政府规制国际贸易

第三节　政府规制国际贸易

Section 3　Government Control on International Trade

【The Fundamental】

Virtually all governments regulate the entry of goods into their jurisdiction. Customs tariffs may be collected, and conformity of the imported goods to local product standards willbe reviewed. Much of the law related to restrictions on imports and controls on exports is derived from agreements governing international economic relations, notably those of the World Trade Organization. We hereby will focus on United States law, which is broadly representative of the regulation of imports and exports.

A search requires checking several trade laws, although certain subjects tend to be identified with a single trade law. For example, the Tariff Act of 1930^[58]is where the tariff schedules^[59]are located; the Trade Act of 1974^[60]is where rules governing trade with less favored nations, those not benefitting from “normal” MFN status, are found. It is also the source of the trade rules for more than most favored nations, those benefitting for example from the generalized system of preferences (GSP) program. The Trade Agreements Act of 1979^[61]and the Uruguay Round Implementation Act of 1994 cover a number of GATT/WTO trade rules. Trade is thus governed principally by a matrix of separate U.S. trade laws ranging from the Tariff Act of 1930 to the Trade Act of 2002.

These are not the only laws which govern United States trade. There are many other acts which regulate trade, some of which appear as amendments to other laws. For example, the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act^[62], intended to reduce the making of improper payments to government officials abroad, is a relatively brief act which modifies the securities laws. The Caribbean Basin Economic Recovery Act^[63], the ANDEAN TradePreference Act^[64]and the Africa Growth and Opportunity Act^[65]extend special duty free import rights to goods from those developing areas. The Buy American Act of 1933^[66]grants government procurement preferences to U.S. manufacturers and service providers to the exclusion of many foreign suppliers.

A. Restrictions on Imports

1. U.S. Imports Law.

The first of the principal laws regulating imports to the United States is the Tariff Act of 1930. This is the famous Smoot-Hawley Tariff Act, which raised tariff walls to substantial heights and worsened the world depression of the early 1930s.The severe tariffs of Smoot-Hawley have since been largely diminished for those nations which benefit from most favored nation (MFN) status, but remain for those less favored. One reason the 1930 Act remains in force is that it is the location of the hundreds of pages of tariffs-the tariff schedules. In addition to tariffs, the 1930 Act includes the organization and functions of the International Trade Commission^[67]. It controls some of the actions which the Commission may take, including of considerable importance, what are commonly referred to as Section 337 actions^[68]challenging unfair practices in import trade. There are extensive provisions for the promotion of foreign trade, and also the major provision protecting American trademarked goods from the entry of counterfeit products. And finally, the Tariff Act of 1930 includes the United Statesrules governing countervailing and antidumping duties.

Although other trade acts were enacted subsequent to the 1930 Act, the next which includes major provisions important to trade is the Trade Act of 1974. This Act includes executive negotiating authority for agreements with other countries, the creation of the office of the United States Trade Representative^[69]and provisions governing the interrelationship of Congress and the President with regard to trade actions. Furthermore, it includes important provisions regulating relief from injury caused by import competition, particularly Section 201 actions^[70], known as “escape clause”^[71]actions. Another title of this 1974 act addresses the enforcement of United States rights under trade agreements, which are reflected in Section 301 actions. A separate title of the Act governs trade relations with countries not currently receiving nondiscriminatory treatment, meaning essentially nonmarket economies. These provisions are becoming less useful as many nonmarket economies have attempted to shed such status for participation in the world market economy. These provisions include the little used but potentially important Section 406^[72], allowing “market disruption”^[73]actions. Finally, the Act includes the generalized system of preferences (GSP) scheme, which gives to certain developing nations tariff status even better than most favored nations receive.

The Trade Agreements Act of 1979 is the third of our important trade acts. This Act was passed principally to implement several of the codes negotiated in the Tokyo Round of the GATT^[74], concluded after negotiations in the mid-1970s. Thus, it has sections dealing with governmentprocurement and technical barriers to trade^[75]. Changes to the rules governing countervailing and antidumping duties, and to customs valuation^[76], both part of the newly adopted GATT codes, were implemented by this Act, but as amendments to the Tariff Act of 1930 rather than enduring provisions identified with this 1979 Act.

The fourth important act is the Trade and Tariff Act of 1984^[77]. In addition to making amendments to the earlier acts, this Act extended “fast track” negotiating authority^[78]and provided for the development of a free trade agreement with Israel. The fifth act is the Omnibus Trade and Competitiveness Act of 1988^[79]. This Act authorized the President to enter into the Uruguay Round of GATT negotiations. It also implemented the Harmonized Tariff Schedule (HTS) of the United States^[80]. Special attention was devoted in this Act to amending Section 301 of the 1974 Trade Act. It is the source of the notorious “Super 301” and “Special 301” procedures whereby the United States targets nations with which it has major trade or intellectual property disputes.

When the United States became a signatory to the North American Free Trade Agreement in 1993, Congress soon thereafter enacted the North American Free Trade ImplementationAct^[81], which made NAFTA part of U.S. trade law. Similarly, when the United States became a signatory to the Agreement Establishing the World Trade Organization in 1994, and its associated agreements and understandings, Congress enacted the Uruguay Round Agreements Act, which made the WTO a part of U.S. trade law.

The Trade Act of 2002 renewed, after a notable lapse, “fast track” international trade negotiating authority for the President. It is under this authority that President George W. Bush has concluded free trade agreements with Chile, Singapore, six Central American nations(CAFTA), Morocco and Australia

2. United States Tariff Rates.

United States tariffs generally take one of three forms. The most common is an ad valorem rate^[82]. Such tariffs are assessed in proportion to the value of the article. Tariffs may also be assessed at specific rates^[83]or compound rates^[84]. Specific rates may be measured by the pound or other weight. A compound rate is a mixture of an ad valorem and specific rate tariff. Tariff rate quotas involve limitations on imports at a specific tariff up to a certain amount. Imports in excess of that amount are not prohibited, but are subject to a higher rate of tariff. Thus tariff rate quotas^[85]tend to restrict imports that are in excess of the specified quota for the lower tariff level.

These are three sets of United States tariff rates: Column 1 General, Column 1 Special and Column 2. Column 1 General tariff rates, known as most favored-nation (MFN) or“normal” tariffs, are the lower and most likely to be applicable. Column 2 tariff rates, originating in the Smoot-Hawley Tariff Act of 1930, are the higher and least likely to be applicable. In addition, there are a variety of selective Column 1 Special provisions, usually duty free entry programs to which the U.S. subscribes. These include the Generalized System of Tariff Preferences of the United States (GSP), the Caribbean Basin Initiative, the Andean Trade Preference Act, the Africa Growth and Opportunity Act of 2000 and Section 9802.00.80 of the HTS. The North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA), and a growing number of bilateral U.S. free trade agreements, generally provide for duty free access.

