Thursday, June 25, 2015

C Partnership Agreement Trans-Pacific Strategies (TPP): The chapter on Policy C he avoided
Alice Pham, C UTS Hanoi, 5/2013 [1]

To introduce
The terms v ề compete e are increasingly becoming popular in the regional trade agreements and free trade agreements (Hereinafter referred to as the employee spends i 'FTA') k k í recent ết. The addition of the terms of competition in the FTAs is promoting e ặc bi ET Powerful in the talks initiated by the United States or the agreements that the US has signed or acceded to, such as the Agreement on Partnership C A trans-Pacific Strategies (TPP).
TPP v ề c Matt b fication is based on an agreement by country New Zealand, Singapore, Chile and Brunei (P4) b surely the PTZ ph talks Inclusion Project 2006 aims to promote trade partners hold a fish c P4 through the removal of tariffs and promoting cooperation in the fields nh u customs procedures, intellectual property and competition policy. The US government blocks (USG) b ay T you desired participation Project negotiations ph Member States and P4 in September 2008, the government of Australia, Ca - na - e, a, Ma - lay -x i - a, M ê - xi - c cell, P ê - Peru and Vietnam has quickly responded. Y na to, the agreement has undergone 16 rounds of talks, socks i latest negotiating session held in Singapore on 03 May 2013, and The next session in Lima, Peru in May.
This is a comprehensive agreement, with 26 chapters being negotiated [2] , covering a teaser ng ​​following contents:
1)       Regulation en t IEP comprehensive market access, including the removal of tariff barriers and the barriers to trade and investment between the Member States other TPP;
2)       Promote trade and develop the supply chain between the member countries TPP;
3)       The c ó problem t inh ê n t su fueling stains, such as ensuring the blades o m l Armenia, sir ch v ề INH s ch yoke Regulators among TPP member countries and ensures a competitive business environment;
4)       New Challenges n guava, especially c ó ê n c a n risks from new technologies; and
5)       The terms of helping members can update your TPP Hi the chemical to solve the new problems arising.
Accordingly, this IEP h exceeds issues commercial 'information FREQUENTLY' (only 2 out of 26 chapters directly related to 'trade-plated i'), including INH v l Gulp b ê n-in- border - dressing gender -qu snails ('fueling ê n su diodes', 'emerging', 'new'), v à Competition also is one of those areas. TPP c ũng considered is' ​​hi the chemical to trade secrets and least transparent in history '. Without a draft chapter hi the chemical yet to be officially announced to extensive consultation, only the leaked documents, such as documents on intellectual property rights (IPRs), or investors. Children will read loudly d L nl à ê have very little information about the content of the chapter competition policy v ề of the chemical hi This. All the information that we know of are:
"PART V ề competition will promote a competitive business environment, consumer protection, and ensuring a level playing field for companies c vaguely evil th The national picture because ê n TPP. The negotiations have been important steps n tiế in construction PART n ay hi m² in the chemical provisions, including the commitments to Car ng th through ailings c lu he avoided, x â à yd single cable network tr v ì competition authorities, ensure the virtual b equity ề t v t stain applicants in competition law enforcement, ensure the virtual b t inh transparency, press v Recommended consumer protection, regulation ện ki en masses m² in nh c á â n and k y revenue ailings cooperation ". [3]
Based t moan Car ng th c ch í shirt b shirt A t this and the specific magnification declaration c kh ng evil plot, a few parties concerned li n ê speculated that the commitments relating to competition policy in the Th Chapter H IEP ng m ại T U by US - Singapore and the Th Chapter H IEP ng m ại T U by US - Korea c ó th To are considered "benchmarks / starting point" for c evil Project v ch ph ề talks mistries incubated in cell n n y à kh drive the chemical Hi the T PP.
Why did nc n ê ó the account-e i ều v ề competition in the FTA's
Th ời Nearly space Italian leather, umbrella n c lu he avoided being seen as a problem 'new generation' hi c evil in the chemical the FTAs. Based on the calculated number of the Forum on Trade and Development of the United Nations (UNCTAD), "Over 100 of the 300 bilateral trade agreements and within steps of the c with the provisions relating to competition policy." [4] Chapter three m i (30) percent is a huge amount. And this really c on c hamlet D shows kh á sufficiently high priority reachable d photos for additional terms v ề Competition v uring the free trade agreements (FTA's). A goal is most often cited as additional terms that we really need to ensure that the benefits of trade liberalization Trade and investment are not specific magnification v h hi cells óa bở i fication acts compete ph giớ trans-i, and trade barriers due to state poses no replaced by anticompetitive behavior of private (C row as the market sharing agreement or price fixing, or c evil incubated th An e o closing v à lo ại amniotic th e tr brewed c Yeah he avoided meager kh market) [5] .
