RESTRICTED  WORLD TRADE  
ORGANIZATION  WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/8 
15 December 2003 
 (03-6606) 
Working Party on the 
Accession of Kazakhstan Original:   English 
 
 
 
ACCESSION OF THE REPUBLIC OF KAZAKHSTAN 
 
TO THE WORLD TRADE ORGANIZATION 
 
Factual Summary of Points Raised  
  
 The attached Factual Summary of Points  Raised on the Accession of the Republic of 
Kazakhstan has been prepared by the Secretariat,  based on documentation examined in the Working 
Party so far.   The Factual Summary will be revi ewed at the next meeting of the Working Party. 
  
_______________ 
  WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/8 
 Page i 
 
 
 TABLE OF CONTENTS 
 
I. INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................... .1 
DOCUMENTATION PROVIDED ......................................................................................................1  
INTRODUCTORY STATEMENTS....................................................................................................1  
II. ECONOMIC POLICIES..........................................................................................................1  
- Monetary and Fiscal Policy..................................................................................................... .1 
- Foreign Exchange and Payments ............................................................................................2  
- Investment Regime.............................................................................................................. ......7  
- State Ownership and Privatization .......................................................................................11  
- Sectoral Priorities............................................................................................................ ........12  
- Mining......................................................................................................................... .............12  
- Pricing Policies ............................................................................................................... .........15  
- Competition Policy............................................................................................................. .....19  
III. FRAMEWORK FOR MAKING AN D ENFORCING POLICIES ....................................23  
- Powers of Executive, Legislative and Judicial Branches of Government ..........................23  
- Authority of Sub-Central Governments ...............................................................................27  
POLICIES AFFECTING TRADE IN GOODS ................................................................................28  
A. IMPORT REGULATIONS....................................................................................................28  
- Registration ................................................................................................................... ..........28  
- Other duties and charges levied on imports but not on domestic production...................30  
- Tariff rate quotas, tariff exemptions.....................................................................................30  
- Fees and charges for services rendered.................................................................................32  
- Application of internal taxes to imports ...............................................................................33  
- Value Added Tax ................................................................................................................ ....33  
- Excise Taxes................................................................................................................... ..........35  
- Quantitative import restrictions, includi ng prohibitions, quotas and licensing 
systems ........................................................................................................................ .............36  
- Import licensing procedures ..................................................................................................37  
- Customs valuation.............................................................................................................. .....40  
- Rules of origin ................................................................................................................ .........41  
- Other customs formalities ...................................................................................................... 43 
- Preshipment inspection ......................................................................................................... .45 
- Anti-dumping, countervailing duties safeguard regimes ....................................................45  
B. EXPORT REGULATIONS ...................................................................................................47  
- Customs tariff, fees and charges for serv ices rendered, application of internal 
taxes to exports............................................................................................................... .........47  WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/8 
Page ii  
 
 -
 Export rest rictions ............................................................................................................ ......48  
- Export licensing............................................................................................................... ........48  
- Export subsidies ............................................................................................................... .......50  
C. INTERNAL POLICIES A FFECTING FOREIGN TRADE IN GOODS .........................50  
- Industrial policy, including subsidies....................................................................................50  
- Technical barriers to trade, sanita ry and phytosanitary measures ...................................53  
- Trade-related investment measures ......................................................................................58  
- State-trading entities......................................................................................................... ......59  
- Free zones, special economic areas........................................................................................59  
- Government procurement......................................................................................................61  
- Transit........................................................................................................................ ..............62  
- Government-mandated counter-trade and barter...............................................................63  
- Agricultural policies.......................................................................................................... ......63  
- Trade in ci vil aircraft........................................................................................................ ......67  
- Textiles regime ................................................................................................................ ........67  
V. TRADE-RELATED INTELLECTUAL  PROPERTY REGIME.......................................67  
- General........................................................................................................................ .............67  
- Industrial property protection...............................................................................................67  
- Responsible agencies for policy formulation and implementation .....................................67  
- Participation in international intellectual property agreements ........................................68  
- Application of national and MFN treatment to foreign nationals......................................69  
- Copyright and related rights..................................................................................................7 0 
- Trademarks, including  service marks...................................................................................71  
- Geographical indications, including appellations of origin.................................................72  
- Industrial designs............................................................................................................. .......73  
- Patents........................................................................................................................ ..............74  
- Plant variety protection....................................................................................................... ...76 
- Layout designs of integrated circuits ....................................................................................77  
- Requirements on undisclosed information, including trade secrets and test data............77  
- Measures to Control Abuse of Intellectual Property Rights...............................................78  
- Civil judicial procedures and remedies.................................................................................79  
- Provisional measures ........................................................................................................... ...81 
- Administrative procedures and remedies.............................................................................81  
- Special border measures........................................................................................................ .83 
- Criminal procedures............................................................................................................ ...84 
POLICIES AFFECTING TRADE IN SERVICES...........................................................................85   WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/8 
 Page iii 
 
 
 - Transparency ................................................................................................................... .......87  
- Trade Agreements............................................................................................................... ....87  
CONCLUSIONS .................................................................................................................... ..............88   WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/8 
 Page 1 
 
 
 I. INTRODUCTION 
1. On 29 January 1996, the Government of the Republic of Kazakhstan requested accession to 
the World Trade Organization (WTO). At its meeting on 6 February 1996 the General Council 
established a Working Party to examine the appli cation of the Government of the Republic of 
Kazakhstan to accede to the WTO Agreement under Ar ticle XII and to submit to the General Council 
Recommendations which could include a draft Protocol  of Accession.  Membership of the Working 
Party was open to all WTO Members.  The terms of reference and the membership of the Working 
Party were reproduced in document WT/ACC/KAZ/2/Rev.17). 
2. The Working Party met on 19-20 March and 9 October 1997 under the Chairmanship of 
H.E. Mr. B. Ekblom (Finland) and on 9 October 1998, 12-13 July 2001, 13 December 2002, under the 
Chairmanship of H.E. Mr. P. Huhtaniemi (Fin land), and on [...] under the Chairmanship of 
H.E. Mr. V. Hinamen (Finland).   
DOCUMENTATION PROVIDED 
3. The Working Party had before it, to serve as a basis for its discussions, a Memorandum on the 
Foreign Trade Regime of the Republic of Kazakhs tan (WT/ACC/KAZ/3 and Addenda), a Survey of 
the foreign trade regime of the Republic of Kazakhstan  (WT/ACC/KAZ/40, 30 April 2003), the 
replies to questions submitted by members of the fo reign trade regime of the Republic of Kazakhstan, 
and other information provided by the Kazakhstan authorities listed in document 
WT/ACC/KAZ/38[/Rev...], including legislative texts and other documentation listed in [Annex I].  
[to be completed] 
INTRODUCTORY STATEMENTS 
[to be completed] 
II. ECONOMIC POLICIES 
- Monetary and Fiscal Policy 4. In response to questions from members of the Working Party, the representative of 
Kazakhstan stated the Government and the Nationa l Bank of Kazakhstan (NBK) intended to maintain 
a free-floating exchange rate of the national currenc y (Tenge (KZT)), based on the current levels of 
demand and supply, and to protect the competitive pow er of Kazakhstani goods on foreign markets.  
The National Bank would not influence the exchange  rate, exercising only the minimum presence on WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/8 
Page 2  
 
