## _wp0610

## Source details

**Canonical URL:** [_wp0610](https://www.imf.org/-/media/websites/imf/imported-full-text-pdf/external/pubs/ft/wp/2006/_wp0610.pdf)

## Other formats

- [Markdown version](/-/media/websites/imf/imported-full-text-pdf/external/pubs/ft/wp/2006/_wp0610.pdf.md)
- [Structured JSON version](/-/media/websites/imf/imported-full-text-pdf/external/pubs/ft/wp/2006/_wp0610.pdf.json)

---

### Purpose and research question
- Assesses the likely effects of reducing tariffs under the Doha Round on market access for developing countries.
- Key concern: whether multilateral tariff reductions under the Doha Round will adversely affect developing countries' market access to developed countries.
- Central mechanism examined: erosion of "preference margins" (the difference between the tariff rate for all WTO members and the preferential tariff applied to a developing country) versus gains from tariff cuts on goods that do not receive preferences.

### Data, scope, and preference utilization
- Uses detailed trade, tariff and preference information for the United States and the European Union.
- Focus on developing countries, including least developed countries (LDCs), and their preferential access to developed-country markets established in the 1970s.
- U.S. GSP scheme coverage:
  - Total U.S. tariff lines: 15,467 articles; most developing countries may export 6,409 articles duty-free.
  - Product coverage for LDC beneficiaries: 44 percent (dutiable imports in 2002 were $6.7 billion, of which $2.9 billion were covered by the GSP scheme).
  - Preference utilization rates:
    - LDC exporters to the United States under GSP: 95.8 percent (out of the $2.9 billion eligible for GSP $2.8 billion received preferential treatment).
    - In the European Union, preference utilization rates for LDC exporters: on average 76 percent for ACP countries and 57 percent on average for non-ACP countries.
    - AGOA preferences utilization was over 80 percent in 2002, with sixteen countries that utilized less than 50 percent.
  - U.S. dollar value ceiling for “competitive needs limitations” was $115 million in 2004, and this increases by $5 million per year.
  - Product coverage collapses to 3.9 percent ($1.5 billion out of $3.9 billion of dutiable imports) when mineral products (HS Chapters 25–27) are excluded.

### Main empirical findings (tariffs, comparative advantage, and preference margins)
- Preferences are often less generous than they appear; some developing countries pay higher average tariffs than developed countries under current schemes.
- Examples of average tariffs (exact values reported):
  - Average tariffs imposed on non-African LDCs’ exports to the United States: 13.14 (Table 2; also noted as 13.1 percent in narrative).
  - Average tariffs imposed on developed countries’ exports to the United States: 1.15 (Table 2; narrative cites 1.2 percent).
- Selected average tariffs by region and market (Table 2 / Table 3 / Table 4):
  - African LDCs: Average tariff paid on U.S. imports 0.07; Average tariff paid on EU imports 0.80.
  - Non-African LDCs: Average tariff paid on U.S. imports 13.14; Average tariff paid on EU imports 5.10.
  - Other developing countries: Average tariff paid on U.S. imports 1.82; Average tariff paid on EU imports 2.37.
  - Developed countries: Average tariff paid on U.S. imports 1.15; Average tariff paid on EU imports 2.89.
  - Average tariffs on comparative advantage products:
    - African LDCs: U.S. 1.79; EU 1.09.
    - Non-African LDCs: U.S. 3.82; EU 2.34.
    - Other developing countries: U.S. 2.64; EU 2.90.
    - Developed countries: U.S. 0.97; EU 2.78.
  - Average tariffs paid on LDC comparative advantage products (LDC Bij > 1):
    - African LDCs: U.S. 0.06; EU 0.94.
    - Non-African LDCs: U.S. 13.53; EU 5.35.
    - Other developing countries: U.S. 3.96; EU 2.35.
    - Developed countries: U.S. 2.80; EU 1.56.
- Key empirical observations:
  - Tariffs averaged across all goods are higher on non-African LDCs’ goods exported to the United States and EU markets than on developed countries’ products.
  - Tariffs averaged across each country’s comparative advantage goods are higher on LDCs and other developing country comparative advantage goods entering the U.S. market than developed country goods; not the case in the EU market.
  - Non-African LDCs pay the highest average tariffs on LDC comparative advantage goods in both the U.S. and the EU markets; African LDCs pay the lowest average tariffs on these exports.

### Policy experiment scenarios (exact specifications)
- Three policy experiments:
  - (i) Uniform tariff reduction of 40 percent on bound rates.
  - (ii) Exclusion of Special Products: exclusion list of 3 percent of the highest tariff lines assumed.
  - (iii) Tiered formula for agriculture based on the Harbinson proposal: 40 percent cut in tariffs under 20 percent, 50 percent cut in tariffs between 20 percent and 80 percent, and 60 percent cut for tariffs above 80 percent with a 100 percent cap; no tariff lines excluded.

### Headline simulation outcomes (aggregate results and product-level impacts)
- Aggregate combined EU&U.S. change in import demand under "No Exclusions" (EU&U.S. Combined column, Table 5):
  - African LDCs: -0.15
  - Non-African LDCs: 8.54
  - Other developing countries: 2.28
  - Developed countries: 1.98
  - All: 2.14
- Aggregate combined results under alternative scenarios (EU&U.S. Combined column, Table 5):
  - Exclusion of Highest 3 Percent Tariff Lines: All = 1.79; African LDCs = -0.27; Non-African LDCs = 7.04; Other developing countries = 1.83; Developed countries = 1.72.
  - Tiered Formula in Agriculture: All = 2.27; African LDCs = -0.04; Non-African LDCs = 8.55; Other developing countries = 2.43; Developed countries = 2.08.
- Product-group level aggregate changes (No exclusions, product-group level):
  - Agriculture: EU 13.05; U.S. 3.06; EU&U.S. combined 8.33.
  - Minerals: EU 0.10; U.S. 0.18; EU&U.S. combined 0.15.
  - Textile and clothing: EU 5.76; U.S. 8.62; EU&U.S. combined 7.36.
  - Other manufacturing: EU 2.01; U.S. 1.26; EU&U.S. combined 1.54.
- Sector- and region-level highlights (selected exact figures):
  - EU agriculture increase for all countries: 13.05 percent.
  - U.S. textiles and clothing increase for all countries: 8.6 percent.
  - African LDCs textile and clothing market access change to the U.S.: -9.59 percent (No exclusions, U.S. column, Table 9).
  - African LDCs EU textile and clothing change: -1.78 percent (No exclusions, EU column, Table 9).
  - Aggregate combined U.S. and EU agriculture change for African LDCs: 1.85 percent (No exclusions, EU&U.S. column, Table 9).
  - South Asia change in import demand (No exclusions, U.S. column, Table 6): 14.94 percent.
  - Other LDCs change in import demand (No exclusions, U.S. column, Table 6): 16.66 percent.
  - Sub-Saharan Africa change in import demand (No exclusions, EU column, Table 6): 0.64 percent; (No exclusions, U.S. column): -1.01 percent; (No exclusions, EU&U.S. combined): -0.15 percent.
  - China (No exclusions): EU 4.00; U.S. 3.42; EU&U.S. combined 3.62.
  - India (No exclusions): EU 5.83; U.S. 3.76; EU&U.S. combined 4.78.

### Distributional and country-level heterogeneity (selected examples, exact values)
- Non-African LDCs record the largest percentage increases in access to combined U.S. and EU markets under all scenarios.
- Some countries experience net losses in market access under all policy experiments:
  - Haiti — No exclusions: EU 1.63; US -4.87; EU&U.S. combined -4.61.
  - Dominica — reported examples include combined values of -21.84 and -27.44 in different lines of the excerpt (large negative impacts due to banana preference erosion).
  - Belize — No exclusions: EU -8.32; US -0.71; EU&U.S. combined -4.39.
  - Jamaica — No exclusions: EU -1.87; US -5.31; EU&U.S. combined -3.01.
- Large gains for specific exporters in some scenarios (exact table extracts):
  - Fiji — No exclusions: EU 49.69; US 7.51; EU&U.S. combined 24.12; Tiered formula combined 31.93.
  - Guyana — No exclusions: EU 43.12; US -0.75; EU&U.S. combined 27.24; Tiered formula combined 37.84.
  - Barbados — No exclusions: EU 20.44; US 0.12; EU&U.S. combined 12.54; Tiered formula combined 17.41.
  - New Zealand — selected entries: Combined (No exclusions) 42.84; Combined (3 percent excluded) 5.12; Combined (tiered) 24.19.
- Minerals and petroleum:
  - Sub-Saharan African countries experience a loss in the U.S. market due to losses in mineral exports, mainly crude petroleum, in some simulations; direction likely to be re-direction among suppliers rather than aggregate fall for African LDCs.

### Preference erosion, exposure, and sensitivity
- Preference erosion rule of thumb:
  - Exporting countries lose market access from general tariff cuts whenever the average U.S. preference margin is 5 percent or above (preference margin defined as "difference between the average tariff rates actually paid on those countries exports to the United States and the MFN tariff rate applicable to those exports").
- When preference margins are calculated including domestic U.S. production, effective preferences are small and many countries show negative preference margins; only a small number enjoy positive preference margins.
- Countries with the highest average preference margins in the United States and the European Union stand to lose the most market access through preference erosion; countries with low or moderate average preference margins are likely to gain market access.

### Sensitivity to demand elasticity and supply assumptions (exact parameters and results)
- Baseline elasticity of substitution across varieties: σ = 6.
- Sensitivity results for combined EU&U.S. import demand change under a 40 percent uniform tariff cut (No exclusions, Table 8):
  - σ = -3.5: EU&U.S. combined import demand (All) = 1.06 percent (EU 1.39 percent; U.S. 0.84 percent).
  - σ = -6.0: EU&U.S. combined import demand (All) = 2.14 percent (EU 2.89 percent; U.S. 1.73 percent).
  - σ = -11: EU&U.S. combined import demand (All) = 4.62 percent (EU 6.15 percent; U.S. 3.64 percent).
- Supply elasticity assumption:
  - Supply elasticity for developing countries is assumed to be infinite throughout the analysis.
  - Over 99 percent of U.S. and EU tariffs are bound (WTO, 2002).
- Interpretive note: The infinite supply elasticity assumption delivers the maximum export revenue effect; finite supply elasticity would reduce trade volume responses and introduce terms of trade effects.

### Methodology and technical implementation (exact steps and parameters)
- Tariff cuts are applied to bound rates; if a tariff is not currently bound it is assumed bound at the current MFN rate and cuts are applied to that bound rate.
- Tariff rates measured at most detailed product line available: HS 10-digit level for the United States and HS 8-digit level for the European Union (more than 10,000 different products).
- Analysis assumes the total share of expenditure on each product at the HS 10-digit level is constant.
- Specific tariffs (~10 percent of tariff lines) converted to ad valorem equivalents by UNCTAD (EU) and by dividing actual duty paid by the value of imports (U.S.).
- Change in Market Access calculation (summary of calculation steps preserved exactly in methodology):
  1. Calculate total U.S. imports for each product i in the base period 0 (year 2003): M0i = Σj M0ijp (tariff-line level, 10-digit).
  2. Estimate total U.S. consumption for each product i: C0i = M0i / m:c i, where m:c i is the estimated ratio of imports to consumption from OECD STAN database.
  3. Calculate new tariff rates t1ijp using existing tariff rates t0ijp as base; simulations include 40 percent tariff cut benchmark; alternative experiments: exclude top 3 percent tariff lines; apply tiered agricultural formula.
  4. Estimate new U.S. imports M1ijp using a CES/Cobb-Douglas framework within 10-digit categories; utility function assumed Cobb-Douglas (elasticity of substitution between different goods at HS 10-digit level = 1). Varieties defined as interaction of country j product and import program p. The elasticity of substitution between different “varieties”, σ, is assumed to be 6 in the baseline. The import demand equation and price-index substitutions are used to derive M1ijp.
  5. Change in market access for exporter j: ∆MA_j = 100*(Σ_ip M1ijp / Σ_ip M0ijp - 1). Export elasticity is assumed infinite (exporting country does not change export prices exclusive of tariffs).
  6. Repeat process for EU imports with modifications due to EU data limitations (use of preference utilization data at 8-digit product and exporter to estimate M0ijp; EBA adjustments for sugar, bananas and rice already implemented in the base period).
- Exact formula definitions appear in Appendix I (Change in Market Access and Average Preference Margin Including Domestic Production as displayed in the source).

### Policy implications and recommendations (exact guidance)
- Reducing MFN tariffs under the Doha Round will lead to improved market access for many developing countries to the U.S. and EU markets that will more than offset losses due to preference erosion for most countries; the small number of developing countries likely to lose market access are those that "receive very large benefits under existing preference schemes."
- To maximize net gains in market access:
  - Minimize excluded tariff lines.
  - Opt for a tiered formula with higher-than-average tariff cuts in agriculture.
- Availability of financial support:
  - The Trade Integration Mechanism (TIM), approved by the IMF Executive Board in April 2004, is available to help developing countries that may face temporary balance of payments shortfalls due to erosion of tariff preferences or other shocks emanating from multilateral trade liberalization.

