributes $7 trillion to the U.S. economy. The people who work in this sector depend on vibrant international institutions like the WTO and robust commercial diplomacy. Trade supports critical income for American farmers of all sizes, as well as the small businesses and economic viability of the rural communities where they live. WTO reform is needed; reform that leads to a market liberalizing agenda for agriculture and a better functioning institution. This will help improve global agricultural sustainability and food security, and the opportunities created through market reforms support U.S. rural communities and workers, and provide good-paying jobs across the United States.

The Coalition includes leading U.S. agricultural organizations representing farmers, businesses, and workers with an objective to specify mutual and realistic priorities for agricultural reforms at the WTO that will yield long-term benefits for U.S. producers and agribusinesses.

For more information, contact: Ben Conner, bconner@dtb-agritrade.com.

Coalition’s Priorities for WTO Reform

For WTO reform, the coalition supports outcomes that align with the following key principles:  

1. Support a restoration of a binding dispute settlement system that enables effective trade enforcement. Dispute settlement must be an effective deterrent to protectionist measures.  
2. Support a proactive agriculture negotiating agenda for MC-13, with short-term goals while laying the groundwork for a more ambitious long-term effort to reform the agricultural trading system toward further market-based and sustainable trade liberalization, reduced distortions, and enhanced transparency. 
3. Any negotiation on any element of agricultural domestic support must be tied to enhancing market access for U.S. food and agricultural exports at a commensurate level.  
4. Any outcome on agricultural domestic support and market access must require that significant developing country agriculture exporters meet the same level of ambition as developed countries and establish a graduation process for developing countries.
5. On specific issues:
   • Public Stockholding (PSH): Oppose the use of market price supports (MPS) as a policy to implement PSH programs and a permanent solution that weakens commitments on trade-distorting support or is not consistent with Article 20 long-term objectives. Any negotiations to change current rules on PSH and MPS must be part of comprehensive trade liberalizing negotiations, including market access.
   • Special Safeguard Mechanism (SSM): Oppose negotiations or outcomes allowing increased use of SSM; negotiations on SSM should be part of comprehensive, trade-liberalizing market access negotiations.
   • Domestic Support: Support negotiating on domestic support only if market access negotiations have a commensurate level of ambition and are reflective of the current global situation on agricultural domestic support in both developed and developing countries. 
   • Market Access: The trade-distorting potential of high market access barriers, particularly in developing countries, remains a major impediment to predictable trading relationships. An ambitious agricultural market access agenda should be part of any post-MC13 work plan for agriculture that includes negotiations on domestic support.
   • Export Restrictions: Support disciplines to improve transparency of and eliminate or minimize export restrictions, but oppose new disciplines exchanged for trade-distorting outcomes on PSH or SSM.
   • Export Competition: Oppose expanding government-to-government sales or any other policies that encourage the international disposal of commodities in surplus due to price supports.
6. Support a science-based and data-driven approach to any negotiations, embracing innovation and sustainability, and preventing disguised restrictions on trade. 
7. Support outcomes that provide for improved transparency and notifications of WTO member policies and measures related to agriculture as foundational to future agriculture negotiations.  
8. Oppose trading off for non-agriculture outcomes any agriculture outcomes that are inconsistent with the objectives in Article 20 of the WTO Agreement on Agriculture – including new special safeguard mechanisms or a permanent exception on MPS tied to public stockholding.