 the domestic currency market to prevent, when necessary, speculative surges in the level of the 
exchange rate of the national currency (KZT).  The monetary policy was aimed primarily to keep the 
annual inflation rate limited to 4-6 per cent between 2003 and 2004, with a subsequent decline to 
3-5 per cent by 2005. 
5. Concerning requests for information on the tax system of Kazakhstan, the representative of 
Kazakhstan noted that current forms of taxation were established by the 2001 Tax Code of the 
Republic of Kazakhstan (WT/ACC/KAZ 36 refers (entered into force on 1 January 2002)).  The main 
concept of the Code was to create a fair, stable, and predictable tax system, as well as a well-balanced tax burden for all categories of taxpayers.  The taxation regime adopted by the Republic of 
Kazakhstan corresponded to internati onal taxation principles.  He furt her added that the Tax Code of 
2001 was the only document which incorporated all re gulations on the Kazakhstani tax system.  The 
Code contained explicit definitions of rights and obligations of all pa rties to tax relations, regulated 
fulfilment of tax commitments, established tax contro l rules, determined the list of taxes and other 
compulsory payments to the budget, as well as all te rms and instruments required for proper operation 
of the tax system.  He noted that taxes, fees, and other compulsory payments comprised: corporate 
income tax, personal income tax, value added tax, excise tax, social tax, land tax, vehicles tax, 
property tax, and taxes for subsurface users.  In addition, the Tax Code contained provisions 
regulating collection of 12 charges and 14 forms of payments, including customs payments. 
[to be completed] 
- Foreign Exchange and Payments 
6. The representative of Kazakhstan stated that Ka zakhstan had accepted the obligations of the 
IMF Agreement Article VIII and had established full current account convertibility in 1996. Under the 
Law "On Currency Regulation", of 24 December  1996 (WT/ACC/KAZ/6/Add.2 refers (amended by 
the Laws No. 154-1 of 11 July 1997; No. 277-1 of 9 July 1998; No. 431-1 of 16 July 1999; No. 154-II 
of 30 January 2001, No.411-II of 8 May 2003)), exch ange transactions were subdivided into current 
operations and operations related to the movement of capital.  
7. In response to questions from members of the Working Party he noted that current operations 
related to the movement of capital covered by th e above mentioned laws included the following:  
transfers for the settlement of accounts relating to  export and import of goods, works, and services 
allowing for the deferral of payment or advance payment for a period of not more than 180 days; 
granting and receipt of loans for a period of not more than 180 days; transfer and receipt of dividends, interest, and other revenues on contributions (depos its), investments, loans, and other operations;  WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/8 
 Page 3 
 
 
 transfers not relating to trade, including grants, i nheritance, wages, pensions, alimony, etc.; and any 
currency operations other than those classified by  the Law "On Currency Regulation" as operations 
connected with the movement of capital.  
8. Operations connected with the movement of capita l comprised of the following:  investments;  
transfers for settlement of accounts relating to operati ons resulting in a complete transfer of exclusive 
rights to intellectual property; transfers as a form of  payment for economic rights to real estate, with 
the exception of property of the same status; transf ers for the settlement of accounts relating to the 
export and import of goods, works, and services allo wing for the deferral of payment or advance 
payment for a period of more than 180 days; grantin g and receipt of loans for a period of more than 
180 days; allocation of contributi ons (deposits) in foreign banks, authorised to perform banking 
operations by the legislation of their countries of registration; international transfers for operations, 
relating to accumulated pension assets; internati onal transfers under accumulation insurance and re-
insurance agreements; and transfer of curre ncy valuables to beneficial ownership.  
9. With respect to questions concerning restricti ons applicable to international transfers and 
payments for current transactions related to go ods and services, the representative of Kazakhstan 
replied that international bank payments and transfer s, effected in the course of current operations 
between residents and non-residents, shall be perform ed by authorized banks without any restrictions 
under procedures set by the National Bank of th e Republic of Kazakhsta n. International bank 
payments and transfers, effected in the course of operations connected with the movement of capital 
in the currency of the Republic of Kazakhstan and foreign currencies, shall be performed based on 
procedures set by the National Bank of the Republic of Kazakhstan.  
10. Purchase, sale, and exchange of foreign curre ncy in Kazakhstan shall be carried out by 
residents and non-residents only through authori zed banks and authorized non-banking financial 
institutions.  
11. Residents may have accounts in foreign currency in  authorized banks in Kazakhstan.  Foreign 
currency received by residents as payments for good s and services or in the form of loans shall be 
subject to obligatory inclusion into their accounts unless otherwise provided by the currency legislation of the Republic of Kazakhstan.  
12. Under the Rules on Currency Operations in Republic of Kazakhstan, adopted by the 
Resolution of the Board of the National Bank No. 115 of 20 April 2001 (WT/ACC/KAZ/4 refers), 
payments and money transfers for operations betw een residents and non-residents may be conducted 
in any currency the parties have agreed upon. Paym ents and money transfers for operations between WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/8 
Page 4  
 
 residents and non-residents may be conducted onl y through their bank accounts, except for cases 
provided for in the normative acts of the National Bank. Prior to carrying out currency operations, a 
resident and/or a non-resident shall submit doc uments, required under the currency legislation of 
Kazakhstan, to the authorized bank. The author ized bank may not effect payments and money 
transfers of a resident and/or a non-resident if  the latter failed to submit the required documents. 
13. He further noted that Article 3 of the Law "On Currency Regulations", 1996 authorized the 
President of Kazakhstan to adopt decisions to rest rict or suspend any currency transactions for the 
purpose of implementing international obligations and in emergency situations.  In addition, the same 
law authorized the National Bank to impose restric tions on the currency of payment used in export 
operations, on surrender requirements applied to export receipts in foreign currency, and on the form 
of payment under specific import and export contracts in order to ensure economic safety of 
Kazakhstan.     
14. Furthermore, the representative of Kazakhstan stated that:  
- Currency valuables, covered by the provi sions of Article 1.1 of the Law of 
Kazakhstan "On Currency Regulation" of 24 December 1996, could be imported in 
Kazakhstan by residents and non-residents without any restrictions under procedures 
set out in the legislation of Kazakhstan; 
- No restrictions applied to export of  the national currency from Kazakhstan by 
residents and non-residents.  Coins of pr ecious metals issued by the National Bank 
and recognized as a legal circulating medium , could be imported to or exported from 
Kazakhstan without any restrictions; 
- Resident natural persons had the right to  export from Kazakhstan foreign currency in 
cash in the amount of US$10,000 unsupported by  documents proving its legal origin.  
If the amount of foreign currency in cash exceeded US$10,000, it could not be 
exported unless it had previously been im ported to Kazakhstan and was accompanied 
by a customs declaration on import. 
- Non-resident natural persons had the right to export from Kazakhstan foreign 
currency in cash equivalent to US$3,000 unsupported by documents proving its legal 
origin.  If the amount of foreign currency in cash exceeded the equivalent of 
US$3,000, it could not be exported unless it had previously been imported and was 
accompanied by a customs declaration filled out upon entry to Kazakhstan;  WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/8 
 Page 5 
 
 
 - If the amount of foreign currency in cash exported by resident and non-resident 
natural persons from the Republic of Kaza khstan did not exceed the equivalent of 
US$3,000, there was no need to declare it to the customs body of Kazakhstan; 
- If the amount of foreign currency in cash exported by resident and non-resident 
natural persons from Kazakhstan exceeded the equivalent of US$3,000, it had to be 
declared in writing to the customs body of Kazakhstan; 
- Resident and non-resident natural persons may export payment documents (bills, and 
checks, including traveller's checks) with  their face value in a foreign currency 
without any restrictions and w ithout a written declaration; and 
- Exports of securities with a face value in  a foreign currency were regulated by the 
laws of the Republic of Kazakhstan on securities.   
15. The representative of Kazakhstan further not ed that, under the Law No. 2200 "Concerning 
Licensing" of 17 April 1995 (WT/ACC/KAZ/4 refers), licensing requirements extended to the following types of operations with currency valuables: 
- retailing and provision of services for foreign currency in cash; 
- opening of accounts by residents (including accounts in the currency of the Republic 
of Kazakhstan) in foreign ba nks and other financial institu tions, authorized to engage 
in corresponding activities by the legislation of the country of registration, except for accounts open by: banks, resident natural pe rsons in foreign banks located in OECD 
member-countries and having the required rati ng of one of the rating agencies, as 
well as persons, temporarily residing outside Kazakhstan, for purposes of 
employment, education, medical treatment, or recreation; 
- investments of residents placed abro ad, excluding: dealing bank operations; 
investments into securities of non-residents, meeting requirements set out in the 
currency and banking legislation of Kazakhstan; investments into authorized capitals 
of legal entities of OECD member-countries and/or member-countries of international 
agreements on stimulation a nd protection of investments, signed and ratified by the 
Republic of Kazakhstan,  under which the i nvesting resident will have the right to 
50 per cent or more of voting shares (50 per cent or more of votes) of an investment 
object; 
- transfers of residents to non-residents as a form of payment under operations of 
transfer of economic rights to real estate, with the exception of property of the same 
status; WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/8 
Page 6  
 