*Source: _wp0610 - Appendix I and excerpts from the provided IMF working paper content.*

### 1.      Technical      Information............................................................................22

### _wp0610 - 1.      Technical      Information............................................................................22

### Purpose and research question
- Assesses the likely effects of reducing tariffs under the Doha Round on market access for developing countries.
- Key concern analyzed: whether multilateral tariff reductions under the Doha Round will adversely affect developing countries' market access to developed countries.
- Central mechanism examined: erosion of "preference margins" (the difference between the tariff rate for all WTO members and the preferential tariff applied to a developing country) versus gains from tariff cuts on goods that do not receive preferences.

### Data and scope
- Uses detailed trade, tariff and preference information for the United States and the European Union.
- Focus on developing countries, including least developed countries (LDCs), and their preferential access to developed-country markets established in the 1970s.

### Main findings (as stated in the text)
- Preferences granted to developing countries are not as generous as they appear; some developing countries actually pay higher average tariffs than developed countries under current preference schemes.
- Example (United States): average tariffs imposed on non-African least developed countries’ (LDCs’) exports is 13.1 percent compared with only 1.2 percent imposed on developed countries’ exports.
- The paper emphasizes that while preference erosion reduces relative advantages, these losses are offset to some extent by gains in market access due to tariff cuts on non-preference-covered goods; the analysis examines whether the gains outweigh the losses.

### Analytical approach (described)
- Quantifies preference margins and simulates the change in market access under Doha Round tariff reductions.
- Compares current preferential access outcomes with hypothetical multilateral tariff reductions to assess net effects on developing countries' market access.

*Source: _wp0610 - 1.      Technical      Information............................................................................22*

### 5.1 percent than on developed country exports at 2.9 percent.

### _wp0610 - 5.1 percent than on developed country exports at 2.9 percent.

### Summary of policy simulations and headline outcomes
- A simulated uniform cut in tariffs of 40 percent in the United States and the European Union combined leads to an increase in import demand of 2.1 percent averaged across all countries.
- Higher-than-average increases in import demand of 8.5 percent are for non-African LDCs’ exports.
- African LDCs record a loss of one-tenth of a percent on average for exports under the uniform 40 percent cut (reported as -0.1 of a percent).
- If the United States and the European Union exclude sensitive products from tariff cuts, the gains in market access for all regional groupings are smaller, on average, relative to the uniform cut.
- Simulations that assume a higher than 40 percent tariff cut in agriculture, using a tiered formula, together with a 40 percent cut in manufacturing, generate the largest gains for all groups of countries.

### Data description and preference utilization
- Under the current U.S. GSP scheme, out of a total of 15,467 articles listed in U.S. tariff lines most developing countries may export 6,409 articles duty-free.
- Product coverage for LDC beneficiaries of the United States' GSP scheme: 44 percent (dutiable imports in 2002 were $6.7 billion, of which $2.9 billion were covered by the GSP scheme).
- Preference utilization rates:
  - For LDC exporters to the United States under GSP: 95.8 percent (out of the $2.9 billion eligible for GSP $2.8 billion received preferential treatment).
  - In the European Union, preference utilization rates for LDC exporters: on average 76 percent for ACP countries and 57 percent on average for non-ACP countries.
  - AGOA preferences utilization was over 80 percent in 2002, with sixteen countries that utilized less than 50 percent.
- The U.S. dollar value ceiling for “competitive needs limitations” was $115 million in 2004, and this increases by $5 million per year.
- Product coverage is much lower when mineral products are excluded (HS Chapters 25-27, mostly oil), collapsing to 3.9 percent ($1.5 billion out of $3.9 billion of dutiable imports).

### Research strategy and modeling assumptions
- Tariff cuts in policy experiments are applied to bound rates rather than directly on MFN rates; if a tariff is not currently bound it is assumed bound at the current MFN rate and cuts are applied to that bound rate.
- All tariff rates measured are at the most detailed product line available: HS 10-digit level for the United States and HS 8-digit level for the European Union (more than 10,000 different products).
- The analysis assumes the total share of expenditure on each product at the HS 10-digit level is constant.
- Elasticity of substitution across varieties is assumed to equal 6.
- Supply elasticity for developing countries is assumed to be infinite throughout the analysis.
- Over 99 percent of U.S. and EU tariffs are bound (WTO, 2002).
- Approximately 10 percent of tariff lines include specific tariffs; these were converted to ad valorem equivalent tariffs by UNCTAD (EU) and by dividing actual duty paid by the value of imports (U.S.).

### Current state of play: average tariffs and comparative advantage
- Table 1 export shares, 2003 (Total U.S.$ billions and shares):
  - African LDCs: Total 26.5; Share to U.S. 24.70 percent; Share to EU-15 29.92 percent; Share to Other Developed Countries 11.26 percent; Share to Developing Countries 34.12 percent.
  - Non-African LDCs: Total 16.6; Share to U.S. 25.14 percent; Share to EU-15 24.82 percent; Share to Other Developed Countries 12.25 percent; Share to Developing Countries 37.79 percent.
  - Other developing countries: Total 1,870.0; Share to U.S. 23.34 percent; Share to EU-15 20.20 percent; Share to Other Developed Countries 27.65 percent; Share to Developing Countries 28.80 percent.
  - Developed countries: Total 5,480.0; Share to U.S. 13.98 percent; Share to EU-15 41.82 percent; Share to Other Developed Countries 21.69 percent; Share to Developing Countries 22.51 percent.
- Average tariffs paid (Table 2):
  - African LDCs: Average tariff paid on U.S. imports 0.07; Average tariff paid on EU imports 0.80.
  - Non-African LDCs: Average tariff paid on U.S. imports 13.14; Average tariff paid on EU imports 5.10.
  - Other developing countries: Average tariff paid on U.S. imports 1.82; Average tariff paid on EU imports 2.37.
  - Developed countries: Average tariff paid on U.S. imports 1.15; Average tariff paid on EU imports 2.89.
- Average tariffs on each region’s comparative advantage products (Table 3):
  - African LDCs: U.S. 1.79; EU 1.09.
  - Non-African LDCs: U.S. 3.82; EU 2.34.
  - Other developing countries: U.S. 2.64; EU 2.90.
  - Developed countries: U.S. 0.97; EU 2.78.
- Average tariffs paid on LDC comparative advantage products (LDC Bij > 1) (Table 4):
  - African LDCs: U.S. 0.06; EU 0.94.
  - Non-African LDCs: U.S. 13.53; EU 5.35.
  - Other developing countries: U.S. 3.96; EU 2.35.
  - Developed countries: U.S. 2.80; EU 1.56.
- Key empirical observations:
  - Tariffs averaged across all goods are higher on non-African LDCs’ goods exported to the United States and EU markets than on developed countries’ products.
  - Tariffs averaged across each country’s comparative advantage goods are higher on LDCs and other developing country comparative advantage goods entering the U.S. market than developed country goods; not the case in the EU market.
  - Non-African LDCs pay the highest average tariffs on LDC comparative advantage goods in both the U.S. and the EU markets; African LDCs pay the lowest average tariffs on these exports.

### Policy experiments (three scenarios) and aggregated market-access results
- Policy experiments:
  - (i) Uniform tariff reduction of 40 percent on bound rates.
  - (ii) Exclusion of Special Products: exclusion list of 3 percent of the highest tariff lines assumed.
  - (iii) Tiered formula for agriculture based on the Harbinson proposal: 40 percent cut in tariffs under 20 percent, 50 percent cut in tariffs between 20 percent and 80 percent, and 60 percent cut for tariffs above 80 percent with a 100 percent cap; no tariff lines excluded.
- Aggregated change in import demand by EU and U.S. (Table 5) — Change in import demand by EU, U.S., and combined EU&U.S. under three scenarios:
  - No Exclusions (EU / U.S. / EU&U.S. Combined):
    - African LDCS: 0.64 / -1.01 / -0.15
    - Non-African LDCs: 4.14 / 13.90 / 8.54
    - Other developing countries: 2.84 / 1.86 / 2.28
    - Developed countries: 2.97 / 1.59 / 1.98
    - All: 2.89 / 1.73 / 2.14
  - Exclusion of Highest 3 Percent Tariff Lines (EU / U.S. / EU&U.S. Combined):
    - African LDCS: 0.17 / -0.75 / -0.27
    - Non-African LDCs: 4.08 / 10.64 / 7.04
    - Other developing countries: 2.12 / 1.63 / 1.83
    - Developed countries: 2.41 / 1.47 / 1.72
    - All: 2.26 / 1.55 / 1.79
  - Tiered Formula in Agriculture (EU / U.S. / EU&U.S. Combined):
    - African LDCS: 0.83 / -1.01 / -0.04
    - Non-African LDCs: 4.16 / 13.90 / 8.55
    - Other developing countries: 3.19 / 1.88 / 2.43
    - Developed countries: 3.27 / 1.60 / 2.08
    - All: 3.21 / 1.74 / 2.27
- Notes on the tiered formula: it results in an average tariff reduction of 50 percent in the case of EU tariffs, and 47 percent in the case of U.S. tariffs (under the Harbinson-based simulation).
- Interpretative points:
  - On average, all country groupings, except African LDCs, enjoy an increase in combined market access to the United States and European Union following a 40 percent cut in tariffs; African LDCs experience a small loss of 0.1 of a percent on average (reported as -0.15 in the “No Exclusions” combined column).
  - Non-African LDCs enjoy the largest percentage increase in access to the combined U.S. and EU markets under all policy scenarios presented.
  - Gains in market access for all country groupings are reduced if exclusion of the highest tariff lines is allowed.
  - The largest gains for all countries occur with the tiered formula in agriculture.
- Heterogeneity and notable country-level outcomes:
  - Some countries experience net losses in market access under all policy experiments (example: Haiti experiences large losses due to losses in clothing exports).
  - Sub-Saharan African countries experience a loss in the U.S. market due to losses in mineral exports, mainly crude petroleum.
  - Within the developing country grouping, Mexico experiences net losses mainly because of its free trade agreement with the United States; China and South Asian countries gain from further tariff cuts because they derive relatively little benefit from existing preferences.

### Additional technical and interpretive remarks
- The study focuses on effects of tariff cuts by the United States and the European Union; the shares of LDCs and other developing countries exports to the United States and the European Union markets combined are approximately 50 percent (Table 1).
- The infinite supply elasticity assumption delivers the maximum export revenue effect, both for revenue gains and losses, and provides an indication of changes in potential market access; finite supply elasticity would reduce trade volume responses but introduce terms of trade effects.
- The analysis incorporates preference utilization rates, bound and applied rate information, and different formula approaches (including exemptions of special products and tiered formulas in agriculture) to assess likely gains in market access and preference erosion.

*Source: authors’ calculations and analysis in the provided IMF working paper excerpt.*

### part in the simulation results. But it is unlikely that African LDCs would suffer falls in

### _wp0610 - part in the simulation results. But it is unlikely that African LDCs would suffer falls in

### Simulated changes in market access (summary of results)
- Under a 40 percent uniform tariff cut benchmark (with sensitivity experiments: exclusion of highest 3 percent tariff lines; and a tiered formula in agriculture based on the Harbinson proposal: "40 percent cut in tariffs under 20 percent, 50 percent cut in tariffs between 20 percent and 80 percent, and 60 percent for tariffs above 80 percent with a 100 percent cap"):
  - EU agriculture increase for all countries: 13.05 percent.
  - U.S. textiles and clothing increase for all countries: 8.6 percent.
  - African LDCs:
    - Textile and clothing market access change to the U.S.: -9.59 percent (No exclusions, U.S. column, Table 9).
    - EU textile and clothing change for African LDCs: -1.78 percent (No exclusions, EU column, Table 9).
    - Combined U.S. and EU agriculture change for African LDCs: 1.85 percent (No exclusions, EU&U.S. column, Table 9).
  - Aggregate/all countries (product-group level, No exclusions):
    - Agriculture: EU 13.05 percent; U.S. 3.06 percent; EU&U.S. combined 8.33 percent.
    - Minerals: EU 0.10 percent; U.S. 0.18 percent; EU&U.S. combined 0.15 percent.
    - Textile and clothing: EU 5.76 percent; U.S. 8.62 percent; EU&U.S. combined 7.36 percent.
    - Other manufacturing: EU 2.01 percent; U.S. 1.26 percent; EU&U.S. combined 1.54 percent.

