Information technology agreement (ITA) of the WTO: Product coverage, dispute settlement and technological development

碩士 === 國立政治大學 === 法學院碩士在職專班 === 97 === Information Technology Agreement (hereinafter ITA) has made significant contribution to the free trade in IT products since its conclusion at the end of 1996. It has been recognized as a successful model of sectorial trade liberalization in the WTO multilateral...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Tseng, Hsien Chao, 曾顯照
Other Authors: Lin, Tsai Yu
Format: Others
Language:zh-TW
Published: 2009
Online Access:http://ndltd.ncl.edu.tw/handle/29655628230816820063
Description
Summary:碩士 === 國立政治大學 === 法學院碩士在職專班 === 97 === Information Technology Agreement (hereinafter ITA) has made significant contribution to the free trade in IT products since its conclusion at the end of 1996. It has been recognized as a successful model of sectorial trade liberalization in the WTO multilateral trading system. However, with the rapid advent of new technology, challenges arising from the determination of tariff treatment on newly innovated IT products become outstanding. Indeed, whether those innovated products are subject to the duty-free treatment of ITA merits intensive considerations. As demonstrated in the first dispute specifically on the prodcut coverage of ITA, where Taiwan, United States and Japan filed against the European Communities in 2008 for three IT products, i.e. set-top box, multi-functional office machine and LCD monitor, how the disptue settlement institutions respond to the applicability of the ITA in the context of techonogical develpment would be critical to the effectiveness of future ITA. In this study, the author argues that relevant factors to be taken into account by the panel adjudicating the ITA dispute include the tariff classification principle embodied in the Harmonized System Convention of the WCO, as well as the “common intention” of all or a great majority of ITA participants pursuant to Article 31 and 32 of the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties (VCLT). Specifically, an examination of the EC’s commitments under schedules of tariff concession by virtue of text (ordinary meaning), object and purpose, context, subsequent practice and relevant rules of international law as stipulated in Article 31 of the VCLT are of importance. Furthermore, looking at elements as to preparatory work and circumstances of the conclusion of the EC’s schedule in accordance with Article 32 of the VCLT is also relevant. On systemic issues, the author proposes two solutions. First, the inclusion of a new notification mechanism into the ITA Committee could be feasilbe. By adopting the concept of “like products” applicable to other fields of trade in goods, the ITA’s product coverage can be reasonably expanded on the basis of the modification of innovated products and advent of modern technology in the market. Second, achieving the consensus on sectorial liberalization of expanded IT products under on-going Doha Round would contribute to establish zero (or low) tariff environment for IT products, which would benefit not only to the global IT industry but also to the multilateral trading system as a whole.