 - transfers of residents to non-residents for the settlement of accounts relating to 
imports of goods, works, and services allowi ng for advance payments for a period of 
more than 180 days, as well as for extension of the period for receipt of earnings in a 
foreign currency as a payment for the export of goods (works, services) by residents 
for a period of more than 180 days after th e date of export of goods (works, services); 
- receipt by residents of payments from non-residents for export of goods, included in 
the Schedule developed by the Government of the Republic of Kazakhstan, in case 
where the  period between the date on whic h the goods were exported and the date on 
which export receipts were collected, exceeds 365 days; 
- granting by residents (other than banks) of loans to non-residents for a period of more 
than 180 days; 
- crediting foreign currency, received by a resident as a loan granted by a non-resident, 
to an account of a third-party, unless there was a provision to the contrary in the currency legislation of the Republic of Kazakhstan; and 
- transfer of currency valuables to beneficial ownership, effected by a resident to a non-
resident. 
16. Some members of the Working Party asked how enterprises acquired rights to deal in foreign 
exchange, whether foreign enterprises were eligible to become licensed banks or exchange points, and 
whether enterprises other than banks could be a pproved.  The representativ e of Kazakhstan replied 
that under a general licence, banks and non-banking  financial institutions may engage in foreign 
exchange. The licenses of the National Bank of Kaza khstan for dealing with foreign exchange were 
issued to legal entities solely i nvolved in foreign exchange.  An y enterprise (Kazakhstan legal entity) 
could be the founder of an exchange bureau.  Howeve r, such enterprise had to establish a subsidiary 
solely involved in foreign exch ange.  Moreover, a non-Kazakhstan legal or physical person was not 
eligible to become a licensed exchange point.  He further noted, however, that a Kazakhstan legal 
person may be partially or fully foreign-owned and may, as such, become a licensed exchange point.  
Thus, any bank registered in Kazakhstan as a Ka zakhstan legal entity (als o if it was 100 per cent 
foreign-owned) was eligible to become an authorized bank (licensed bank).  Branch and 
representative offices of foreign banks, however, were not allowed to deal in foreign exchange until 
they were registered as Kazakhstan legal persons.   
17. Moreover, under the Rules of Registration of  Currency Operations Connected with the 
Movement of Capital and Opening of Foreign Bank Accounts, adopted by the Resolution of the Board 
of the National Bank of Kazakhstan No. 225 of 4 July  2003, registration with the National Bank shall 
be required for the following operations:  WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/8 
 Page 7 
 
 
 - currency operations, connected with the movement of capital, resulting in receipts of 
property (funds) in Kazakhstan and/or emer ging obligations for repayment of funds 
of a non-resident exceeding the equivalent of US$100,000; 
- borrowing from non-residents for a term of more than 180 days, including financial 
leasing; 
- crediting by non-residents of import and export operations; 
- investments of non-residents into Kazakhsta n in the form of direct and portfolio 
investments, including primary distribution of securities of residents on international capital markets, inclusive of the issue of de positary receipts for securities of residents; 
- transfers of non-residents as payment for a complete transfer of exclusive rights to 
intellectual property works, e ffected by residents; and 
- transfers of non-residents as payment for ec onomic rights to real estate, with the 
exception of property of the same status. 
18. He also noted that registration of currency oper ations connected with th e movement of capital 
was not restrictive, and was conducted for statis tical purposes for the balance of payments.  The 
National Bank of Kazakhstan intended to pursue its policies aimed at the liberalization of the currency 
regime and facilitation of opera tions connected with movement of capital, and schedules the 
completion of the process for 2007. 
[to be completed] 
- Investment Regime 
19. In response to requests for inform ation, the representative of Kazakhstan stated that reform of 
the legal and regulatory investment regime was need ed in order (i) to move from a centralized to a 
market economy, and (ii) to attract needed investment to increase production, modernize infrastructure and restructure the industrial b ase. Kazakhstan had cons tructed a sound legal 
environment conducive to investment.  Important le gislation to implement international norms and 
standards had been enacted including Law No . 373 "On Investments" of 8 January 2003 
(WT/ACC/KAZ/42 refers), the Tax Code of 12 J une 2001, the Customs Code of 5 April 2003, the 
Insurance Law of 18 December 2000, Law No. 232-1 "On Unfair Competition" of 9 June 1998 (with 
amendments introduced by the Law No. 123-II of  Kazakhstan, of 15 December 2000), Law No. 272 
"On Natural Monopolies" of 9 July 1998 (WT/ ACC/KAZ/18 refers), Edict No. 2350 "Concerning 
Petroleum" of 28 June 1995 (WT/ACC/KAZ/4 refers ), currency and banking laws and regulations, 
intellectual property legislation,  and the Law "Concerning the Subsurface and its Utilisation" of WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/8 
Page 8  
 
 27 January 1996, the Civil Code of  Kazakhstan (General Section) of 27 December 1994 and the Civil 
Code of Kazakhstan (Special Section) of 1 July 1999 (WT/ACC/KAZ/4 refers). 
20. The representative of Kazakhstan added that the provisions of the Investment Law 2003 were 
consistent with relevant WT O obligations, including those under the TRIMs and Subsidies 
arrangements.  He further stated that the Inv estment Law contained an explicit definition of 
investments and investment activities, establishe d a national treatment regime for domestic and 
foreign investors yet noted that, as stated in the Article 3 of the Law, legislative acts of Kazakhstan 
could specify areas where investment activities of foreign investors or enterprises with foreign 
participation were restricted or pr ohibited, for national security reasons. 
21. Some members of the Working Party asked if there was any domestic legal protection for 
foreign investors in cases of expropriation.  The representative of Kazakhstan replied that 
Article 26(3) and (4) of the Constitution of Kaza khstan and Article 8 of the Investment Law 2003 
both provided domestic legal protection to foreign inv estors in the event of expropriation.  Enforced 
seizure of property of investors (nationalization, requisition) for national n eeds could be performed 
only in exceptional cases, stipulated in the legislativ e acts of Kazakhstan.  In cases where the property 
of an investor was nationalized, his losses, incurr ed by the enactment of the legislative acts of 
Kazakhstan on nationalization, had to be compensated in full. In cases where the property of an 
investor was subject to requisition, he must be paid its market value. 
22. The representative of Kazakhstan added that the sound investment climate in Kazakhstan 
could be proved by the fact that during the peri od of 1993 and the first half of 2003, the country 
succeeded to attract US$23.4 billion in foreign direct investments (FDI).  The breakdown of the investment structure by countries showed that ma jor part of investments came from the USA, Great 
Britain, Italy, the Netherlands, the Russian Federa tion, the Switzerland and China. As noted by the 
representative of Kazakhstan, on 28 May 2003 the international rating agency, Standard&Poor's, 
raised the sovereign rating of the Republic of Kazakhstan for long-term bonds in foreign currency 
from "BB" to "BB+", while the rating for long-t erm bonds in national currency  was raised from 
"BB+" to "BBB-". Moreover, Kazakhstan became th e first CIS country granted the rating level of 
Baa3 by Moody's and BB+ by Fitch IBCA. 
23. Members of the Working Party noted that Law No. 2717 "Concerning Land", of 
22 December 1995 (WT/ACC/KAZ/4 refers), permit ted private land ownership in Kazakhstan and 
provided that legal entities of Kazakhstan, whose sh ares may be wholly foreign-owned, had the right 
to own land.  However, many types of land plots (inc luding land used for agriculture, defence, natural 
reserves, and commonly used land in populated areas) were excluded from the coverage of the Law.   WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/8 
 Page 9 
 
 
 The representative of Kazakhstan clarified that th e legislation of Kazakhstan on land was based on the 
Constitution of Kazakhstan and cons isted of the Land Code of Kaza khstan of 20 June 2003 as well as 
other normative acts.  Relations arising from the use and protection of subsurface; water; air; forests 
and other vegetation; fauna; objects of environment of a particular ecological, scientific, or cultural 
value; and land reserves under special protection of the State were regulated by a special legislation of  Kazakhstan.  Using their rights, participants of la nd relations should not inf lict damage on the natural 
resources per se and environment as a whole, nor infringe rights and interests of other parties. 
24. Economic relations related to ow nership, use, disposal of land, as well as transactions with 
land were regulated by the civil legislation of Kazak hstan, unless there were provisions to the contrary 
in the laws of Kazakhstan on land, forest, or wa ter resources, subsurface use, flora and fauna, and 
areas under special protection of the state and enviro nmental protection.  Righ ts of natural persons 
and legal entities given by law may not be restricted or limited in anyway by acts of public bodies. 
25. The representative of Kazakhstan further stated that foreign individua ls, legal entities, and 
stateless persons had the same rights and responsibili ties arising from land relations as individuals and 
legal entities of Kazakhstan, unless subject to othe r provisions of the Land Code or other national 
legislative acts.  According to Article 23 of th e Land Code, land plots with  built on industrial and non-
industrial, including housing, build ings (structures, facilities) a nd their compounds, the land intended 
for servicing buildings (structures, facilities), ex cept for land intended for the maintenance of 
commercial agricultural production and forestry, may be  in the private ownership of foreign citizens, 
stateless persons and foreign legal entities (non-govern mental).  Paragraph 2 of the Article 34 of the 
Code stipulated that foreign land users may not ha ve permanent land use rights.  Under Articles 37 
and 97 of the Land Code, foreign in dividuals and stateless persons may not have agricultural lands of  
Kazakhstan in private ownership, their rights to these lands being limited to a temporary land use on 
terms of leasing for ten years. 
26. Rights of other countries to the use of land in  Kazakhstan were regulated by international 
agreements ratified by Kazakhstan.  If international agreements, ratif ied by Kazakhstan, set different 
rules from those included in this Code, rules of inte rnational agreements may prevail.  International 
agreements ratified by the Republic  of Kazakhstan would apply to la nd relations directly except for 
cases when it was necessary to adopt a law for such an agreement to become applicable. 
27. The representative of Kazakhstan added that under Article 26 of the Land Code land plots 
occupied with the following may not be in private ownership: WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/8 
Page 10  
 