The reviews by other l can mention How ti g om m ục ux ê â à yd cable network v publication only last ditch policies v à c Matt regional competition authorities to achieve a higher level of integration. Th AM ch í e ến ó c m a memory area ội nh kh h hit the low liquor Asia as ASEAN also recommended t c struck ới competition policy in the agenda towards building a C Separate general economic map inh ng K o h c ủa. A Another goal is to help protect the developing countries do not have national competition law or a strong competition authorities th c ó To against anticompetitive behavior stems from outside national borders as form cartels International Quo c, or merger and acquisition fueling ê ê n gi n bi ới c ó How-image ới t compete across borders, etc.
M r Land ặc ph d buzzing ến bearings, potential obligations in terms ANG t v ề competition m² in c evil FTA's c ó ê bi bi n et of evil kh kh L á n. Some FTA s y ê simply your cost uc The national of him because ê n th 'best efforts' to adopt, maintain and apply competition law. The language used in some other s FTA've also can c ó bu ng count r à high ộc ề m h Matt Lay nv Legal. D n Ay ù my CPC or dull kh th evil, evil c n th ội OA content mudras c ó To cover g th ec om vi applies app ê nt c evil threat accumulators irrespective of amniotic e x u c m ot ó t t stain process applicants right propriety or make virtual b Transparency in qu ì á nh tr reality of competition law enforcement. There may also be provisions v ề cooperation or coordination between right foot the enforcement of competition law: either on the basis of "positive evil t h synthesize" (p os itive comity) [6] or "evil t h spatch Separate tailstock th e "(negative comity) [7] . At a deeper level of commitment, c evil FTAs can swing a micro EC ến th e Transformation into postpay a consultative mechanism or independent dispute resolution, or a competent authority beyond the national level can apply competition law directly with private entities within the free trade area - The most typical example m² in My School he h n spatch the European Union.
Whether the provision is really what the issue most important to developing country participation v rushing c evil FTAs n was: are the measures for special and differential (S & D) to meet Development needs m² in box kh ng H - S & D measures may include: (i) c ó provisions to protect the interests of less developed nư OC, (ii) plans reachable exceptions or exemptions from some obligations, (iii) c ó period of transition, and (i v) Though reachable technical support; and whether the noise t t n the box kh ng policy space to drown ph ere c tri c evil plot h à ng ng the PTZ Company national and or meet Application concerns about industrial policy or umbrella ng kh.
The content may have in Chapter v ề competition m² in the chemical Hi to TPP
As was mentioned above, there has never been a leak of information about the chapter competition policy Hi the chemical to TPP, v ì that we did not know exactly ê evil b c n join talks will read c ph ó projects those obligations, or whether the members are developing countries can obtain the S & D treatment does. What we do know, based on recent press release, only the general objective of this chapter and the following will constitute part of the text:
  • The OC nư Members maintain and adopt competition laws prohibit fishing c anticompetitive behavior;
  • The OC nư Members maintain the competent authorities responsible for law enforcement, national competition ('the competition authorities');
  • The OC nư Members ensure convergence c manual processes [8] in competition law enforcement;
  • The OC nư ê n t u moderators have high principles Mid-à l pv ề compete [9] in the treatment of state-owned enterprises, c evil government enterprises and monopoly companies as ordered à nư Nh m² in OC [10] .
  • The OC nư t moderator aware of t value INH transparent activities in competition law enforcement, and publicized to the public by numerous information such as exceptions and exemptions of competition laws in their respective countries; Information about the c evil State enterprises and monopoly enterprises as ordered à nư Nh m² in OC, etc.
  • T he nư OC p t moderator hợ law enforcement partners to protect consumers;
  • C OC nư evil b t make virtual moderator Konig rights ki ện c kh nh â á n in competition law enforcement [11] ; and
  • Technical cooperation between the OC nư TPP members.

