Caribbean Trade Law and Development

Tag: grenada

  • OECS WTO members underwent 4th WTO Trade Policy Review this week

    OECS WTO members underwent 4th WTO Trade Policy Review this week

    Alicia Nicholls

    On May 3-5, 2023, the World Trade Organisation (WTO) completed its fourth review of the trade policies and practices of the six Organisation of Eastern Caribbean States (OECS) WTO members. These are Antigua and Barbuda, Dominica, Grenada, Saint Kitts and Nevis, Saint Lucia and Saint Vincent and the Grenadines. The OECS delegation was led by the Honourable Everly Paul Chet Greene, Minister of Foreign Affairs and Trade of Antigua and Barbuda, and Chair of the OECS Council of Ministers of Trade. The discussant was Her Excellency Ambassador Nadia Theodore, Permanent Representative of Canada to the WTO.

    WTO members, meeting as the Trade Policy Review Body, reviewed the WTO Secretariat’s Report and the reports from the Governments of those six countries. During the meeting, WTO members had the opportunity to seek clarity from the OECS delegation on various issues relating to their trade policies and practices. The Chairperson’s concluding remarks stated that 24 delegations had taken the floor over the two-day meeting and 169 advance written questions from 12 delegations had been submitted for the review.

    According to the chairperson’s concluding remarks, the OECS members were applauded for “the constructive role that the OECS-WTO Members play in the multilateral trading system” despite their small size. They also received praise for their open trade and investment regimes and strong support of environmental action. However, major concerns raised surrounded implementation of commitments under WTO agreements and the backlog in compliance with their WTO notifications. It was pointed out in the Secretariat report that this was likely because of capacity constraints and the fall-out from the COVID-19 pandemic.

    The OECS is a regional intergovernmental organisation and subregional integration movement in the Caribbean region which was formed in 1981 with the signing of the Treaty of Basseterre, subsequently revised. All OECS members are members of the Caribbean Community (CARICOM). Besides the six members mentioned (all six are sovereign States), it also includes a non-sovereign full member, Montserrat. These full members are part of the Eastern Caribbean Currency Union (ECCU) and therefore share a common currency, the Eastern Caribbean dollar. Its associate members are non-sovereigns: British Virgin Islands, Anguilla, Martinique and Guadeloupe.

    The TPR reports are made publicly available and are a rich source of information for trade analysts and potential investors of a country’s trade policies and its general trading and macroeconomic environment. The TPRB chairperson’s concluding remarks are released shortly after. The minutes of the meeting, as well as members questions, are also released about six weeks after the conclusion of the review.

    You can read the report and other documents here.

    Alicia Nicholls, B.Sc., M.Sc, LL.B. is an international trade specialist and founder of the Caribbean Trade Law and Development blog http://www.caribbeantradelaw.com.

  • Caribbean Citizenship by Investment Programmes and Climate Resilience

    Caribbean Citizenship by Investment Programmes and Climate Resilience

    Alicia Nicholls

    Citizenship by investment programmes (CIPs) are currently operated by five countries in the Caribbean. These are St. Kitts & Nevis, Dominica, Grenada, Antigua & Barbuda and St. Lucia. Caribbean CIPs face increasing threats stemming from reputational risks, increased regional and international competition and heightened international scrutiny. Despite these challenges, some Caribbean CIP-operating countries are utilising CBI revenues to finance climate change adaptation/mitigation initiatives in order to build climate resilience.

    The Climate Change Challenge

    June 1st of each year marks the official start of the Atlantic Hurricane Season. It is exemplified in the rhyme many Caribbean school children learn: “June – too soon, July – standby, August – you must prepare, September – remember, and October – it’s all over”.

    Rhymes aside, Caribbean countries are no strangers to the human, economic, financial and social devastation inflicted by weather systems around this time of the year. 2017 was an unforgetable year as Hurricanes Maria and Irma caused significant damage to a number of Caribbean islands, most notably Dominica, the island of Barbuda (part of Antigua & Barbuda) and the US territories of Puerto Rico and the US Virgin Islands.

