Download GTU MBA 2016 Summer 4th Sem 2840010 Wto Multilateral Trading System And Its Impact On Business Question Paper

Download GTU (Gujarat Technological University) MBA (Master of Business Administration) 2016 Summer 4th Sem 2840010 Wto Multilateral Trading System And Its Impact On Business Previous Question Paper

1

Seat No.: ________ Enrolment No.___________

GUJARAT TECHNOLOGICAL UNIVERSITY
MBA ? SEMESTER- IV. EXAMINATION ? SUMMER 2016

Subject Code: 2840010 Date:03/05/2016
Subject Name: WTO Multilateral Trading System and its Impact on Business
Time: 10.30 am to 01.30 pm Total Marks: 70
Instructions:
1. Attempt all questions.
2. Make suitable assumptions wherever necessary.
3. Figures to the right indicate full marks.

Q.1 (a) Objective Questions

6
1. In a state trading the primary obligations are
A. Clarity & simplicity B. Detailed technicalities
C. Commercial
considerations
D. All of the above
2. The objective of Government procurement of goods & services is of non
discrimination between

A. Foreign supplier and
domestic supplier
B. Asian and western countries
C. None of the above D Developing countries and least
developed countries

3. Government procurement of goods and services applies to
A. Purchases of whole
year
B. Purchases beyond threshold limit
C. Purchases of capital
goods
D. Necessities of life
4. GATS Rules pre supposes the protection to the service industries by
A. Tariff imposition B. Prohibition of services
C. National domestic
regulations
D. All of the above
5. GATS presupposes the ingredients of services like
A. Tangible
characteristics
B. Prompt technical services
C. Temporary movement
of natural persons
D. None of the above
6. The operation framework of GATS Rules advocates
A. Transparency of
Regulation
B. Discouraging monopoly
C. None of the above D. All of the above at A &B
FirstRanker.com - FirstRanker's Choice
1

Seat No.: ________ Enrolment No.___________

GUJARAT TECHNOLOGICAL UNIVERSITY
MBA ? SEMESTER- IV. EXAMINATION ? SUMMER 2016

Subject Code: 2840010 Date:03/05/2016
Subject Name: WTO Multilateral Trading System and its Impact on Business
Time: 10.30 am to 01.30 pm Total Marks: 70
Instructions:
1. Attempt all questions.
2. Make suitable assumptions wherever necessary.
3. Figures to the right indicate full marks.

Q.1 (a) Objective Questions

6
1. In a state trading the primary obligations are
A. Clarity & simplicity B. Detailed technicalities
C. Commercial
considerations
D. All of the above
2. The objective of Government procurement of goods & services is of non
discrimination between

A. Foreign supplier and
domestic supplier
B. Asian and western countries
C. None of the above D Developing countries and least
developed countries

3. Government procurement of goods and services applies to
A. Purchases of whole
year
B. Purchases beyond threshold limit
C. Purchases of capital
goods
D. Necessities of life
4. GATS Rules pre supposes the protection to the service industries by
A. Tariff imposition B. Prohibition of services
C. National domestic
regulations
D. All of the above
5. GATS presupposes the ingredients of services like
A. Tangible
characteristics
B. Prompt technical services
C. Temporary movement
of natural persons
D. None of the above
6. The operation framework of GATS Rules advocates
A. Transparency of
Regulation
B. Discouraging monopoly
C. None of the above D. All of the above at A &B
2

Q.1 (b) 01] Discuss the principle of Transparency

02] Explain the term Tariff and quantitive embargo

04
Q.1 (c) 01] Objects of GATS And TRIP agreements

02] Role of Dispute settlement body (DSB) of WTO.

04

Q.2 (a) Explain the conceptual applicability of GATS Rules with governing
pre-requisites
07



(b) Analyse the General and conditional obligations Engraved in GATS
Rules with exceptions if any



engraved in GATS Rules with exceptions
07


OR


(b) Explain the GATS Rules governing the principles of participation of
developing countries
07

Q.3 (a) Explain the philosophy of MFN Principles, National Treatment
principle under GATS Rules
07
(b) Explain the GATS Rules for horizontal and sectorial commitments 07
OR
Q.3 (a) Explain the beneficial implications of GATS Rules On Export
opportunities, skilled and unskilled workers
07
(b) Discuss the benefits from commitments by countries on Financial
services, Health related services.
07