3. Customs Classification.

The United States had its own system of classification set out in the Tariff Schedule of the United States (TSUS). However, beginning in 1982, the United States initiated steps to convert the TSUS into a Harmonized Commodity Description and Coding System (HS)^[86]of classification, in common with the classification system used by most other countries and developed by the Customs Cooperation Council in Brussels. The United States adopted the Harmonized System as the Harmonized Tariff Schedule (HTSUS) for classification of all imports by enactment of the Omnibus Trade and Competitiveness Act of 1988, with an effective date of Jan. 1, 1989. Other nations have adopted HS and use it for U.S. exports.

4. Customs Valuation.

United States customs valuation is now calculated by the “transaction value”^[87]of the imported item and, if that cannot be determined, by certain fall-back methods which are, in descending order of eligibility for use: the transaction value of identical merchandise^[88], the transaction value of similar merchandise^[89], the resale price of the merchandise with allowances for certain factors, or the cost of producing the imported item. “Transaction value” is “the price actually paid or payable for the merchandise when sold for exportation to the United States” plus “certain amounts reflecting packing costs, commissions paid by buyer, any assist, royalty or license fee paid by buyer, and any resale, disposal, or use proceeds that accrue to seller.”This approach to valuation forms the core of the new Agreement on Implementation of Article VII of GATT 1994^[90].

5. Rules of Origin.

Tariff schedules often provide that duties on an imported item vary depending upon the country from which the item comes. Hence, where goods are from, legally speaking, matters.

The core U.S. “rule of origin”^[91]provides that an article is a product of a country only if it is wholly the growth, product, or manufacture of that country or in the case of an article which consists in whole or in part of materials from another country, it has been substantially transformed into a new and different articles of commerce with a name, character, or use distinct from that of the article or articles from which it was so transformed. For example, this“substantial transformation”^[92]test is relevant in determining the rate at which U.S. customs duty is charged (MFN or not).

Under the proposed WTO Agreement on Rules of Origin^[93], there will be an effort to harmonize the rules of origin on a world-wide basis. A committee of experts is charged with creating rules which are “objective, understandable, and predictable.” They are likely to differ from the core U.S. rule. Special rules of origin apply to the various U.S. duty free entry programs, most notably NAFTA which relies principally on changes in tariff classifications and regional value content to determine which goods may freely be traded. It is expected that the WTO agreement on rules of origin will adopt these approaches.

6. U.S Import Quotas and Nontariff Trade Barriers.

The United States has employed import quotas for many years. Tariff-rate quotas^[94]have been applied to dairy products, olives, tuna fish, anchovies, brooms, and sugar, syrups and molasses. Quite a few absolute quotas^[95]originate under Section 22 of the AgriculturalAdjustment Act^[96]. These quotas are undertaken when necessary to United States farm price supports or similar agricultural programs. Some U.S. agricultural quotas are being converted into tariffs under the WTO Agreement on Agriculture^[97]. Some quotas imposed by the U.S. are sanctions for unfair trade practices, as against tungsten from China. Other quotas originate in international commodity agreements, and important restraints on textile imports are achieved as a result of the international Multi-Fiber Arrangement, which should be phased out by 2005 under the WTO Textiles Agreement.

The Agricultural Act of 1949^[98]requires the President to impose global import quotas^[99]on Upland Cotton whenever the Secretary of Agriculture determines that its average price exceeds certain statutory limits. Whenever this is the case, unlike the ordinary restrictive import quota, the importation of Upland Cotton is duty free. Like the U.S. Meat Import Act, this provision tends to be countercyclical to market forces for cotton in the United States.

Lastly, the United States sometimes imposes import restraints for national security or foreign policy reasons. Many of these restraints originate from Section 232 of the Trade Expansion Act of 1962^[100]. This provision authorizes the President to “adjust imports” whenever necessary to the national security of the country.

7. U.S. Escape Clause Proceedings.

GATT Article XIX permits suspension of tariff concessions and MFN treatment if increased quantities of imports threaten or cause serious injury to a domestic industry. In theUnited States, suspension of tariff concessions is obtained through “escape clause proceedings,”^[101]also called Section 201 proceedings under the Trade Act of 1974. In the United States, decisions about import adjustments are made by the President upon recommendation of the International Trade Commission (ITC), the successor to the United States Tariff Commission. A petition requesting import relief for the purpose of“facilitating positive adjustment to import competition may be filed with” the ITC by any entity which is “representative of an industry.” Such entities may be an industry member firm, a trade association, a labor union or even a “group of workers,” so long as they are representative of the industry. The petition must specify the purposes for which import relief is being sought, and ought to present the industry’s plan for meeting import competition. The ITC then investigates to determine whether the increase in imports is “a substantial cause of serious injury”, or threatens serious injury, to the domestic producers of the imported item.

B. Controls on Exports

1. The Export Administration Act and Regulations.

United States exports are principally governed by the Export Administration Act (EAA)^[102], and several hundred pages of associated regulations.

The policy of the United States toward export controls is set forth in Section 3 of the Export Administration Act of 1979, which provides that:

It is the policy of the United States to use export controls only after full consideration of the impact on the economy of the United States and only to the extent necessary: (a) to restrict the export of goods and technology which would make a significant contribution to the military potential of any other country or combination of countries which would prove detrimental to the national security of the United States; (b) to restrict the export of goods and technology where necessary to further significantly the foreign policy of the United States or to fulfill its declared international obligations; and (c) to restrict the export of goods wherenecessary to protect the domestic economy from the excessive drain of scarce materials and to reduce the serious inflationary impact of foreign demand.

2. The Process of Licensing Exports.

a. Commerce Control List.

Whether or not a license is required depends primarily on two issues; the type of goods or technology to be exported, and the destination country. The Bureau of Export Administration(BXA) of the Department of Commerce maintains the Commerce Control List (CCL). This includes all items subject to export controls, except for those under the control of another branch of the government, such as the control of munitions by the Department of State. The transfer by Executive Order of encrytion devices from State to Commerce in 1996 was particularly contentious. The CCL is divided into ten general categories (e.g., “Category 3—Electronics”). Within each category are five different groups of products, identified by letters A through E (e.g., “Group C-Materials”). Three further numbers identify the reasons for control (national security, possible use by terrorists, etc.). Together this makes a four digit and one letter Export Control Classification Number (ECCN, i.e., 3A001).

b. Licensed Exports.

When a license is needed, a critical decision usually made by counsel to the exporter, application is made to the BXA in the Department of Commerce. The application must be approved and the license issued before the goods or technology may be exported. In many cases, a license will only be issued upon certain conditions, such as limiting the capability of the export product, restricting it to civilian use and prohibiting its use for any military or intelligence gathering purposes, or prohibiting resale to another controlled country. There is often a considerable negotiating process between the exporter and the BXA. When a license is issued, the exporter is responsible for the performance of all terms and conditions of the license, both by the foreign licensee and by foreign buyers or subsequent buyers. It is important for the exporter to know what conditions might be imposed on the license at the time the original contract is signed, so that such conditions may also be imposed in the contract on the foreign parties.

