Government Procurement Provisions Generally Similar Across Trade Agreements, Says GAO
The World Trade Organization Government Procurement Agreement (GPA), NAFTA, and U.S. bilateral free trade agreements with Australia, Colombia and South Korea bear general similarities in government procurement text and commitments, but show some differences that reflect newer technology, according to…
Sign up for a free preview to unlock the rest of this article
Timely, relevant coverage of court proceedings and agency rulings involving tariffs, classification, valuation, origin and antidumping and countervailing duties. Each day, Trade Law Daily subscribers receive a daily headline email, in-depth PDF edition and access to all relevant documents via our trade law source document library and website.
a Government Accountability Office report (here). Similarities could stem from concurrent negotiation of the GPA and other FTAs, the report said. The 2014 revised GPA overall provides wider market access than the FTAs that were reviewed; for example, the revised GPA covers 85 central U.S. government entities, but NAFTA covers only 53 U.S. government entities, the report said. GAO’s GPA review focused on the U.S. and trading partners with the top five GPA procurement markets -- the EU, Japan, Canada, South Korea and Norway. The report pointed out that Mexico and Canada don’t have a sub-central government entity coverage schedule in NAFTA, and that South Korea doesn’t have one in the Korea-U.S. FTA. For its report, GAO analyzed WTO and U.S. documents pertaining to the GPA and U.S. FTAs, and interviewed Office of the U.S. Trade Representative and Commerce Department officials. GAO didn't make recommendations in the report.