    In a 2016 International Monetary Fund (IMF) study, Acevedo wrote that in the Caribbean, “storms cause on average 1.6 percent of GDP in damages every year, but that figure could be 1.6 to 3.6 times larger due to underreporting of disaster and damages.” One of the many adverse impacts of climate change is more intense weather systems. As such, the level of damage from hurricanes and tropical storms is expected to rise.

    Whereas climate change mitigation focuses primarily on emissions reduction, adaptation recognizes the irreversibility of some climate change impacts and emphasizes resilience building through targeted programmes, initiatives, policies and projects. Caribbean countries’ domestic financing constraints necessitate their disproportionate reliance on international financing and support for their climate change adaptation efforts. High debt overhangs mean they often lack the fiscal space to respond quickly and adequately to climatic shocks. Rebuilding requires significant capital, which can be burdensome for small countries beset by narrow tax bases and limited ability to attract the large inflows of FDI required. In some cases,  high gross national income (GNI) per capita restrict their access to most official development assistance and concessional funding from multilateral agencies.

    Role of CBI Revenues

    In light of these constraints, revenues from CIPs are increasingly attractive sources of inflows for funding development programmes and initiatives. In its Staff Concluding Statement of the 2019 Article IV Mission for Grenada published in May 2019, the IMF noted that “robust FDI flows, including from the citizenship-by-investment (CBI) program, are financing the external deficit while supporting economic growth.” It further noted that these inflows “have helped channel sizable resources to the contingency fund that could be used for mitigating the effects of natural disasters”.

    In September 2017, St Kitts & Nevis introduced a temporary third investment option, the Hurricane Relief Fund, to prepare for future hurricanes, repair property damage and support Caribbean neighbours in need. The minimum contribution is US$150,000. The Fund was controversial because it was criticised as further evidence of a “race to the bottom” among Caribbean CIPs. Nonetheless, it was reported that over 900 persons benefited from the Hurricane Relief Fund. A reported 1200 applications were received under the Fund, but it is unclear how many were successful.

    CBI assisting Dominica’s recovery

    In September 2017, category five Hurricane Maria caused Dominica pervasive human, social and economic damage equivalent to 226% of its GDP (Post Disaster Needs Assessment 2017), resulting in 31 confirmed deaths and 34 missing. According to the Government of Dominica, CBI inflows have been pivotal in financing Dominica’s recovery. In its Article IV Report on Dominica, the International Monetary Fund (IMF) noted that “fiscal performance deteriorated sharply due to the fall in tax revenue after the hurricane, but was partially offset by a surge in grants and buoyant Citizenship-by-Investment (CBI) sales revenues.”

    Following Hurricane Maria, Dominica has sought to become “the world’s first climate-resilient nation”. The island nation has emphasized resilience-focused rebuilding with the help of international donor funding coordinated through its Climate Resilience Executing Agency for Dominica (CREAD). This includes building climate-resilience structures.

    In a recent article, the Dominica Citizenship by Investment Unit (CBIU) noted as follows:

    After Hurricane Maria last year, Dominica’s CBI Programme was responsible for funding housing and hotel developments, as well as tourism and agriculture projects that cumulatively helped the island recover. The collected financial resources also enabled the Dominican authorities to make payments to affected home owners in the region of £26 million, whilst a government scheme to build 5,000 new homes is financed entirely by CBI income, according to Prime Minister Roosevelt Skerrit.

    Moreover, it was announced that the Housing Revolution, which is providing climate resilient low income housing is “completely funded by Dominica’s Citizenship by Investment (CBI) Programme”. 

    Conclusion

    CIPs have significant risks, but can also be tools for promoting sustainable development. The revenue inflows can assist cash-strapped governments in financing climate climate adaptation and mitigation programmes.

    This is not to suggest, however, that CIP revenues are a panacea for financing resilience. Firstly, heavy dependence on these revenues is a real risk which must be guarded against due to the potential volatility of CBI revenue inflows. Fiscal discipline, including prudent management of these inflows, is important to ensure these countries have the fiscal space to respond to any shocks. Fiscal responsibility frameworks such as that adopted by Grenada are important.