- Region-level and country-group highlights (selected figures from Tables 6–8):
  - LDCs by region (No exclusions, tiered formula columns included in tables):
    - South Asia change in import demand (No exclusions, U.S. column, Table 6): 14.94 percent.
    - Other LDCs change in import demand (No exclusions, U.S. column, Table 6): 16.66 percent.
    - Sub-Saharan Africa change in import demand (No exclusions, EU column, Table 6): 0.64 percent; (No exclusions, U.S. column): -1.01 percent; (No exclusions, EU&U.S. combined): -0.15 percent.
  - Developing countries by region (No exclusions, Table 7):
    - South Asia: EU 4.04 percent; U.S. 6.14 percent; EU&U.S. combined 4.93 percent.
    - China: EU 4.00 percent; U.S. 3.42 percent; EU&U.S. combined 3.62 percent.
    - Caribbean and Latin America: EU 5.77 percent; U.S. 1.10 percent; EU&U.S. combined 2.71 percent.
  - Sensitivity to demand elasticity (Table 8; 40 percent uniform tariff cut, No exclusions):
    - When elasticity σ = -3.5, change in EU&U.S. combined import demand (All) = 1.06 percent (EU 1.39 percent; U.S. 0.84 percent).
    - When elasticity σ = -6.0, change in EU&U.S. combined import demand (All) = 2.14 percent (EU 2.89 percent; U.S. 1.73 percent).
    - When elasticity σ = -11, change in EU&U.S. combined import demand (All) = 4.62 percent (EU 6.15 percent; U.S. 3.64 percent).
    - Text summary: "The change in import demand by the European Union and United States increases from 1.1 percent, when the elasticity of substitution is assumed to equal -3.5, to 4.6 percent when the elasticity of substitution is assumed to be -11."

- Preference margins and exposure to preference erosion:
  - Exporting countries tend to lose market access from general tariff cuts whenever the average U.S. preference margin is 5 percent or above (defined as "difference between the average tariff rates actually paid on those countries exports to the United States and the MFN tariff rate applicable to those exports").
  - When preference margins are calculated taking domestic U.S. production into account, effective preferences are small and many countries show negative preference margins; only a small number of countries enjoy positive preference margins.
  - Countries with the highest average preference margins in the United States and the European Union stand to lose the most market access through preference erosion; countries with low or moderate average preference margins are likely to gain market access.

- Notable country-specific examples (from narrative results):
  - Dominica (2003): banana exports to the EU = US$7.6m, equal to 37 percent of Dominica's total exports to the EU and 32 percent of its total exports to the EU and U.S.; 99 percent of Dominica's banana exports to the EU enter under preferential arrangements; these banana exports are reduced to US$2.6 million following 40 percent tariff cuts in the EU.
  - St. Lucia (2003): banana exports to the EU = US$23.7 million, equal to 89 percent of its aggregate exports to the EU and 58 percent of its combined exports to the EU and United States; 100 percent of banana exports to the EU enter under preferential arrangements; a 40 percent MFN tariff cut reduces its banana exports to the EU to US$8.1 million.
  - Several countries projected to gain substantial EU market access (agricultural products): Malawi, Zambia, Barbados, Guyana, Swaziland, Argentina, Fiji, Mauritius, New Zealand.

### Main analytical findings and interpretation
- Preference erosion is the key determinant of whether a country loses market access following multilateral tariff liberalization: "The higher the current preference margin, the higher the loss from preference erosion, hence the less likely that the gains will outweigh the losses."
- Trade diversion and redirection effects:
  - U.S. tariff reductions for other suppliers can cause redirection of petroleum exports because "the direction of commodity trade tends to minimize transport costs plus taxes." The text notes it is unlikely that African LDCs would suffer falls in aggregate petroleum exports in the short term; more likely is re-direction of petroleum exports among suppliers.
- Product-level distribution of gains:
  - Largest gains: EU agriculture and U.S. textiles and clothing.
  - Smallest gains: minerals and other manufacturing.
  - Excluding highest 3 percent tariff lines reduces magnitude of gains but not relative product ranking.
  - A tiered formula in agriculture increases the gains for all country groupings.

### Policy implications and recommendations (from Conclusions)
- Some developing countries have inferior market access to developed countries:
  - Average tariffs on non-African LDCs’ exports to the United States: 13.1 percent.
  - Average tariffs on developed countries’ exports to the United States: 1.2 percent.
- Reducing MFN tariffs under the Doha Round will lead to improved market access for many developing countries to the U.S. and EU markets that will more than offset losses due to preference erosion; the small number of developing countries likely to lose market access are those that "receive very large benefits under existing preference schemes."
- To maximize net gains in market access:
  - Minimize excluded tariff lines.
  - Opt for a tiered formula with higher-than-average tariff cuts in agriculture.
- Availability of financial support: The Trade Integration Mechanism (TIM), approved by the IMF Executive Board in April 2004, is available to help developing countries that may face temporary balance of payments shortfalls due to erosion of tariff preferences or other shocks emanating from multilateral trade liberalization.

### Technical methodology (Appendix: calculation steps and key technical parameters)
- Change in Market Access calculation (steps summarized):
  1. Calculate total U.S. imports for each product i in the base period 0 (year 2003): M0i = Σj M0ijp (tariff-line level, 10-digit).
  2. Estimate total U.S. consumption for each product i: C0i = M0i / m:c i, where m:c i is the estimated ratio of imports to consumption from OECD STAN database.
  3. Calculate new tariff rates t1ijp using existing tariff rates t0ijp as base; simulations include 40 percent tariff cut benchmark; alternative experiments: exclude top 3 percent tariff lines; apply tiered agricultural formula.
  4. Estimate new U.S. imports M1ijp using a CES/Cobb-Douglas framework within 10-digit categories; utility function assumed Cobb-Douglas (elasticity of substitution between different goods at HS 10-digit level = 1). Varieties defined as interaction of country j product and import program p. The elasticity of substitution between different “varieties”, σ, is assumed to be 6 in the baseline. The import demand equation and price-index substitutions are used to derive M1ijp.
  5. Change in market access for exporter j: ΔMA_j = 100*(Σ_ip M1ijp / Σ_ip M0ijp - 1). Export elasticity is assumed infinite (exporting country does not change export prices exclusive of tariffs).
  6. Repeat process for EU imports with modifications due to EU data limitations:
     - M0ij available but not M0ijp; use EU preference utilization data (by 8-digit product and exporting country) to estimate M0ijp, assuming trade entering under a preference enters under the most favorable scheme.
     - Assume EU Everything But Arms (EBA) tariff reductions for sugar, bananas and rice for LDCs are already implemented in the base period (requires prior adjustment of base import values for those products).
- Key technical parameter preserved exactly:
  - Elasticity of substitution between varieties in baseline: σ = 6.
  - Change in market access formula: ∆MA_j = 100*(Σ_ip M1ijp / Σ_ip M0ijp - 1).

*Source: authors’ calculations and text from the provided IMF working paper excerpt.*

### Appendix                                                                        I

### _wp0610 - Appendix I

### Methodology: Change in Market Access and Preference Margins
- Change in market access measure (as given in the text):
  - ()
    ()
    00 0
    0
    *
    iMFNijpijp
    ip
    ijp
    ip
    ttM
    M
    −
    ∑∑
    ∑∑
    ( 3 )
  - where t0iMFN is the MFN tariff applicable to product i and all other variables are defined in the Change in Market Access section above.

- “Average Preference Margin Including Domestic Production” (as given in the text):
  - ()
    (
    0_00
    0
    *
    i    AVERAGEijpijp
    ip
    ijp
    ip
    ttM
    M
    −
    ∑∑
    ∑∑
    ( 4 )

- Definition of 0_i AVERAGE t (tariff revenue per consumption) (as given in the text):
  - ()
    00
    0_
    0
    *
    ijpijp
    jp
    i    AVERAGE
    i
    tM
    t
    C
    =
    ∑∑
    ( 5 )

### Table A1 — Total Exports: Selected entries and key statistics
- African LDCs (selected rows, US$ millions; Share to U.S. (percent); Average U.S. Tariff; Share to EU-15 (percent); Average EU Tariff):
  - Angola: 9,326.90; 48.31; 0.00; 13.79; 0.04
  - Benin: 304.10; 0.22; 0.46; 14.87; 1.01
  - Burkina Faso: 218.60; 0.43; 1.45; 23.30; 1.59
  - Burundi: 49.31; 3.27; 0.00; 50.65; 0.11
  - Cape Verde: 23.62; 5.22; 1.11; 71.75; 0.33
  - Central African Republic: 65.70; 0.34; 0.05; 91.13; 0.07
  - Chad: 99.42; 4.81; 0.03; 44.28; 0.33
  - Comoros: 37.71; 0.90; 0.05; 69.05; 0.94
  - Congo, Dem. Rep. of: 1,026.30; 17.86; 0.01; 76.76; 0.06
  - Djibouti: 83.20; 0.76; 2.87; 6.34; 1.23
  - Equatorial Guinea: 2,770.70; 34.75; 0.01; 36.07; 0.02
  - Eritrea: 6.61; 1.26; 1.21; 36.05; 0.92
  - Ethiopia: 512.74; 4.43; 0.01; 29.60; 1.00
  - Gambia, The: 5.10; 0.79; 1.67; 67.60; 1.79
  - Guinea: 829.51; 10.52; 0.07; 44.82; 0.43
  - Guinea-Bissau: 76.72; 2.76; 0.00; 11.57; 0.07
  - Lesotho: 432.39; 7.07; 0.32; 0.79; 0.84
  - Liberia*: 1,049.60; 5.91; 0.02; 66.24; 0.08
  - Madagascar: 2,454.20; 26.20; 0.24; 41.69; 1.77
  - Malawi: 457; 12.72; 1.57; 35.30; 4.40
  - Mali: 229.41; 1.15; 0.40; 28.22; 0.28
  - Mauritania: 598.50; 0.16; 0.02; 61.89; 0.19
  - Mozambique: 985; 0.94; 0.59; 77.40; 2.89
  - Niger: 209.1; 4.56; 0.57; 43.89; 0.08
  - Rwanda: 50.4; 0.13; 0.00; 8.56; 0.13
  - Sao Tome and Principe: 6.6; 2.90; 2.59; 93.93; 0.72
  - Senegal: 1,151.20; 0.70; 0.29; 29.80; 0.73
  - Sierra Leone: 215.1; 3.13; 2.53; 81.07; 0.47
  - Somalia: 84.4; 0.23; 1.91; 2.46; 1.02
  - Sudan: 2,480.60; 0.12; 0.00; 9.22; 0.81
  - Tanzania: 1,218.40; 0.93; 0.40; 52.91; 0.46
  - Togo: 494.6; 2.11; 0.10; 24.34; 0.17
  - Uganda: 164.6; 3.09; 0.01; 33.53; 1.41
  - Zambia: 727.8; 1.77; 0.01; 17.98; 8.72

- Non-African LDCs (selected rows):
  - Afghanistan, Islamic Republic of: 211.3; 29.69; 0.10; 11.87; 2.00
  - Bangladesh: 5,809.40; 33.70; 14.31; 49.84; 4.84
  - Bhutan: 58.2; 0.90; 0.76; 1.78; 1.52
  - Cambodia: 2,118.30; 53.28; 15.15; 19.94; 4.87
  - Haiti: 376; 90.81; 2.03; 3.60; 1.20
  - Kiribati: 277.3; 7; 0.03; 1.86; 7.47
  - Lao People’s Democratic Republic*: 306.2; 1.45; 33.07; 48.53; 4.52
  - Maldives*: 1133; 2.28; 9.00; 15.60; 3.69
  - Myanmar*: 2,759.60; 10.70; n.a.; 15.43; 10.07
  - Nepal: 652.7; 29.07; 11.33; 9.54; 1.94
  - Samoa: 87.1; 3.04; 0.36; 5.73; 0.67
  - Solomon Islands: 123.2; 1.17; 0.05; 2.86; 0.16
  - Timor-Leste: 62.4; 2; 0.00; 42.28; 1.08
  - Tuvalu: 2.1; 0.36; 0.44; 52.51; 5.50
  - Vanuatu: 85.8; 1.11; 0.00; 4.55; 0.17
  - Yemen, Republic of: 3,779.30; 1.91; 0.08; 2.05; 1.51

- Other developing countries (selected rows):
  - Albania: 447.1; 0.51; 4.03; 93.32; 6.43
  - Algeria*: 24,600.00; 19.91; 0.12; 59.07; 0.15
  - Anguilla: 7.1; 19.14; 0.15; 68.10; 0.68
  - Antigua and Barbuda: 412.6; 3.27; 0.34; 92.20; 0.35
  - Argentina: 29,600.00; 10.60; 1.15; 19.70; 8.48
  - Armenia: 670.5; 8.20; 2.47; 38.90; 1.07
  - Aruba*: 82.2; 9.18; 0.19; 50.68; 3.05
  - Azerbaijan*: 2,591.70; 2.46; 0.62; 65.65; 0.10
  - Bahamas, The*: 1,373.30; 36.41; 0.37; 29.62; 0.20
  - Bahrain: 6,631.60; 4.28; 7.13; 1.68; 2.69
  - Barbados: 249.8; 4.43; 0.14; 14.88; 14.25
  - Belarus*: 9,945.60; 1.03; 2.53; 22.91; 2.14
  - Belize: 202.8; 56.33; 0.59; 28.32; 13.02
  - Bermuda*: 465.9; 3.34; 0.36; 42.03; 0.01
  - Bolivia: 1,650.70; 14.29; 0.20; 6.74; 0.19
  - Bosnia and Herzegovina: 1,244.90; 1.01; 1.80; 64.89; 5.34
  - Botswana: 2,155.30; 0.66; 0.02; 85.89; 0.06
  - Brazil: 73,100.00; 23.13; 1.80; 24.82; 5.26
  - British Indian Ocean Ter.: 4.1; 31.61; 5.79; 11.28; 0.91
  - British Virgin Islands: 3849.5; 3; 1.55; 38.98; 0.07
  - Brunei Darussalam*: 4,144.30; 7.75; 10.73; 0.33; 3.07
  - Bulgaria: 7,540.20; 4.47; 5.25; 56.53; 2.17
  - Cameroon: 2,245.80; 7.53; 0.07; 63.82; 2.31
  - Cayman Islands*: 734.9; 1.65; 0.05; 94.00; 0.01
  - Chile*: 20,100.00; 17.78; 0.44; 24.32; 2.14
  - China*: 438,000.00; 21.14; 2.85; 16.46; 3.37

*Entries marked with an asterisk appear with an asterisk in the source table.

