United States of America: Suspension of Argentina's GSP benefits
Description
President Obama signed Proclamation 8788 on March 26, 2012, suspending Argentina’s status as a GSP beneficiary country under the duty-free program “because it has not acted in good faith in enforcing arbitral awards in favor of United States citizens or a corporation, partnership, or association that is 50 percent or more beneficially owned by United States citizens.” This action, which became effective on May 29, 2012, follows an interagency review of two separate petitions submitted by U.S. companies. The petitions sought the removal of Argentina from GSP eligibility based on the Government of Argentina’s failure, in contravention of the GSP statutory eligibility criteria, to act in good faith in recognizing as binding and enforcing arbitral awards in favor of U.S. companies rendered under the United States-Argentina bilateral investment treaty and the Convention on the Settlement of Investment Disputes between States and Nationals of Other States (ICSID Convention). The subject awards, totaling about $300 million plus interest, were rendered by ICSID arbitral tribunals in 2005 and 2006 and were subsequently upheld against challenge by Argentina in ICSID annulment proceedings. The Government of Argentina has not paid the awards, despite repeated requests to do so by the two petitioners and the United States Government.
Any Evidence-Based Deliberation:
| Question | Result |
|---|---|
| Is there anything in the public record to suggest that evidence of the effectiveness of the proposed measure was considered during official deliberations? | |
| Is there any evidence that alternatives to the proposed measure were considered? | |
| Is there anything in the public record that suggests that empirical evidence informed the comparison across the alternatives available to government? | |
| Was such evidence identified? | |
| Is such evidence publicly available? | |
| Did the official decision-maker in question provide an explanation as to why a chosen measure was favoured over alternatives? | |
| Is there any evidence to suggest that potentially affected trading partners were consulted before the measures were taken? | |
| Is there any evidence that safeguards have been put in place to ensure that implementation of the initiative is transparent and non-discriminatory? | |
| Did the government state its intention to review the measure within one year of implementation? |
Date Discovered:
Implemented: Yes
Date of inception: 29 May 2012
GTA Evaluation: Amber
Source:
See the hyperlinked materials in the description.
Government Response:
- 357 reads
