Five years have passed since a tariff measure on Spanish black olives sparked a long-running dispute between the United States and the European Union. The Geneva-based World Trade Organization became the arena where both sides sought to interpret international rules. After the case was reopened, Washington revisited its duties to align with global standards. On August 1, 2018, the United States raised export charges on the Spanish product from 21.60 percent to 34.75 percent, aiming to shield the Californian olive industry from European Union agricultural support. Brussels officials argued that these duties violated WTO norms and secured a partial victory in 2021 when the United States reduced the tariff from 35 percent to 31 percent. The decision to impose the tax has already translated into a substantial hit for Spanish producers, estimated at 280 million dollars in lost sales in the United States.
Today the case has been revived as the European Union maintains that the sanctions do not comply with international rules, noting that aid to farmers flows through the Common Agricultural Policy rather than to the producers themselves. A WTO panel to assess whether the United States followed a previous ruling against the Spanish olive tariffs was announced on July 28. Antonio Mora explains that the conflict between Brussels and Washington, which began in 2019 and was projected to wrap up by 2021, has resurfaced. He contends that the tariffs remain unfair and that this was already acknowledged in prior decisions. The Secretary General of the Spanish Mesa Exporters and Industrialists Association for Olives emphasizes that the California market disruption caused Spanish producers to lose about three-quarters of their American market share. The United States is urged to investigate Spanish exports to determine if CAP aid reached farmers growing olives rather than the producers themselves.
The EU maintains that the United States imposed tariffs on Spanish black olives, arguing that CAP subsidies do not benefit processors but the olive growers themselves. The Commerce Department’s tariff decision rested on this distinction, an interpretation seen as inconsistent with WTO rules. The assessment suggests that because subsidies primarily reach olive farmers, the United States may struggle to sustain a 35 percent levy over time.
From the Spanish government and the European Union, there is a commitment to exhaust every available avenue to defend the interests of Spain’s black olive sector and to resolve the economic fallout. The submission by the European Commission of a compliance review panel to the WTO on July 14 is part of this effort. Additional actions involving the European Commission and the Andalusian regional government are described as necessary steps in the broader strategy to resolve foreclosures and support the sector, according to official sources within the Ministry of Agriculture.
“Legal tricks”
Antonio Mora of Asemesa points to a perception that several strategic moves allowed the United States market to be closed to Spanish olives. He notes that neighboring producers in Egypt, Turkey, and Morocco benefited during the period when access narrowed, and he suggests that meaningful progress on the case may not occur until 2024. The European Union has treated this trade friction as a central element of its agricultural subsidies policy through the CAP. A potential adverse WTO decision could influence the entire framework of European farm aid.
Earlier this year, the EU and the United States agreed to form a specialized group to assess compliance with international rules. Reports indicate both sides pledged to cooperate so a panel could deliver its assessment within roughly three months of its creation. The group has been formed with a chair and two members, and representatives from eight countries—Brazil, China, India, Japan, Russia, Switzerland, and Turkey—joined to participate in the proceedings before the WTO. These participants reserve the right to present testimony in the weeks ahead as the process unfolds.
Officials from the European Commission note that typical working groups in these matters release decisions within about thirteen months, yet there is optimism that this case will move more quickly. For many, this is seen as a straightforward legal issue with broader implications for how tariff disputes are resolved on the world stage.