Revisão da política comercial do Brasil na OMC

Encerrou-se hoje, 26 de junho, a sexta revisão da política comercial do Brasil na Organização Mundial do Comércio (OMC).

A revisão da política comercial é um exercício regular ao qual se submetem todos os membros da OMC. A frequência com que ocorrem as revisões depende da participação de cada Membro no comércio mundial. No caso do Brasil, as revisões ocorrem a cada quatro anos.

O objetivo da revisão é aumentar a transparência e a compreensão mútua dos Membros sobre as respectivas políticas comerciais e contribuir para o debate do público e dos Governos a respeito do alcance e dos efeitos daquelas políticas.

A revisão abrange a elaboração de relatórios pelo Secretariado da OMC e pelo Governo, a apresentação de perguntas escritas e orais e o debate ao longo de dois dias. O Brasil recebeu cerca de 800 perguntas sobre os mais variados temas: desempenho macroeconômico, infraestrutura, defesa comercial, tributação, licenciamento de importações. Esse número é semelhante ao da revisão anterior, realizada em 2009. 43 delegações intervieram no debate oral.

Nesta revisão, os Membros reconheceram o potencial de desenvolvimento e o desempenho econômico do Brasil, assim como suas realizações nos últimos quatro anos. O Brasil foi elogiado pela forma como enfrentou a crise econômica global, em boa medida em função de políticas macroeconômicas sólidas. Congratularam o Brasil pelos avanços na diversificação de seu comércio exterior. Também foram elogiadas as melhorias nos indicadores sociais, inclusive no alívio à pobreza, a redução na desigualdade de renda e no desemprego nesse período.

Em seus comentários finais, o Presidente da Sessão, Joakim Reiter, enumerou áreas da política comercial brasileira em que os membros vislumbram possibilidade de aperfeiçoamento, como tarifas, outros encargos que afetem as importações, procedimentos aduaneiros e licenciamento de importações, mecanismos de estímulo e programas de crédito, compras governamentais, propriedade intelectual, agricultura, investimentos e serviços.

Concluding remarks by the Chairperson

1. This sixth Trade Policy Review of Brazil has provided an excellent opportunity to improve our understanding of Brazil trade and investment policies. I would like to thank Ambassador Paulo Estivallet de Mesquita, Director-General of the Economic Department at the Brazilian Ministry of External Relations, Minister-Counsellor Marcia Donner Abreu of the Permanent Mission of Brazil to the WTO, and the rest of the large Brazilian delegation, for their constructive engagement throughout this exercise. I would also like to thank Ambassador CHOI, Permanent Representative of the Republic of Korea to the WTO, for his intervention as discussant. Brazil's written answers to the over 800 written questions have been well appreciated by Members and we look forward to Brazil's replies to the additional questions submitted today, no later than one month after this meeting.

2. Overall, as mentioned by the discussant, Members recognized Brazil's overall development potential and economic performance, as well as its achievements during the period under review. Brazil was commended for having weathered the global economic crisis well, largely due to sound macroeconomic policies. Members also noted that GDP growth averaged 3.6% over the 2007-2012 period, driven by strong domestic demand and favourable conditions for Brazilian exports. Brazil was congratulated for the progress made in further diversification of its trade. Members also strongly welcomed the improvements made in social indicators, including poverty alleviation, and reduction in income inequality and unemployment during the period under review. However, it was also noted that GDP growth decelerated since mid-2011, partly triggered by the appreciation of the real and the global economic slowdown, but also reflecting structural shortcomings that affect Brazil's competitiveness. These include inadequate infrastructure, insufficient access to credit, labour market rigidities, and a complex tax system. Members expressed their hope that Brazil would address these challenges without resorting to trade restrictive policies, in particular given the large size of the Brazilian economy and its impact on world trade. Members also observed that competitiveness could be enhanced by improving the business environment.

3. Members welcomed Brazil's active participation in the multilateral trading system and in the Doha Development Agenda, including in agriculture, as a coordinator of the G-20, and in development-related issues. Brazil was commended for its strong commitment to the finalisation of the DDA, for its engagement in South-South cooperation and for its initiatives in support of LDCs. Brazil was also encouraged to assume additional responsibilities in the WTO commensurate with its prominent position in the global economy. In this respect, some Members invited Brazil to accede to the GPA, to join the negotiations to expand the coverage of the Information Technology Agreement, and to ratify the Fifth Protocol to the GATS.

4. It was noted that in order to address the loss of competitiveness, especially in the manufacturing sector, Brazil has expanded credit programmes and adopted a number of measures, including under thePlano Brasil Maior. However, some of the measures taken, such as temporarily increasing tariffs, using preferential margins for goods and services in government procurement, and applying criteria to favour domestic production when granting incentives or credits, might have a restrictive impact on trade. In general, Members prompted Brazil to refrain from the use of this kind of measures and to make trade policy implementation more transparent and predictable.

5. Members also noted that Brazil has stepped up the use of contingency measures, in particular antidumping, and urged the Brazilian authorities to ensure accurate and fair application of such measures, as well as exercise restraint in the recourse to them as they may stifle trade.

