Flight Safety
Are these the correct terms of the agreement? If so, it certainly appears unfair to the US aircraft programs. Why not request a change, or demand one?
It would appear that these terms are indeed correct and it all needs to be sorted out before the escalating subsidies cause too much of a diminishing return.
A web search will reveal quite a bit of data. You can also ask your politicians for the printed word and they will, more often than not, give you all the information you require.
A few quotes can be taken from...
http://europa.eu.int/comm/trade/good...t/overview.htm
The last sentence of this quote is enlightening..
On the other hand, the agreement establishes that indirect support (i.e. benefits provided for aeronautical applications of NASA or military programmes) should be limited to a 3% of the nation's LCA industry turnover. This discipline is primarily targeted to the support system in use in the US. In contrast to the European system of repayable royalty-based loans, since the repeal of the US rules on recoupment, there is no requirement for indirect support to be reimbursed.
The next quote is even better...
(3) In 1998, according to a monitoring study carried out on behalf of the Commission, it was estimated that the amount of US Government indirect support to its LCA industry reached almost $ 2 billion in 1997, i.e. around 7% of its commercial turnover (thus well above the 3% limit set by the 1992 Agreement).
I have yet to locate the minutes of the Uruguay negotiations but they should make interesting reading given that one side - or both - are engaged in active protectionism.
Quote..
The EU regrets that, at the end of the Uruguay Round negotiations, the US blocked the adoption of a new Civil Aircraft Agreement supported by all other negotiating parties. Although negotiations have continued since, no progress has been made.
No doubt the agreement did not suit the best interests of the US. Had the US gained the support of other parties then the EU would probably have blocked it.
Both sides of the fence are the same. The grass is not greener.