Most of (90%) This content has been specified in the IEP of T H T U incense by the US Commerce - South Korea and the T incense trade IEP H T U by Singapore - United States. For the benefit of all stakeholders, some Terms prominent and most relevant of the two agreements are cited below nh u 'Starting point' of TPP agreement:

  • Goals:
"Get that th c evil C acts mentioned in this incense likely restrict [...] trade and investment, the parties deny that trust Partners prohibition c evil This behavior, enforcement of competition policy Matt ó c c s m v ề Lay economic, and tha m collaborations will help ensure that the benefits of the chemical Hi This "(Agreement on Trade T U T incense from Singapore - the United States, Article 12-1).
  • Through competition law:
"M o i Partners will adopt or maintain measures to prohibit acts of anti-competitive business with the objective of promoting economic efficiency and consumer welfare, and appropriate action will be taken against such acts " (Agreement ng m Th Chapter ại T U by Singapore - United States, Article 12-2 (1)).
  • Establish competition authorities:
"Each partner will establish or maintain an agency responsible for implementing the measures prohibits anticompetitive business" (Agreement ng m Th Chapter ại T U by Singapore - United States, Article 12-2 (2)).
  • Process t bad practices:
"- Each Partner to ensure that the defendant in a trial INH ch publication only be convened to decide whether the m ot acts have violated competition law or kh ng box, cough ặc specific magnification c ó c Extend pressure evil c d app sanctions or remedies for administrative violations of the competition law or kh ng box, ARE reachable c ó opportunity to give evidence to protect themselves and be heard in court. Especially, each Partner will ensure that the defendant had a reasonable opportunity to cross-examine any witnesses or other individuals testify and to reconsider and reject the evidence and other information collected is the basis for making judgments.
- Each partner will be for individuals imposed a punishment or remedies for breach of competition law application meets reachable Appeal penalties or remedies in court that the b Israel Partners.
-    Each partner will give powers to the agency responsible for implementing the national competition law to resolve lawsuits by civil or administrative conciliatory approach to the subject of enforcement proceedings. Each party Partners may provide c evil n such agreements under your AM the approval of the court.
-    Each Partner will c ng B cell regulation v ề procedures for conducting hearings publication only INH ch be convened to decide whether the m ot acts have violated competition law or kh ng box, cough ặc the sanctions or administrative remedy th E c ó reachable applies app for such violations. The regulations This will include the procedures for giving evidence in the case, is applied fairly to all parties to the case "(Agreement Chapter Th ng m n the US by T U - Korea, Article 16-1 (3-6)).
  • Central postpay v ề C He avoided:
As designated monopoly - "Each partner must ensure that any private monopolies is specified after the chemical Hi This takes effect and any monopolies new government was appointed to:
a)       Consistency Activity with the obligations of the partners in the chemical Hi This while now monopoly that performs any regulatory authority, the publication only qu ch fication l INH, or rights nư à l nh Gulp brains were then handed Partners exclusively related goods or services, such as the right to import and export licenses, approve commercial transactions, or pressure quotas, fees, or other costs;
b)       They eat to alk Activity tr ê Matt nc c s evil see x heating aid for trade when purchasing goods or services on the market exclusively related, including activities related to price, quality, t inh available à ng h h c ủa óa, Inclusion ng kh consume her, transport and the terms and conditions of sale, except in compliance with any provision under mandate not conflict with c u m â evil sub-paragraph (c) and (d);
c)       No p pleased with discrimination investment item is defined, with The national commodity Other partners, with service providers The national Partnership k ia when purchasing goods and services on the market monopoly concerned; and
d)      Do not use monopoly position to engage, directly or indirectly, through transactions with the parent company, subsidiaries, co-owned enterprises, in the act of protest c He avoided non-monopoly on the market in Britain l th in women OC there g y â damaged pipe photo adverse investment items were defined. "(Agreement Chapter ng ​​Th T u m n the US-- Korea, Article 16-2)

State Enterprises - "Each partner must ensure that any state enterprise that is established or maintained:
a)       Activities consistent with the obligations of the Partnership in the chemical Hi This matter is now to make any regulatory authority, management comments INH ch publication only, or rights Gulp nh à l oc nư The national public were then given to Partners, such as the right to expropriate, licenses, approve commercial transactions, or pressure quotas, fees or other charges; and
b)       K hip discrimination when buying goods and services, investment items were prescribed. (Agreement Chapter ng ​​Th T u m n the US-- Korea, Article 16-3).
