{ "id": "RL32375", "type": "CRS Report", "typeId": "REPORTS", "number": "RL32375", "active": false, "source": "EveryCRSReport.com", "versions": [ { "source": "EveryCRSReport.com", "id": 105394, "date": "2005-01-12", "retrieved": "2016-04-07T19:57:49.941255", "title": "The U.S.-Australia Free Trade Agreement: Provisions and Implications", "summary": "After more than a year of negotiations, U.S. and Australian trade officials concluded a bilateral\nfree\ntrade agreement (FTA) on February 8, 2004. The negotiations proved unexpectedly difficult. \nPresident Bush and Australian Prime Minister Howard had committed to completing the negotiations\nby the end of 2003, but differences over agriculture, especially sugar, and other sensitive issues\ncaused the deadline to slip.\n \n \u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0The U.S.-Australia FTA (USAFTA) is a comprehensive\nagreement. It commits the United\nStates and Australia not only to eliminate tariffs on most of their bilateral trade in goods, but also\nto ensure nondiscriminatory treatment in most areas of bilateral trade in services, government\nprocurement, in foreign investment as well as improved protection of intellectual property rights.\n \u00a0\n \u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0Under the USAFTA, the United States and Australia addressed\nthe few significant irritants in\ntheir bilateral economic relationship. In so doing, the agreement could further solidify an already\nstrong relationship. For Australia, those irritants include U.S. restrictions on beef and dairy\nproducts. For the United States they include Australian local content requirements in television\nprogramming, sanitary and phytosanitary (SPS) measures, state-sanctioned monopolies in exports\nof wheat and other grains, and screening of foreign investments. In some cases, such as U.S.\nrestrictions on beef and dairy and Australian investment screening, the two sides agreed to loosen\nrestrictions. In the case others, such as the Australian SPS measures and state-sanctioned\nmonopolies, they agreed to establish mechanisms for further discussion. However, in the case of\nsome irritants, such as U.S. import controls on sugar, the two countries agreed no change was\npossible. \n \n \u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0United States Trade Representative Robert Zoellick and\nAustralian Trade Minister Mark Vaile\nsigned the agreement on May 18, 2004, in Washington. On July 6, 2004, the President submitted\nlegislation to implement the agreement. On July 8, the House Ways and Means Committee reported\nout the implementing bill, H.R. 4759 , by voice vote, and on July 15, the full House\npassed the measure (314-109) in a largely bipartisan vote. On July 15, reported the Senate Finance\nCommittee reported out the companion bill, and on July 16 the full Senate passed the measure\n(80-16), and it was sent to the President for his signature. President Bush signed the U.S.-Australia\nFree Trade Agreement Implementation Act on August 3, 2004 ( P.L. 108-286 ). On November 17,\n2004, trade officials from each country exchanged diplomatic notes indicating that implementing\nlegislation passed by the other country met the requirements of the FTA. However, this occurred\nonly after discussions were held to resolve U.S. concerns over provisions contained in the Australian\nimplementing legislation pertaining to pharmaceutical patents. The FTA is entered into force\nJanuary 1, 2005.", "type": "CRS Report", "typeId": "REPORTS", "active": false, "formats": [ { "format": "HTML", "encoding": "utf-8", "url": "http://www.crs.gov/Reports/RL32375", "sha1": "4b0185f0ab6d311133cf1205b1f2074eee7a9e7d", "filename": "files/20050112_RL32375_4b0185f0ab6d311133cf1205b1f2074eee7a9e7d.html", "images": null }, { "format": "PDF", "encoding": null, "url": "http://www.crs.gov/Reports/pdf/RL32375", "sha1": "f5b442bb209c848c4aec0c6c9d670311ca369a79", "filename": "files/20050112_RL32375_f5b442bb209c848c4aec0c6c9d670311ca369a79.pdf", "images": null } ], "topics": [] } ], "topics": [ "Foreign Affairs" ] }