3. Boycott Provisions and U.S. Export Laws.

United States boycotts which prohibit trade, both exports and imports, tend to be the subject of specific legislation directed towards identified countries. Enforcement is shifted from the Department of Commerce to the Department of the Treasury. The Office of ForeignAssets Control (OFAC) within Treasury^[103]is the responsible agency for controlling these specific boycotts. The pattern of governance is a broad assets control law with additional laws directed to specific countries. The various country specific regulations prohibit specific transactions and transfers. By controlling the flow of currency, whether to pay for imports or be paid for exports, trade is thereby controlled. Terminating the flow of currency is intended to terminate trade.

United States boycott policy, as expressed in such laws as the Cuban Democracy Act of 1992, the Iran and Libya Sanctions Act of 1996, the Cuban Liberty and Democratic Solidarity(Libertad) Act of 1996 (“Helms-Burton”)^[104], and the Burmese Freedom and Democracy Act of 2003 may attempt to reach the conduct of third party nations toward the boycotted country. Using such devices as exerting extraterritorial power over owned or controlled entities located in third nations, the United States attempts to draw into the boycott these third nations.

(Adapted from Chapter 3 and 4, International Trade and Economic Relations in a Nutshell, Ralph H. Folsom, University of San Diego, USA and published by Thomson West Group in 2004.)

[The Reflections]

1. What is the basic content of the Trade Act of 1974?

2. In the United States, who are entitled to make a petition requesting import relief for the purpose of facilitating positive adjustment to import competition?

3. What are the differences in respect of the exact forms of import relief between the escape clause proceedings and the antidumping and countervailing duty proceedings？

4. What is the policy of the United States toward export controls?

5. Please make a brief description of the basic domestic law framework governing the United States trade.

【The In-depth】

U.S Antidumping Law and Its Implementation of WTO Antidumping Code

United States objections to dumping were recorded as the subject of a protest by Secretary of the Treasury Alexander Hamilton in 1791, and have continued to be the subject of investigations. In general, U.S. antidumping statutes compare the price at which articles are imported or sold within the United States with the actual market value or wholesale price of such articles in the principal markets of the country of their production at the time of their export to the U.S. The approach was established by the Antidumping Act of 1916, a rarely used criminal statute, which was considered an unfair competition law, or price discrimination statute, and was functionally similar to the price discrimination statutes applicable to domestic business. The European Union, Japan and others successfully challenged the 1916 Act in WTO dispute resolution proceedings as inconsistent with the Antidumping Code. The EU and Japan have been authorized to retaliate, but only to the extent of actual application of the 1916 Act to their exports.

Other U.S. antidumping provisions found in the Tariff Act of 1930 implement the Antidumping Code. Under these provisions, “dumping” is the sale of imported goods at “less than fair value” (LTFV) or the difference between the product’s export price or constructed export price and its “normal value.” “Normal value”, in turn, is usually determined by the amount charged for the goods in the exporter’s domestic market (the “home market”). If such sales are both at LTFV and cause or threaten “material injury” to a domestic industry, or retard its development, then an antidumping duty “shall” be imposed. The antidumping duty levied is in addition to the usual customs charged on such products, and is in the amount of the difference between the price at which the goods are sold for export to the United States and the home market price.

Since the statute requires a determination of threatened or actual “material injury”, or retardation of the establishment of a U.S. industry, much depends upon a workable definition of “material injury.” The statutory definition is “harm which is not inconsequential, immaterial, or unimportant.” And further provides that, in making a determination of “material injury,” the ITC “shall” consider the volume of imports involved the effect of the imports on U.S. pricesfor “like products”, and the impact of the imports on U.S. producers of “like products”, but only in relation to production operations in the United States. The ITC is directed to evaluate both the actual and potential declines not only in production, sales and profits, but also in market share and productivity of the domestic industry. It is also directed to evaluate actual and potential negative effects on employment, growth, ability to raise capital and investment. All effects are to be measured on an industry-wide basis, and not in relation to an individual company; but a threat to a “major portion” of a national industry is sufficient.

In order to conform U.S. law to the WTO Antidumping Code, the Tariff Act (1930) was amended to provide for a de minimus dumping margin. The ITA in making its preliminary determination must disregard any weighted average dumping margin that is de minimus, i.e., any average dumping margin that is less than two percent ad valorem or the equivalent specific rate for the subject merchandise. Any weighted average dumping margin that is de minimus must also be disregarded when making final determinations.

Additional Tariff Act amendments have reduced the discretion previously available by imposing strict statutory time limits. In the case of an antidumping petition, the ITA must make an initial determination within twenty days after the date on which a petition is filed. This time limit may be extended to forty days in any case where necessary to poll or otherwise determine support for the petition by the industry and exceptional circumstances exist. Time limits are also imposed on the ITC in their determination of whether there is a reasonable indication of injury.

Further WTO-derived amendments authorize an adjustment to sales-below-cost calculations for start-up costs, thought to be particularly beneficial to high-tech products. There is a new “captive production” section intended to remove such internal sales from ITC injury determinations. The United States failed to fully implement the average-to-average or transaction-to-transaction dumping calculations mandated by the Antidumping Code. Rather, weighted average approaches will only be used in the investigatory phase, not in subsequent administrative reviews where the traditional U.S. calculation of dumping margins by comparing individual U.S. sales to average home or third country sales will continue. Adjustments for profits from further manufacturing, selling and distribution of products in the U.S. are authorized. And the amendments strengthen existing U.S. anti-circumvention provisions despite their absence from the WTO Antidumping Code. Also reinforced is U.S. law on exclusion of sales below cost from normal value calculations in the home market.

Still more WTO-driven changes require the ITC to provide all parties to the proceeding with an opportunity to comment, prior to the Commission’s vote, on all information collected in the investigation. Imports from a country subject to investigation must be deemed negligible if they amount to less than three percent of the volume of all such merchandise imported into the United States in the most recent 12-month period preceding the filing of the petition for which data are available. If imports from a country are deemed negligible, then the investigation regarding those imports must be terminated. The Commission is ordinarily required to consider cumulation of imports from two or more countries when the imports are subject to investigations as a result of petitions filed on the same day. The Commission must make any cumulative analysis on the basis of the same record, even if the simultaneously filed investigations end up with differing final deadlines.

The International Trade Commission must consider the magnitude of the dumping margin(although not the magnitude of the margin of subsidization) in making material injury determinations. Lastly, the Commission must conduct a review no later than five years after an antidumping or countervailing duty order is issued to determine whether revoking the order would likely lead to continuation or recurrence of dumping or subsidies and material injury. Known as the “sunset provision”, this new WTO requirement results in review of all existing antidumping and countervailing duty orders.

(Adapted from Chapter 3 and 4, International Trade and Economic Relations in a Nutshell, Ralph H. Folsom, University of San Diego, USA and published by Thomson West in 2004.)