  • T INH m inh prospectus:
"1. The parties recognize r õ Estimate the value of t transparency in the implementation of EC policy reality of m m² in ình competition.
2. Based on the request of a b ê n Partners, each party must publicly available to other c evil Partners information concerning:
a)       The active enforcement of competition law;
b)       State enterprises and monopolies under mandate, public or private, of any formal en n c uring hamlet, on the condition that b ê n requirements and road ê ch n t r dull entity li ê n agency, goods and services Th e c emplacements and related markets, nh u've also some indications that for th these entities may participate in behavior are barriers to trade or investment between the partners; and
c)       The My School synthesize h Yeah exception and free tr of competition law, on condition b ê n requirements and road clearly dull ch c mound of goods and services and market th Related To, c u m ot nh v ũng Ai indications that measures such exception or waiver may hinder trade and investment between the partners.
3. Each party partners to ensure that all the final administrative decision on a violation of competition law are presented as written and raise any actual discovery process as well as up Legal arguments and analysis as a basis for given c evil decided there. Moreover, each partner will ensure that decisions and implement decisions ENH l will be c ng B cells T able V A nb fication or, when the umbrella ng b c u v whoa NH unfeasible, then widely publicized to the public under Chapter ng ​​c ph evil yoke kh to those interested and the Partner k ia Th e t c ó Try to find th ê IMP hi m. In decision or l ENH which the Partnership announced that the public can ới v remove confidential business information or other information protected by law being disclosed to the public. "(T incense trade agreements by the US T U - Korea, Article 16-5).
  • B Virtual consumer protection across borders [12] :
"1. The parties received R Partners importance of cooperation on issues related to consumer protection laws aimed at promoting the welfare of consumers. Accordingly, the Partnership will read cooperation, in the case of c Brøndby teammates ng agency ại accordingly, in enforcing consumer protection laws.
2. C á c right of efforts to strengthen cooperation [...] in the areas of common interest relating to consumer protection legislation, including:
a) T l slobbering desire Education v ề policies that protect consumers and the exchange of information related to the reality of our issued and enforcement of consumer protection laws;
b) Strengthening cooperation to detect and prevent c welding of fraud and deceptive trade go against the interests of consumers.
c) Consultation slobbering l nh AM minimize violations of consumer protection laws with cross-border aspects important; and
d) Incubate ng enforce protection of the T drive on guidance to officials required to synthesize t H ere evil Economics Ph ế tri ace (OECD) the virtual B N Guoi consumer protection against fraudulent behavior and L G ian T ừa island flavor transboundary commerce (2003).
3. Nothing contained in this Article limiting the discretion of the authorities referred to in paragraph 2, as decide whether nc n ó ê Action vapor v meet ới requirements of the respective authorities of the other The national Partnership, and also does not prevent any public authority of these bodies action related to a specific problem.
4. Each Party shall endeavor to identify, within the field of general interest, ng t h Chapter spatch v ới important benefit of themselves, these obstacles e amniotic v ới Falling home effective cooperation with the partner k ia to enforce consumer protection laws, and will consider amending the domestic legal framework to mitigate these challenges. "(Agreement on Trade T U T incense by the US - Korea, Article 16-6)
  • Cooperation:
"The parties recognize the importance of R of cooperation and collaboration in order to develop more effective Competition law and policy in the area of free trade and cooperation agreement in this matter. "(Agreement on Trade T U T incense by Singapore - the United States, Article 12-4)

Why should we be concerned?
