* Trans Pacific Partnership free-trade deal signed on Monday
* Covers 12 Pacific Rim countries, 40 pct of world economy
* Companies say it falls sort of promised ambitions
* Some complain U.S. is biggest beneficiary
(Adds European reaction)
By Jane Wardell and Robert-Jan Bartunek
SYDNEY/BRUSSELS, Oct 6 (Reuters) - Early industry reaction
to a long-sought trade agreement reached between 12 Pacific Rim
countries on Monday amounted to faint praise that it could have
been worse and umbrage that the United States appeared to be the
biggest winner.
The Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP), aimed at liberalising
commerce across nations accounting for 40 percent of the world's
economy, was signed late on Monday after five difficult years of
talks, though it still needs ratification by each country.
Initial ambitions for the deal, covering an enormous range
of products and services from kiwifruit to semiconductors, were
clipped back in many areas to find agreement. There was also
concern that the summary made public didn't disclose the detail
where the devils might lurk.
Negotiations between the European Union and the United
States on a similar deal, which proponents say could deliver
some $100 billion of economic gains, appear stalled as
negotiators clash over issues ranging from chlorine-washed
chicken to genetically modified products.
But European business organisations said the agreement among
Pacific Rim countries could spur flagging talks between the
28-member bloc and Japan.
"With the conclusion of TPP we are now confident the EU
might be closer to conclude ambitious agreements with Japan and
the U.S.," European industry association BusinessEurope said in
a statement.
New Zealand's Fonterra FCG.NZ , the world's biggest dairy
exporter, said the deal was a "small but significant" step
forward for the dairy sector but "entrenched" U.S. protectionism
meant it fell far short of its original ambition to eliminate
all tariffs.
The politically influential Dairy Farmers of Canada
highlighted financial losses, albeit mitigated by a "fair
compensation package".
Beef, sugar, rice, seafood and horticulture companies in
Australia and New Zealand welcomed the increased access to
Japanese markets thanks to tariff reductions under the deal.
"We should focus on the gains made in this agreement for
Australian sugar, and not the success of the powerful U.S. sugar
lobby in maintaining their protectionist stance against bringing
sugar into their deficit market," said Dominic Nolan, chief
executive of the Australian Sugar Milling Council.
LOST CONCESSIONS
In India, there was concern that exports to the United
States would suffer from the loss of zero-duty export
concessions.
"If the deal is implemented, India's exports of products
like textile and leather will be severely affected," said
Abhijit Das, head of the Centre for WTO studies, a think-tank
run by India's Ministry of Commerce and Industry.
He suggested the deal could nudge India into restarting
negotiations on a free-trade agreement with the EU.
Among those expected to welcome the deal are U.S.-based
global e-commerce companies like Google GOOGL.O and Uber
UBER.UL , who will have restrictions removed on sales into
foreign markets, including existing requirements that they
establish local infrastructures.
The U.S. Trade Representative office welcomed the
"cutting-edge rules to promote internet-based commerce - a
central area of American leadership".
Australian Retailers Association executive director Russell
Zimmerman said it was too early to say how those measures would
affect local retailers but warned there was a risk of harm
"unless barriers are also lifted for Australian retailers going
overseas".
Even in areas where the Obama administration compromised,
such as cutting the monopoly period for new biologic drugs,
companies were grudging in their welcome.
Osamu Nagayama, chairman and chief executive of Japan's
Chugai Pharmaceutical Co Ltd 4519.T , which sells such drugs in
the United States through Switzerland's Roche ROG.VX , was
grateful that the settlement didn't drop below eight years as
the protection period.
"That said, given the current R&D environment, shortening
the data protection period would be challenging for the overall
pharmaceutical industry," he added.