[The Terms]

1. normal value: 正常价值（与出口价格比较，确定是否存在倾销）

2. material injury: 实质损害

3.domestic industry: 国内产业

4. retardation of the establishment of a domestic industry: 国内产业建立阻碍

5. like products: 相同产品

6. sunset provision: 日落条款（规定反倾销税征收的期限）

7. average-to-average dumping calculations: 平均对平均比较法

8. transaction-to-transaction dumping calculations: 个别对个别比较法

[The Discussions]

1. The relationship between the LTFV and the normal value.

2. The factors the ITC usually considers when making the determination of material injury.

3. The difference of dumping calculation methodology between the WTO Antidumping Code and the U.S. counterparts.

4. The influence the WTO Antidumping Code has imposed on the U.S. antidumping laws.

【The Further Sources】

Joanna Bonarriva, Michelle Koscielski, and Edward Wilson, Export Controls: An Overview of Their Use, Economic Effects, and Treatment in the Global Trading System, Staff Publications and Working Papers of ITC, 2009.

Judith M. Dean, Robert Feinberg, Jose E. Signoret, Michael Ferrantino, and Rodney Ludema, Estimating the Price Effects of Non-Tariff Barriers, Staff Publications and Working Papers of USITC, 2009.

The Economic Effects of Significant U.S. Import Restraints, USITC Commission Publications, 2011.

【注释】

[1]《关税与贸易总协定》，简称GATT，于1947年签署通过，该多边协定规定了货物贸易领域最惠国待遇、国民待遇、关税约束和减让等基本原则，旨在达成国际贸易的自由化和便利化。经过多轮缔约方之间的贸易谈判，关税水平得以大幅度降低，而且其基本规定以及后续协议已发展成为较为完整的国际贸易政策体系。1995年1月成立的世界贸易组织成立是对GATT1947的继承和发展。GATT1947在1994年经修改完善，仍是世界贸易组织框架协议的组成部分。

[2]《马拉喀什建立世界贸易组织协定》，简称《世界贸易组织协定》、《WTO协定》，于1995年1月正式生效。作为世界贸易组织法律框架中的根本性文件，《WTO协定》规定了该组织的宗旨、法律地位、机构及职能、决策机制等重要问题，其下的《多边货物贸易协议》、《服务贸易总协定》和《与贸易有关的知识产权协定》构成调整世界贸易的主要规则框架。我国于2001年12月11日正式加入世界贸易组织，成为其第143个成员。

[3]透明度原则，是指WTO成员方应公布其制定和实施的贸易措施及其修改、增补或废除等变化情况以及所参加的影响其国际贸易政策的国际协定，并通知世贸组织，没有公布的措施不得实施。在WTO协定中，透明度原则的主要内容包括贸易政策措施的公布、贸易政策的通知和贸易政策评审三个方面。透明度对于增加市场竞争的可预见性具有重要作用，和最惠国待遇原则、国民待遇原则被认为是建立世界统一市场经济体系的三大法律原则。

[4]市场准入，是指WTO成员方允许其他成员方的货物、服务以及资本参与本国市场的程度。市场准入原则旨在通过降低、取消或减少关税和非关税壁垒，以及通过对开放特定市场做出的具体承诺，加深市场开放程度，保证WTO各成员方在世界市场上公平自由竞争。由于服务贸易领域许多部门涉及国家安全和经济正常运行，并且各国服务贸易水平相差悬殊，因此在服务贸易中，市场准入原则的实施是具体承诺的义务，而不是一般性义务。

[5]国民待遇，是指WTO任何成员方对其他成员方的产品、服务或服务提供者以及知识产权所有者和持有者提供的待遇，不低于本国同类产品、服务或服务提供者以及知识产权所有者和持有者。在服务贸易领域，与市场准入原则一样，国民待遇是WTO成员方具体承诺的义务，而非一般性义务。

[6]《关于争端解决规则和程序的谅解协定》，简称DSU，是WTO协定的重要组成部分，规定了世贸组织争端解决的一般规则和程序。

[7]服务贸易理事会，在世贸组织总理事会领导下，具体负责《服务贸易总协定》的执行情况。

[8]最惠国待遇的例外与豁免，是指GATS允许成员方在特定条件下维持某些与最惠国待遇原则不一致的管理措施，成员方可以按照GATS规定的条件列出其不愿承担最惠国待遇的措施清单，从而有权在特定服务部门给予特定国家以更优惠的待遇。但是这些例外只能一次确定，且例外清单的内容不得增加。在GATS生效后，任何新的最惠国待遇的例外，只能通过WTO协定的豁免程序获得，即根据3/4多数通过可以豁免某成员方在世贸组织中承担的义务。

[9]1979年11月，关税与贸易总协定缔约方全体通过了“发展中国家的差别的和更优惠的待遇，互惠和全面参与”的授权条款，授权发达的缔约方根据普遍优惠制度对原产自发展中国家的产品给予优惠的关税待遇，而发达缔约方不期待获得互惠。该授权条款规定了普遍优惠制度的基本内容，成为GATT1994的组成部分，并构成最惠国待遇义务的例外，一直存续至今。

[10]南南合作制度，规定于GATT1947第18条，是发展中国家在GATT框架下开展贸易合作，相互降低关税壁垒，以扩大发展中国家间贸易，促进发展中国家经济的制度。

[11]此等补偿应在最惠国的基础上进行，如果受影响成员方与修改成员方未能就补偿达成协议，受影响方可将该事项提交仲裁。如果提交仲裁，修改成员方必须按照仲裁裁决进行补偿调整后方能修改或撤销其承诺。如果不按照仲裁裁决实施，则任何受影响方可以进行报复。对于调整或撤销承诺和修改减让表，由服务贸易理事会负责制定程序，任何成员方均应遵守。

[12]欧洲联盟，简称欧盟，是以欧洲共同体为基础建立的集政治、经济实体为一身的区域一体化组织。1992年，欧共体12国签订《欧洲联盟条约》（也称《马斯特里赫特条约》），该条约于1993年11月生效，欧盟得以成立。欧盟目前已发展成为拥有27个成员国，占全球贸易超过43%的自由贸易区，是目前世界上经济实力最强、一体化程度最高的国家联合体。欧盟成立以前，欧共体已形成欧洲统一市场，基本消除了妨碍商品、资本、人员和服务自由流通的障碍。

[13]欧洲法院，是欧盟的司法机构，其管辖范围可以分为三个基本领域：（1）审理成员国或者欧盟执行委员会对另一成员国违反条约义务提起的诉讼；（2）审理对欧共体机构提起的诉讼；（3）对成员国国内法院提出的关于欧共体法的有效性或解释做出先行裁决。先行裁决赋予了欧洲法院对欧盟法的司法解释权，旨在保障欧盟法在各成员国适用的统一性。欧洲法院由13名法官组成，实行全体合议庭制，法官任命需经成员国一致同意，每届任期6年。

[14]《北美自由贸易协定》，由美国、加拿大和墨西哥三国在1992年8月达成并于1994年1月1日生效，由此成立北美自由贸易区。北美自由贸易区是以美国为主导、南北双方为共同发展而组建的区域经济一体化组织，旨在发挥区内成员的比较优势，通过自由贸易和投资，推动区内产业结构调整，促进成员经济发展。《北美自由贸易协定》调整范围涉及货物贸易、服务贸易和知识产权领域，对贸易待遇、关税减让、原产地规则以及争端解决等问题作出规定。