Q.4 (a) Discuss with example the benefits of TRIPS Agreement on creative and
innovative work, transfer of technology.
07
(b) Analyse the concept of Trade Mark with purpose served and remedial
measures for infringement
07
OR
Q.4 (a) Analyse the concept of Patents with pre-requisites and remedial
measures for infringement
07
(b) Analyse the concept of Compulsory Licensing with pre conditions
engraved in TRIPS Agreement.
07
FirstRanker.com - FirstRanker's Choice
1

Seat No.: ________ Enrolment No.___________

GUJARAT TECHNOLOGICAL UNIVERSITY
MBA ? SEMESTER- IV. EXAMINATION ? SUMMER 2016

Subject Code: 2840010 Date:03/05/2016
Subject Name: WTO Multilateral Trading System and its Impact on Business
Time: 10.30 am to 01.30 pm Total Marks: 70
Instructions:
1. Attempt all questions.
2. Make suitable assumptions wherever necessary.
3. Figures to the right indicate full marks.

Q.1 (a) Objective Questions

6
1. In a state trading the primary obligations are
A. Clarity & simplicity B. Detailed technicalities
C. Commercial
considerations
D. All of the above
2. The objective of Government procurement of goods & services is of non
discrimination between

A. Foreign supplier and
domestic supplier
B. Asian and western countries
C. None of the above D Developing countries and least
developed countries

3. Government procurement of goods and services applies to
A. Purchases of whole
year
B. Purchases beyond threshold limit
C. Purchases of capital
goods
D. Necessities of life
4. GATS Rules pre supposes the protection to the service industries by
A. Tariff imposition B. Prohibition of services
C. National domestic
regulations
D. All of the above
5. GATS presupposes the ingredients of services like
A. Tangible
characteristics
B. Prompt technical services
C. Temporary movement
of natural persons
D. None of the above
6. The operation framework of GATS Rules advocates
A. Transparency of
Regulation
B. Discouraging monopoly
C. None of the above D. All of the above at A &B
2

Q.1 (b) 01] Discuss the principle of Transparency

02] Explain the term Tariff and quantitive embargo

04
Q.1 (c) 01] Objects of GATS And TRIP agreements

02] Role of Dispute settlement body (DSB) of WTO.

04

Q.2 (a) Explain the conceptual applicability of GATS Rules with governing
pre-requisites
07



(b) Analyse the General and conditional obligations Engraved in GATS
Rules with exceptions if any



engraved in GATS Rules with exceptions
07


OR


(b) Explain the GATS Rules governing the principles of participation of
developing countries
07

Q.3 (a) Explain the philosophy of MFN Principles, National Treatment
principle under GATS Rules
07
(b) Explain the GATS Rules for horizontal and sectorial commitments 07
OR
Q.3 (a) Explain the beneficial implications of GATS Rules On Export
opportunities, skilled and unskilled workers
07
(b) Discuss the benefits from commitments by countries on Financial
services, Health related services.
07

Q.4 (a) Discuss with example the benefits of TRIPS Agreement on creative and
innovative work, transfer of technology.
07
(b) Analyse the concept of Trade Mark with purpose served and remedial
measures for infringement
07
OR
Q.4 (a) Analyse the concept of Patents with pre-requisites and remedial
measures for infringement
07
(b) Analyse the concept of Compulsory Licensing with pre conditions
engraved in TRIPS Agreement.
07
3
5

Discuss the case and suggest five possible solutions/outcome.

India?s national solar programme, which was launched in 2010, aims to
?establish India as a global leader in solar energy, by creating the policy
conditions for its diffusion across the country as quickly as possible?. To
incentivise the production of solar energy within the country, the government
under the programme agrees to enter into long-term power purchase
agreements with solar power producers, effectively ?guaranteeing? the sale of
the energy produced and the price that such a solar power producer could
obtain. Thereafter, it would sell such energy through distribution utilities to the
ultimate consumer. However, a solar power producer, to be eligible to
participate under the programme, is required compulsorily to use certain
domestically sourced inputs, namely solar cells and modules for certain types
of solar projects. In other words, unless a solar power producer satisfies this
domestic content requirement, the government will not ?guarantee? the
purchase of the energy produced.

