Category: USTR

Navigating Innovation: How the Presidential Candidates Address Technology, IP, and the China Challenge

This article examines the candidates’ positions and accomplishments in four key areas implicating technological competition: derisking, negotiating, and advancing new trade policies, reorganizing government structures to promote competitiveness, and developing policies to address new technology issues.  On the surface, the differences in approaches appear to focus primarily on matters of degree.  Both parties support such tools as continued tariffs against Chinese imports, use of export controls and other trade sanctions, and enhanced efforts to “de-link” or “de-risk” from dependency on Chinese imports.  Nonetheless, candidates Trump and Harris have sparred over the extent and impact of the tariffs, and the track records and rhetoric of the candidates suggest more differences than may initially be evident.

Australia, US, and EU Submissions at the WTO on China and Anti-Suit Injunctions

By assembling the briefs submitted by the EU, Australia and the United States in the WTO case DS611, a stark difference in approach emerges between the United States and the EU/Australia. It appears that the United States is allying itself more closely with China, perhaps with a goal of limiting WTO jurisdiction in certain areas. At the same time, however, the United States appears to be retreating on its long-held commitments to increasing transparency in China’s judicial and legal system.

USTR, IP and US-China Trade

On October 4 2021, USTR Katherine Tai delivered her much-awaited speech at CSIS outlining US-China trade policy under the Biden Administration. The speech summarizes her “top to bottom” review of US-China trade policy. Sadly, it was one of the most IP-free speeches that we have heard from USTR on China trade policies. USTR Tai mentioned intellectual property only once when she briefly talked about the Phase 1 Agreement. An Administration orientation towards increasing market access for grains and goods, but not protection and commercialization of intangible rights, could have long-term adverse consequences.

The WTO IP Cases That Weren’t

Does the WTO / TRIPS Agreement still have teeth on IP? This blog explores the possible claims that could be made involving TRIPS Agreement violations and China. The more important claims are complex, data-dependent, and would require a whole of government approach by the Biden adminisitration.