[15]服务业投资以及商业人员的暂时入境。

[16]与《服务贸易总协定相比》，《北美自由贸易协定》对服务贸易待遇的规定严于前者，根据《北美自由贸易协定》，服务贸易适用最惠国待遇原则和国民待遇原则，在市场准入方面，除了该协定附件中附件列举的内容以外，都要受该协定规则的约束。

[17]世界知识产权组织于1974年12月依《建立世界知识产权组织公约》成立，是联合国组织系统下的专门机构。世界知识产权组织致力于保护知识产权并促进其使用，管理涉及知识产权保护各方面的24个国际条约。目前，世界知识产权组织成员国已达185个，我国于1980年6月正式加入该组织，成为该组织第90个成员国。

[18]实用新型，是一种保护发明的知识产权权利，其名称、保护对象和保护期限在各国的规定不尽相同。如在我国，一般指对产品的形状、构造或其结合提出的适于实用的新技术方案，在其他国家，实用新型被称作“实用工具”、“小型专利”、“实用创新”等。实用新型的创造性和技术水平较发明专利低，但实用价值大，在专利权审批上采取简化审批程序、缩短保护期限、降低收费标准办法加以保护。

[19]工业产权，是指依法对应用于商品生产和流通中的发明创造和显著标记等智力成果在一定地域和期限内享有的专有权，主要包括发明专利、实用新型、外观设计、商标等，有些国家的法律和国际条约还将服务标记、企业名称、产地标记和原产地名称等权利也包括在内。工业产权具有知识产权的一般属性，即专有性、地域性和时效性。

[20]艺术产权，通常指文学、艺术和科学作品的作者依法对其作品享有的权利，通常表现为版权（即著作权）以及邻接权（即作品传播者权）。

[21]技术转让，通常是指技术持有者将其技术通过一定方式转让给他人使用的行为。在技术转让中，一般不发生技术所有权的转让，而是技术使用权的转移，转让的内容一般包括专利技术使用权、商标使用权、专有技术使用权、计算机软件使用权以及普通技术使用权等。

[22]邻接权，指作品传播者对其传播作品过程中所作出的创造性劳动成果所享有的权利，主要包括出版者、表演者、录制者、播放者的权利。邻接权与著作权密切相关，又是独立于著作权的一种权利。英美法系国家版权与邻接权通常不做区分，在大陆法系国家才严格区分两者的概念。在我国，邻接权主要是指出版者的权利、表演者的权利、录像制品制作者的权利、录音制作者的权利、电视台对其制作的非作品的电视节目的权利以及广播电台的权利。

[23]商业名称、商号。

[24]服务标记、服务商标，指提供服务的经营者为将自己提供的服务与他人提供的服务相区别而使用的标志。服务商标一旦被服务企业所注册，该企业也就拥有了对该服务商标的独占专有使用权，并受法律的保护。

[25]集体商标，是指以团体、协会或者其他组织名义注册，专供该组织成员在商事活动中使用，以表明使用者在该组织中的成员资格的标志，其作用是向用户表明使用该商标的企业具有共同的特点。集体商标一般不可转让。

[26]认证标志，主要指质量认证标志，是指产品经法定认证机构按规定的认证程序认证合格，准许在该产品以及包装上使用表明该产品质量和性能符合认证标准的标识，对企业的产品或服务起到质量信誉证的作用。质量认证标志一般由一国国内认证机构设计和颁布，一些有影响的国际机构以及外国的认证机构也对向其申请认证并经认证合格的他国厂商生产的产品颁发其认证标志，如国际羊毛局的纯羊毛标志、美国保险商实验室的UL标志等。

[27]财产权利、经济权利。

[28]人身权利、精神权利。

[29]（作品）复制权。

[30]表演权。

[31]国内法，与国际法相对。

[32]与贸易有关的知识产权理事会，是世贸组织总理事会下设机构，具体负责监督执行《与贸易有关的知识产权协定》（TRIPS），其职能主要包括：（1）监督TRIPS的实施；（2）就有关与贸易有关的知识产权问题为成员国提供协商机会；（3）应成员国的请求就争端解决程序为成员国提供帮助；（4）与有关各方协商并提供必要信息；（5）成员国指定的其他任务；（6）与世界知识产权组织进行协调并签订协定。

[33]过渡安排。

[34]《伯尔尼公约》，全称为《保护文学和艺术作品伯尔尼公约》，于1886年在瑞士伯尔尼签订，1887年12月生效。我国于1992年10月加入该公约，适用公约的1971年巴黎文本。《伯尔尼公约》是版权领域第一个世界性多边国际条约，也是至今影响最大的版权公约。除规定版权保护的国民待遇、自动保护以及独立保护三个基本原则以外，还对版权保护的作品范围、权利主体范围、作者的权利、权利保护期限等问题作出重要规定。

[35]自动保护。

[36]起源国，即作品起源国，（1）对于首次在一个公约成员国发表的作品，以该国家为起源国；对于在给予不同保护期限的数个公约成员国同时发表的作品，起源国为立法给予最短保护期的国家；（2）对于在非公约成员国和某一公约成员国同时发表的作品，视后者为起源国；（3）对于未出版的作品或首次在非公约成员国出版而未同时在公约成员国出版的作品，而其作者具有某公约成员国国籍的，则该成员国为起源国。

[37]《保护表演者、录音制品制作者与广播组织公约》，又称《领接权公约》、《罗马公约》，是第一个关于邻接权国际保护的公约，于1961年在罗马缔结，1964年生效。只有加入了《伯尔尼公约》或《世界版权公约》的国家才能加入该公约，截止2003年，该公约共有76个成员国，我国未加入该公约。该公约对表演者、录音制品制作者以及广播组织享受国民待遇的条件作出规定，将邻接权范围具体为表演者权、录音制品制作者权和广播组织权并规定了具体形式。

[38]《世界知识产权组织版权条约》，简称《版权条约》，于2002年3月生效，中国尚未参加。该公约在有关版权的保护对象、主体和基本原则等重要方面直接援用了《伯尔尼公约》的规定。该公约将计算机程序和数据库（数据汇编）作为文字作品加以保护。另外，该公约针对网络传输等新的作品传输方式和手段规定了公共传输权，根据该公约规定，文学和艺术作品的作者应享有专有权，以授权将其作品以有线或者无线方式向公众传播。

[39]权利管理信息，是说明作品、表演、录音录像制品权利人和作品使用条件的信息，其主要作用在于标明权利人、声明权利以及公示作品的使用条件。权利管理信息保护在保护版权人利益方面具有重要作用：一方面，版权人需要通过权利管理信息向公众声明其权利、表明权利人身份以及作品的使用条件，促进作品的合法使用；另一方面，作品使用者需要获取权利管理信息从而依法对作品进行使用。