 - defence and national security, defence i ndustry, those in the state ownership; 
engineering and technical facilities, communications built for the protection and 
defence of the National Frontier of  Kazakhstan;  customs facilities; 
- specially-protected natural territories; 
- forestry, except for land plots listed in paragraph 4 of Article 128 of this Code; 
- water economy, except for land plots listed in paragraph 2 of Article 133 of this 
Code; 
- main railway networks and automobile roads of common use; and 
- territories of common use in populated ar eas, except for land plots occupied with 
buildings and facilities in private owne rship, and needed for servicing them. 
28. Some members of the Working Party asked whethe r there were any restrictions or conditions 
applicable to foreign-owned legal entities of Kaza khstan investing in land or leasing subsurface rights 
that did not apply to domestic entities of Kazakhs tan.  The representative of Kazakhstan responded 
that there were no restrictions or conditions app licable to foreign-owned legal entities of Kazakhstan 
investing in land or leasing subsurface rights (wheth er partially or 100 per cent foreign-owned) that 
did not apply equally to domestically-owned Kaza khstan legal entities.  Under Article 11 of the Law 
"On Subsurface and Subsurface Use", the rights to subsurface use may be owned by both Kazakhstani 
and foreign natural persons and legal entities.   
29. He further added that Article 11-1 of the Law s tipulated the following general restrictions on 
the use of subsurface resources: 
- The Government may restrict or prohibit operations connected with subsurface use 
within any specific area for reasons of nati onal security and environmental protection; 
- The Government may impose a partial or full ban on the use of subsurface resources 
within inhabited localities, suburban areas, industrial sites, as well as areas occupied 
by communications and transport facilities if  it constituted a potential danger for the 
human life and health, facilities, or environment; and 
- Subsurface use within areas under special prot ection of the State shall be regulated by 
the legislation of Kazakhstan on areas under special protection.  
 [to be completed]  WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/8 
 Page 11 
 
 
 - State Ownership and Privatization 
30. The representative of Kazakhstan stated that foreign investors were accorded national 
treatment when state-owned enterprises were priva tised.  He referred to Article 2 of the Law "On 
Privatization" of 23 December 1995 and Article 3 of the Civil Code of 27 December 1994 
(WT/ACC/KAZ/4 refers).  Moreover, no legislativ e acts of Kazakhstan stipulated discriminatory 
treatment concerning foreign par ticipation in privatization. 
31. Some members of the Working Party asked whet her procedures for privatization were made 
accessible to the public and further and in which publi cations the relevant procedures could be found.  
The representative of Kazakhstan stated that the rules and procedures governing privatization were 
described in laws and regulations which were avai lable from the Ministry of Justice or the State 
Privatization Committee.  Forthcoming cash auctions  were advertised in national mass media 30 days 
prior to auction date, specifying the list of compan ies, terms, and the procedures of auctions.  In 
addition, massive public education campaigns to  educate the public about cash auctions were 
conducted during December 1995 and January 1996.  He  further noted that information regarding the 
procedures and terms of privatization for each company subject to the case-by-case privatization 
program was published in major ne wspapers and information regard ing privatization procedures, 
auctions and the security market in Kazakhs tan was also accessible through the internet 
(www.minfin.kz ). 
32. Some members of the Working Party asked whet her foreign participants could also purchase 
shares on the secondary market, from groups that had previously received shares in the privatization 
of these enterprises.  The representative of Kazakhstan replied that foreign participants could purchase 
shares, on the secondary market, from groups that have previously received shares in the privatization 
of these enterprises provided that such enterp rises were listed on the secondary market.  One 
exception was that agricultural producers, who ha d privileges (received shares in exchange of 
liabilities) during the first and second stage of priv atization, could not sell their shares to either 
foreign or domestic investors until their liabilities we re paid off to the joint stock company (JSC). 
33. Some members of the Working Party asked wh ether foreign investors were eligible to 
participate in the investment funds that owned shares  in privatized companies.   The representative of 
Kazakhstan referred to Presidential Resolution No. 1290 of 23 June 1993 that established the legal 
framework for Investment Privatization Funds (IPFs ) and stated that there were no conditions or 
restrictions prohibiting foreign investors from purchas ing shares in IPFs once they were converted to 
JSCs of open type. WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/8 
Page 12  
 
 34. In response to requests for more inform ation concerning the progress made in the 
privatization process, the representative of K azakhstan presented a Memorandum on Privatization 
which was circulated in document WT/ACC/KAZ/30 dated 12 October 2000.  The representative of 
Kazakhstan further stated that Kazakhstan w ould, upon request by WTO Members, provide 
information on recent developments in its privati zation program as well as information regarding 
economic and trade reforms affecting the foreign trade regime of Kazakhstan. 
[to be completed]  
- Sectoral Priorities 
- Mining 
35. Some Members of the Working Party noted that in the mining sector, the relevant legislation 
on licensing of users of natural resources stipulated  three types of licence - an exploration licence, a 
mining licence, and a combined exploration/mining licence often referred to as a "complex licence". 
They asked whether the legislation had been interpreted so as to prohibit the issue of the "complex 
licence" and institute a two-stage exploration- then-mining approach.  The representative of 
Kazakhstan replied that since 2000 after the enact ment of the Law of Kazakhstan No. 467-1 of 
11 August 1999 "On Changes and Ame ndments to Legislative Acts of the Republic of Kazakhstan on 
Subsurface Use and Oil Operations in the Republic of Kazakhstan", the right to subsurface use may 
be granted solely on a contractual basis, while all licenses issued prior to enactment of the above Law 
were valid until the date of expiry, including exte nsion periods, in accordance with the legislation of 
Kazakhstan in place at the time licenses were issued.  
36. The representative of Kazakhstan further stated  that subsurface use in Kazakhstan was 
regulated by the Statutory Order of the Preside nt of Kazakhstan No. 2828 of 27 January 1996 "On 
Subsurface and Subsurface Use" (amended by Laws  No. 381-1 of 11 May 1999, and No. 467-1 of 
11 August 1999), and Statutory Order of the Presi dent of Kazakhstan No. 2350 of 28 June 1995 
"Concerning Petroleum" (amended by the Law of the Republic of Kazakhstan No. 467 of 
11 August 1999), and other normative acts of Kazakhstan.  Both a bove-mentioned Presidential orders 
determined authorities of executive bodies; established procedures for granting the right of subsurface 
use and awarding the contracts, general rules for ope rations related to subsurface use; defined rights 
and obligations of subsurface users, terms and c onditions of legislative provisions on protection of 
subsurface resources and environment, as well as on safety of population and staff.  WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/8 
 Page 13 
 