6. The main – although admittedly non-exhaustive – areas for possible improvement brought up by Members during the review include the following and let me stress here that we have also taken due note of the comments provided by Ambassador Paulo Estivallet de Mesquita today, as well as Monday, which address many of these points:

1. Tariffs: Beyond encouraging a closing of the substantial gap between bound and applied rates, Members expressed concern with respect to the tariff increase on 100 tariff lines in October 2012 and the possibility that a further increase on another 100 lines could take place in 2013. Some Members enquired about the possible effect of these increases on Brazil's prices and competitiveness as well as on the level of imports. Brazil replied that technical studies were conducted to analyse the desirability of any tariff changes.

2. Other charges affecting imports: It was noted that the level and complexity of Brazil's tax system has a considerable impact on the price of imported goods. Questions were raised on Brazil's plans to simplify internal taxation, on national treatment of some tax reductions or suspensions, and on plans to harmonize state value-added tax rates. Brazil answered that there are plans to simplify the taxation system, beyond improvements already made, but it is an effort for the long haul and that there is no discrimination in the application of tax reductions or suspensions.

3. Customs and Import licensing: While noting improvements made in customs and trade facilitation, Members enquired about the increased costs related to customs clearance during the period of review. Brazil was also requested to provide an explanation for the wide use of non-automatic import licensing, as well as information with respect to licensing procedures, the agencies involved, and the conditions attached to licensing. Brazil replied that the list of items subject to licensing was publicly available and that licensing was used mostly for health, safety and environmental reasons, or for products subject to tariff quotas (TRQs) or trade remedy measures.

4. Incentives schemes and credit programmes: Members raised numerous questions with respect to the different incentives programmes available, in particular the conditions attached, such as local content and/or production process criteria. Concerns were raised with respect to some sector-specific schemes, such as in automotives, telecommunications, chemicals, and oil and gas sectors. Members also raised questions with respect to the scope, benefits and trade effects of different export incentive programmes. Similarly, the conditions to benefit from some credit and guarantee programmes, especially those managed by the BNDES, were the subject of a large number of questions, including the criteria for local content and production process conditions, the use of non-automatic procedures in the allocation of credits, and the determination of interest rates. Some members enquired about the WTO consistency of parts of these programmes. In its replies, Brazil stated that it does not consider that there are any local content conditions and that the application of its incentive programmes is not discriminatory. With regard to credit programmes, Brazil replied that it considers that nothing in the WTO Agreements should be read as prohibiting a Member to establish conditions on production or on technology.

5. Government procurement: While improvements have been made, especially with regard to transparency and risk management, some Members expressed concern with the recent introduction of domestic preferences in the government procurement process, and enquired about the reasons why the requirement to use tendering procedures is frequently waived. Brazil responded that the introduction of preference margins does not intend to be discriminatory or trade restrictive, but to promote job and income generation in the sectors selected.

6. Intellectual property: A number of Members posed several questions with respect to other IPR issues, including geographical indications, copyright protection, patents, compulsory licensing and enforcement. Questions were asked in particular with respect to procedures for patent applications for pharmaceutical products and the agencies involved. In particular, concerns were expressed regarding prior consent requirements by the health and sanitary agency ANVISA. In response, Brazil noted that ANVISA's examination focuses on the three patentability criteria provided for in the TRIPS Agreement.

7. Agriculture: Members noted that Brazil's average protection for the sector was low, however, they noted the possible trade-distorting effect of some measures such as the policy of guaranteed minimum prices, and queried about the insufficient availability of private credit to the sector. Brazil replied that it considers its agricultural regime open, with limited levels of protection. On rural credit, Brazil noted that there are no barriers for its provision by private banks, but rather a lack of interest on their part.

8. Investment and services: Members remarked that the different services sectors were relatively open to foreign investment, providing the same legal treatment for foreign and local capital and no restrictions on remittances. They also commended Brazil for the liberalization that had taken place in some sectors. Brazil was encouraged to reflect this in its WTO commitments and to pursue further liberalization. Some Members enquired about certain aspects of the new reinsurance regulations, which seem to restrict market access. Questions were also raised with respect to the application of certain charges on maritime import freight. In the area of telecommunications, some Members questioned the use of local content provisions in the auction bids of radio waves. Brazil replied that the radio spectrum is a public resource, and its auctions take into account economic and social development considerations.

7. In conclusion, Members generally commended Brazil for its economic resilience to the recent global economic crisis, while recommending that it undertake further structural reforms and maintain an open trade and investment regime to secure sustainable growth. Members welcomed Brazil's achievements in the social sphere, and encouraged it to improve its competitiveness and business environment to lock in those achievements. In particular, Members invited Brazil to avoid resorting to trade restricting or distorting measures to promote domestic production, as these measures would not result in long-term growth and may impede taking full advantage of Brazil's participation in the global economy.

8. The numerous questions posed and the participation of a large number of delegations in this meeting reflect the Members' substantive interest in Brazil's trade and investment policies and practices. Similarly, many Members underlined Brazil's leadership role in the WTO and encouraged it to shape its trade policies and assume further responsibilities in line with its position in the global economy. In closing, I would like to thank the Brazilian delegation, all the other delegations, the discussant and the Secretariat for this successful review".