No NAFTA Question Too Tough

Confused about NAFTA? Well, who isn’t? The politicians and pundits are all over the map on this one, and so emotional! You would think they were discussing something vital, like war and peace, rather than a glorified Sisters City program, which is what NAFTA really is.

Strike that last thought. That was opinion, and as your self-appointed NAFTA Answer Man my intent here is to deal strictly in fact. A neutral authority. Here’s how I work. You ask a question, I provide an answer. No generalities or hot rhetoric. Every answer a Direct Quotation from the Document Itself. See, unlike many of those engaged in the debate, I actually have obtained a copy of the treaty. It sits right on my desk, as thick as the L.A. Yellow Pages. I have looked at it. Some.

And now, on to the questions!

Q. Hey NAFTA Man! Where does Perot get that “sucking sound” stuff?

A. Not sure, suspect it might be Article 801, Paragraph 1:

“Subject to paragraphs 2 and 4 and Annex 801.1, and during the transition period only, if a good originating in the territory of a Party, as a result of the reduction or elimination of a duty provided for in this Agreement, is being imported into the territory of another Party in such increased quantities, in absolute terms, and under such conditions that the imports of the good from that Party alone constitute a substantial cause of serious injury, or threat thereof, to a domestic industry producing a like or directly competitive good, the Party into whose territory the good is being imported may, to the minimum extent necessary to remedy or prevent the injury. . . .”

It goes on from there, but now I’ve forgotten your question.

*

Q. Me too. Tell me, though, is the whole treaty written like that?

A. No, some of it can be a tad wordy; see Article 402, Section 6:

“If an exporter or producer of a good calculates the regional value content of the good on the basis of the transaction value method set out in paragraph 2 and a Party subsequently notifies the exporter or producer, during the course of a verification pursuant to Chapter 5 (Customs Procedures), that the transaction value of the good, or the value of any material used in the production of the good, is required to be adjusted or is unacceptable under Article 1 of the Customs Valuation Code, the exporter or producer may then also calculate the regional value content of the good on the basis of the net cost method set out in paragraph 3.”

*

Q. Mr. Nafta, sir. I’m a California farmer who only wants to know what this thing will mean to me and only me.

A. Doesn’t everybody. Try Article 705, Section 4:

“Except as provided in Annex 702.1, an exporting Party shall deliver written notice to the importing Party as least three days, excluding weekends, prior to adopting an export subsidy measure on an agricultural good exported to the territory of another Party. The exporting Party shall consult with the importing Party within 72 hours of receipt of the importing Party’s written request, with a view to eliminating the subsidy of minimizing any adverse impact on the market of the importing Party for that good.”

Capisce?

*

Q. I’m a Hollywood producer (assistant) interested in developing a NAFTA plot. Anything in the treaty that might suggest a possible love interest angle?

A. No.

*

Q. What is the single most frightening passage in NAFTA?

A. Easy. Annex 703. 2, Section B, Paragraph 3:

“Except with respect to a good set out in Section B or C or Annex 703.3, where a Party applies an over-quota tariff rate to a qualifying good pursuant to a tariff rate quota set out in its Schedule to Annex 302.2, or increases a customs duty for a sugar or syrup good to a rate that exceeds the rate of customs duty for that good set out in its GATT Schedule of Tariff Concessions as of July 1, 1991, the other party waives its rights under the GATT with respect to the application of that rate of customs duty.”

That’s one the politicians won’t talk about at all.

*

Q. My brother is a lawyer. He says the real winner in NAFTA will be the lawyers hired to sort it all out, clause by clause. Is he full of it, or what?

A. Annex 1210.5. Section B, Paragraph 1.:

“Each Party shall, in implementing its obligations and commitments regarding foreign legal consultants as set out in its relevant Schedules and subject to any reservations therein, ensure that a national of another Party is permitted to practice or advise on the law of any country in which that national is authorized to practice as a lawyer.”

Does that answer your question?