US Invests That WTO MFN for Equal Treatment to All Must Go

[ABS News Service/13.10.2026]

Geneva – Several countries questioned the United States, China and the United Kingdom over their respective World Trade Organization reform proposals at an informal meeting on foundational issues yesterday, said people familiar with the developments.

Washington justified its stance on rethinking the most-favored-nation principle and its link with reciprocity.

The meeting, convened by facilitator Ambassador Sumathi Balakrishnan of Malaysia, maintained a conversational tone, said a trade envoy who asked not to be quoted. However, discussions across the WTO reform tracks – covering foundational issues, decision-making, level-playing-field issues and development provisions – continue to leave members divided.

US Trade Envoy Ambassador Joseph Barloon answered several questions about the basis of the US demands, according to people present at the meeting.

The US proposal centered on several themes including transparency and notification requirements; changing the development architecture, particularly doing away with the self-designation framework for availing Special and Differential Treatment; bringing a “more flexible pathway to incorporate plurilateral agreements into the WTO architecture”; rethinking “how the MFN principle functions in its current form and embark on a frank discussion of the link between MFN and reciprocity, which itself is a bedrock WTO founding principle”; and examining the role of the Secretariat to fortifying essential security.

MFN

Washington maintained that “MFN now is a glue keeping us from increasing trade and deepening market opening agreements in a balanced and reciprocal manner,” said a person, who asked not to be quoted.

The United States also listed a series of exemptions to MFN, citing regional trade agreements, Articles 20 and 21 of the GATT, Article 25 on pathway to waivers and plurilaterals, the person said.

Washington also mentioned that the government procurement agreement as a means of not having MFN as an overarching rule, the person said.

Brazil asked how Washington would visualize changes to the MFN principle, the bedrock of the multilateral non-discriminatory trading system.

In response, the US trade envoy said it was a good question requiring longer examination. He also said that the United States did not have a set or preordained outcome in mind, said people familiar with the developments.

Clarity on US Trade Deals

Brazil also sought clarity on the deals the US has signed with numerous countries under the stated objective of fair and reciprocal agreements since April 2025, which have not yet been notified to the WTO, according to a participant who took part in the meeting. Brazilian Trade Envoy Ambassador Guilherme Patriota asked whether the reciprocal deals signed with members will ever be notified – and specifically, their tariffs and how they would apply, whether on an MFN basis or in another manner, said participants who asked not to be identified.

That issue was not discussed during the session.

The US trade envoy said the important aspect for now would be what members want before they can discuss how to change MFN. He cited Ambassador Jamieson Greer’s statement to the effect that United States wants to produce more of what it consumes and to keep a manufacturing base.

Ambassador Patriota commented that imbalances in trade based on trade deficits should not be examined only quantitatively, as is often the case by pointing to total values of deficits or surpluses, but should also be considered qualitatively. This is because a member may have a surplus based on the export of commodities with low value added, but may have a deficit in manufactured goods of high value added, an Asian official said.

WTO reform proponents like the European Union and Norway said they liked the continuation of MFN, while some other members apparently showed some willingness to consider and debate the issue further, said participants who asked not to be quoted.

Significantly, most developing countries expressed concerns on changes to MFN, expressing their opposition to the US proposal, said people familiar with the developments.

On the role of the WTO Secretariat, several members agreed with the US stance, said participants who asked not to be quoted. However, some reform proponents, particularly members of the Friends of the System, came to support the WTO Secretariat, providing more latitude to the Secretariat than Washington seemed ready to concede, said participants who asked not to be quoted.