TwitterRSS
Close

WTO

The WTO discussion is broken into three stages below:

2000 – 2010: Work Programme on E-commerce

The World Trade Organisation (WTO) first launched a framework to support e-commerce in 1998 with the Work Program on E-commerce.

Discussions focused on looking at the impacts of e-commerce in three major areas of trade: goods, services, intellectual property, and a discussion didicated to the development implication of e-commerce. However, little progress in terms of negotiation or agreement of formal rules, occurred in the 2000s from the Work Program.

With a lack of agreement, key points of contention have not been confronted. Specifically there has been a lack of agreement on how data flows relate to other WTO trade agreements, such as on services (GATS).

This has led to a lack of clarity on existing rules. WTO rules are widely acknowledged to be mismatched to the internet age and with grey areas. Very few legal cases have been brought to the WTO dispute mechanism by members related to infringements around digital due to uncertainty.

During this period, WTO members biannually renewed a temporary Moratorium on E-commerce in which which they committed to no customs duties on electronic transmissions.

2010-2018: Expanding discussions

As digital trade has grown, this situation has begun to change (in the 2010s). This was driven driven by the US and supported by tech firms who applied pressure for new rules.

Members currently have varying positions on instigating digital trade rules in the WTO:

Liberalising agendas – The US, supported by countries such as Japan and Australia, with more advanced firms are pushing for stronger rules that protect open digital trade and support their technology leadership

Support for weak rules – The EU and China support relatively soft rules, They support some aspects of liberalisation, in balance with their own internal policy agendas.

Latecomer nations – Digital latecomer countries are split. There are those who think open digital trade rules would attract a growth in global digital investments. There are others who are concerned that WTO rules will reduce ‘policy space’ and their ability to pursue national digital policies.

Developing countries – Some specific countries (such as India) are also opposed to new WTO issues, arguing that negotiations on the WTO Doha ‘development’ round need to be resolved first

Tensions came to a head in 2017 prior to the WTO ministerial in Buenos Aires. In this ministerial, the objective was to move the E-commerce Working Group from discussion to negotiation on rules. Opposition to this move was led by India and the African Group. Momentum also faded with the elections in the US, with President Trump disengaging from the WTO.

The Ministerial concluded with a lukewarm statement for future activities. The renewal of the moratorium was agreed, but with no other progress.

2018 – : Seeking negotiations and agreements

With the failure to move forward on digital trade, a split occurred on how to move digital trade forward in the WTO.

Following the WTO Ministerial, 76 members, including the United States, the EU, and Japan announced in 2019 that they would begin to work in a plurilateral group, that became the negotations on Joint Statement Initiative (JSI) on E-commerce.

A number of developing countries did not join this plurilateral group, given their objections. Some further countries did join during negotiations push the number of countries included up to 91 (negotiations include the US, EU and China). The JSI was convened by Australia, Japan and Singapore.

This groups begun discussing rules on e-commerce with a near-final “solidified draft” made public in 2024. The US stepped back in 2023 from supporting stronger policies around data in the JSI, and with disagreements on cross-border data flows, the agreement is focussed more strongly on standardising digital issues such as e-signatures, e-transactions and ensuring basic rules such as online consumer protection.

Alongside the (JSI) negotiations, deabte about the validity of the moratorium of e-commerce have grown. There are demands to make the moratorium permanent. But some countries such as India and South Africa have taken the opposite position and are calling for a complete rethinking of the moratorium. The JSI will likely include a clause seeking to make the moratorium more permenant.