 
 37. The Ministry of Energy and Mineral Res ources was the body, authorized to award 
commercial exploration, mining, and combined exploration/mining contracts.  Contracts for 
commercial exploration and/or mining of commonl y occurring minerals were awarded by local 
executive bodies. 
38. Contractual rights to subsurface use may be gr anted both to natural persons and legal entities. 
Foreign natural persons, legal entities, and stateless persons possessed the same rights and 
responsibilities arising from subsurface use as natural persons and legal entities of Kazakhstan.  If the 
right to subsurface use was granted to more than one natural person and/or legal entities, who were 
expected to become joint owners of the right to su bsurface use in the future, the contract had to be 
awarded by the authorized body and these natura l persons and/or legal entities.  Rights and 
obligations of subsurface users arising from contr actual terms and conditions were defined in an 
agreement concluded between subsu rface users and attached to the contract as its integral part. 
39. The representative of Kazakhstan further noted that the right to subsurface use may be 
exercised after awarding of the Contract.  Under th e current legislation, the right to subsurface use 
may be granted and contract awarded based on: 
- the results of tenders for the best investment projects; and 
- the results of direct negotiations. 
Tenders were organized by the authorized body.   Members of the Evaluation Committee were 
appointed by the authorized body and approved by th e Government.  Tenders c ould be either open or 
closed.  Under open tender, all interested parties c ould participate in the bidding process.  The terms 
for conducting an open-tender shall be published in mass media.  U nder closed tender, only limited 
number of parties could participate in the bidding process.  
40. The authorized body was required to receipt and register submitted tender applications.  
Applications must be accepted fo r consideration only if and when an applicant paid the fee for 
participation.  An applicant must be officia lly notified that the application was accepted for 
consideration within one month following the date of its receipt.  After receipt of the application, the 
authorized body must send to an applicant a package of geological data on a specific area, for which it 
intends to grant the right to subsurface use.  Th e package must be prepared by a government body 
responsible for the use and protection of subsurface resources, and shall contain complete information 
required by applicants to prepare tender proposals.   The content of the package, sent to various 
applicants, must be identical.    WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/8 
Page 14  
 
 41. An applicant had to prepare and submit a tende r proposal  within the timeframe set in the 
terms and conditions of particip ation.  Tender proposals, received and accepted by the authorised 
body, may not be returned to applicants.  Based  on the evaluation of proposals, the Evaluation 
Committee selected a winner and prepared a protocol  to this effect.  The protocol contained the 
decision of the Evaluation Committee on a winner with  the attached tender proposal.  The Protocol 
had to be signed by all members of the Evaluation Committee and its Chairman.     
A winner was selected by the Evaluation Comm ittee based on the following main criteria: 
- a timeframe for the beginning and intensity  of exploration and/or mining activities, 
commercial viability and profitability of the proposed mining project; 
- projected amount of initial and subseq uent payments to the budget;  
- a volume of investments, terms and conditions of project financing and capital 
investments into the development of industria l and social infrastructure of contractual 
territories; and 
- guarantees of full implementation of legislative and normative acts on the protection 
of subsurface resources and environment, as well as on work safety. 
42. The Evaluation Committee prepared a short-list of tender proposals to select a final winner.  
In order to make a final decision, the Evalua tion Committee may require additional information on 
submitted tender proposals.  Short-listed candidates had the right to improve their proposals at the 
following stage of the bidding process.  A winner of  closed tender was officially notified by the 
authorized body.  Results of open tender were published in official publications. 
43. Some members of the Working Party asked on what grounds the authorised body could 
legally refuse an application for participation in the tender process and whether the authorised body 
was required to set out in writing its reasons for refusing an application.  The representative of 
Kazakhstan referred to Article 13 of the Rules for aw arding the right to subsurface use in Kazakhstan, 
adopted by the Resolution of the Government No. 108 of 21 January 2000, the authorized body may 
refuse receipt of tender proposal in the following cases: 
- tender proposal was submitted in the way which violates the Rules for awarding the 
right to subsurface use;  
- tender proposal contained false or  unreliable information; and 
- tender proposal lacked documents dem onstrating technical, financial, and 
organizational capacity of an applicant required for exploration/mining activities 
specified in the invitation for tender.   WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/8 
 Page 15 
 
 
 44. The representative of Kazakhstan added that the authorized body was not required to set out 
in writing its reasons for refusing an application for participation in tender.  However, the legislation 
of Kazakhstan stipulated that an applicant who was refused the right to participate in tender process 
had the right for judicial appeal.  The judicial au thority had the power to overturn the decision of the 
authorized body. 
[to be completed] 
- Pricing Policies 
45. The representative of Kazakhstan stated that w ith the process of price liberalization initiated 
in Kazakhstan by the Decree No. 569 "On Measures for Price Liberalization" of 3 January 1992, the 
government initiated its market economy oriented re forms accompanied with transition to free market 
prices on industrial and engineering products, cons umer goods, works and services.  As a result, state 
regulation was restricted to natural monopolies and services provided by public entities and state-
owned enterprises (i.e. services classified as na tural monopolies).  Given the conditions of a 
competitive market, under the Law of Kazakhstan No. 144 of 19 January 2001 "On Competition and 
Restriction of Monopolistic Activities", an authorized body may introduce price controls where  
entities with a dominant (monopolistic) position in a specific commodity market violated the anti-
monopoly legislation  (i.e. when their actions were aimed to restrict or prevent competition and as 
such prejudiced rights of other market agents to free competition).  State regulation of activities of 
natural monopolies was implemented through the mech anisms of establishing (i) tariff rates (prices, 
fee rates); (ii) tariff estimates; (iii) temporary decr easing coefficients; and (iv) special order for cost 
formation.  
46. The representative of Kazakhstan further noted th at the operation of natural monopolies in the 
market of services and goods (works) were regul ated by the Law No. 272-II of 9 July 1998 "On 
Natural Monopolies".  The basic objectives of th e Law included: (i) determination of a legal 
framework for state control and regulation of ac tivities of natural monopolies; and (ii) balancing 
consumers' interests vis-à-vis  interests of natural monopolies.  The following activities were classified 
as natural monopolies:  
- transportation of oil and oil products through the main pipe-lines; 
- storage, transportation of gas and gas condensate through the main and distribution pipe-
lines, operation of gas-distribution units and connected gas distribution pipe-lines; 
- transmission and distribution of electricity and heat, including:  WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/8 
Page 16  
 
 - production of heat by heating boilers using combined production methods; 
- services in technical dispatching of release and consumption of electric energy;   
- services of a main railroad network, including:  
- services of access roads, in cases where th ere are no other competing access roads, 
and where construction of one is technica lly impossible or economically impractical; 
- air navigation services, services of seaports and airports;   
- telecommunication services using local networks;  
- services of waterworks and sewerage networks; and 
- public postal services.  
Provisions of the Law did not extend to indivi dual entrepreneurs and le gal persons, engaged in 
activities classified as natural monopolies, but relating to construction and operation of objects, used 
for their own needs.  For a market entity, engaged in activities classified as of natural monopoly, the 
state control and regulation covered only those activities.    
47. Some members of the Working Party noted that oil pipeline tariff rates were higher for 
transportation of exported oil.  Those members not ed that GATT Article XI provided that "other 
measures" could not be used to prohibit or restrict the exportation or sale for export of any product 
destined for the territory of another member.  They  stated that Kazakhstan was expected to eliminate 
this discriminatory pricing applicable to oil destin ed for export prior to WTO accession.  In response, 
the representative of Kazakhstan noted that in acco rdance with the methodology currently used for 
establishing tariffs on oil transportation by the main pipelines, the unified tariff rates applied both for 
domestic import/export (transit) ope rations.  As of 1 April 2000, all branches of the CJSC 
KazTransOil used a single tariff of US$15 for 1 ton/1,000 km (plus VAT), fixed later at KZT 2,415.  In order to slow down the growth of domestic pr ices on oil products, the decreasing coefficient of 
0.46 was applied for services provided to residents of  Kazakhstan for transportation of crude oil to 
refineries within the country. 
48. Some members of the Working Party stated th at Kazakhstan should notify the Working Party 
of all price controls on products and services still in effect, at the central and sub-central levels, by HS 
number, including the authority to apply the measur es, the reasons for the existing controls, and the 
conditions under which Kazakhstan expected to use su ch controls in the future.  In response, the 
representative of Kazakhstan stated that price cont rols also extended to public utility services and 
state services.  Public utility services were subject to  price controls because delivery of those services  WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/8 
 Page 17 
 