In 2013, the U.S. brought a complaint before the WTO arguing that the
domestic content requirement imposed under India?s national solar programme
is in violation of the global trading rules. Specifically, it said, India has violated
its ?national treatment? obligation by unfavourably discriminating against
imported solar cells and modules. In other words, India was discriminating
between solar cells and modules which were otherwise identical on the basis of
the national ?origin? of the cells and modules, a clear violation of its trade
commitment. India principally relied on the ?government procurement?
justification, which permitted countries to derogate from their national
treatment obligation provided that the measure was related to ?the procurement
by governmental agencies of products purchased for governmental purposes
and not with a view to commercial resale or use in production of goods for
commercial sale?. India also argued that the measure was justified under the
general exceptions since it was necessary to secure compliance with its
domestic and international law obligations relating to ecologically sustainable
development and climate change.

The panel, in its 140-page report, examined in detail the submission of the
parties and rightly concluded that India, by imposing a mandatory domestic
content requirement, had violated its national treatment obligation. In so far as
the government procurement derogation was concerned, the panel found that
the product being subject to the domestic content requirement was solar cells
and modules, but the product that was ultimately procured or purchased by the
government was electricity. The domestic content requirement was therefore
not an instance of ?government procurement?. Finally, the panel found that
since India failed to point out any specific obligation having ?direct effect in
India? or ?forming part of its domestic legal system?, which ?obligated? India
to impose the particular domestic content requirement, the general exception
was not available to the Indian government in the instant case.

Use of clean energy

The ruling, however, has come under intense criticism, particularly from
environmentalists, as undermining India?s efforts towards promoting the use of
clean energy. However, there appears to be no rational basis for how
mandatory local content requirements contribute towards promoting the use of
clean energy.


14
FirstRanker.com - FirstRanker's Choice
1

Seat No.: ________ Enrolment No.___________

GUJARAT TECHNOLOGICAL UNIVERSITY
MBA ? SEMESTER- IV. EXAMINATION ? SUMMER 2016

Subject Code: 2840010 Date:03/05/2016
Subject Name: WTO Multilateral Trading System and its Impact on Business
Time: 10.30 am to 01.30 pm Total Marks: 70
Instructions:
1. Attempt all questions.
2. Make suitable assumptions wherever necessary.
3. Figures to the right indicate full marks.

Q.1 (a) Objective Questions

6
1. In a state trading the primary obligations are
A. Clarity & simplicity B. Detailed technicalities
C. Commercial
considerations
D. All of the above
2. The objective of Government procurement of goods & services is of non
discrimination between

A. Foreign supplier and
domestic supplier
B. Asian and western countries
C. None of the above D Developing countries and least
developed countries

3. Government procurement of goods and services applies to
A. Purchases of whole
year
B. Purchases beyond threshold limit
C. Purchases of capital
goods
D. Necessities of life
4. GATS Rules pre supposes the protection to the service industries by
A. Tariff imposition B. Prohibition of services
C. National domestic
regulations
D. All of the above
5. GATS presupposes the ingredients of services like
A. Tangible
characteristics
B. Prompt technical services
C. Temporary movement
of natural persons
D. None of the above
6. The operation framework of GATS Rules advocates
A. Transparency of
Regulation
B. Discouraging monopoly
C. None of the above D. All of the above at A &B
2

Q.1 (b) 01] Discuss the principle of Transparency

02] Explain the term Tariff and quantitive embargo

04
Q.1 (c) 01] Objects of GATS And TRIP agreements

02] Role of Dispute settlement body (DSB) of WTO.

04

Q.2 (a) Explain the conceptual applicability of GATS Rules with governing
pre-requisites
07



(b) Analyse the General and conditional obligations Engraved in GATS
Rules with exceptions if any



engraved in GATS Rules with exceptions
07


OR


(b) Explain the GATS Rules governing the principles of participation of
developing countries
07

Q.3 (a) Explain the philosophy of MFN Principles, National Treatment
principle under GATS Rules
07
(b) Explain the GATS Rules for horizontal and sectorial commitments 07
OR
Q.3 (a) Explain the beneficial implications of GATS Rules On Export
opportunities, skilled and unskilled workers
07
(b) Discuss the benefits from commitments by countries on Financial
services, Health related services.
07

Q.4 (a) Discuss with example the benefits of TRIPS Agreement on creative and
innovative work, transfer of technology.
07
(b) Analyse the concept of Trade Mark with purpose served and remedial
measures for infringement
07
OR
Q.4 (a) Analyse the concept of Patents with pre-requisites and remedial
measures for infringement
07
(b) Analyse the concept of Compulsory Licensing with pre conditions
engraved in TRIPS Agreement.
07
3
5

Discuss the case and suggest five possible solutions/outcome.