*Source: _wp0610 - Appendix I*

### Appendix                                                                        I

### _wp0610 - Appendix I

### Total exports and trade shares (selected entries from Table A1)

- Christmas Island — Total Exports: 20.95 US$ millions; Share to U.S.: 1.82 percent; Average U.S. Tariff: 2.48 percent; Share to EU-15: 1.62 percent; Average EU Tariff: 2.22 percent
- Cocos (Keeling) Islands — Total Exports: 2.21 US$ millions; Share to U.S.: 2.80 percent; Average U.S. Tariff: 2.42 percent; Share to EU-15: 3.11 percent; Average EU Tariff: 1.63 percent
- Colombia — Total Exports: 13,100.00 US$ millions; Share to U.S.: 47.05 percent; Average U.S. Tariff: 0.35 percent; Share to EU-15: 14.39 percent; Average EU Tariff: 22.61 percent
- Congo, Rep. of — Total Exports: 2,708.20 US$ millions; Share to U.S.: 16.88 percent; Average U.S. Tariff: 0.02 percent; Share to EU-15: 9.74 percent; Average EU Tariff: 0.40 percent
- Cook Islands — Total Exports: 8.52 US$ millions; Share to U.S.: 7.23 percent; Average U.S. Tariff: 0.29 percent; Share to EU-15: 2.01 percent; Average EU Tariff: 4.26 percent
- Costa Rica — Total Exports: 5,800.40 US$ millions; Share to U.S.: 47.12 percent; Average U.S. Tariff: 0.39 percent; Share to EU-15: 18.24 percent; Average EU Tariff: 24.21 percent
- Cote d'Ivoire — Total Exports: 5,493.40 US$ millions; Share to U.S.: 7.09 percent; Average U.S. Tariff: 0.01 percent; Share to EU-15: 54.89 percent; Average EU Tariff: 1.64 percent
- Croatia — Total Exports: 6,186.60 US$ millions; Share to U.S.: 2.65 percent; Average U.S. Tariff: 0.98 percent; Share to EU-15: 54.99 percent; Average EU Tariff: 0.95 percent
- Cuba* — Total Exports: 1,221.70 US$ millions; Share to U.S.: 0.03 percent; Average U.S. Tariff: 0.00 percent; Share to EU-15: 25.88 percent; Average EU Tariff: 3.89 percent
- Dominica — Total Exports: 39.3 US$ millions; Share to U.S.: 6.32 percent; Average U.S. Tariff: 0.60 percent; Share to EU-15: 24.92 percent; Average EU Tariff: 0.06 percent
- Dominican Republic — Total Exports: 5,308.10 US$ millions; Share to U.S.: 85.87 percent; Average U.S. Tariff: 1.14 percent; Share to EU-15: 7.48 percent; Average EU Tariff: 7.98 percent
- Ecuador — Total Exports: 6,038.50 US$ millions; Share to U.S.: 40.60 percent; Average U.S. Tariff: 0.24 percent; Share to EU-15: 17.18 percent; Average EU Tariff: 48.77 percent
- Egypt — Total Exports: 6,160.70 US$ millions; Share to U.S.: 8.45 percent; Average U.S. Tariff: 6.06 percent; Share to EU-15: 32.84 percent; Average EU Tariff: 0.83 percent
- El Salvador — Total Exports: 1,254.90 US$ millions; Share to U.S.: 19.42 percent; Average U.S. Tariff: 4.17 percent; Share to EU-15: 6.11 percent; Average EU Tariff: 1.68 percent
- Falkland Island — Total Exports: 153.6 US$ millions; Share to U.S.: 3.38 percent; Average U.S. Tariff: 0.00 percent; Share to EU-15: 89.18 percent; Average EU Tariff: 0.34 percent
- Fiji — Total Exports: 50324.53 US$ millions; Share to U.S.: 24.53 percent; Average U.S. Tariff: 6.51 percent; Share to EU-15: 22.18 percent; Average EU Tariff: 32.90 percent
- French Southern and Antarctic* — Total Exports: 8.20 US$ millions; Share to U.S.: 0.84 percent; Average U.S. Tariff: 1.05 percent; Share to EU-15: 49.23 percent; Average EU Tariff: 5.31 percent
- French Polynesia* — Total Exports: 151.4 US$ millions; Share to U.S.: 14.56 percent; Average U.S. Tariff: 1.74 percent; Share to EU-15: 16.17 percent; Average EU Tariff: 0.11 percent
- Gabon — Total Exports: 319.9 US$ millions; Share to U.S.: 2.21 percent; Average U.S. Tariff: 0.00 percent; Share to EU-15: 40.26 percent; Average EU Tariff: 0.13 percent
- Georgia — Total Exports: 465.3 US$ millions; Share to U.S.: 3.30 percent; Average U.S. Tariff: 0.59 percent; Share to EU-15: 16.71 percent; Average EU Tariff: 0.94 percent
- Ghana — Total Exports: 2,324.30 US$ millions; Share to U.S.: 2.91 percent; Average U.S. Tariff: 0.06 percent; Share to EU-15: 54.04 percent; Average EU Tariff: 0.27 percent
- Gibraltar — Total Exports: 173.2 US$ millions; Share to U.S.: 1.67 percent; Average U.S. Tariff: 1.92 percent; Share to EU-15: 78.01 percent; Average EU Tariff: 2.42 percent
- Greenland* — Total Exports: 489.5 US$ millions; Share to U.S.: 2.94 percent; Average U.S. Tariff: 0.00 percent; Share to EU-15: 70.04 percent; Average EU Tariff: 0.72 percent
- Grenada — Total Exports: 3829.00 US$ millions; Share to U.S.: 0.02 percent; Average U.S. Tariff: 34.37 percent; Share to EU-15: 0.51 percent
- Guam — Total Exports: n.a. US$ millions; Share to U.S.: n.a.; Average U.S. Tariff: 9.45 percent; Share to EU-15: (not listed)
- Guatemala — Total Exports: 2,634.70 US$ millions; Share to U.S.: 30.02 percent; Average U.S. Tariff: 6.74 percent; Share to EU-15: 5.43 percent; Average EU Tariff: 1.33 percent
- Guyana — Total Exports: 472.1 US$ millions; Share to U.S.: 19.91 percent; Average U.S. Tariff: 0.07 percent; Share to EU-15: 33.85 percent; Average EU Tariff: 28.24 percent
- Honduras — Total Exports: 992.34 US$ millions; Share to U.S.: 1.85 percent; Average U.S. Tariff: 2.35 percent; Share to EU-15: 17.88 percent; Average EU Tariff: 5.34 percent
- India — Total Exports: 63,000.00 US$ millions; Share to U.S.: 18.05 percent; Average U.S. Tariff: 3.36 percent; Share to EU-15: 21.79 percent; Average EU Tariff: 4.46 percent
- Indonesia — Total Exports: 61,100.00 US$ millions; Share to U.S.: 12.10 percent; Average U.S. Tariff: 5.48 percent; Share to EU-15: 13.05 percent; Average EU Tariff: 4.04 percent
- Iran, Islamic Republic of* — Total Exports: 33,800.00 US$ millions; Share to U.S.: 0.41 percent; Average U.S. Tariff: 0.62 percent; Share to EU-15: 14.85 percent; Average EU Tariff: 0.35 percent
- Iraq — Total Exports: 8,942.70 US$ millions; Share to U.S.: 54.94 percent; Average U.S. Tariff: 0.13 percent; Share to EU-15: 18.74 percent; Average EU Tariff: 0.35 percent
- Jamaica — Total Exports: 1,631.50 US$ millions; Share to U.S.: 32.12 percent; Average U.S. Tariff: 0.64 percent; Share to EU-15: 31.16 percent; Average EU Tariff: 2.60 percent
- Jordan — Total Exports: 3,081.60 US$ millions; Share to U.S.: 21.51 percent; Average U.S. Tariff: 0.37 percent; Share to EU-15: 2.90 percent; Average EU Tariff: 1.28 percent
- Kazakhstan — Total Exports: 12,900.00 US$ millions; Share to U.S.: 0.76 percent; Average U.S. Tariff: 1.54 percent; Share to EU-15: 15.28 percent; Average EU Tariff: 0.66 percent
- Kenya — Total Exports: 2,551.10 US$ millions; Share to U.S.: 1.60 percent; Average U.S. Tariff: 0.36 percent; Share to EU-15: 27.78 percent; Average EU Tariff: 0.83 percent
- Korea, Dem. People’s Republic of — Total Exports: 942.8 US$ millions; Share to U.S.: 0.01 percent; Average U.S. Tariff: 80.60 percent; Share to EU-15: 6.63 percent; Average EU Tariff: 4.16 percent
- Kuwait* — Total Exports: 20,200.00 US$ millions; Share to U.S.: 12.28 percent; Average U.S. Tariff: 0.29 percent; Share to EU-15: 10.17 percent; Average EU Tariff: 0.32 percent
- Kyrgyz Republic — Total Exports: 581.7 US$ millions; Share to U.S.: 1.12 percent; Average U.S. Tariff: 8.91 percent; Share to EU-15: 3.03 percent; Average EU Tariff: 3.93 percent
- Lebanon — Total Exports: 1,523.90 US$ millions; Share to U.S.: 4.34 percent; Average U.S. Tariff: 1.12 percent; Share to EU-15: 9.42 percent; Average EU Tariff: 0.96 percent
- Libya* — Total Exports: 14,600.00 US$ millions; Share to U.S.: 2.10 percent; Average U.S. Tariff: 0.18 percent; Share to EU-15: 84.56 percent; Average EU Tariff: 0.25 percent
- Macao* — Total Exports: 2,822.68 US$ millions; Share to U.S.: 50.67 percent; Average U.S. Tariff: 17.82 percent; Share to EU-15: 28.68 percent; Average EU Tariff: 10.43 percent
- Macedonia, former Yugoslav Republic of — Total Exports: 1,363.20 US$ millions; Share to U.S.: 5.34 percent; Average U.S. Tariff: 9.45 percent; Share to EU-15: 54.65 percent; Average EU Tariff: 0.84 percent
- Malaysia* — Total Exports: 105,000.00 US$ millions; Share to U.S.: 19.58 percent; Average U.S. Tariff: 0.84 percent; Share to EU-15: 12.11 percent; Average EU Tariff: 1.67 percent
- Marshall Islands* — Total Exports: 178.6 US$ millions; Share to U.S.: 15.59 percent; Average U.S. Tariff: 0.01 percent; Share to EU-15: 24.93 percent; Average EU Tariff: 0.04 percent
- Mauritius — Total Exports: 1,862.10 US$ millions; Share to U.S.: 17.47 percent; Average U.S. Tariff: 4.80 percent; Share to EU-15: 65.90 percent; Average EU Tariff: 8.74 percent
- Mexico* — Total Exports: 165,000.00 US$ millions; Share to U.S.: 88.89 percent; Average U.S. Tariff: 0.27 percent; Share to EU-15: 3.38 percent; Average EU Tariff: 1.16 percent
- Micronesia, Federated States of* — Total Exports: 85.7 US$ millions; Share to U.S.: 18.04 percent; Average U.S. Tariff: n.a.; Share to EU-15: 0.16 percent; Average EU Tariff: 0.48 percent
- Moldova — Total Exports: 790.3 US$ millions; Share to U.S.: 4.26 percent; Average U.S. Tariff: 13.81 percent; Share to EU-15: 23.35 percent; Average EU Tariff: 4.69 percent
- Mongolia — Total Exports: 615.9 US$ millions; Share to U.S.: 23.21 percent; Average U.S. Tariff: 14.99 percent; Share to EU-15: 7.26 percent; Average EU Tariff: 3.63 percent
- Montserrat — Total Exports: 1.8 US$ millions; Share to U.S.: 4.30 percent; Average U.S. Tariff: 3.77 percent; Share to EU-15: 7.90 percent; Average EU Tariff: 1.85 percent
- Morocco — Total Exports: 8,777.20 US$ millions; Share to U.S.: 2.80 percent; Average U.S. Tariff: 2.66 percent; Share to EU-15: 75.71 percent; Average EU Tariff: 1.17 percent
- Namibia — Total Exports: 1,303.70 US$ millions; Share to U.S.: 2.70 percent; Average U.S. Tariff: 0.21 percent; Share to EU-15: 29.87 percent; Average EU Tariff: 0.56 percent
- Nauru* — Total Exports: 30.8 US$ millions; Share to U.S.: 1.00 percent; Average U.S. Tariff: 1.34 percent; Share to EU-15: 3.25 percent; Average EU Tariff: 1.51 percent
- Netherlands Antilles* — Total Exports: 1,377.00 US$ millions; Share to U.S.: 46.92 percent; Average U.S. Tariff: 0.37 percent; Share to EU-15: 10.09 percent; Average EU Tariff: 7.78 percent
- New Caledonia* — Total Exports: 729 US$ millions; Share to U.S.: 1.43 percent; Average U.S. Tariff: 0.92 percent; Share to EU-15: 35.78 percent; Average EU Tariff: 0.07 percent
- Nicaragua* — Total Exports: 605.2 US$ millions; Share to U.S.: 36.50 percent; Average U.S. Tariff: 7.06 percent; Share to EU-15: 10.71 percent; Average EU Tariff: 0.79 percent
- Nigeria — Total Exports: 24,100.00 US$ millions; Share to U.S.: 38.26 percent; Average U.S. Tariff: 0.00 percent; Share to EU-15: 21.84 percent; Average EU Tariff: 0.06 percent
- Niue — Total Exports: 3.6 US$ millions; Share to U.S.: 3.36 percent; Average U.S. Tariff: 6.47 percent; Share to EU-15: 1.71 percent; Average EU Tariff: 4.00 percent
- Norfolk Island — Total Exports: 353.9 US$ millions; Share to U.S.: 2 percent; Average U.S. Tariff: 0.18 percent; Share to EU-15: 11.03 percent; Average EU Tariff: 0.00 percent
- Northern Mariana Islands* — Total Exports: 10.5 US$ millions; Share to U.S.: n.a.; Average U.S. Tariff: n.a.; Share to EU-15: 12.89 percent; Average EU Tariff: 11.30 percent
- Oman — Total Exports: 11,400.00 US$ millions; Share to U.S.: 1.16 percent; Average U.S. Tariff: 4.86 percent; Share to EU-15: 1.93 percent; Average EU Tariff: 1.83 percent
- Pakistan — Total Exports: 12,700.00 US$ millions; Share to U.S.: 23.17 percent; Average U.S. Tariff: 10.30 percent; Share to EU-15: 29.14 percent; Average EU Tariff: 3.78 percent
- Palau* — Total Exports: 16.8 US$ millions; Share to U.S.: 0.91 percent; Average U.S. Tariff: 0.64 percent; Share to EU-15: 0.37 percent; Average EU Tariff: 5.40 percent
- Panama — Total Exports: 798.75 US$ millions; Share to U.S.: 2.03 percent; Average U.S. Tariff: 0.14 percent; Share to EU-15: 23.21 percent; Average EU Tariff: 51.25 percent
- Papua New Guinea — Total Exports: 2,260.20 US$ millions; Share to U.S.: 2.64 percent; Average U.S. Tariff: 0.06 percent; Share to EU-15: 11.03 percent; Average EU Tariff: 0.59 percent
- Paraguay — Total Exports: 1,241.50 US$ millions; Share to U.S.: 3.62 percent; Average U.S. Tariff: 2.12 percent; Share to EU-15: 6.87 percent; Average EU Tariff: 2.95 percent
- Peru — Total Exports: 8,749.40 US$ millions; Share to U.S.: 26.50 percent; Average U.S. Tariff: 0.12 percent; Share to EU-15: 25.35 percent; Average EU Tariff: 0.60 percent
- Philippines — Total Exports: 36,200.00 US$ millions; Share to U.S.: 20.07 percent; Average U.S. Tariff: 4.05 percent; Share to EU-15: 16.25 percent; Average EU Tariff: 1.41 percent
- Pitcairn — Total Exports: 3.6 US$ millions; Share to U.S.: 3.55 percent; Average U.S. Tariff: 0.88 percent; Share to EU-15: 61.00 percent; Average EU Tariff: 0.50 percent
- Qatar* — Total Exports: 13,400.00 US$ millions; Share to U.S.: 1.68 percent; Average U.S. Tariff: 3.08 percent; Share to EU-15: 2.09 percent; Average EU Tariff: 0.56 percent
- Romania — Total Exports: 17,600.00 US$ millions; Share to U.S.: 3.51 percent; Average U.S. Tariff: 3.21 percent; Share to EU-15: 67.88 percent; Average EU Tariff: 1.01 percent
- Russian Federation — Total Exports: 134,000.00 US$ millions; Share to U.S.: 2.30 percent; Average U.S. Tariff: 0.63 percent; Share to EU-15: 25.92 percent; Average EU Tariff: 0.79 percent
- Saint Helena — Total Exports: 21.1 US$ millions; Share to U.S.: 27.26 percent; Average U.S. Tariff: 0.15 percent; Share to EU-15: 34.53 percent; Average EU Tariff: 0.68 percent
- Saint Pierre and Miquelon* — Total Exports: 4.8 US$ millions; Share to U.S.: 6.08 percent; Average U.S. Tariff: 0.02 percent; Share to EU-15: 21.26 percent; Average EU Tariff: 3.16 percent
- Saudi Arabia* — Total Exports: 89,000.00 US$ millions; Share to U.S.: 21.95 percent; Average U.S. Tariff: 0.28 percent; Share to EU-15: 15.27 percent; Average EU Tariff: 0.46 percent
- Serbia and Montenegro — Total Exports: 2,455.00 US$ millions; Share to U.S.: 0.64 percent; Average U.S. Tariff: 1.37 percent; Share to EU-15: 59.62 percent; Average EU Tariff: 10.20 percent
- Seychelles — Total Exports: 273.8 US$ millions; Share to U.S.: 0.81 percent; Average U.S. Tariff: 0.22 percent; Share to EU-15: 76.99 percent; Average EU Tariff: 0.49 percent
- South Africa — Total Exports: 31,600.00 US$ millions; Share to U.S.: 12.15 percent; Average U.S. Tariff: 0.19 percent; Share to EU-15: 35.57 percent; Average EU Tariff: 1.41 percent
- Sri Lanka — Total Exports: 4,867.80 US$ millions; Share to U.S.: 36.45 percent; Average U.S. Tariff: 13.39 percent; Share to EU-15: 29.35 percent; Average EU Tariff: 6.46 percent

