It is expected to provide a much-needed geopolitical counterweight to the United States and China. However, it can only do this if it can establish an aircraft industry and military industrial base large enough to command the attention of the U.S. The Current Status of the Airbus-Boeing WTO Dispute

In May 18, 2011, the WTO Appellate Body upheld the Panel's finding that certain EU subsidies to Airbus "caused serious prejudice to the interests of the United States."

These subsidies included financing arrangements provided by EU countries for the development of Airbus aircraft, equity infusions from EU countries to companies within the Airbus consortium, infrastructure improvements, and public land use rights. The Appellate Body found that "the effect of the subsidies was to displace exports of Boeing single-aisle and twin-aisle LCA from the European Union, Chinese, and Korean markets and Boeing single-aisle LCA from the Australian market," causing serious prejudice to the interests of the United States. The Appellate Body then upheld the Panel's recommendation to the EU to "take appropriate steps to remove the adverse effects or & #8230; withdraw the subsidy."

Since the May 18 WTO report, the U.S. And EU have been bickering over the implementation of the report, specifically the EU's "appropriate steps to remove the adverse effects or & #8230; withdraw the subsidy" recommended by the Panel. On December 19, 2011, the EU informed the DSB that it had taken appropriate steps to brings its measures into conformity with its WTO obligation. However, the U.S. claimed that the steps taken by the European Union did not bring it into compliance with the Dispute Settlement Body's (DSB) rulings.

On March 30, 2012, the United States requested the establishment of a compliance panel to supervise the EU's implementation of the May 18 report; the panel was created on April 17, 2012. On August 13, 2012, the Chairman of the compliance panel informed the DSB that the panel, after consultations with the parties, had adopted a timetable in which it expected to issue its report in 2013.

The EU objected to the countermeasures requested by the U.S. And the matter was referred to arbitration. As of January 19, 2012, the U.S. And EU requested the appointed Arbitrator to suspend its work for the time being, presumably until the U.S. implements its countermeasures and the DSB is petitioned by either side to make a ruling on the appropriateness of those countermeasures.
Life after Subsidies for Airbus

In the event that the EU does withdraw its subsidies from Airbus for some reason, Airbus still has many creative options available to obtain financing and enhance its competitive edge in the marketplace. For example, as Boeing has demonstrated in its Japanese partnerships undertaken in the development of the 787 Dreamliner, many private firms such as Mitsubishi and Kawasaki are willing to provide substantial soft loans, $1.5 billion, just for Boeing to hire their firms to build parts of the new plane. That $1.5 billion was certainly appreciated for a project that topped $15 billion in total development costs, with Boeing not looking at profitability until 2020.

These firms seek lucrative business opportunities as valued contractors, but they are more interested in developing the knowledge base to produce aircraft themselves one day, or supply parts to aircraft. Whichever their route, their partnership with Boeing will help develop their country's aircraft industry. Boeing's partnerships, with private firms as well as the U.S. Department of Defense, demonstrate that the ability to mass produce technologically advanced aircraft is a coveted asset in the modern world, with both governments and private firms willing to dole out substantial funds for the privilege of partnership.

Knight, p. 222

http://www.wto.org/english/tratop_e/dispu_e/cases_e/ds316_e.htm

http://seattletimes.com/html/businesstechnology/2016310102_boeing25.html?