1.
For the European Union, the beef which stemmed from cattle cultured growth hormones could cause the health consequences, such as hormonal irregularities and cancer, because it thought the culture was unnatural and unknown. Known the hormones are naturally extracted in animals, and the scientists agreed that the hormones don't have any health risk. While many countries, including countries which have produced big meat, have accepted to use the hormones as a way to decrease costs and satisfy demands of consumers, the European Union has banned applying of the cultural technology in its countries and the importation of the hormone-treated beef. The behavior of international trade didn't satisfy concerned parties in the WTO, such as the United States, Australia, and Canada, so the countries filed formal complaints to WTO finally.
2.
In both the court of first instance and the court of appeal, the WTO ruled against the European Union because its ban over the importation of the hormone-treated beef was illegal, without any convincing evidences to justify the ban. Under the WTO's verdict, the European Union either repealed the ban or was imposed punitive sanctions. The European Union chose to do nothing, so it was imposed punitive tariffs by the United States. The European Union accepted the punitive tariffs rather than repealing the ban on the importation of the hormone-treated beef. I don't know whether or not the punitive tariffs over the European Union affected the U.S. consumers' benefits. On the other hand, if another country could not power to impose the punitive tariffs over the EU, the WTO's verdict became unenforceable.
Closing Case:
1.
There two groups benefitted from the imposition of U.S. tariffs over the tire imports from China. First, after 6 months of imposing the U.S. tariffs, the U.S. tire producers increased their productions of 15% and promised to increase more than their capacity of the production. However, they didn't seem to increase the capacity as what they said. Second, some other export countries, such as Indonesia, Thailand, and Mexico increased their tire exportation to the U.S. because their tire cost was lower than the cost of Chinese tire, being affected by the U.S. tariffs. According to the Chinese officials, the groups which suffered from the U.S. tariffs were small and medium-size wholesalers and dealers, which could go out their business, and low-income consumers in the U.S. when the average of Chinese tire cost increased from 10% to 20%. Of course, the Chinese producers also suffered from the U.S. tariffs because the tire exports to the U.S decreased 34% during the same period of the 6 months.
After the response of the U.S. by using the tariffs, the China imposed the tariffs over some the U.S. export products to China. The move caused a complex matter which could be looked like a trade war. I mean the two countries raised and created their tariffs on each other for a purpose retaliated against each other.
2.
I think the United States should file the Chinese tariffs to WTO and require that both parties should comply with and enforce the WTO's verdict, rather than other actions which are like a retaliation each other by using the trade barriers. The fact that the Chinese are raising tariff rates on the importation of the goods of the U.S. is like a retaliation against the U.S. for the tire tariffs, so it has proved that China could potentially be violating WTO rules.