    Secondly, due diligence standards of CIPs must be maintained and should not be lowered or compromised just to attract greater inflows.   

    Thirdly, any special climate/disaster relief funds financed by CBI revenues should be situated within a coherent national policy framework for catalyzing and making optimum use of these and other resources for building climate resilience.

    Fourthly, transparency is also important. This also includes timely data on the number of applications received under special funds, timely audits of the funds and reporting of the audits of these special funds. It also requires sensitizing the general public about the use to which the funds are being put.

    Alicia Nicholls, B.Sc., M.Sc., LL.B., is an international trade and development consultant with a keen interest in sustainable development, international law and trade. You can also read more of her commentaries and follow her on Twitter @LicyLaw.

    DISCLAIMER: All views expressed herein are her personal views and do not necessarily reflect the views of any institution or entity with which she may be affiliated from time to time.

  • In defence of Caribbean Citizenship by Investment (CBI) Programmes

    In defence of Caribbean Citizenship by Investment (CBI) Programmes

    Alicia Nicholls

    A  60 Minutes Special aired by American network, CBS, on January 1, 2017 has added fuel to the fiery debate on the legitimacy of Caribbean countries’ economic citizenship programmes. Whether intended or not, the segment entitled “Passports for Sale” cast a shadow of iniquity on the programmes which certain Caribbean countries, and to which an increasing number of countries are turning in order to stimulate their economies and attract much needed foreign investment.

    Last year, St. Lucia joined four other Eastern Caribbean countries: Antigua & Barbuda, Dominica, Grenada and St. Kitts & Nevis by offering a direct citizenship programme. Economic investor programmes fall into two broad types: residency programmes (which only offer investors the right to reside) and citizenship programmes (which confer citizenship, either directly or after a period of residency).

    Caribbean CBI programmes fall into the category of direct economic citizenship programmes which entitle qualifying investors and their qualifying spouse and/or dependents (e.g: children or elderly parents) to citizenship of the host country upon making a qualifying investment under that particular programme. Depending on the programme, a qualifying investment could be a monetary contribution of at least a certain amount to a special fund, the purchase of real estate of a minimum value or the purchase of government bonds in some cases. Investors and their co-applicants must also pass stringent due diligence procedures and pay the prescribed fees.

    The reporting on the Caribbean CBI programmes was reduced to simply the “sale of passports” without taking into account the rationale behind the operation of these programmes. CBI programmes are not only about raising revenue through foreign investment for cash-starved Caribbean countries, but have wider development goals. These include helping to improve infrastructure, creating jobs and  attracting investors who are the “best of the best”, that is, persons with know-how and skills and networks which could redound to the benefit of the host economy. It is for this reason that an increasing number of countries, including Western countries, have either implemented economic investor programmes or are thinking of doing so.

    CBI programmes not limited to small states

    Indeed, missing from the CBS segment was that economic investor programmes are not unique to small countries like those in the Caribbean or the EU small state of Malta whose programme has a one-year residency requirement. Economic investor programmes are offered by a growing number of countries around the world. For example, the United States has its EB-5 Immigrant-Investor Programme where eligible investors may obtain a green card once they “make the necessary investment in a commercial enterprise in the United States; and plan to create or preserve 10 permanent full-time jobs for qualified U.S. workers”. Several European countries offer Golden Visa programmes, while a number of Canadian provinces offer Provincial Entrepreneur Programs whereby qualifying investors can attain permanent residence once a qualifying investment is made.

    As I argued in a recent article I wrote for Henley Partners’ Global Residence and Citizenship Review Q3 2016, once carefully managed, CBI programmes can be tools of development. A prime example is St. Kitts & Nevis, which at one point had been among the world’s most indebted countries, and has seen its economic fortunes turned around.

    Focuses on missteps and not changes

    The 60 Minutes Special focused almost exclusively on the missteps made under some of the CBI programmes, while comparatively little was said of the changes made to the programmes to increase the robustness of the due diligence processes. For instance, St. Kitts & Nevis undertook a revamp of its programme amidst concerns raised by the US and Canada.