### Observations from the table segment
- Several economies show very high shares of exports directed to one partner: e.g., Mexico* — Share to U.S.: 88.89 percent; Dominican Republic — Share to U.S.: 85.87 percent; Macao* — Share to U.S.: 50.67 percent.
- Some entries show unusually high Average U.S. Tariff values: Korea, Dem. People’s Republic of — Average U.S. Tariff: 80.60 percent; Macao* — Average U.S. Tariff: 17.82 percent; Moldova — Average U.S. Tariff: 13.81 percent; Sri Lanka — Average U.S. Tariff: 13.39 percent.
- Several economies have very large Total Exports figures in the dataset excerpt: Russia — 134,000.00 US$ millions; Malaysia* — 105,000.00 US$ millions; Mexico* — 165,000.00 US$ millions; India — 63,000.00 US$ millions; Indonesia — 61,100.00 US$ millions.

*Italicized entries in source table indicate notation present in the original table.*

*Source: Appendix I, Table A1 (excerpt) of the provided PDF content.*

### Appendix                                                                        I

### _wp0610 - Appendix I

### Table A1. Total Exports (continued / concluded) — Selected country entries and key statistics
- St. Kitts and Nevis: Total Exports US$ 48.378.48; Share to U.S. (percent) 0.04; Average U.S. Tariff 17.23; Share to EU-15 (percent) 10.52
- St. Lucia: Total Exports US$ 62.319.55; Share to U.S. (percent) 2.30; Average U.S. Tariff 33.16; Share to EU-15 (percent) 0.05
- St. Vincent and the Grenadines: Total Exports US$ 38.113.23; Share to U.S. (percent) 0.16; Average U.S. Tariff 30.23; Share to EU-15 (percent) 0.09
- Suriname: Total Exports US$ 550.626.84; Share to U.S. (percent) 0.01; Average U.S. Tariff 36.69; Share to EU-15 (percent) 2.57
- Swaziland: Total Exports US$ 59928.96; Share to U.S. (percent) 0.62; Average U.S. Tariff 21.19; Share to EU-15 (percent) 16.39
- Syrian Arab Republic*: Total Exports US$ 5,730.703.70; Share to U.S. (percent) 1.76; Average U.S. Tariff 57.07; Share to EU-15 (percent) 1.42
- Tajikistan*: Total Exports US$ 559.31.38; Share to U.S. (percent) 9.28; Average U.S. Tariff 18.11; Share to EU-15 (percent) 4.09
- Thailand: Total Exports US$ 80,300.0017.02; Share to U.S. (percent) 2.81; Average U.S. Tariff 14.72; Share to EU-15 (percent) 6.41
- Tokelau: Total Exports US$ 33.620.33; Share to U.S. (percent) 4.40; Average U.S. Tariff 35.54; Share to EU-15 (percent) 4.41
- Tonga: Total Exports US$ 30.649.28; Share to U.S. (percent) 0.04; Average U.S. Tariff 4.81; Share to EU-15 (percent) 30.19
- Trinidad and Tobago: Total Exports US$ 5,241.3054.85; Share to U.S. (percent) 0.01; Average U.S. Tariff 7.84; Share to EU-15 (percent) 0.94
- Tunisia: Total Exports US$ 7,354.400.66; Share to U.S. (percent) 4.01; Average U.S. Tariff 79.92; Share to EU-15 (percent) 1.76
- Turkey: Total Exports US$ 47,300.007.94; Share to U.S. (percent) 5.17; Average U.S. Tariff 51.82; Share to EU-15 (percent) 2.02
- Turkmenistan*: Total Exports US$ 934.18.72; Share to U.S. (percent) 10.11; Average U.S. Tariff 29.16; Share to EU-15 (percent) 0.64
- Turks and Caicos Islands: Total Exports US$ 33.818.88; Share to U.S. (percent) 0.01; Average U.S. Tariff 47.88; Share to EU-15 (percent) 1.92
- Ukraine*: Total Exports US$ 20,900.001.48; Share to U.S. (percent) 1.48; Average U.S. Tariff 19.27; Share to EU-15 (percent) 2.86
- United Arab Emirates*: Total Exports US$ 47,100.002.57; Share to U.S. (percent) 4.09; Average U.S. Tariff 8.40; Share to EU-15 (percent) 1.44
- Uruguay: Total Exports US$ 2,198.0011.40; Share to U.S. (percent) 11.77; Average U.S. Tariff 22.91; Share to EU-15 (percent) 13.62
- Uzbekistan: Total Exports US$ 1,904.004.60; Share to U.S. (percent) 3.03; Average U.S. Tariff 15.77; Share to EU-15 (percent) 0.85
- Venezuela: Total Exports US$ 25,000.0044.35; Share to U.S. (percent) 0.15; Average U.S. Tariff 12.56; Share to EU-15 (percent) 1.15
- Vietnam*: Total Exports US$ 21,800.0022.50; Share to U.S. (percent) 9.96; Average U.S. Tariff 25.25; Share to EU-15 (percent) 5.98
- Wallis and Futura Islands: Total Exports US$ 1.30.70; Share to U.S. (percent) 4.77; Average U.S. Tariff 24.45; Share to EU-15 (percent) 2.19
- Zimbabwe: Total Exports US$ 1,592.803.79; Share to U.S. (percent) 1.83; Average U.S. Tariff 33.31; Share to EU-15 (percent) 4.44

