The WTO has been considered as an international trade body to help increase trade in goods and services between nations by removing various trade barriers, such as tariffs, subsidies and quotas. To this end, several trade agreements have been ratified over the years under the WTO. Trade-related investment measures (TSTs) are a WTO agreement that protects foreign investment in third countries from discrimination. Trump`s criticism of the WTO is seen by many as opening a new front in his trade war with China. Earlier, the US president called China a “currency manipulator” because it allowed the yuan to depreciate against the dollar. Since the beginning of last year, China and the United States have also imposed high tariffs on imports. China`s status in developing countries at the WTO gives Mr. Trump a new opportunity to attack China. Given that developing countries are likely to oppose all efforts to prevent them from protecting their national economic interests, it is unlikely that global trade rules will undergo drastic reform in the near future. In addition, the WTO`s inability to contain global trade tensions has raised questions about its relevance in today`s world, ahead of the upcoming WTO ministerial negotiations in Kazakhstan next year. This is all the more true because, over the years, global tariff rates have fallen as a result of bilateral trade agreements rather than multilateral trade agreements negotiated at the WTO.
However, as has already been said, developing countries such as India and China may attempt to delay the implementation of these WTO agreements because of their disadvantaged economic status. They may continue to impose tariffs and quotas on goods and services to limit imports and encourage domestic producers who might otherwise be affected by lower prices or lower quality imports. India, for example, heavily subsidizes agriculture in the name of food security to protect its farmers. While local producers can be protected by protectionist barriers such as tariffs, consumers in India and China will have limited access to foreign products. Developed countries that are pushing for the WTO e-commerce agreement, including the EU, the UNITED States, Canada, Australia and Japan, are very ambitious in their intention. Indeed, Japan wants existing WTO agreements to also apply to e-commerce. Issues such as the free flow of data on computer servers without data location requirements, a permanent moratorium on customs, non-disclosure of the source code and the prohibition of forced transfer of technology should all be on the negotiating agenda. E-commerce remains a very asymmetrical space in which certain dominant entries have the potential to distort a level playing field. The definition and importance of e-commerce also varies from country to country.
At the same time, India remains uncertain about its regulation of e-commerce, particularly with regard to foreign direct investment. The latest rules of e-commerce are a ham-handed exercise in regulatory overruns. You list arbitrary restrictions for exclusive product offers as well as deep discounts. In addition, a company that has to some extent an e-commerce reader cannot place its products on its platform. India must strike a balance in its own e-commerce policy before entering the global arena. Its position in favour of maintaining the traditional wto negotiating framework should be continued without addressing new issues beyond trade facilitation. E-commerce is not “extraneous” for trade, unlike Singapore tower themes like TRIMS, but its rules are still in the making and space is hectic. The status of “dev country