    The CBS 60 Minutes Special also harped on the fact that some unsavoury characters had managed to obtain passports through CBI programmes. This is regrettable, no doubt, but “shady”characters have managed to earn residency in western countries which have much greater due diligence capability than do small states. The CBS Special did not mention, for instance, that Caribbean CBI countries maintain a list of restricted nationalities. Nationals from Afghanistan, Iran and Syria are not eligible under St. Kitts & Nevis’ programme, as an illustration.

    Moreover, when oligarchs from Russia and the Middle East set up homes in western countries, no one (and rightfully so) questions their intention. Yet, why is a nefarious light cast on a Russian or Middle Easterner who obtains citizenship via a Caribbean CBI programme? Why the double standard? Or better yet, why are Caribbean countries constantly being held to a higher standard? Or is it because Caribbean CBI programmes, just like our much maligned offshore financial services sectors, are one area in which Caribbean countries can actually go toe to toe with developed countries?

    Growing demand for secondary passports

    One of the biggest falsehoods about CBI programmes is that secondary passports are sought primarily by persons with nefarious intent or as the CBS Special put it “scoundrels, fugitives, tax cheats, and possibly much worse”. This is far from the case. The growing class of High Net Worth Individuals (HNWIs), which includes a growing number of persons from emerging economies, increasingly see second passports as an “insurance policy” against instability or economic uncertainty in their home countries. Moreover, simple things like travelling for business or taking one’s family on vacation can be burdensome if one comes from a country with limited visa-free access to other countries. A good quality passport, therefore, brings mobility benefits.

    However, it is not only HNWIs from emerging economies which have sought secondary passports. Many, particularly those living abroad, are renouncing their American citizenship not because they necessarily want to dodge their tax duty, but because of the onerous and costly reporting requirements and the fact that American citizens may be liable to pay tax on income earned abroad to the Federal Government even if they have been resident in another country for years. Added to this, ever since the passage of the Foreign Account Tax Compliance Act of 2010 which requires foreign financial institutions to report to the US Inland Revenue Service on assets owned by US citizens, Americans have been renouncing their citizenship in record numbers.

    The demand indicators for secondary citizenship are all trending in the right direction, which is yet another reason why countries are turning to economic investor programmes. The election of President-elect Donald Trump in the US led the Canadian Immigration Department’s website to crash on election night as Americans increased online enquiries about moving to Canada, while the UK’s impending withdrawal has spurred demand by UK nationals for second EU passports.

    Additionally, investors who acquire citizenship under Caribbean CBI programmes do not only come from “questionable countries”. The St. Lucia Times reported in December that among the 38 citizenships which were granted in St. Lucia, “there were seven applicants from the Middle East, three from Russia, two from Asia, two from North Africa, two from South Africa, one from North America and one from Europe.”

    Attractiveness of Caribbean passports

    There is also the erroneous belief that Caribbean CBI programmes’ popularity stems from their  purported corruption or because of the perceived negligible due diligence.  Caribbean passports are attractive for a multiplicity of reasons. Holders of Caribbean passports enjoy visa-free access to a growing number of countries, which tick off the mobility box for investors. The high standard of living and political stability in the Caribbean appeals to those investors in search of a lifestyle change.

    CBI Caribbean countries’ citizenship laws  recognise both citizenship by birth (jus soli) and citizenship by descent (jus sanguinis) meaning that investors can pass on their citizenship to their children (born after the investor’s acquisition of citizenship) whether they are born in the host country or not.Moreover, Caribbean countries allow for dual citizenship so they do not have to renounce their current nationality.

    Another factor is that the lack of residency requirement reduces the time it takes to acquire citizenship than through naturalisation. There are other factors such as Caribbean countries’ access to international business hubs through frequent flights to international gateways, their tax-friendly climates and their network of tax treaties and investment treaties with third states.

