EUROPEAN UNION MRLS AND PESTICIDE POLICIES – SPECIFIC TRADE CONCERN 448:
EU MRLS FOR ALPHA-CYPERMETHRIN, BUPROFEZIN, CHLOROTHALONIL,
CHLORPYRIFOS, CHLORPYRIFOS-METHYL, CYPERMETHRIN,
DIFLUBENZURON, ETHOXYSULFURON, GLUFOSINATE,
IMAZALIL, IOXYNIL, IPRODIONE, mancozeb,
MOLINATE, PICOXYSTROBIN
AND TEPRALOXYDIM

SUBMISSION BY THE UNITED STATES of america

The following submission, received on 31 March 2025, is the statement made by the United States of America at the 19-21 March 2025 WTO SPS Committee, and is being circulated at the request of the Delegation of the United States of America.

_______________

1.  The United States, along with other WTO Members, reiterates our deep concern with the European Union's pesticide approval and renewal decisions and the systemic barriers to trade that result from the subsequent withdrawal or reduction of pesticide maximum residue levels, or MRLs, to the limit of quantification (LOQ) or the lower limit of determination (LOD) based on uncertainty and insufficient scientific evidence.

2.  In general, the United States reiterates our request that the European Union align with Codex MRLs rather than lowering MRLs to LOQ or LOD when EFSA is unable to finalize a full risk assessment.

3.  Concerning _G/SPS/N/EU/788 on MRL reductions for dithiocarbamates, including mancozeb, the United States requests that the European Union reconsider the proposed mancozeb MRL reductions for agricultural, including walnuts. The United States further requests that the mancozeb MRL for walnuts be maintained at the current EU level and a 36-month transition period be granted to allow for additional information to be considered and an import tolerance application to be assessed.

4.  The United States continues to ask that the European Union consider more flexible approaches to the enforcement of changes to MRLs. Specifically, we request that the European Union extend the transition periods for MRLs that the European Union has established without completing a risk assessment that identifies specific risks to consumers.

5.  The United States understands that the European Union has attempted to address concerns about MRL enforcement practices that appeared to favor EU producers by updating its regulations to indicate that EU authorities should enforce compliance based on MRLs "in effect on the date of the placing food or feed on the market in the European Union".

6.  However, the United States remains concerned that this approach does not address concerns for imported products, especially those with longer shelf lives. The United States asks the European Union to consider a more trade-facilitating approach to enforcing pesticide MRLs, such as the well-established practice of exempting food that remains in commerce after a tolerance has been revoked or lowered, known as the FDA "channels of trade" policy.

7.  The United States also expects the European Union to take WTO Member comments into account prior to finalizing its draft measures. On numerous occasions, the European Commission has voted on draft regulations on active substance renewals and MRLs without a sufficient time for the Commission to consider Members' comments and revise draft measures as appropriate.

8.  Lastly, we ask the European Union to retain existing MRL levels while import tolerances are under consideration. Recognition and establishment of science-based import tolerances is one of the few recourses available to producers in third countries when the European Union revokes the authorization of a plant protection product, and we encourage the European Union to continue to support and, as possible, streamline the process for establishing import tolerances.

9.  Farmers around the world face many serious challenges, and we urge the European Union to recognize that its regulatory approaches for plant protection products continue to be out of step with those of nearly every other Member of the WTO and to carefully consider the concerns that have been raised for years by many WTO Members.

__________