A greater number of non-tariff barriers were recently adopted by major ASEAN nations in the wake of the global financial crisis of 2008-9 compared to previously, with the majority being technical regulations such as TBT’s. The responses to TBT range from relatively easy adjustment by companies in Thailand to significant difficulties experienced by firms in Indonesia. It is important that corporations find ways to accommodate themselves to these TBTs, and the government, for its part, needs to be active in drawing attention to TBTs in order to provide firms with accurate information on TBTs. In addition, Mutual Recognition Agreements between countries or MOUs concerning certification periods of different countries should receive strategic consideration.
Also cited as major impediments for companies were non-tariff barriers resulting from increases in trade remedy measures such as safeguards and antidumping/ countervailing measures, import licenses and strengthening of importing procedures that create difficulties with respect to customs, institutional loopholes such as subjective classification of HS codes. Along with encouraging firms to be outspoken about trade remedies, it is also necessary that official channels be established that would enable smaller firms to convey their opinions to countries concerned. The problems related to customs can be effectively dealt with if institutional system such as the ASEAN Single Window mechanism, to be established by 2015, is utilized actively. Institutional loopholes warrant careful assessment at the government level, followed by negotiation with the government of that country to remedy them.
When the Ad-Valorem Equivalents (AVEs) of NTBs against its small cars, one of Korea’s major export items, were approximated, the import licenses found in Malaysia had a AVE value of almost 0%; whereas AVE of Philippine’s import ban on smaller used cars was extremely high at 127%. The figures for technical regulations and quantitative restrictions such as tighter import procedures and pre-shipment inspection for hot rolled steel plate and tin plates produced in Indonesia, were relatively high at 29.5% and 35.9%, respectively. Depending on the country or item, the AVE exists at both extremes, from close to 0% to 127%. The most affected were products with high price elasticity, exhibiting more a greater import reduction effect as a result of NTBs.
The implications that can be drawn from the current situation and assessment of NTBs in ASEAN are as follows. First, it is imperative that a broad database on NTBs for ASEAN and Korea’s other major export destinations be established with a variety of encouragement measures from the government for its utilization. Second, a recognition of the fact that the government’s efforts to remove NTBs in ASEAN will facilitate exports by small and medium-sized firms is warranted. And as NTBs are increasing for a variety of products (such as newspaper printing paper, cardboard, used cars), the government should maintain focus on those items as well. Third, bilateral negotiations or pursuing FTAs would be a better option for dismantling NTBs of individual ASEAN countries, as opposed to utilizing the Korea-ASEAN FTA Implementation Committee, held only once or twice every year. Fourth, given that UNCTAD is investigating Korea for possible NTBs, and that the organization would list the results in a freely accessible database (TRAINS), Korea must effect a plan to prepare itself for potential demands for removal of NTBs in the future.