India?s national solar programme, which was launched in 2010, aims to
?establish India as a global leader in solar energy, by creating the policy
conditions for its diffusion across the country as quickly as possible?. To
incentivise the production of solar energy within the country, the government
under the programme agrees to enter into long-term power purchase
agreements with solar power producers, effectively ?guaranteeing? the sale of
the energy produced and the price that such a solar power producer could
obtain. Thereafter, it would sell such energy through distribution utilities to the
ultimate consumer. However, a solar power producer, to be eligible to
participate under the programme, is required compulsorily to use certain
domestically sourced inputs, namely solar cells and modules for certain types
of solar projects. In other words, unless a solar power producer satisfies this
domestic content requirement, the government will not ?guarantee? the
purchase of the energy produced.

In 2013, the U.S. brought a complaint before the WTO arguing that the
domestic content requirement imposed under India?s national solar programme
is in violation of the global trading rules. Specifically, it said, India has violated
its ?national treatment? obligation by unfavourably discriminating against
imported solar cells and modules. In other words, India was discriminating
between solar cells and modules which were otherwise identical on the basis of
the national ?origin? of the cells and modules, a clear violation of its trade
commitment. India principally relied on the ?government procurement?
justification, which permitted countries to derogate from their national
treatment obligation provided that the measure was related to ?the procurement
by governmental agencies of products purchased for governmental purposes
and not with a view to commercial resale or use in production of goods for
commercial sale?. India also argued that the measure was justified under the
general exceptions since it was necessary to secure compliance with its
domestic and international law obligations relating to ecologically sustainable
development and climate change.

The panel, in its 140-page report, examined in detail the submission of the
parties and rightly concluded that India, by imposing a mandatory domestic
content requirement, had violated its national treatment obligation. In so far as
the government procurement derogation was concerned, the panel found that
the product being subject to the domestic content requirement was solar cells
and modules, but the product that was ultimately procured or purchased by the
government was electricity. The domestic content requirement was therefore
not an instance of ?government procurement?. Finally, the panel found that
since India failed to point out any specific obligation having ?direct effect in
India? or ?forming part of its domestic legal system?, which ?obligated? India
to impose the particular domestic content requirement, the general exception
was not available to the Indian government in the instant case.

Use of clean energy

The ruling, however, has come under intense criticism, particularly from
environmentalists, as undermining India?s efforts towards promoting the use of
clean energy. However, there appears to be no rational basis for how
mandatory local content requirements contribute towards promoting the use of
clean energy.


14
4

If the objective is to produce more clean energy, then solar power producers
should be free to choose energy-generation equipment on the basis of price and
quality, irrespective of whether they are manufactured locally or not. In fact, by
mandatorily requiring solar power producers to buy locally, the government is
imposing an additional cost, usually passed on to the ultimate consumer, for
the production of clean energy. The decision may therefore stand to benefit the
interest of the ultimate consumer. It is entirely possible to give preferential
treatment to clean energies (in the form of tax rebates for solar power
producers and so on) without requiring mandatory local content. Perhaps, what
is even more instructive is the fact that India during its submissions before the
WTO did not invoke the general exceptions under article XX(b) or (g) of the
General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade typically relied upon in trade disputes
by parties seeking to protect their domestic regulations on ?environmental? or
?health? grounds. India therefore did not itself believe that the local content
requirement under the programme was imposed for the ?conservation? of ?clean
air?.
The panel ruling, however, is not final and reports indicate that India will
prefer an appeal to the appellate body. Simultaneously, India may be exploring
the option of filing a counter complaint against the U.S., with several states in
the U.S. such as Michigan, Texas and California having also reportedly been
accused of employing mandatory local content requirements in the renewable
energies sector.
14

Nevertheless, amidst the cacophony of the Prime Minister?s ?Make in India?
campaign, India must resist the temptation of adopting protectionist measures
such as domestic content requirements which are inconsistent with its
international obligations. Domestic content measures, despite their immediate
political gains, have a tendency to skew competition. Manufacturers must
remain free to select inputs based solely on quality and price, irrespective of
the origin. The Modi government must continue working towards building a
business and regulatory environment which is conducive to manufacturing.
This would require systemic changes in the form of simpler, transparent and
consistent laws and effective dispute resolution mechanisms.
Question: Analyze the following case. Do you agree with this analysis? Write
your five major arguments or observations with reasons, why do you agree or
disagree with the views expressed in the case.


*************
FirstRanker.com - FirstRanker's Choice