As virtual eatin lu Compliments, suggestions PART in beforehand, with pediatric ều good reason to supplement c evil provisions on competition in the chemical hi on free trade general. Italian leather also à l e i ều Should l àm in My School m² in Hi h synthesize the chemical to TPP, of course v ới ensure that the situation b virtual difference in the developing countries and their needs must be met to an e in full adequate and appropriate. Falling home Figure A risk ê ê ri ng nm peppers ề v v c he avoided rushing H IEP trade ARE reachable considered participating à l v Mr. nh ất of 21st Century synonymous with OC nư vi th ec c evil you because ê ó c ns will read her c opportunities and obligations. For example, at H IEP standard TPP k k ết ARE reachable done, c evil e country has by far the CPC ch no law or competition policy like Brunei would be soon adopted and implemented ay lu à tn accordingly. Falling home country, with all the distinctive characteristics m² in m ình, really need a comprehensive competition policy, s â ur cancellable or not, although pediatric ê n, not within the framework of this discussion. Or a country with the level of interference r ất Separate deep m² in Nh à r nư OC v c evil in Indi Separate m² in the market through c evil State enterprises or monopolies like Vietnam will s Slim ensuring that risk ê secondary battery l nt v ề hit very hard competition. O nce of members participate in negotiations for e to the present evil kh kh ng box for pc ph evil c é á ó provided nc nh â ki en masses ện according ailings c lu he avoided then maybe will have to amend the law. On the other hand, the OC t nư moderator may benefit from technical cooperation in the framework of this IEP H, or from c evil consultation and exchange of information pouring i, etc. Or the addition m OT Chapter V INH s yoke ề ch nh c u v whoa he avoided will read help ensure that the benefits c ó ó Th e c from treaty This trade will not stabilize h t n the behavior by limiting cross-border c he avoided or distort competition act of evil c the government. However, the question is:
S ao consumers, as an interested party, regardless of the contents of the chapter on competition issues in the TPP H IEP?
A reachable family plans ch th whole village ế ới gi Hidden Pictures was Falling home maintain competition in the market will eventually àm l ng t ă consumer welfare. Competition law aims to protect the process of free competition in the market to ensure the efficient allocation of scarce economic resources. Assume ch the à l INH, while economic efficiency is maximized, these effects will ultimately create benefits for the consumer include improved and innovative in i) lower costs and prices; ii) improving quality; iii) have more options and iv) improve the service. In this way, the final competition will promote consumer welfare. However, the relationship between competition law enforcement (the content of the chapter on competition H IEP mention TPP) and the welfare of consumers are not always õ r r ANG as v whoa. Besides, there is always a danger that one sees 'consumer welfare' in perspective too narrow, if only approached from the perspective of market competition. There are many other issues, such as micro EC ph ải to ensure availability, continuity and Transformation into ph th gi á ù h synthesize m² in essential commodities / public, normally are due c evil State enterprises or monopolies under designated suppliers. Or competition laws to squeeze ph EC c incubating micro-x ă ng li mandatory (Compulsory licensing) or for injection ph Parallel importation publication only when x occurrence of abuse of intellectual property rights anticompetitive. A. This in creating favorable conditions for public use / access c evil ph publications humidity protected t Battery EN or goods have already be reachable c hamlet certain patents. Or more individuals or bodies ó c evil bi painting c ph ện competitive pressure boosting drugs snail g (g ene ric) t Chapter ng ​​v CONNECTION students will learn compassion et du ới reachable on the pharmaceutical market in the scope of national competition law his roots a. Or u c t e Europe are legal obstacles to consumers and consumer organizations in competition cases, consumers are compensated how to c Evil Economic losses h g at pH ải light by c ch IU evil PART competitive behavior cause (eg concerning exclusive or international cartel). We still do not know what This problem will be x ử l reviews How in this chapter of the TPP or H IEP how they are interpreted with the content of the relevant chapter.
Many consider consumer protection as a field separate, but complementary for competition law. Competition law opens the selected through maintaining competitiveness in the market, while consumer protection laws protect consumers to H can make intelligent choices between alternatives. Two forms of this policy so that the overall objective is "consumer welfare". It also may be the reason why the protection of consumers transnational added as part of the program v ề H IEP competition m² in TPP. This upgrade can be assessed as emphasize and enhance the importance of press v Recommended protect consumers worldwide and to promote the harmonization of consumer protection laws. However, it should not forget that this content has been included in the Agreement Chapter ng ​​m Th ại T U by United America - South Korea but later was ejected in Chapter ng ​​m Th Agreement ại T U by Singapore - United States. And even in the Agreement Chapter ng ​​Th T u m n the US-- Korea, v publication Recommended Consumer protection is only added as an extra item that no settlement method hamlet ch [13] . This time with TPP, push e ề b v v ệ virtual fishermen ud ê ời ti Brøndby teammates can also be an h ạng section 'nh th controversy brewed s u warm boots h in m² in the public 'in program agenda to deflect our concerns from other fields where the interests of consumers will inevitably be negative impacts.