[40]《保护工业产权巴黎公约》，简称《巴黎公约》，1884年生效，是工业产权领域最重要的国际条约，其适用范围是工业产权，旨在保证一成员国的工业产权在所有其他成员国都得到保护。历经多次修改，《巴黎公约》现行的是1980年日内瓦文本。巴黎公约未能制定统一的工业产权法，而是以各成员国内立法为基础进行保护。公约规定了各成员国必须共同遵守的基本原则和最低标准，以协调各成员国的立法，使之与公约的规定相一致。

[41]假冒标记。

[42]《专利合作条约》，于1970年缔结，于1978年6月生效，历经多次修改，该公约对《巴黎公约》的缔约国开放，截止2012年4月一共有145个成员国，我国于1994年1月正式成为公约成员国。该公约解决了传统的分国别申请专利的问题，确立了国际申请、国际检索和国际公布的统一性制度，对专利申请程序进行规定，不涉及专利批准的问题。自生效以来，简化了成员国国民在其他成员国范围内申请专利的手续，延长了申请人按《巴黎公约》可享有的优先权期限。

[43]《商标国际注册马德里协定》，1989年5月生效，是用于规定、规范国际商标注册的国际条约。根据该协定，在缔约国国内有工商营业所、住所或国籍的自然人或法人，可以通过所属国的注册当局向世界知识产权组织国际局提出商标国际注册的申请，非缔约国国民，如在缔约国拥有永久住所或工商营业所的，可与缔约国国民同样对待。对于注册申请，国际局会同所属国注册当局检查后，应对提出申请的商标予以注明并公布。我国于1989年10月加入该协定。

[44]作为在邻接权国际保护领域中的基本公约，《罗马公约》对录音制品制作者权利的保护多有不足，尤其是随着复制技术的不断发展，有必要缔结专门的公约来保护录音制品制作者的权利，《保护录音作品制作者防止未经授权复制其录音制品公约》，简称《录音制品公约》，即在此背景下缔结。该公约扩大了录音制品制作者的权利内容；公约允许各国通过国内立法对邻接权进行保护。截止2004年，该公约共有72个成员国，我国于1992年11月加入该公约。

[45]许可合同，指一方将其知识产权的使用权转让给另一方，由另一方支付使用费的合同，许可合同一方是技术出让方，或称许可人，另一方为技术受让方，或称被许可方、引进方。

[46]独占许可。

[47]交叉许可。

[48]一揽子许可。

[49]限制性商业条款，又称限制性商业惯例，联合国《关于控制限制性贸易做法的多边协议的公平原则和规则》将其界定为通过滥用或谋取滥用市场支配地位，限制进入市场或以其他方式不适当地限制竞争，对国际贸易造成或可能造成不利影响，或者是通过企业之间的协议及其他安排造成了同样影响的行动或行为。在技术转让中，限制性商业惯例表现为技术出让方对受让方在技术使用、技术改进、产品生产和销售等方面施加的各种法律所禁止的限制。

[50]《谢尔曼法》，其全称为《保护贸易和商业不受非法限制与垄断之害法》，1890年通过并实施，是美国国会制定的第一部反托拉斯法，该法奠定了反垄断法的基础，至今仍然是美国的反垄断基本法。与美国一样，发达国家多通过反垄断法或公平贸易法对国际技术转让中的限制性商业条款进行管理和控制，虽然这些法律法规内外一体适用，但总体上对限制性商业条款管制较松，这是由发达国家的科技水平和经济发展水平在世界所处的地位所决定的。

[51]《欧共体条约》第81条第1款对限制竞争协议作出规定，如果生产商和销售商之间的买卖协议可能影响成员国间的贸易，并且以妨碍、限制或者扭曲共同市场上的竞争为目的，或者具有这样的后果，则此协议是违法的。

[52]出口限制条款，可分为直接限制与间接限制两种。直接限制是指全面限制受让方的产品向受让方所在国以外的任何国家或地区出口。间接限制主要包括的做法有（1）禁止向特定国家出口或者规定只能向特定国家出口；（2）限制产品出口的数量；（3）限制产品出口的价格；（4）限制产品出口的渠道，比如产品出口由出让方或其指定的代理人包销或独家代理。

[53]卡特尔（协议），意为限制竞争的行为，一般指横向限制竞争行为，即相互竞争的企业通过共谋而实施的限制竞争行为，其主要类型包括规定销售条件的卡特尔（价格卡特尔）、规定销售范围的卡特尔（区域卡特尔）、限定产量的卡特尔（产量卡特尔）等，卡特尔对正常的市场竞争与交易具有扭曲和阻碍作用，常受到比较严格的规制。

[54]不质疑条款。

[55]搭售条款。

[56]限制研究与发展条款。

[57]回授条款。

[58]《1930年关税法》，又称《斯姆特-霍利关税法》，由美国国会于1929年通过并于1930年生效，该法案主要将平均关税从当时的38%进一步提高到60%，因此立即招致美国所有贸易伙伴的报复，进而导致整个国际贸易的困顿和秩序混乱，并由此引发了第一次世界性的经济危机。

[59]约束关税并分阶段削减原则是关贸总协定的基本原则，各成员对其进口产品作出的关税减让，构成了该成员的关税减让表，其中公布的税率是受到约束的可适用税率的最高限，即为约束关税税率。

[60]《1974年贸易法》，是美国对外贸易的基本法律之一，不仅延续并修订总统的传统的贸易协定谈判权，引进国会审议总统签订的贸易协定的快轨道程序，还对非关税壁垒、最惠国待遇以及例外、对发展中国家的普惠制待遇、保障措施以及301调查等问题作出规定。其中的“301调查”，即“301条款”，是《1974年贸易法》第301条的俗称，是美国贸易法中有关对外国立法或行政上违反协定、损害美国利益的行为采取单边行动的立法授权条款。

[61]《1979年贸易协定法》批准了关税与贸易总协定东京回合的谈判成果，将有关贸易救济、海关估价、政府采购、产品标准等成果纳入到美国的贸易法体系。该法为贸易保护的合理性以及广泛运用奠定了法律基础，使非关税贸易保护成为美国对外贸易交往中的重要手段。

[62]《外国腐败行为法案》，于1977年制定并经多次修改，旨在禁止美国公司以及个人贿赂国外政府公职人员的行为，是目前规制美国企业对外行贿最主要的法律。1977年法案的实施使美国公司在海外市场上处于一定竞争劣势，并遭到大量美国跨国企业的反对，对此，美国寻求国际支持，与经济合作发展组织（OECD）、世界银行（WB）、国际货币基金组织（IMF）等国际组织合作，签订有关海外反腐败协定，一面进行立法调整，使该法案更加适应国际商贸实践。

[63]《加勒比海盆地经济复苏法》，1983年通过并生效，美国给予加勒比海国家优惠关税措施，符合条件的受惠国产品可免税出口到美国市场。

[64]《安第斯贸易优惠法案》，美国国会于1991年通过生效，通过对哥伦比亚、秘鲁、厄瓜多尔和玻利维亚等安第斯地区国家的产品给予免税待遇，以帮助这些国家打击毒品种植和生产。在《2002年贸易法》中，美国修改并提高了对上述国家的贸易优惠措施，并将该法案更名为《安第斯贸易促进和根除毒品法案》。