    Conclusion

    For the above reasons I found the CBS 60 Minutes Special’s “Passports for Sale” segment to be extremely unbalanced. I also question why except for a nominal reference to Malta at the beginning, Caribbean CBI programmes were singled out and why so much attention was devoted to some of the mishaps but little was said of the steps taken to prevent a recurrence. An online petition by One people, One Caribbean has sought to set the record straight and also calls for the retraction of the segment.

    That being said, I do believe that robust and honest debate on the functioning of Caribbean countries’ CBI programmes is an important exercise once it is objective and not skewed. For example, the lack of transparency on the number of citizenship approvals granted under CBI programmes and to whom is a problem I have mentioned before. Although some countries have started to release some of their statistics, more data should be released and in a more timely manner.

    What is needed as well is greater cooperation among Caribbean CBI countries. Some critics of CBI programmes raise the legitimate fears that increased competition both among Caribbean CBI programmes and with extra-Caribbean CBI programmes may lead to a race to the bottom in order to remain competitive. Perhaps what needs to be done is harmonisation of Caribbean countries’ CBI due diligence requirements so that an investor who fails the due diligence requirements of one Caribbean programme cannot gain access to another’s. Another option could be to harmonise CBI countries’ restricted countries’ lists. I am under no illusion that this would be an easy task but it is perhaps worth considering.

    There is some support for greater OECS collaboration on this issue. The Prime Minister of St. Lucia, Allen Chastanet, has called for an OECS approach to CBI programmes through an OECS initiative based at the OECS Secretariat. However, it should be noted that a pan-OECS initiative may be problematic as not all OECS countries are supportive of such programmes. Additionally, CBI programmes must be free of political influence and interference.

    Cooperation with the wider Caribbean Community (CARICOM) is also needed. Non-CBI CARICOM countries have raised concerns about reputational and security implications for their own countries. Under the Revised Treaty of Chaguaramas, the broad definition of “Community National” means that an individual who attains citizenship of a CARICOM country would qualify as a community national and be entitled to those benefits.

    As I argued before, CBI programmes are not a panacea. Continued monitoring and upgrading of the programmes is needed to ensure that they meet their objectives of contributing to national development, while also ensuring the strictest of due diligence standards.

    Alicia Nicholls, B.Sc., M.Sc., LL.B., is a trade and development consultant with a keen interest in sustainable development, international law and trade. You can also read more of her commentaries and follow her on Twitter @LicyLaw.

  • St. Lucia and Grenada ratify WTO Trade Facilitation Agreement

    Alicia Nicholls

    Just a week shy of the commencement of the WTO’s 10th Ministerial Conference in Nairobi, Kenya, St. Lucia and Grenada became the first states of the Eastern Caribbean Economic Union (ECCU) to ratify the World Trade Organisation’s Trade Facilitation Agreement.

    The TFA, which has the potential to increase global merchandise exports by up to $1 trillion per annum (according to the World Trade Report 2015), aims to expedite the movement, release and clearance of goods, including goods in transit and to provide measures for effective cooperation between customs authorities. It is the first WTO agreement to link implementation to countries’ capacity to implement.  In November 2014, WTO members adopted a Protocol of Amendment to insert the TFA Agreement into Annex 1A of the WTO Agreement. Both countries have already notified their Category A commitments pursuant to the Agreement.

    St. Lucia and Grenada also join Trinidad & Tobago, Belize and Guyana to make it a total of five CARICOM states which have ratified the Agreement so far. Late last month Guyana became the 53rd state to ratify.

    For the TFA to enter into force, ratification by two-thirds of the WTO’s membership of 162 is required.This week Cote de Ivoire and Kenya also ratified the Agreement, becoming the fifth and sixth African countries to do so. This brings the number of ratifications to 57 states, which is more than half the number needed for the Agreement to enter into force.

    The ratification by St. Lucia and Grenada are a welcomed development and it is hoped more CARICOM states will follow suit. My article on the benefits of the TFA for small island developing states can be accessed here.

    Alicia Nicholls, B.Sc., M.Sc., LL.B. is a trade and development consultant with a keen interest in sustainable development, international law and trade. Please note that the views expressed in this article are solely hers. You can also read more of her commentaries and follow her on Twitter @LicyLaw.