Developed countries (selected entries)
- Andorra: Total Exports US$ 83.30.35; Share to U.S. (percent) 1.06; Average U.S. Tariff 88.07; Share to EU-15 (percent) 7.43
- Australia: Total Exports US$ 70,200.008.76; Share to U.S. (percent) 1.55; Average U.S. Tariff 14.21; Share to EU-15 (percent) 2.31
- Austria: Total Exports US$ 88,700.005.21; Share to U.S. (percent) 1.58; Average U.S. Tariff 58.66
- Belgium: Total Exports US$ 255,000.006.71; Share to U.S. (percent) 1.01; Average U.S. Tariff 72.57
- Canada: Total Exports US$ 272,000.0085.78; Share to U.S. (percent) 0.04; Average U.S. Tariff 5.09; Share to EU-15 (percent) 3.28
- Cyprus: Total Exports US$ 922.91.92; Share to U.S. (percent) 1.42; Average U.S. Tariff 56.30
- Czech Republic: Total Exports US$ 48,700.002.44; Share to U.S. (percent) 1.49; Average U.S. Tariff 69.83
- Denmark: Total Exports US$ 64,600.005.71; Share to U.S. (percent) 0.95; Average U.S. Tariff 60.60
- Estonia: Total Exports US$ 5,622.502.33; Share to U.S. (percent) 1.28; Average U.S. Tariff 58.25
- Faeroe Islands: Total Exports US$ 595.52.16; Share to U.S. (percent) 0.08; Average U.S. Tariff 79.02; Share to EU-15 (percent) 2.80
- Finland: Total Exports US$ 52,500.007.90; Share to U.S. (percent) 0.71; Average U.S. Tariff 51.39
- France: Total Exports US$ 358,000.006.95; Share to U.S. (percent) 1.12; Average U.S. Tariff 62.78
- Germany: Total Exports US$ 749,000.009.17; Share to U.S. (percent) 1.67; Average U.S. Tariff 54.23
- Greece: Total Exports US$ 13,700.006.42; Share to U.S. (percent) 2.16; Average U.S. Tariff 47.32
- Hong Kong SAR: Total Exports US$ 229,000.0018.24; Share to U.S. (percent) 8.51; Average U.S. Tariff 13.68; Share to EU-15 (percent) 3.66
- Hungary: Total Exports US$ 42,300.003.14; Share to U.S. (percent) 1.04; Average U.S. Tariff 73.85
- Iceland: Total Exports US$ 2,380.509.45; Share to U.S. (percent) 0.34; Average U.S. Tariff 72.07; Share to EU-15 (percent) 1.14
- Ireland: Total Exports US$ 93,000.0020.60; Share to U.S. (percent) 0.11; Average U.S. Tariff 61.27
- Israel: Total Exports US$ 31,800.0038.04; Share to U.S. (percent) 0.10; Average U.S. Tariff 26.50; Share to EU-15 (percent) 1.22
- Italy: Total Exports US$ 300,000.008.27; Share to U.S. (percent) 3.23; Average U.S. Tariff 54.19
- Japan: Total Exports US$ 472,000.0024.90; Share to U.S. (percent) 1.73; Average U.S. Tariff 15.35; Share to EU-15 (percent) 3.84
- Korea, Republic of: Total Exports US$ 196,000.0019.55; Share to U.S. (percent) 2.24; Average U.S. Tariff 14.10; Share to EU-15 (percent) 3.48
- Latvia: Total Exports US$ 2,893.702.89; Share to U.S. (percent) 0.67; Average U.S. Tariff 61.80
- Liechtenstein: Total Exports n.a.n.a.; Share to U.S. (percent) 1.94; Average U.S. Tariff n.a.; Share to EU-15 (percent) 0.29
- Lithuania: Total Exports US$ 7,162.102.80; Share to U.S. (percent) 1.61; Average U.S. Tariff 42.06
- Luxembourg: Total Exports US$ 9,986.102.42; Share to U.S. (percent) 1.66; Average U.S. Tariff 82.44
- Malta: Total Exports US$ 2,467.1014.46; Share to U.S. (percent) 1.07; Average U.S. Tariff 44.28
- Monaco: Total Exports US$ 362.7n.a.; Share to U.S. (percent) 1.31; Average U.S. Tariff 1.14
- Netherlands: Total Exports US$ 227,000.005.31; Share to U.S. (percent) 0.93; Average U.S. Tariff 72.03
- New Zealand: Total Exports US$ 16,500.0014.51; Share to U.S. (percent) 2.48; Average U.S. Tariff 15.35; Share to EU-15 (percent) 32.47
- Norway: Total Exports US$ 67,900.008.64; Share to U.S. (percent) 0.35; Average U.S. Tariff 75.62; Share to EU-15 (percent) 0.33
- Poland: Total Exports US$ 53,500.002.20; Share to U.S. (percent) 2.21; Average U.S. Tariff 68.35
- Portugal: Total Exports US$ 31,800.005.70; Share to U.S. (percent) 2.70; Average U.S. Tariff 79.35
- San Marino: Total Exports n.a.n.a.; Share to U.S. (percent) 1.52; Average U.S. Tariff n.a.; Share to EU-15 (percent) 3.81
- Singapore: Total Exports US$ 144,000.0014.26; Share to U.S. (percent) 0.47; Average U.S. Tariff 13.37; Share to EU-15 (percent) 1.99
- Slovak Republic: Total Exports US$ 22,000.005.26; Share to U.S. (percent) 2.70; Average U.S. Tariff 60.67
- Slovenia: Total Exports US$ 12,800.003.64; Share to U.S. (percent) 1.77; Average U.S. Tariff 58.41
- Spain: Total Exports US$ 158,000.004.10; Share to U.S. (percent) 2.33; Average U.S. Tariff 71.10
- Sweden: Total Exports US$ 102,000.0011.48; Share to U.S. (percent) 1.00; Average U.S. Tariff 53.99
- Switzerland: Total Exports US$ 101,000.0011.30; Share to U.S. (percent) 1.52; Average U.S. Tariff 59.40; Share to EU-15 (percent) 0.98
- Taiwan Province of China: Total Exports US$ 151,000.0017.67; Share to U.S. (percent) 2.41; Average U.S. Tariff 12.51; Share to EU-15 (percent) 1.85
- United Kingdom: Total Exports US$ 320,000.0015.02; Share to U.S. (percent) 0.96; Average U.S. Tariff 53.42
- United States: Total Exports US$ 724,000.00; Share to U.S. (percent) 20.84; Average U.S. Tariff 2.10

- Note: an asterisk indicates a developing country/region that does not receive GSP from the U.S.

### Table A2. EU and U.S. Preferential Trade Arrangements (used in simulation)

(i) European Union Preferential Trade Arrangements used in Simulation
- GSP rates
- GSP rates for LDC
- ACP rates
- Preference for European Economic Area
- Preference for Overseas Countries and Territories
- Preference for Countries Fighting Drug
- Preference for Albania
- Preference for Algeria
- Preference for Andorra
- Preference for Bosnia and Herzegovina
- Preference for Bulgaria
- Preference for Taiwan Province of China
- Preference for Croatia
- Preference for Cyprus
- Preference for Czech Republic
- Preference for Egypt
- Preference for Estonia
- Preference for Faroe Island
- Preference for West Bank and Gaza Strip
- Preference for Hong Kong SAR
- Preference for Hungary
- Preference for Iceland
- Preference for Israel
- Preference for Jordan
- Preference for Lebanon
- Preference for Latvia
- Preference for Lithuania
- Preference for Macedonia, former Yugoslav Republic of
- Preference for Malta
- Preference for Mexico
- Preference for Morocco
- Preference for Myanmar
- Preference for Norway
- Preference for Poland
- Preference for Romania
- Preference for Slovak Republic
- Preference for Slovenia
- Preference for South Africa
- Preference for Switzerland
- Preference for Syrian Arab Republic
- Preference for Tunisia
- Preference for Turkey
- Preference for Serbia and Montenegro

(ii) U.S. Preferential Trade Arrangements used in Simulation
- GSP rates
- GSP rates for LDC
- Africa Growth and Opportunity Act (AGOA)
- Andean Trade Preference Act (ATPA)
- Andean Trade Promotion and Drug Eradication Act (ATPDEA)
- Caribbean Basin Initiative (CBI)
- Caribbean Basin Trade Partnership Act (CBTPA)
- Preference for Canada
- Preference for Chile
- Preference for Israel Special Rate (duty-free treatment)
- Preference for Jordan
- Preference for Mexico
- Preference for Singapore

*Source: _wp0610 - Appendix I*

### Appendix                                                                        I

### Appendix I — Table A3. Change in Market Access Following a 40 Percent Tariff Cut (Proxied by Change in Import Demand by European Union and United States)

### African LDCs — reported values by country (row values reproduced exactly as in source)
- Angola — 0.04; -0.05; -0.03; 0.04; -0.05; -0.03; 0.04; -0.05; -0.03
- Benin — 1.43; 0.42; 1.39; 1.35; 0.42; 1.31; 1.69; 0.42; 1.64
- Burkina Faso — 2.22; 2.06; 2.22; 0.30; 2.06; 0.33; 2.99; 2.06; 2.98
- Burundi — 0.13; 0.00; 0.12; 0.13; 0.00; 0.12; 0.13; 0.00; 0.12
- Cape Verde — -1.09; -10.86; -2.47; -1.10; -5.91; -1.78; -1.08; -10.86; -2.47
- Central African Republic — 0.06; -0.04; 0.05; 0.06; -0.04; 0.05; 0.06; -0.04; 0.05
- Chad — 0.44; 0.02; 0.05; 0.44; 0.02; 0.05; 0.44; 0.02; 0.05
- Comoros — 1.38; 0.05; 0.81; 1.38; 0.05; 0.81; 1.38; 0.05; 0.81
- Congo, Dem. Rep. of — 0.08; -0.02; 0.07; 0.04; -0.02; 0.03; 0.09; -0.02; 0.08
- Djibouti — 1.79; 4.24; 2.11; 1.79; -0.03; 1.54; 1.79; 4.24; 2.11
- Equatorial Guinea — -0.15; -0.02; -0.08; -0.15; -0.02; -0.08; -0.15; -0.02; -0.08
- Eritrea — 0.30; 1.83; 0.52; 0.28; 0.31; 0.29; 0.31; 1.83; 0.52
- Ethiopia — 1.22; -1.14; 0.81; 0.32; -0.20; 0.23; 1.58; -1.14; 1.10
- Gambia, The — 1.94; 1.44; 1.92; 1.94; 1.44; 1.92; 1.94; 1.44; 1.92
- Guinea — 0.66; 0.13; 0.59; 0.66; 0.12; 0.59; 0.66; 0.13; 0.59
- Guinea-Bissau — -1.70; -0.05; -0.45; -1.70; -0.05; -0.45; -1.70; -0.05; -0.45
- Lesotho — 0.32; -9.44; -9.31; 0.40; -6.63; -6.53; 0.29; -9.44; -9.31
- Liberia* — 0.12; 0.03; 0.11; 0.12; 0.03; 0.11; 0.12; 0.03; 0.11
- Madagascar — 0.44; -6.55; -2.67; -1.53; -5.51; -3.30; 1.25; -6.55; -2.23
- Malawi — 6.53; -1.73; 4.02; 0.48; 0.35; 0.44; 8.90; -1.73; 5.67
- Mali — 0.25; 0.54; 0.27; 0.25; 0.54; 0.27; 0.25; 0.54; 0.27
- Mauritania — -0.33; 0.02; -0.32; -0.33; 0.02; -0.32; -0.32; 0.02; -0.32
- Mozambique — 2.51; -0.79; 2.46; 2.27; -0.40; 2.23; 2.61; -0.79; 2.56
- Niger — 0.09; 1.20; 0.35; 0.04; 1.20; 0.32; 0.11; 1.20; 0.37
- Rwanda — -0.27; 0.00; -0.21; 0.02; 0.00; 0.02; -0.35; 0.00; -0.27
- São Tomé and Príncipe — 0.85; 4.34; 0.89; 0.85; 4.34; 0.89; 0.90; 4.34; 0.93
- Senegal — -0.56; 0.30; -0.55; -0.56; 0.30; -0.55; -0.39; 0.30; -0.38
- Sierra Leone — 0.60; 2.31; 0.74; 0.60; 0.65; 0.60; 0.60; 2.31; 0.74
- Somalia — 0.96; 2.85; 1.56; 0.96; 2.85; 1.56; 0.96; 2.85; 1.56
- Sudan — 0.96; 0.00; 0.95; 0.32; 0.00; 0.31; 1.16; 0.00; 1.15
- Tanzania — -0.38; -0.74; -0.39; 0.11; -0.58; 0.09; -0.57; -0.74; -0.58
- Togo — -0.72; 0.15; -0.70; -0.76; 0.15; -0.74; -0.69; 0.15; -0.67
- Uganda — 1.61; -1.60; 1.32; 1.56; -1.44; 1.29; 1.63; -1.60; 1.34
- Zambia — 12.91; -0.02; 10.13; 0.31; -0.01; 0.24; 17.94; -0.02; 14.07

### Non African LDCs — reported values by country (row values reproduced exactly as in source)
- Afghanistan, Islamic Republic of — 1.92; 0.16; 1.40; 1.85; 0.15; 1.35; 1.95; 0.16; 1.42
- Bangladesh — 3.66; 15.33; 7.88; 3.66; 10.66; 6.19; 3.67; 15.33; 7.89
- Bhutan — 2.14; 1.31; 1.89; 2.14; 1.31; 1.89; 2.14; 1.31; 1.89
- Cambodia — 2.49; 17.33; 13.30; 2.30; 14.42; 11.13; 2.56; 17.33; 13.32

*Italicized line indicating source PDF and table.*

### Appendix                                                                        I

### Appendix I

### Table A3 — Change in Market Access Following a 40 Percent Tariff Cut (Proxied by Change in Import Demand by European Union and United States)

- Table structure (as presented in the excerpt):
  - Three scenarios shown: "No exclusions", "3 percent tariff lines excluded", "tiered agricultural formula".
  - For each scenario, the table reports three columns: "EU", "US", "(EU+US)".
  - The excerpt covers country/region rows for a set of low-income, small island, and other developing countries (partial table).