 
 depended heavily on natural monopolies.  Public utility  services were important for growth of trade in 
services and investment in Kazakhstan.  Most in vestors were either c onsumers of public utility 
services or investors in the infrastructure of natu ral monopolies delivering those services.  Thus, the 
Agency of Kazakhstan for Regulation of Natural Monopolies, Protection of Competition and Support 
of Small Businesses (further, Anti-Monopoly Committee)  approved and applied tariff rates for natural 
monopolies, also controlled the price of public u tility services including heat distribution, sewage 
systems, telecommunication services (domestic and international communication services, telegraph 
communication services, cable radio installation, receiving/transmitting TV and radio programs via 
satellite, data transmission through communication channe ls), water distribution, electricity, and gas.  
The main objective of Kazakhstan's pricing policy in public utility services was the establishment of 
economically justifiable prices for all consumers reflecting, where applicable, inter alia , the cost of 
production, the cost of transportation, and the profitability of entities providing those services.  
Production costs were regulated only for activiti es classified as natural monopolies and for entities 
enjoying dominant (monopolistic) position in a specific commodity market in cases stipulated by the 
Laws On Electric Energy" and "On Competition and Restriction of Monopolistic Activities".  The 
cost of transportation was determined through ta riff rates established to regulate natural monopolies 
(e.g. power transmission and distribution networks , telecommunication networks, gas pipelines, heat 
pipelines, sewage network, and water distribution networks).  
49. In response to questions concerning price control of electricity, natural gas or other forms of  
energy, the representative of Kazakhstan stated that  price and tariff controls  were applied only to 
services (goods, works) of natural monopolies.  Other (alternative) forms of energy supply to 
consumers, except electrical, heat and gas (gas co ndensate) was not included in the list of natural 
monopolies.  Production of electric energy, natural gas and other forms of energy belonged to the 
domain of competitive market where prices were de termined by market agents independently, except 
for activities classified as natural monopolies as listed in paragraph [46] of this document .  
Furthermore, the enterprises of Kazakhstan were give n the opportunity to conclude direct contracts on 
power supply from domestic and foreign power producing enterprises.  
50. He further noted that in case a natural monopoly n eeded to change its tari ff rates, such entity 
had to submit an application to the Authorized B ody reflecting proposals for new rates with indication 
of projected costs and desired profit.  The Aut horized Body reviewed the documents taking into 
account operations of similar enterprises within Kazakhstan and conducted a financial and, where 
necessary, technical expertise of proposed tariffs.  Tariffs (prices, charges) on services of a natural 
monopoly, approved by the Authorized Body, could not be below the value of costs required to 
provide services (produce goods, perform works), and a llowed the adequate level of profits necessary WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/8 
Page 18  
 
 to ensure its efficient operation.  Tariffs (prices, charges) could be changed no more than once every 
two quarters.  New tariffs (prices, charges) were implemented starting from the first of the quarter.  
Any natural monopoly could dispute the decision of the Authorized Body regarding new tariff rates in 
the court of law.  
51. The representative of Kazakhstan further noted th at state services were provided solely by 
public bodies and state-owned enterprises.  Fees a nd duties charged by such entities were established 
by legislation.  The table on pages 3-5 of document WT/ACC/KAZ/6/Add.2 summarized state 
services and entities responsible for rendering such ser vices.  State fees and duties were specified by 
the Law "On State Duties" of 31 December 1996.  He also stated that with the exceptions of fees on 
intellectual property subject matter, fees applied equally to foreign and national legal entities and 
natural persons.  Public transport charges were c ontrolled by local administrative bodies.  The State 
Post Office was considered a natural monopoly a nd hence its tariff rates were approved by the 
Authorized Body.  Nevertheless, rates established fo r private competing companies in this sector were 
not regulated by the Authorized Body, and alt hough, under the Law of Kazakhstan No. 2200 "On 
Licensing", licenses were required to be engaged in  postal services, this requirement did not create 
any barriers preventing potential participants to ente r this sector.  He further noted that there was no 
significant competition for postal services within Ka zakhstan and that currently there were around 
ten domestic and foreign companies enga ged in parcel and courier services. 
52. In response to questions referring to future elim ination of price controls, the representative of 
Kazakhstan stated that the government planned to eliminate price controls for public transportation 
services, certain telecommunication services and services of rail transport as soon as the competitive environment was developed in these sectors, the restructuring of natural monopolies was 
implemented; and, consequently, certain natural monopolies were transferred to competitive market 
sphere.  The government however intended to main tain tariff regulations for public utility services. 
The list of entities (services) included in the nationa l and local state registers of natural monopolies, 
information on changes in tariffs on their services  were regularly published in mass media.  In 
response, some members of the Working Party requ ested additional information on the 700 market 
subjects noted in the State Register, in particular  which goods or services were covered, and whether 
price controls were applied to all such "market subjects".  
53. The representative of Kazakhstan further stated th at currently, given the conditions of market  
economy, regulation of natural monopolies considera tion was being given to not fixing prices at a 
level that would merely ensure the recovery of a justified level of costs, but would also permit the 
taking of a profit that would permit natural monopolies to develop in an efficient manner.  To this  WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/8 
 Page 19 
 
 
 end, the government had adopted the Program on Improvement of Tariff Policies of Natural 
Monopolies,  which was based on new approaches to tariff formation and introduced forward-looking 
methods, such as calculation of the income rate for a regulated asset base (RAB) and setting of 
medium-term tariff caps. 
54. A new methodology allowing to set RAB was based on: (i) the degree to which assets are 
used; and (ii) incentives to owners to attract additi onal investments.  Thus, the income level would  
reflect value of assets involved, and, eventually, invi gorate attraction of invest ments into capital assets 
of natural monopolies.  As an additional invest ment-conducive incentive for natural monopolies, the 
government was planning to implement a policy of  setting medium-term caps on tariff rates (for a 
term of three years).  This measure was expected to invigorate long-term investment projects aimed modernization and introduction of new resource saving and low-cost technologies; reduction of 
existing risks, and creation of incentives for reduction of production costs.   
55. The representative of Kazakhstan confirmed that from the date of accession, the price controls 
in place and any applied in the future would be  applied in a WTO-consistent fashion.   
[to be completed] 
- Competition Policy 
56. The representative of Kazakhstan stated that basic goal of the competition policy in his 
country was to create a favourable climate for e fficient functioning of goods and services markets by: 
(i) restraining and preventing monopolistic and an ti-competitive practices am ong economic operators, 
(ii)facilitating competition, (iii) protecting legitimat e interests of consumers, (iv) controlling over 
economic concentration and (v) preventing arb itrary intervention of public bodies in economic 
activities of market entities.  
57. The representative of Kazakhstan noted that fo llowing adoption of Law No. 272 "On Natural 
Monopolies" and Law No. 232-1 "On Unfair Compet ition" in 1998 (WT/ACC/ KAZ/36/Add.2 refers), 
the rules of conduct in the market of natural monopolies were codified and regulatory mechanisms 
aimed to suppress coordinated actions and protect mark et competition introduced.  State regulation of 
the activities of natural monopolies and contro l over their compliance with the anti-monopoly 
legislation was enforced under the Law of the Republic of Kazakhstan "O n natural monopolies" and 
subordinate legislative acts.  He further noted that the anti-monopoly legislation of Kazakhstan had 
been expanded to include Law No. 144 "On Compet ition and Restriction of Monopolistic Activities" 
of 19 January 2001.  It contained new defin itions of dominant (monopoly) position and market WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/8 
Page 20  
 
 subjects.  It also adjusted and intensified st ate control over establishment, reorganization and 
liquidation of market subjects and their associations , and increased responsibility for violations of 
monopoly legislation and consumers' interests.  Legislation establishing procedures for adoption, 
appeal and fulfilment of instructions and decisi ons of the anti-monopoly agency had been introduced, 
and the range of possible penalties expanded.  Fu rther, the representative of Kazakhstan emphasized 
that in cases where provisions of an internationa l agreement to which Kaza khstan was party differed 
from the Law, the provisions of international agreem ents would prevail over the national legislation.  
58. In response to further questions he noted that  agreements or coordinated activities between 
competing and non-competing market agents, as well as agreements c oncluded between public 
bodies, or between a public body and a market agen t were invalidated and prohibited in cases where 
they resulted in the restriction of competition or  infringed the rights of legal entities and natural 
persons.  Price regulation of prices of compani es enjoying a monopoly position in specific markets 
were only imposed by the authorized body when le gislative provisions were infringed or the actions 
were regarded as abuse of market power and aimed at the restriction of competition. 
59. The representative of Kazakhstan further added that  any enterprise considered to be a natural 
monopoly, irrespective of their form of property, was subject to inclusion in the State register of 
natural monopoly subjects.  The Register was formed on the basis of State register of legal persons of 
Kazakhstan, made by the Ministry of Justice of Kazakhstan pursuant to the Civil Code and Decree 
No. 2198 "On State Registration of Legal Persons" of 17 April 1995.  The criteria for inclusion in the 
Register was the carrying out of an activity in the sphere of a natural monopoly as well as a market 
dominant position.  The State register consisted of  republic wide and local sections.  The republic 
wide was created and maintained by the central authorized body and including the natural monopoly 
subjects, operating in markets extending beyond the border of one oblast, major city, or the capital. 
Local sections of the Register were formed and ke pt by territorial authorized bodies and covered 
natural monopoly subjects, engaged in activities cl assified as natural monopoly in local markets 
confined to one oblast, city, rayon, settlement, other localities. 
60. Some members of the Working Party requested  the representative of Kazakhstan to identify 
and describe the sectors that remained subject to monopolies or monopolistic behaviour and to specify 
whether these sectors were generally dominated by pr ivate monopolies or by state-owned enterprises.  
The representative of Kazakhstan replied that in a ddition to natural monopolies, the authority of the 
Agency of the Republic of Kazakhstan on Regul ation of National Monopolies and Protection of 
Competition also extended to companies having a dominant position in a specific commodity market. 
Under the acting law of the Republic of Kazakhsta n, a company was deemed to have a dominant  WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/8 
 Page 21 
 
