To what extent has the U.S. government addressed air cargo issues in policymaking and during bilateral aviation negotiations, and what are the possibilities for separating negotiations of air cargo services from broader negotiations that include passenger services? We also provided copies of a draft of this report to the departments of Transportation and State for their review and comment. Regulation by Foreign Aviation Authorities

Burdensome legal and administrative requirements were deemed a significant problem by six airlines. These problems were cited at airports in 5 of the 10 largest U.S. international airfreight markets in 1994. Ground-Handling Restrictions Degrade the Quality of Airlines’ Services

Thirteen U.S. airlines responding to our survey reported problems with ground-handling at 31 foreign airports, most of which are located in Latin America and the Asia/Pacific region. Other attempts to resolve problems have been unsuccessful. Recommendations

We recommend that the Secretary of Transportation develop and distribute to all U.S. airlines information on the assistance available and guidance on the procedures to be followed in requesting aid from the U.S. government in resolving problems in doing business abroad and extend DOT’s current effort to collect information on the status and severity of U.S. airlines’ problems in doing business abroad to include all U.S. all-cargo airlines that operate internationally. DOT and the State Department Have Advanced Air Cargo Issues, but All-Cargo Carriers Advocate Dedicated Negotiations

U.S. delegations have discussed air cargo issues to some extent in their negotiations with more than three-quarters of the countries with which bilateral talks have been held since 1989. Nevertheless, restrictions persist. As a remedy, most U.S. all-cargo airlines advocate separating negotiations of cargo rights from broader negotiations that include passenger services. Separate All-Cargo Negotiations Face Several Obstacles

In contrast to such arguments for separate negotiations are obstacles suggesting that this approach may not be routinely practical or appropriate.
Why GAO Did This Study

Pursuant to a congressional request, GAO reviewed U.S. air cargo airlines' reported problems in doing business abroad, focusing on the: (1) nature of the airlines' problems; (2) actions the affected airlines and the Departments of Transportation (DOT) and State have taken to resolve these problems; (3) extent to which the U.S. government has addressed air cargo issues in policymaking and during bilateral aviation negotiations; and (4) possibilities for separating negotiations of air cargo services from broader negotiations that include passenger services.

What GAO Found

GAO found that: (1) the 22 U.S. all-cargo airlines responding to a survey reported a range of obstacles to doing business abroad which impair their competitiveness and reported that they experienced significant problems at 81 foreign airports; (2) the most pervasive problems were related to regulation by foreign governments and foreign aviation authorities, with most of these problems occurring at airports in Latin America or the Asia-Pacific region; (3) many of the carriers have attempted to resolve such problems themselves, although some have requested assistance from DOT or State, while others were unaware that assistance was available; (4) U.S. delegations have raised air cargo issues with more than three-quarters of the countries with which they have conducted bilateral talks since 1989; (5) restrictions persist in spite of the resulting expansion of opportunities for U.S. all-cargo carriers; and (6) 13 of the 22 airlines advocate separating negotiations of air-cargo rights from broader negotiations that also address passenger rights, but this approach may not be practical or appropriate on a regular basis.