[65]《非洲增长与机遇法案》，美国国会于2000年通过生效，2002年该法案第二期获得通过，为48个撒哈拉沙漠以南的非洲国家提供单方面贸易优惠条件，符合条件的非洲国家可以按照普惠制向美国免税出口4 600余种商品，其中受益最为显著的是纺织品和服装。2006年，《非洲投资刺激法》（AIIA）通过，授予一些欠发达国家比《非洲增长与机遇法》更大的优惠。

[66]《购买美国产品法》，美国国会于1933年通过，要求联邦政府优先采购在美国生产的加工商品（国内最终产品），以及在美国开采或生产的未加工商品，该法案对可以不采购美国产品的例外情况也作出规定。该法案是美国最有代表性的政府采购国内优惠法案，之后多部倾向于购买本国商品的采购法律法规，如《联邦采购条例》、《美国复兴和再投资法案》等也受该法影响。

[67]国际贸易委员会，简称ITC，是独立的准司法联邦机构，其职责范围包括：判定美国国内行业是否因外国产品的倾销或补贴而受到损害；判定进口对美国国内行业部门的影响；对某些不公平贸易措施，采取应对措施；对贸易和关税问题进行研究；就贸易与关税问题向总统、国会和其它政府机构提供技术性信息和建议。在对外反倾销和反补贴调查工作中，国际贸易委员会负责判定国内产业是否因外国倾销或补贴行为而受到损害。

[68]“337条款”，指《1930年贸易法》第337节的内容，其明确授权国际贸易委员会对进口中的不公平贸易做法进行调查和查处，如果判定违反了“337条款”，国际贸易委员会将签发排除令，指示海关禁止有关产品进口。“337条款”将“不正当的竞争方法和不正当行为”与“进口到美国或在美国境内销售的产品侵犯在美国境内的知识产权的行为”认定为非法行为，并以此启动“337诉讼”。

[69]美国贸易代表办公室，简称USTR，由美国国会根据1962年的《贸易扩张法案》创建，美国贸易代表办公室的首脑为美国贸易代表，直接对总统和国会负责。USTR既指代美国贸易代表，也指代他所负责的机构。该机构经授权负责制定并管理美国全部贸易政策，还被指定为国家的首席谈判官员，并作为美国在主要国际贸易组织的代表。

[70]“201条款”，指《1974年贸易法》第201－204节，题目为“受进口损害的产业的积极调整”。该条款授权总统在来自其它国家的进口产品数量以致给国内产业造成严重损害威胁时，采取适当的救济措施以防止或补救损害并便利国内产业必要的调整。

[71]例外条款、免责条款。

[72]“406条款”，规定于《1974年贸易法》，旨在防止来自非市场经济国家的出口扰乱美国市场，只要表明来自非市场经济国家的出口干扰了美国同类工业，即可启动“406诉讼”。“406条款”调查的启动可以由总统、美国贸易代表、参议院财政委员会、众议院赋税委员会以及国内产业代表提出，由国际贸易委员会负责调查。

[73]市场扰乱，指一项产品的进口快速增长，无论是绝对增长还是相对增长，构成对生产同类产品或直接竞争产品的国内产业造成实质损害或实质损害威胁的重要原因。

[74]关税与贸易总协定谈判东京回合，于1973年发起，1979年结束。通过该回合谈判，大量产品的关税得以削减，使世界9个主要工业国家市场上工业制成品的加权平均关税降到6%左右，完税额下降34%，并达成一系列协议，包括给予发展中国家的关税优惠和非关税措施待遇得以合法化，还通过了有关非关税措施或具体产品的守则，涉及补贴与反补贴措施、技术贸易壁垒、政府采购、海关估价、进口许可程序；、修订肯尼迪回合反倾销守则、民用航空协议等。

[75]技术性贸易壁垒，属于非关税壁垒措施，指确定商品某些特征的技术法规或技术标准，以及旨在检验商品是否符合这些技术法规或标准的认证、审批和测试程序所形成的不合理贸易障碍。为减轻技术性贸易壁垒对国际贸易的阻碍作用，乌拉圭回合正式达成了《技术性贸易壁垒协定》，简称TBT协议，其实施使各成员方的标准化和认证体系日趋开放和透明，对于防止利用技术法规或标准与合格评定程序作为贸易保护工具起到一定积极作用。

[76]海关估价，指一国（或地区）海关根据法定的价格标准和程序，为征收关税对进出口货物确定其完税价格的行为和过程。武断地高估进口商品价格或对不同国家产品实施不同的估价标准都会对国际贸易造成扭曲和障碍，为消除或减少海关估价对国际贸易的不利影响，乌拉圭回合在已有的GATT1947、东京回合《海关估价守则》基础上达成了《海关估价协定》，对海关估价规则、协定的管理、磋商与争端解决、对发展中国家特殊与差别待遇等方面作出规定。

[77]《1984年贸易和关税法》，该法于1984年10月签署，在其第三编“国际贸易与投资”中，该法扩大了总统参与贸易谈判的授权并确定了谈判应达成的目标，同时列举了外国严重妨碍国际贸易的做法与壁垒，强化了总统对不公平贸易做法的报复权，并赋予美国贸易代表独立调查不公平贸易行为的权力；该法第六编为“反倾销与反补贴法修正案”，对反倾销与反补贴的调查程序进行简化，并就“补贴”的概念、倾销或补贴造成实质损害的标准作出修改或补充。

[78]快轨道程序，最早由《1974年贸易法》规定，指在批准总统的外贸协定方面，要求对国会授权的行政部门参加的外贸协定谈判，除在谈判阶段总统与国会进行及时的密切磋商外，一旦协定提交国会，国会不得搁置，也不能修改，只能通过或否决，而且期限非常短暂。

[79]《1988年综合贸易与竞争法》，其内容涉及贸易待遇、进口救济与贸易秩序、出口促进与管制等重要制度，该法特别授权总统就关税减让、电讯产品出口、知识产权保护等进行谈判。该法标志着公平贸易取代自由贸易成为美国贸易政策的基本原则，并对不公平贸易行为进行了法律界定，确定了相应应对措施。

[80]《美国统一关税税则目录》，是美国制定并公布实施的税率目录表，主要包括商品归类号码、商品名称以及特征、税率等栏目，在税率栏中，包括一般税率和特殊税率、法定税率两个大类，一般税率是指享有美国最惠国待遇的税率，特殊税率指享有美国特别优惠待遇的税率，适用于享有美国特惠税率额国家，税率大大低于最惠国税率甚至免税。

[81]《北美自由贸易区协定实施法》，为实施《北美自由贸易协定》，由美国国会于1993年制定通过，对自由贸易区的关税减让作出规定；调整范围包括货物贸易、服务贸易以及投资、知识产权领域；对原产地规则作出明确规定；明确规定自由贸易区待遇不影响依据美国法的国家安全、不公平贸易做法、进口救济等对区内产品的适用。

