Advertisement

May 18, 2013

World Trade Organization Rules Against Ontario’s “Buy Local” Program

The Province of Ontario has imposed a requirement that in order to participate in its feed in tariff program (FIT) for solar energy a project much source at least 60% of the solar project content from within the Province. That requirement has been challenged by Japan and the European Union. The World Trade Organization now has ruled that this domestic-content requirement violates sections of the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade 1994. Canada will be appealing the decision.

Many in Michigan have suggested that the Ontario requirement would be good for Michigan manufacturing, if coupled with a Michigan FIT. However, under the federal Constitution such a requirement would give rise to challenges from the other 49 states under the Commerce Clause, which generally prohibits one state from erecting impediments to interstate commerce. Now we see that such a state law would also violate international trade agreements. All this begs the question of whether the bow to Michigan content in granting bonus renewable energy credits may itself be subject to challenge.

© 2013 Varnum LLP

About the Author

Partner

Bruce Goodman practices environmental law, energy law and construction law. His environmental expertise includes air quality permitting work, compliance counseling on air emissions, state and federal enforcement defense issues, and environmental management program development. His energy expertise includes negotiating numerous electric power sales agreements, both for wholesale sellers of energy and for retail consumers of energy, state rate cases, developing municipal energy tariffs, and energy project permitting....

616-336-6743

Boost: AJAX core statistics

Legal Disclaimer

You are responsible for reading, understanding and agreeing to the National Law Review's (NLR’s) and the National Law Forum LLC's  Terms of Use and Privacy Policy before using the National Law Review website. The National Law Review is a free to use, no-log in database of legal and business articles. The content and links on www.NatLawReview.com are intended for general information purposes only. Any legal analysis, legislative updates or other content and links should not be construed as legal or professional advice or a substitute for such advice. No attorney-client or confidential relationship is formed by the transmission of information between you and the National Law Review website or any of the law firms, attorneys or other professionals or organizations who include content on the National Law Review website. If you require legal or professional advice, kindly contact an attorney or other suitable professional advisor.  

Some states have laws and ethical rules regarding solicitation and advertisement practices by attorneys and/or other professionals. NLR does not accept advertising from attorneys or law firms. The National Law Review is not a law firm nor is www.NatLawReview.com  intended to be an advertisement or a referral service for attorneys and/or other professionals. The NLR does not wish, nor does it intend, to solicit the business of anyone or to refer anyone to an attorney or other professional.  NLR does not answer legal questions nor will we refer you to an attorney or other professional if you request such information from us. 

Under certain state laws the following statements may be required on this website and we have included them in order to be in full compliance with these rules. The choice of a lawyer or other professional is an important decision and should not be based solely upon advertisements. Attorney Advertising Notice: Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome. Statement in compliance with Texas Rules of Professional Conduct. Unless otherwise noted, attorneys are not certified by the Texas Board of Legal Specialization, nor can NLR attest to the accuracy of any notation of Legal Specialization or other Professional Credentials.