[1] This is one of three study by the Organisation for International Consumers entrusted to members and independent experts perform at the 17th round of negotiations of the Agreement on Strategic Partnership across the Pacific in Lima. The opinions presented are those of the author alone.
[2] It should be noted that the TPP is negotiated as a unified package , which means' all areas of negotiations are part of a whole can not be broken down by the agreement and can not be negotiated separately . In other words, there will be no agreement until all areas have been through '. (Source: World Trade Organization WTO, How to organize the negotiations - Principles, can be accessed at < >)         
[3] Draft Agreement on Strategic Partnership transpacific Dương: < >
[4] The terms of competition in the Regional Trade Agreements: How to ensure the benefits of growth , the United Nations in 2005.
[5] Ibid
[6] (Ch ú th m² in fishing interests ịch ời d) According to accumulators risk ê n nt ay, c Matt opinion ủa m c c he avoided The national ot th hi n the chemical ê him because of / th OA mudras h spatch evil c t th e y ê ó your cost uc c Matt opinion he avoided c c m ot The national ủa th picture because ê ó c c n kh evil evil Separate publication only th e h synthesize useful, cough ặc applies app c ện bi ph evil judgments shall apply c lu ết expenditure under ailings c If he avoided other OC nư m² in amniotic e h v evil ới c h eat him because he avoided ch ế c / ph fication c he avoided the e ang di en tr ê nl other OC Th nh female ó c u ng t he image damaged ới oi l c evil useful essential in c y ê The national ủa uc Europe.
[7] (Ch ú th m² in fishing interests ịch ời d) According to accumulators n nt ê risk it, you are finished her c th c evil snail nư ê him because the chemical nc hi ủa the / th h synthesize t oa mudras Animus ết k x heating aid will read view oi l e ến essential in c ons c ủa The national evil ê n th kh him because evil when applying ailings c lu d app OC m ình nư he avoided.
[8] Falling home reality of precursor e waterlogged procedures in enforcing competition law / antitrust ensure stakeholders have the same rights as the right to be heard in the trial, the right to be given evidence of protection, and the right to ask the court of appeals in á n, etc. For reference and further reading, c th ó To view abominable A t s m ot specific magnification eg Guide K hu next ASEAN policy War has probably one chapter discussing this issue - Chapter 7. This guide can be downloaded from dull ch address: < >.
[9] The risk ê secondary battery l nt v ề c he avoided strikes can be interpreted as a regulatory mechanism (i) where nh à nư businesses and private OC've also ch iu s u e i ều ch each plane are nh u c m ot ủa gathers c evil rule à v i ều account-e; and (ii) no connection to the State of th c ó To bring competitive advantage to m ot or pediatric facilities ều the chemical business compared to other market participants. (OECD, State Enterprises and Principles struck central l v ề competition , DAF / COMP (2009) 37). Relating to competition law and policy, this rule can be interpreted in a narrow sense as the competing principles be applied ph anyone even par with both private companies and the state, with few exceptions r ất . In Singapore FTA - United States, it is particularly noted that ' Singapore will issue a general legal framework ề v compete later in January 2005, and would not exclude businesses from s u n uring e i while point c ch ủa ều legal mechanisms such as government enterprises '. (Footnote first Singapore FTA Chapter 12 - USA on C evil publication only anti-competitive business behavior, monopoly enterprises is specified, and the game now nh nư OC).
[10] Although the topic v ề treatment measures amniotic v e ới the State enterprise / government and monopoly enterprises under the designation was not mentioned directly in the text ội n c v ề competition Hi the chemical ủa the TPP is being negotiated, some parties believe this is a critical content, usually in the United States emphasized negotiations ng m th Chapter ại which it participated. This could also be an expression of the goal of "ensuring a level playing field for companies nư vaguely evil oc c ê n th picture because TPP".
[11] A ều i This means that any individual that business or property harmed by anti-competitive behavior or other acts with a m c competition law (eg the operator anticompetitive behavior) may sue the relevant courts to get compensation for damage. Regulation ki en masses ện m² in c á â n nh competition law has had one long development process t n the United States, starting with the 1890 Sherman Act.
[12] It should be noted here that the free trade agreements Singapore - United States does not have provisions on the protection of consumers across borders.
[13] See also Chapter ng ​​m Th Agreement ại T U by US - Korea, Article 16-8.