### Key numeric findings (selected values from the excerpt)

- Notable large positive changes (excerpt):
  - Fiji — No exclusions: EU 49.69, US 7.51, (EU+US) 24.12; 3 percent tariff lines excluded: EU -0.01, US 7.47, (EU+US) 4.52; tiered agricultural formula: EU 69.52, US 7.51, (EU+US) 31.93.
  - Guyana — No exclusions: EU 43.12, US -0.75, (EU+US) 27.24; 3 percent tariff lines excluded: EU 1.12, US -0.14, (EU+US) 0.66; tiered agricultural formula: EU 59.72, US -0.73, (EU+US) 37.84.
  - Kiribati — No exclusions: EU 13.70, US 0.04, (EU+US) 3.46; 3 percent tariff lines excluded: EU 13.70, US 0.04, (EU+US) 3.46; tiered agricultural formula: EU 17.77, US 0.04, (EU+US) 4.45.
  - Myanmar* — No exclusions: EU 13.49, US n.a., (EU+US) 13.49; 3 percent tariff lines excluded: EU 13.27, US n.a., (EU+US) 13.27; tiered agricultural formula: EU 13.58, US n.a., (EU+US) 13.58.
  - Guam — No exclusions: EU 12.28, US n.a., (EU+US) 12.28; 3 percent tariff lines excluded: EU 6.09, US n.a., (EU+US) 6.09; tiered agricultural formula: EU 14.41, US n.a., (EU+US) 14.41.
  - Argentina — No exclusions: EU 12.20, US 2.49, (EU+US) 8.67; 3 percent tariff lines excluded: EU 3.76, US 2.20, (EU+US) 3.19; tiered agricultural formula: EU 15.51, US 2.59, (EU+US) 10.81.
  - Brunei Darussalam* — No exclusions: EU 4.72, US 12.69, (EU+US) 11.54; 3 percent tariff lines excluded: EU 4.72, US 12.46, (EU+US) 11.34; tiered agricultural formula: EU 4.72, US 12.69, (EU+US) 11.54.
  - Brazil — No exclusions: EU 7.27, US 4.24, (EU+US) 5.72; 3 percent tariff lines excluded: EU 2.91, US 3.75, (EU+US) 3.34; tiered agricultural formula: EU 9.44, US 4.41, (EU+US) 6.86.

- Notable large negative changes (excerpt):
  - Dominica — reported values include: -24.99, 0.76, -21.84; and a second line with -31.38, 0.76, -27.44 (entries shown across the excerpt consistent with large negative impacts in some scenarios).
  - Belize — No exclusions: EU -8.32, US -0.71, (EU+US) -4.39; 3 percent tariff lines excluded: EU 0.65, US -0.22, (EU+US) 0.20; tiered agricultural formula: EU -8.32, US -0.93, (EU+US) -4.50.
  - Jamaica — No exclusions: EU -1.87, US -5.31, (EU+US) -3.01; 3 percent tariff lines excluded: EU -0.76, US -5.04, (EU+US) -2.17; tiered agricultural formula: EU -1.99, US -5.31, (EU+US) -3.08.
  - Côte d’Ivoire — No exclusions: EU -2.05, US -0.01, (EU+US) -1.64; 3 percent tariff lines excluded: EU -0.06, US -0.01, (EU+US) -0.05; tiered agricultural formula: EU -2.49, US -0.01, (EU+US) -2.00.
  - Falkland Island — No exclusions: EU -2.53, US 0.00, (EU+US) -2.42; 3 percent tariff lines excluded: EU -2.66, US 0.00, (EU+US) -2.53; tiered agricultural formula: EU -2.50, US 0.00, (EU+US) -2.38.

- Examples of small or mixed impacts (excerpt):
  - Haiti — No exclusions: EU 1.63, US -4.87, (EU+US) -4.61; 3 percent tariff lines excluded: EU 1.63, US -2.99, (EU+US) -2.81; tiered agricultural formula: EU 1.64, US -4.87, (EU+US) -4.61.
  - Lao People's Democratic Republic* — No exclusions: EU 2.69, US -6.21, (EU+US) 2.47; 3 percent tariff lines excluded: EU 2.68, US -5.94, (EU+US) 2.47; tiered agricultural formula: EU 2.70, US -6.21, (EU+US) 2.48.
  - Maldives* — No exclusions: EU 2.81, US 11.82, (EU+US) 9.82; 3 percent tariff lines excluded: EU 2.81, US 11.82, (EU+US) 9.82; tiered agricultural formula: EU 2.64, US 11.82, (EU+US) 9.78.
  - Solomon Islands — No exclusions: EU -0.10, US 0.07, (EU+US) 0.00; same values reported across scenarios in the excerpt.
  - Timor-Leste — No exclusions: EU 1.48, US 0.00, (EU+US) 1.44; same values reported across scenarios in the excerpt.
  - Tuvalu — No exclusions: EU 5.05, US 0.79, (EU+US) 4.92; same values reported across scenarios in the excerpt.

- Representative entries from "Other developing countries" block (excerpt):
  - Albania — No exclusions: EU 9.74, US 2.88, (EU+US) 9.55; 3 percent tariff lines excluded: EU 9.71, US 2.39, (EU+US) 9.51; tiered agricultural formula: EU 10.28, US 2.88, (EU+US) 10.08.
  - Algeria* — No exclusions: EU 0.26, US 0.18, (EU+US) 0.23; 3 percent tariff lines excluded: EU 0.25, US 0.18, (EU+US) 0.22; tiered agricultural formula: EU 0.27, US 0.18, (EU+US) 0.23.
  - Barbados — No exclusions: EU 20.44, US 0.12, (EU+US) 12.54; 3 percent tariff lines excluded: EU 0.47, US 0.14, (EU+US) 0.34; tiered agricultural formula: EU 28.39, US 0.11, (EU+US) 17.41.
  - Bosnia and Herzegovina — No exclusions: EU 7.83, US 1.62, (EU+US) 7.74; 3 percent tariff lines excluded: EU 6.89, US 1.08, (EU+US) 6.81; tiered agricultural formula: EU 8.50, US 1.63, (EU+US) 8.40.
  - China* — No exclusions: EU 4.00, US 3.42, (EU+US) 3.62; 3 percent tariff lines excluded: EU 3.94, US 3.13, (EU+US) 3.42; tiered agricultural formula: EU 4.06, US 3.42, (EU+US) 3.65.
  - Colombia — No exclusions: EU 3.00, US -0.28, (EU+US) 0.54; 3 percent tariff lines excluded: EU -0.07, US -0.15, (EU+US) -0.13; tiered agricultural formula: EU 3.80, US -0.27, (EU+US) 0.75.
  - India — No exclusions: EU 5.83, US 3.76, (EU+US) 4.78; 3 percent tariff lines excluded: EU 5.06, US 3.23, (EU+US) 4.13; tiered agricultural formula: EU 6.11, US 3.76, (EU+US) 4.92.
  - Indonesia — No exclusions: EU 5.10, US 5.90, (EU+US) 5.49; 3 percent tariff lines excluded: EU 5.10, US 3.57, (EU+US) 4.34; tiered agricultural formula: EU 5.13, US 5.90, (EU+US) 5.51.

### Observations visible within the excerpt
- The table reports heterogeneous impacts across countries and scenarios: some countries show large positive changes in import demand (e.g., Fiji, Guyana, Barbados), while others show sizable negative changes (e.g., Dominica, Belize).
- Several entries report "n.a." for the US column (e.g., Myanmar, Guam), indicating unavailable US-side estimates in these rows in the excerpt.
- A number of small island states report large percentage changes under at least one scenario in the excerpt (examples above).

*Source: Table A3 (excerpt) from Appendix I of the provided PDF.*

### Appendix                                                                        I

### Appendix I

### Table A3 — Change in Market Access Following a 40 Percent Tariff Cut (continued)
(Proxied by Change in Import Demand by European Union and United States)

- Table structure and scenarios:
  - Columns present changes proxied by the EU, the US, and combined (EU+US).
  - Three policy scenarios are reported across columns: "No exclusions", "3 percent tariff lines excluded", and "tiered agricultural formula".
  - Each country/region row shows numeric changes for EU, US, and (EU+US) under the three scenarios. Numeric values are reported exactly as in the table.

- Selected country/region entries (values presented exactly as in source):
  - Libya* — 0.50 0.16 0.49 0.50 0.16 0.49 0.50 0.16 0.49
  - Macao SAR* — 14.01 19.31 17.48 14.01 11.47 12.34 14.01 19.31 17.48
  - Macedonia, former Yugoslav Republic of — -1.50 10.77 -0.34 -1.25 7.19 -0.45 -1.59 10.78 -0.42
  - Malaysia* — 2.15 1.11 1.47 2.14 0.95 1.37 2.16 1.11 1.48
  - Mauritius — 11.30 -0.71 9.53 -1.26 -0.46 -1.14 16.27 -0.69 13.77
  - Mexico* — 0.79 -0.54 -0.48 0.77 -0.43 -0.38 0.80 -0.54 -0.48
  - Moldova — 7.32 15.64 8.31 7.22 14.26 8.06 7.49 15.64 8.46
  - Mongolia — 4.33 16.69 15.52 4.33 13.43 12.57 4.33 16.69 15.52
  - Morocco — -0.97 3.26 -0.65 -0.96 3.09 -0.67 -0.90 3.33 -0.59
  - Namibia — -1.86 -3.06 -2.19 -0.78 -2.92 -1.36 -2.33 -3.06 -2.53
  - Nicaragua* — -0.39 6.87 6.32 0.19 7.33 6.80 -0.52 6.87 6.32
  - Norway (Northern Mariana Islands* entry) — 16.19 n.a. 16.19 16.19 n.a. 16.19 16.19 n.a. 16.19
  - Pakistan — 2.41 13.67 7.57 0.98 12.97 6.47 2.91 13.67 7.84
  - Romania — -0.96 3.28 -0.69 -1.71 2.27 -1.46 -0.39 3.28 -0.16
  - Russian Federation — 1.20 0.84 1.13 0.87 0.73 0.84 1.33 0.84 1.23
  - Serbia and Montenegro — 16.20 2.48 15.35 8.90 2.44 8.50 19.48 2.48 18.43
  - Sri Lanka — 8.67 14.31 11.85 8.64 10.43 9.65 8.69 14.31 11.86
  - St. Kitts and Nevis — 8.97 -0.64 2.41 0.16 -0.64 -0.39 12.50 -0.64 3.53
  - St. Lucia — -58.73 1.58 -37.55 -0.04 1.31 0.43 -74.26 1.58 -47.63
  - Suriname — 3.63 0.01 2.15 1.35 0.01 0.80 4.47 0.01 2.64
  - Swaziland — 23.52 10.08 -0.08 1.39 -4.80 -2.96 32.38 -10.07 2.56
  - Thailand — 9.24 3.23 5.69 6.54 2.58 4.20 11.15 3.23 6.48
  - Turkey — 0.80 6.35 1.66 0.46 5.54 1.25 0.95 6.35 1.78
  - Ukraine* — 4.77 1.77 4.22 3.85 1.46 3.41 5.14 1.77 4.53
  - United Arab Emirates* — 2.00 5.16 2.67 1.94 4.57 2.50 2.03 5.16 2.69
  - Uruguay — 18.55 22.48 20.42 5.06 2.28 3.74 25.17 29.09 27.03
  - Vietnam* — 7.34 10.76 9.05 7.32 8.05 7.69 7.36 10.76 9.07
  - Zimbabwe — 7.68 2.25 6.99 6.54 2.23 5.99 8.14 2.25 7.39

- Developed countries (selected entries; values exact):
  - Andorra — 10.91 0.92 10.79 5.56 0.92 5.51 12.94 0.92 12.80
  - Australia — 3.33 2.51 2.97 1.79 2.36 2.04 4.12 2.54 3.43
  - Canada — 4.70 -0.22 0.07 1.86 -0.20 -0.08 6.45 -0.22 0.17
  - Faeroe Islands — 3.72 0.15 3.67 3.72 0.15 3.67 4.31 0.15 4.26
  - France — 1.71 1.71 1.60 1.60 1.75 1.75
  - Germany — 2.53 2.53 2.49 2.49 2.53 2.53
  - Greece — 4.04 4.04 3.59 3.59 4.04 4.04

*Italicized entries and annotations (e.g., n.a.) appear in the original table as provided.