[82]从价税率。

[83]从量税率。

[84]混合税率。

[85]关税配额。

[86]《商品名称及编码协调制度》，简称《协调制度》，是协调国际上商品分类而制定的多用途国际贸易商品分类目录。最初由世界海关组织的前身，海关合作理事会，主持制定，目的是为海关征税、贸易统计、商品运输计费与统计等提供一套国际贸易商品分类体系。《协调制度》在1988年正式实施，全球目前已有超过150个国家使用，全球贸易总量的90%以上的货物都以HS作为分类依据。中国于1992年加入并实施《关于商品名称及编码协调制度的国际条约》。

[87]成交价格。

[88]相同货物的成交价格，指进口货物的完税价格不能根据成交价格确定时，完税价格应为与被估价货物同时或大约同时出口至相同进口国的相同货物的成交价格。

[89]类似货物的成交价格，指进口货物的相同货物的完税价格不能确定时，完税价格应为与被估价货物同时或大约同时出口至相同进口国的类似货物的成交价格。

[90]《关于履行1994年关税与贸易总协定第7条的协定》，即《海关估价协定》。

[91]原产地规则，是指一国或地区为确定货物原产地而实施的普遍适用的法律、法规以及行政决定，其核心是判断货物原产地的具体方法和标准。确定货物原产地，对于各国实施关税差别待遇、实施反倾销、反补贴等以及其他贸易管理措施、实施贸易统计等方面具有重要作用。

[92]实质性改变，是指此等改变形成了一种完全不同的新产品，该产品与其原材料或部件相比，具有其独立的名称、特征或用途，产品发生实质性改变的国家或地区即为该产品的原产地。判断产品是否产生实质性改变，一般采用增值百分比标准、特殊加工工序和税目变化标准等方法。

[93]《原产地规则协定》，于乌拉圭回合达成，旨在消除或减少各国原产地规则的不统一对国际贸易造成的消极影响，该协定对原产地规则作出明确界定并规定了协定的适用范围，对原产地规则的协调作出要求和规定，设立原产地规则技术委员会，授权其进行原产地规则的进一步协调，并要求各成员在乌拉圭回合结束直至协调工作计划完成前的过度期间遵守一定义务，如保证遵守其公布的的原产地标准、使用肯定性原产地标准等。

[94]关税配额是将关税与配额结合起来实施进口数量限制的一种方法，对在配额内进口的商品征收较低的关税，超出配额的进口商品征收较高的关税。

[95]绝对配额，指进口国政府在一定期限内对某种商品的进口规定最高限额，超过最高限额的则不准进口。绝对配额还可细分为全球配额、国别配额与进口商配额。其中，全球配额，是指在配额限度内，可从全世界任何国家或地区进口，达到限额为止。国别配额，指按不同国家或地区对规定的进口总限额进行分配，达到限额时，停止从该国或地区进口。进口商配额，是指按进口商分配规定的进口额度，超过额度的不准进口。

[96]《农业调整法案》，于1933年通过，旨在振兴美国农业，该法案以1909至1914年农业繁荣时期农产品对工业品相对价格为“平价”，对农产品实行价格支持，美国政府保证按照“平价”买进农产品，使农民每年以等量的农产品能够交换到相同数量的工业品。

[97]《农业协定》，又称《农产品协定》，于乌拉圭回合达成，该协定确定农业以及农产品贸易领域的基本目标与原则，如建立公正的、以市场导向为目标的农产品贸易体系，最终纠正和防止世界农产品市场中存在的种种限制和扭曲现象，并对发展中国家成员的特殊需要和条件给予考虑等。该协定除了对适用的农产品范围作出规定外，主要内容还包括农产品市场准入、农业国内支持、出口补贴以及卫生与植物卫生措施等规则。

[98]《1948年农业法》规定，自1950年1月1日起实行灵活的价格支持，即按照产量的高低来决定支持价格的降低或提高。《1949年农业法》否决了《1948年农业法》价格支持政策，继续把主要农产品的价格支持在平价80%—90%的水平上。对1952年以后的作物则根据供应情况，把价格支持在平价70%—90%的水平上。法律还规定，对乳制品、桐油子、蜂蜜、马铃薯和羊毛也实行强制性的价格支持，支持水平为平价的60%—90%。对于其他产品的价格支持由农业部长根据供求情况来定。

[99]全球进口配额。

[100]《1962年贸易扩大法》，该法是二战后美国第一个重要的贸易立法，其内容主要包括：第一，自1962年起的5年间，授权总统在与其他国家缔结贸易协定时，有权将任何进口的商品关税削减50～100%，以换取别国的相互减税，有权与欧洲共同体谈判，削减或完全免除双方出口总额在资本主义世界贸易中占 80%以上那类商品的关税，有效期 5年。第二，总统拥有对于对美国的出口产品进行“不当限制的”国家撤销关税减让的权限。

[101]“例外条款程序”，也称“201条款”，是指美国《1974年贸易法》第201-204节，现收在《美国法典》第19编2251-2254节，名为“受进口损害的产业的积极调整”。该条款授权总统在来自其它国家的进口产品数量激增以致给国内产业造成严重损害威胁时，采取适当的救济措施以防止或补救损害。例外条款下的保障措施是对公平但却压倒性的外国竞争的救济，其目的是对急剧增加的外国进口造成国内产业损害的临时救济，其适用条件比反倾销和反补贴严格。

[102]美国出口管制的法律体系大体可以分成两部分：一部分是军用物资体系，以1976年的《武器出口管制法》（AECA）为基石；另一部分是（军民）两用物资体系，以1979年的《出口管理法》（EAA）为基石。1979年的《出口管理法》（EAA）授权美国总统对两用物项出口进行管制。2011年6月，美国商务部公布了《战略贸易许可例外规定》，最终目标是要建立单一的管制清单、单一的出口管制执法协调机构、单一的信息技术系统和单一的许可证发放机构。

[103]财政部海外资产控制办公室，简称为OFAC，成立于1950年，是美国重要的针对特定国家、地区和人员进行的经济和贸易制裁的政府部门，其职能在于管理和执行所有基于美国国家安全和对外政策的经济和贸易制裁。该机构经特别立法授权，可对美国境内的所有外国资产进行控制和冻结，同时负责在对外经济和贸易制裁事宜上，与美国的欧洲盟国进行紧密合作。

[104]《1996年古巴自由民主团结法案》，即《赫尔姆斯伯顿法》，美国国会于1996年通过，主要内容包括：加强对古巴的国际制裁；支持建立“自由和独立的古巴”；主张美国国民有权向美国法庭起诉与被古巴政府没收其财产有牵连的外国人；美国政府有权拒绝向与被没收的美国财产有牵连的外国人发放签证等，该法案的目的是威胁国际企业界，阻断外界与古巴的贸易与投资，强化对古巴的遏制，由于该法案蔑视国际公认的行为准则，遭到多数国家反对，一直推迟执行此法的执行。