 
 position in a specific commodity market if it had more  than 35 per cent market share.  However, the 
definition of a dominant position also extended to  market agents, whose share in a specific 
commodity market was below the annual cap set by the anti-monopoly agency, based on the 
following criteria:  (i) stability of the share of th is market agent in a sp ecific commodity market; 
(ii) relative shares of competing agents operating in the same market; and (iii) opportunities existing 
for participation of new entrants.  In addition, more than one market agents were considered to have a 
dominant position if:  (i) the aggregate share of not more than two market agents accounted for 
50 per cent or more in a specific commodity market; or  (ii) the aggregate share of not more than three 
market agents accounted for 70 per cent or more in a specific commodity market. The number of 
companies having a dominant position could fluctuate depending on changes in the share of entities in 
a specific commodity market of the country.  The authorized body monitored activities of those 
companies and conducted periodic market analysis.  The representative of Kazakhstan further noted 
that all state holding companies had been dissolved following their reorganization in 1995 and most 
companies within the structure of these holding companies were being privatized under the mass 
privatization program. 
61. Some members of the Working Party, stated that enterprises that had monopoly positions in 
international trade and/or domestic distribution in Kazakhstan should be notified under Article XVII 
of the GATT 1994 and the 1994 Understanding.  Thos e members asked whether Kazakhstan intended 
to notify any of its "natural" monopolies.  The representative of Kazakhstan replied that natural 
monopolies in Kazakhstan acted as transport carri ers with equal open access to all suppliers and 
operators regardless of form and type of ownership.   No exclusive rights or special privileges were 
granted to these natural monopolies and therefor e such natural monopolies did not fall under the 
definition of Article XVII of GATT 1994 or Article VIII of GATS.   
62. Some members of the Working Party asked whether the label "natural monopoly" indicated 
any restraints on market entry by other firms a nd whether foreign-funded enterprises were able to 
invest in sectors dominated by "natural" monopolies.  The representative of Kazakhstan stated that the 
label "natural monopoly" did not indicate any restra ints on market entry by other firms.  Foreign-
funded enterprises were able to invest in sectors dominated by "natural" monopolies.  
63. Identification of the enterprises that were na tural monopolies in the oil and oil products 
pipelines and gas pipelines industries was also requ ested by some members of the Working Party.  
The representative of Kazakhstan stated that th e natural monopolies in the oil and oil products 
pipeline and gas pipeline industries, listed by the National Anti-Monopoly Committee were as the 
following: WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/8 
Page 22  
 
 - CJSC KazTransOil;  
- CJSC Intergas Central Asia; and 
- OJSC Takhat. 
64. Some members requested more information c oncerning the procedures followed for allowing 
natural monopolies access to the oil pipelines, the cr iteria these enterprises c onsidered in allocating 
access to the pipelines and any forms of guidance pr ovided by the Government of Kazakhstan with 
respect to the allocation of access to the pipelines.   The representative of Kazakhstan stated that 
currently there was only one pipeline, Atyrau (Kazakhs tan)- Samara (Russia) used for export of crude 
oil.  The amount of available quota for export of crude oil from Kazakhstan was determined in an 
annual intergovernmental agreement between Russia a nd Kazakhstan.  Once in a quarter, oil exporters 
could apply for quota to the Ministry of Energy, which allocated the available quotas among the 
Kazakhstani exporters proportionally to the volum e of production.  So, if company planned to 
increase its production, it had to apply for additi onal quotas.  Once quotas were granted, oil exporter 
had to sign a contract for oil exportation with  the "Kazakhnefteprovod", a company operating the 
export pipeline.  No preferences were granted to  domestic or CIS companies in awarding the oil 
export quotas and the unified tariff rates were applie d for exporting oil of all exporters.  He further 
noted that other oil pipelines and gas pipelines were  not used at full capacity although there was an 
open access to their services without using the quota sy stem.  Users of such pipelines signed contracts 
directly with the company operating the pipeline. 
65. Some members asked why telecommunications services (domestic and international 
communication services, telegraph communication services, cable radio installation, receiving/transmitting television and radio progr ams via satellite, data transmission through 
communication channels) were considered "n atural monopoly", and whether Kazakhstan was 
prepared to make commitments in its GATS Schedule in the basic telecommunications sector and 
value-added networks.  The representative of Kaza khstan stated that only local telephone services and 
lease of communication channels were currently considered natural monopolies mainly because there 
was no sufficient competition in the delivery of su ch services.  There were, however, no regulatory 
barriers to enter this sector.  He further stat ed that Kazakhstan's commitments in the basic 
telecommunications sector and value-added networks  were provided in its revised offer on services. 
66. In reference to questions concerning licensing,  the representative of Kazakhstan stated that 
according to Law No. 2200 "Concerning Licensing" , activities provided by natural monopolies 
(except companies operating water system) required licensing.  The process to obtain a licence was the same for companies with or without foreign ownership and the required documents to obtain a  WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/8 
 Page 23 
 
 
 licence included an application, proof of payment of  licence fee, copy of certificate of registration (if 
a legal entity is applying for licence), and docu ments demonstrating appr opriate qualification 
(qualification requirements). 
67. More information was requested by member s of the Working Party concerning natural 
monopolies, particularly concerning the criteria on which a judgment that an industry or service-sector is a natural monopoly, was based.  Informatio n was also requested concerning the existence of 
"local natural monopolies".  The representative of Kazakhstan stated that pursuant to Law No. 272 
"On Natural Monopolies", the subjects of natural monopoly were the managing subjects, carrying out 
the types of activities as listed in the paragraph 46 of this document.  Furthermore he recalled that, a list of natural monopolies regulated by the nati onal Anti-Monopoly Committee, had been provided 
and circulated in document WT/ACC/KAZ/14 (page 2-3) dated 20 February 1998.  
68. He further noted that natural monopolies provi ded transport services through providing equal 
access to all users.  In addition, these natural monopo lies were not engaged in the trade of goods.  For 
example, oil pipeline companies only transport crude  oil based on contracts with oil producers and 
trading companies, and were not themselves engaged in the trade of crude oil. 
[to be completed] 
III. FRAMEWORK FOR MAKING AND ENFORCING POLICIES 
- Powers of Executive, Legislative and Judicial Branches of Government 
69. The representative of Kazakhstan stated that the Republic of Kazakhstan was a Presidential 
State with power divided among the legislative, exec utive, and judicial branches.  The President was 
Head of State and executive powers in the Republic of Kazakhstan were exercised by the President 
and the Government of th e Republic of Kazakhstan.   The President was elected to seven year terms of 
office on the basis of universal, equal and direct suffrage by secret ballot.  The members of the Government, including the Prime Minister, Minist ers and heads of State committees were appointed 
and could be dismissed, individually or collectively,  by the President.  The President also appointed 
three of the seven members of th e Constitutional Council; seven of th e thirty nine members of the 
upper house of Parliament; executive heads of local gove rnment units in the Oblasts and major cities; 
all diplomatic representatives of the State; the highest commanding officers of the armed forces; the 
Chairperson and two members of the State Budget Co mmittee; and the State Secretary of the Republic 
of Kazakhstan.  WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/8 
Page 24  
 