* _wp0610 - Appendix I (Table A3)

### Appendix                                                                        I

### _wp0610 - Appendix I

### Change in Market Access Following a 40 Percent Tariff Cut (Proxied by Change in Import Demand by European Union and United States) — Table A3 (concluded)

- Context: Change in market access following a 40 percent tariff cut proxied by change in import demand by European Union (EU) and United States (US).
- Table covers multiple country/region rows with columns for EU, US, and combined (EU+US) results under different exclusions/formula specifications (e.g., "No exclusions", "3 percent tariff lines excluded", "tiered agricultural formula"). Selected entries from the table (values preserved exactly as in the source):

  - Hong Kong SAR
    - Combined (No exclusions): 5.01
    - Combined (3 percent tariff lines excluded): 9.37
    - Combined (tiered agricultural formula): 7.07
    - EU (No exclusions): 4.97
    - US (No exclusions): 6.94
    - (EU+US) (No exclusions): 5.90
    - EU (3 percent tariff lines excluded): 5.03
    - US (3 percent tariff lines excluded): 9.37
    - (EU+US) (3 percent tariff lines excluded): 7.08

  - Hungary
    - Combined (No exclusions): 1.42
    - Combined (3 percent tariff lines excluded): 1.42
    - Combined (tiered agricultural formula): 1.33
    - EU (No exclusions): 1.33
    - EU (3 percent tariff lines excluded): 1.42

  - Iceland
    - EU (No exclusions): -0.38
    - Combined (No exclusions): -0.27
    - US (No exclusions): 0.52
    - EU (3 percent tariff lines excluded): -0.66
    - US (3 percent tariff lines excluded): 0.50
    - (EU+US) (3 percent tariff lines excluded): -0.51
    - EU (tiered agricultural formula): -0.31
    - US (tiered agricultural formula): 0.52
    - (EU+US) (tiered agricultural formula): -0.20

  - Ireland
    - Combined (No exclusions): 0.15
    - Combined (3 percent tariff lines excluded): 0.15
    - EU (tiered agricultural formula): 0.14
    - EU (3 percent tariff lines excluded): 0.14

  - Israel
    - EU (No exclusions): 1.20
    - EU (3 percent tariff lines excluded): -0.23
    - Combined (3 percent tariff lines excluded): 0.28
    - EU (tiered agricultural formula): 1.14
    - EU (tiered agricultural formula) (other column): -0.20
    - Combined (tiered agricultural formula): 0.28
    - US (tiered agricultural formula): 1.27
    - (EU+US) (tiered agricultural formula): -0.22
    - (additional) combined value: 0.31

  - Italy
    - Combined (No exclusions): 4.20
    - Combined (3 percent tariff lines excluded): 4.20
    - Combined (tiered agricultural formula): 3.93
    - EU (tiered agricultural formula): 3.93
    - EU (3 percent tariff lines excluded): 4.21

  - Japan
    - EU (No exclusions): 4.90
    - US (No exclusions): 2.74
    - Combined (No exclusions): 3.52
    - EU (3 percent tariff lines excluded): 4.87
    - US (3 percent tariff lines excluded): 2.74
    - Combined (3 percent tariff lines excluded): 3.51
    - EU (tiered agricultural formula): 4.91
    - US (tiered agricultural formula): 2.74
    - Combined (tiered agricultural formula): 3.53

  - Korea, Republic of
    - Combined (No exclusions): 4.62
    - Combined (3 percent tariff lines excluded): 3.12
    - Combined (tiered agricultural formula): 3.67
    - EU (No exclusions): 4.61
    - US (No exclusions): 2.55
    - (EU+US) (No exclusions): 3.30
    - EU (3 percent tariff lines excluded): 4.64
    - US (3 percent tariff lines excluded): 3.12
    - (EU+US) (3 percent tariff lines excluded): 3.68

  - Latvia
    - Combined (No exclusions): 1.09
    - Combined (3 percent tariff lines excluded): 1.09
    - Combined (tiered agricultural formula): 1.04
    - EU (tiered agricultural formula): 1.04

  - Liechtenstein
    - EU (No exclusions): -0.29
    - US (No exclusions): 2.83
    - Combined (No exclusions): 0.37
    - EU (3 percent tariff lines excluded): -0.29
    - US (3 percent tariff lines excluded): 2.83
    - Combined (3 percent tariff lines excluded): 0.36
    - EU (tiered agricultural formula): -0.28
    - US (tiered agricultural formula): 2.83
    - Combined (tiered agricultural formula): 0.37

  - Lithuania
    - Combined (No exclusions): 2.74
    - Combined (3 percent tariff lines excluded): 2.74
    - Combined (tiered agricultural formula): 1.84
    - EU (tiered agricultural formula): 1.84
    - EU (3 percent tariff lines excluded): 3.00

  - Luxembourg
    - EU (No exclusions) (value shown in table): 2.79
    - EU (3 percent tariff lines excluded): 2.79
    - EU (tiered agricultural formula) (other column): 2.36
    - (EU+US) (tiered agricultural formula): 2.79

  - Malta
    - Combined (No exclusions): 1.57
    - Combined (3 percent tariff lines excluded): 1.57
    - Combined (tiered agricultural formula): 1.01
    - EU (tiered agricultural formula): 1.01

  - Netherlands
    - EU (No exclusions): 1.70
    - EU (3 percent tariff lines excluded): 1.70
    - EU (tiered agricultural formula): 1.67
    - (EU+US) (tiered agricultural formula): 1.70

  - New Zealand
    - Combined (No exclusions): 42.84
    - Combined (3 percent tariff lines excluded): 5.12
    - Combined (tiered agricultural formula): 24.19
    - EU (No exclusions): 5.70
    - US (No exclusions): 3.11
    - (EU+US) (No exclusions): 4.42
    - EU (3 percent tariff lines excluded): 61.27
    - US (3 percent tariff lines excluded): 5.97
    - (EU+US) (3 percent tariff lines excluded): 33.92

  - Norway
    - EU (No exclusions): 0.11
    - US (No exclusions): 0.56
    - Combined (No exclusions): 0.17
    - EU (3 percent tariff lines excluded): 0.09
    - US (3 percent tariff lines excluded): 0.56
    - Combined (3 percent tariff lines excluded): 0.14
    - EU (tiered agricultural formula): 0.15
    - US (tiered agricultural formula): 0.56
    - Combined (tiered agricultural formula): 0.20

  - Poland
    - Combined (No exclusions): 3.57
    - Combined (3 percent tariff lines excluded): 3.57
    - Combined (tiered agricultural formula): 2.85
    - EU (tiered agricultural formula): 2.85
    - EU (3 percent tariff lines excluded): 3.65

  - Portugal
    - Combined (No exclusions): 3.59
    - Combined (3 percent tariff lines excluded): 3.59
    - Combined (tiered agricultural formula): 3.10
    - EU (tiered agricultural formula): 3.10
    - EU (3 percent tariff lines excluded): 3.60

  - Singapore
    - EU (No exclusions): 2.15
    - US (No exclusions): 0.43
    - Combined (No exclusions): 1.30
    - EU (3 percent tariff lines excluded): 2.07
    - US (3 percent tariff lines excluded): 0.37
    - Combined (3 percent tariff lines excluded): 1.23
    - EU (tiered agricultural formula): 2.19
    - US (tiered agricultural formula): 0.43
    - Combined (tiered agricultural formula): 1.32

  - Slovak Republic
    - Combined (No exclusions): 3.52
    - Combined (3 percent tariff lines excluded): 3.52
    - Combined (tiered agricultural formula): 3.34
    - EU (tiered agricultural formula): 3.34

  - Slovenia
    - Combined (No exclusions): 2.49
    - Combined (3 percent tariff lines excluded): 2.49
    - Combined (tiered agricultural formula): 2.34
    - EU (tiered agricultural formula): 2.34

  - Spain
    - Combined (No exclusions): 3.70
    - Combined (3 percent tariff lines excluded): 3.70
    - Combined (tiered agricultural formula): 3.59
    - EU (tiered agricultural formula): 3.59

  - Sweden
    - Combined (No exclusions): 1.51
    - Combined (3 percent tariff lines excluded): 1.51
    - Combined (tiered agricultural formula): 1.51
    - EU (tiered agricultural formula): 1.51

  - Switzerland
    - EU (No exclusions): 0.54
    - US (No exclusions): 2.17
    - Combined (No exclusions): 0.80
    - EU (3 percent tariff lines excluded): 0.30
    - US (3 percent tariff lines excluded): 2.16
    - Combined (3 percent tariff lines excluded): 0.59
    - EU (tiered agricultural formula): 0.69
    - US (tiered agricultural formula): 2.18
    - Combined (tiered agricultural formula): 0.92

  - Taiwan Province of China
    - Combined (No exclusions): 2.52
    - Combined (3 percent tariff lines excluded): 3.36
    - Combined (tiered agricultural formula): 3.03
    - EU (No exclusions): 2.50
    - US (No exclusions): 2.69
    - (EU+US) (No exclusions): 2.61
    - EU (3 percent tariff lines excluded): 2.52
    - US (3 percent tariff lines excluded): 3.36
    - Combined (3 percent tariff lines excluded): 3.03

  - United Kingdom
    - Combined (No exclusions): 1.45
    - Combined (3 percent tariff lines excluded): 1.45
    - Combined (tiered agricultural formula): 1.40
    - EU (tiered agricultural formula): 1.40

  - United States
    - Combined (No exclusions): 2.80
    - Combined (3 percent tariff lines excluded): 2.41
    - Combined (tiered agricultural formula): 2.99

- Note: an asterisk indicates a developing country/region that does not receive GSP from the U.S.

### References (as listed in the Appendix)

- Alexandraki, Katerina, and Hans Peter Lankes, 2004, “The Impact of Preference Erosion on Middle-Income Developing Countries,” IMF Working Paper No. 04/169 (Washington: International Monetary Fund).
- Baldwin R. E., and T. Murray, 1977, “MFN Tariff Reductions and Developing Country Trade Benefits Under the GSP,” Economic Journal, Vol. 87, pp. 30–46.
- Brenton, Paul, and Takako Ikezuki, 2004, “The Initial and Potential Impact of Preferential Access to the U.S. Market under the African Growth and Opportunity Act,” World Bank Policy Research Working Paper No. 3262 (Washington: World Bank).
- Dean, Judith M., and John Wainio, 2005, “Quantifying the Value of U.S. Tariff Preferences,” World Bank Discussion Paper, forthcoming.
- Devault, James, 1996, “Competitive Need Limits and the U.S. Generalized System of Preference,” Contemporary Economic Policy, Vol. 14, pp. 58–66.
- European Commission, 2003a, User's Guide to the European Union's Scheme of Generalised Tariff Preferences, February 2003.
- European Commission, 2003b, Green Paper on the Future of Rules of Origin in Preferential Trade Arrangements, Brussels (December), COM(203) 787 final.
- Francois, Joseph, Bernard Hoekman, and Miriam Manchin, 2005, “Preference Erosion and Multilateral Trade Liberalization,” CEPR Discussion Paper No. 5153 (London: Center for Economic Policy Research).
- Francois, Joseph, and Will Martin, 2003, “Formula Approaches for Market Access Negotiations,” World Economy, Vol. 26, pp. 1–28.
- Hummels, David, 2001, “Toward a Geography of Trade Costs” (unpublished; Indiana: Krannert School of Management).
- MacPhee, Craig, and David I. Rosenbaum, 1989, “The Asymmetric Effects of Reversible Tariff Changes Under the United States GSP,” Southern Economic Journal, Vol. 56, pp. 105–25.
- Mattoo, Aditya, Devesh Roy, and Arvind Subramanian, 2002, “The Africa Growth and Opportunity Act and Its Rules of Origin: Generosity Undermined,” IMF Working Paper No. 02/158 (Washington: International Monetary Fund).
- Ozden, Caglar, and Eric Reinhardt, 2003, “The Perversity of Preferences: The Generalized System of Preferences and Developing Country Trade Policies, 1976-2000,” World Bank, Policy Research Working Paper Series No. 2955.
- Romalis, John, 2005, “NAFTA's and CUSTFA's Impact on International Trade;” NBER Working Papers Series No. 11059 (Cambridge, Massachusetts: National Bureau of Economic Research).
- Sebastian, Jean, David Laborde and Will Martin, 2005, “Consequences of Alternative Formulas for Agricultural Tariff Cuts,” Ch. 4 in (eds.) Kym Anderson and Will Martin, Agricultural Trade Reform and the Doha Development Agenda (Washington: World Bank).
- Subramanian, Arvind, 2003, “Financing of Losses from Preference Erosion,” paper prepared by IMF staff for the World Trade Organization, WT/TF/COH/14/14, Geneva.
- United Nations Conference on Trade and Development (UNCTAD), 2001, Improving Market Access for Least Developed Counties (unpublished; New York).
- UNCTAD, 2003, Trade Preferences for LDCs: An Early Assessment of Benefits and Possible Improvements, UNCTAD/ITCD/TSB/2003/8, New York and Geneva.
- World Trade Organization, 2002, “Market Access: Unfinished Business Post Uruguay Round Inventory and Issues.”
- World Trade Organization, 2003, “Negotiations on Agriculture: First Draft of Modalities for the Further Commitments,” Geneva: World Trade Organization, TN/AG/W/1Rev.1. 19, March (The Harbinson Draft).
- Yang, Yongzheng, 2005, “Africa in the Doha Round: Dealing with Preference Erosion and Beyond,” IMF Policy Discussion Paper No. 05/8 (Washington: International Monetary Fund).

*Appendix I — Table A3 and References (concluded).*

---


_Source: https://www.imf.org/-/media/websites/imf/imported-full-text-pdf/external/pubs/ft/wp/2006/_wp0610.pdf_