Colombia

This fourth Trade Policy Review of the Plurinational State of Bolivia has provided us with the opportunity to deepen our understanding of its trade and investment policies, and in particular regarding the reforms introduced since the last Review in 2005. I would like to thank the delegation from Bolivia, led by Ambassador Clarems Endara, Vice-Minister of Foreign Trade and Integration, for its constructive engagement throughout this exercise. I would also like to thank our discussant, Ambassador Francisco Lima Mena from El Salvador, for his interesting and thought-provoking remarks, as well as the 28 delegations which took the floor the first day, for their active participation in this Review. Members were pleased to participate in the fourth Trade Policy Review of Bolivia, which is taking place 12 years after the previous Review.

The Trade Policy Review Mechanism (TPRM) was first established on a trial basis by the GATT contracting parties in April 1989. The Mechanism became a permanent feature of the World Trade Organization under the Marrakesh Agreement which established the WTO in January 1995.

This is the fifth review of the trade policies and practices of Colombia. During the review period, between the beginning of 2012 and the end of 2017, Colombia’s GDP grew at an average annual rate of 3.3%, driven chiefly by domestic demand. Having reached annual rates exceeding 4% in 2012-2014, this growth subsided somewhat starting in 2015. In 2017, GDP is estimated to have grown by 1.8%. This slowdown was the result of a decrease in exports, particularly oil and other raw materials, and a slower growth in domestic demand. Growth is expected to pick up in 2018. In order to stimulate the economy, the authorities have launched an economic reform programme, which includes tax incentives, reductions in tariffs and other taxes, changes in the investment regime, and increased investment in infrastructure. Although the prospects for economic growth and inflation are favourable, a number of structural problems still pose a significant challenge, including the need to continue promoting diversification of the economy and reducing poverty.

It is usual for both governments and organizations from the private and civil society sector of developing countries to dedicate more time and resources to bilateral and regional negotiations than to multilateral negotiations. In principle, this contradicts the classic theory of trade in which the greatest welfare gains are to be found in the multilateral field and in which preferential trade agreements (PTAs) can lead to trade diversion and welfare losses.

El 10 de agosto de 2018, la OMC hizo público el informe del Grupo especial sobre el caso “Unión europea y sus estados miembros - Determinadas medidas relativas a al sector de la energía”.

Le 27 novembre 2015, l’OMC a publié le rapport du Groupe spécial chargé d’examiner la plainte du Panama dans l’affaire “Colombie — Mesures visant les importations de textiles, vêtements et chaussures” (DS461)

On 11 July 2019 the WTO circulated two panel report in the cases brought by Canada and Mexico in “United States — Certain Measures on Steel and Aluminium Products” (DS550) and “United States — Certain Measures on Steel and Aluminium Products” (DS551).

On 18 June 2013, Panama requested consultations with Colombia with respect to the imposition by Colombia of a compound tariff affecting the importation of textiles, apparel and footwear from Panama. The measure at issue is a compound tariff that Colombia has allegedly imposed by Presidential Decree No. 074 of 23 January 2013 (Decree 074/2013). Panama claims that this measure at issue is contained in: - Decree 074/2013; - Decree 1497/2011 as regards the definition of the products covered by the nomenclature of Chapters 61, 62, 63 and 64 of the Tariff Schedule; and - Memorandum No. 000165 of 30 April 2013 from the Customs Management Department of the Directorate of National Taxes and Customs on “measures to control compliance with Decree 074 of 2013”.

On 18 June 2013, Panama requested consultations with Colombia with respect to the imposition by Colombia of a compound tariff affecting the importation of textiles, apparel and footwear from Panama. The measure at issue is a compound tariff that Colombia has allegedly imposed by Presidential Decree No. 074 of 23 January 2013 (Decree 074/2013). Panama claims that this measure at issue is contained in: - Decree 074/2013; - Decree 1497/2011 as regards the definition of the products covered by the nomenclature of Chapters 61, 62, 63 and 64 of the Tariff Schedule; and - Memorandum No. 000165 of 30 April 2013 from the Customs Management Department of the Directorate of National Taxes and Customs on “measures to control compliance with Decree 074 of 2013”.

El 27 de abril de 2009, la OMC hizo público el informe del Grupo especial sobre el caso “Colombia - Precios indicativos y restricciones de los puertos de entrada”.

El 11 de julio de 2019, la OMC distribuyó dos informes del Grupo Especial que entendió en los asuntos planteados por el Canadá y México: “Estados Unidos — Determinadas medidas relativas a los productos de acero y aluminio” (DS550) y “Estados Unidos — Determinadas medidas relativas a los productos de acero y aluminio” (DS551).

L’OMC a publié, le 27 avril, le rapport de groupe spécial examinant la plainte déposée par le Panama dans l’affaire Colombie — Prix indicatifs et restrictions relatives aux bureaux d’entrée (DS366).

El 11 de julio de 2019, la OMC distribuyó dos informes del Grupo Especial que entendió en los asuntos planteados por el Canadá y México: “Estados Unidos — Determinadas medidas relativas a los productos de acero y aluminio” (DS550) y “Estados Unidos — Determinadas medidas relativas a los productos de acero y aluminio” (DS551).

Le 11 juillet 2019, l’OMC a distribué deux rapports du Groupe spécial chargé des affaires “États-Unis — Certaines mesures visant les produits en acier et en aluminium” (DS550) et “États-Unis — Certaines mesures visant les produits en acier et en aliminium” (DS551) introduites par le Canada et le Mexique, respectivement.

On 20 July 2018 the WTO circulated the panel report in the case brought by Russia in “Ukraine — Anti-Dumping Measures on Ammonium Nitrate.