Juan Carlos Zapata, Executive Director of the Development Foundation for Guatemala (Fundesa), said that the resolution of the court is very important; However, he indicated that it is necessary that the processes be exhausted and confirmed in the different instances of the United States.
“We will be attentive to the corresponding notification and implementation by the Office of the Commerce Representative (USTR) and the Customs and Borders Control Office (CBP),” he added.
Fundesa acknowledges that the recent resolution of the International Trade Court of that country raises relevant aspects on the legal limits in the imposition of tariffs and trust that, as the corresponding legal and administrative processes progress, respect for the current commercial agreements is guaranteed and the preferential access that allows trade between Guatemala and the United States to continue generating employment, investment and development for both countries, the executive, exposed the executive.
“We are waiting for the corresponding ads by USTR and CBP,” Zapata said.
Meanwhile, Álvaro González Ricci, president of the Bank of Guatemala (Banguat), and the economic manager Johny Gramajo said that it cannot be responded bluntly about the decision of the court, but, in any case, they indicated, the resolution refers that it would be illegal to invoke the emergency law of 1977 to impose tariffs.
“If this is binding or not, and if this suspends or not, a little more analysis is required and see the way in which the sentence was issued by this court. It is an issue that will be carefully analyzed to issue a position,” they said.
They stated that the markets began to react and that the reaction could be positive to the extent that this causes a more permanent than temporary situation.
For its part, the Ministry of Economy indicated that, for the moment, they still do not have an official position, since it is recent news. “The theme will be treated in tomorrow’s round (Thursday),” they added.
Subscriber content
Zapata states that having declared unconstitutional the use of the IEEPA law as the basis to impose general tariffs, any measure of rates that is based only on that legislation, such as the 10% tariff applied to Guatemala and other countries of CAFTA-DR, lacks legal validity and should be considered full of full right. He adds that the sentence has a permanent effect, and prohibits its future reapplication based on the same law, however, he said that the ruling can still be appealed to the Court of Appeals of the Federal Circuit, where the government of that country can argue that the Executive does have authority under those laws and with it would seek to restore the blocked tariffs, although they consider that the process can take several months, and it is uncertain given by several months, and it is uncertain.