I'm not planning on any comments because there is not much in there to talk about. The usual stuff about specific instances of backsliding with respect to a few WTO commitments, the same criticisms about market access and IP enforcement, etc. is all there. The report is not full of jargon, and as usual is a workmanlike and informed job of reporting on what U.S. industry is telling the government. Oh, sorry, the preferred term is "stakeholder," not "U.S. industry." Apparently this makes it seem as though the U.S. government was getting its marching orders from parties other than U.S. companies. What's wrong with simply saying that the government is looking out for U.S. companies? Is there shame in this?

But I digress.

USTR also published a fact sheet on the recent JCCT meetings and has a nice list of what was accomplished, again for those of you keeping score at home. The correct jargon for stuff that was actually signed (e.g. the pharma inspection MoU) is "deliverable." Isn't the public sector fun, kids?

In all serious, the USTR is one of those agencies that does a lot of good work, is staffed by some really hard working and talented lawyers (the lawyers are the only ones I've ever talked to, so I can't comment on the rest of the staff), and does not generally engage in stupid political rhetoric. Some of the most even-handed and smart China trade commentary I've heard has come from USTR folks, including their general counsel.