 70. He further explained that upon approval of both houses of the Parliament, the President would 
appoint the Head and Chairman of the National Ba nk, and, with the consent of the Senate, the 
Prosecutor General and the Chairperson of the Nati onal Security Committee.  The President formed 
the Security Council and the Supreme Court Council. 
71. The President was authorized to prioritize draft laws for consideration by Parliament and, 
once adopted, to either sign them into effect or to veto them.  In order to override a Presidential veto, 
both houses of Parliament must generate a vote of at least two thirds of total members.  A draft law 
with a top-priority status must be considered by the Parliament of the Republic of Kazakhstan within 
one month after its submission.  The President of  the Republic of Kazakhstan shall approve laws 
submitted by the Senate within 15 days with subse quent promulgation or return the law in full or 
separate Articles thereof to the Parliament of the Republic of Kazakhstan for further consideration to 
be completed within a term of one month.   After the law or separate Articles thereof were re-
considered, or upon receipt of the confirmation of the Parliament of the Republic of Kazakhstan on its 
earlier decision, the President of the Republic of Ka zakhstan must sign the law within seven days.  In 
cases where the Parliament failed to incorporate Pres ident’s comments in the Law, the Law would be 
viewed as not adopted or adopted in the form proposed by the President of the Republic of 
Kazakhstan.  The Laws of the Republic of Kazakhs tan should come into force within ten calendar 
days after the date of their first official publica tion, unless the laws or acts on implementation of these 
laws specify different terms for enactment.  The Pa rliament could delegate its legislative powers to 
the President for a period of up to one year.  The Pr esident could dissolve Par liament in the following 
cases:  where insurmountable differences arose be tween the houses of Parliament or between 
Parliament and another branch of State power giving rise to a political crisis; where Parliament passed a vote of no-confidence in the Government or twice re fused to give its consent to the appointment of 
the Prime Minister.  The President could call a national referendum as well as adopt decrees and 
resolutions implementing legislation.  
72. The Government was organized and supervised by the Prime Minister. The Government was 
accountable to the President, and in cases, which were  stipulated in sub-paragraph 6 Article 53 and 
sub-paragraph 6 Article 57 of the Constitution of the Republic of Kazakhstan, the Government was 
accountable to the Parliament of the Republic of Kazakhstan.  The Government was authorized to 
develop, implement and enforce the main directions  of socio-economic policy in the State including 
policies in the area of foreign relations, foreign ec onomic relations, revenue ge neration, state property 
management, defence and public order.  The G overnment, within its competence, must enact 
resolutions binding in the entire territory of the Republic of Kazakhstan, s ubmit draft laws to the 
Majilis, lower house of the Parliament, and enforce adopt ed laws.  Subsidiary legislation in the form  WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/8 
 Page 25 
 
 
 of resolutions and directives could be issued by th e Government.  The subsidiary legislation acts of 
the Government, as well as the acts of the executive heads of units of local government could be 
annulled by the President.  The mandate of the Gove rnment expired with that of the President unless 
otherwise terminated by the President. 
73. The Parliament was a bi-cameral legislative body, consisting of a lower house, called the 
Majilis, and an upper house, called the Senate.  The Majilis consisted of  77 deputies, elected to five 
year terms on the basis of universal, equal and dire ct suffrage by secret ballot.  The deputies of the 
Senate were elected to six year terms with half s ubject to re-election every three years.  Excluding the 
seven deputies appointed by the President, two depu ties from each Oblast, major city and the capital, 
were elected at a joint session of deputies of all representative bodies. 
74. At joint sessions, Parliament could adopt Cons titutional Laws, Laws, resolutions and decrees 
on issues that, regulated the most important pub lic relations, and amend the Constitution, upon the 
initiative of the President.  Parliament approved of  and could issue changes to, the State budget and 
put forward an initiative calling for a national refere ndum.  At separate sessions, the Majilis and then 
the Senate could ratify or denounce international trea ties and decide issues of State loans and other 
forms of economic assistance.  The Senate, inter alia , had exclusive jurisdiction, at the initiative of 
the President, to elect and discharge the Chairperson and all Justices of the Supreme Court and the Chairpersons of the Collegiums of Justice.  The Majilis, inter alia,  had exclusive jurisdiction to accept 
draft Laws for consideration and to announce Preside ntial elections and to bring charges against the 
President of the Republic of Kazakhstan for high treason.  
75. Judicial power in Kazakhstan was enforced by proceedings ensuing from civil, criminal, and 
other legislation, and exercised within the framewo rk of a unitary court system divided among three 
tiers.  The Supreme Court of the Republic of Kaza khstan was the supreme body on civil, criminal and 
other cases, exercising supervisory powers in relati on of subordinate courts of general jurisdiction, 
including supervision of their activities within limits set by the legislation and provision of 
explanations and clarifications on issues relating to court practices.  
76. He further added that the Supreme Court acted as a nisi prius for cases stipulated by the 
legislation; as a court of appeal for cases examined in the first instance by oblast courts; considers 
cases for supervisory purposes, and cases relating to new evidence, previously processed by lower 
level courts and the Supreme Court; studies and comp iles practices relating to application of laws and 
other normative legislative acts of the Republic of Kazakhstan; enacts normative decrees containing 
clarification on issues of court practices; devel ops proposals on improvement of laws and other 
normative legislative acts; manages and analyzes forensic statistical data.  The Supreme Court WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/8 
Page 26  
 
 included the Chairman, chairmen of chambers, and judges, and consisted of the Supervisory 
Collegiums, Collegiums for Civil and Criminal Cases, and Plenary Court Session.  Below the 
Supreme Court were Oblast Courts, the Astana City  Court, the Almaty City Court and the Military 
Court of Troops.  Oblast Courts, Astana and Al maty City Courts considered cases within their 
competence as nisi prius courts, courts of appeal, courts of cassation; cases of supervisory nature and 
cases involving new evidence; supervise rayon (city) c ourts; maintain and analyze forensic data; study 
and structure results of court practices, and perform ot her functions stipulated by the legislation.  Like 
the Supreme Court, Oblast courts were specialized  into the Supervisory Collegiums, Collegiums for 
Civil and Criminal Cases, and Plenary Court Session.  Rayon courts acted as nisi prius courts for 
consideration of all cases, excluding cases within comp etence of other courts under the law.  Unlike 
the Supreme Court and Oblast courts, rayon courts we re not subdivided into Collegiums.  Finally, the 
Military Courts were courts of original and specia lized jurisdiction.  While Kazakhstan did not have a 
Constitutional Court, per se , cases before the courts which give rise to questions challenging the 
constitutionality of laws or subsid iary legislation were reviewed by the Constitutional Council.  The 
Constitutional Council could declare the law or subsidiary legislation  
77. The Government was responsible for devel oping Kazakhstan's economic policy including 
policy on foreign trade.  Overall policy in the area of foreign relations was overseen by the Ministry 
of Foreign Affairs.  The Government's genera l economic policy, including its foreign economic 
policy, was developed and coordinated through the Ministry of the Economy and Budget Planning.  
The Ministry of Industry and Trade was the prin cipal Governmental body r esponsible for generating 
State policy on international trade, including pr oposals on customs rates and duties which are 
subsequently implemented by the State Customs Co mmittee; and attraction and allocation of foreign 
investments.  The Ministry of Industry and Trade also assumed responsibility for issuing import and export licenses.  State finance policy, including currency control and currency aspects of foreign 
economic relations, was determined by the Ministry of Finance.  Administration of currency control 
was carried out by the National Bank through th e issuance of licenses to conduct currency 
transactions. 
78. Members of the Working Party asked whet her the WTO Agreement had priority over 
Kazakhstan's national legislation and further sought a description of how, in legal terms, the WTO 
rules and commitments would be ratified.  The repr esentative of Kazakhstan stated that Article 4.3 of 
the Constitution of Kazakhstan stipulated that inte rnational agreements had priority over national 
legislation and that such international agreements  were applied directly except for cases when it was 
necessary to adopt a law for interna tional agreement to become applicable.  Pursuant to Article 22 of 
the Presidential Decree "On the Procedure for Conclusion, Execution and Denunciation of  WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/8 
 Page 27 
 
 
 International Agreements of the Republic of Kaza khstan" of 12 December 1995, the Government and 
other concerned State bodies were obligated to en sure that Kazakhstan fulfilled all obligations it 
assumed under international agreements.  He furthe r stated that the obligations, which Kazakhstan 
would assume upon accession to the WTO, and which contradicted to the provisions of other international agreements, would take effect in Kazakhstan only after incor poration of appropriate 
amendments to such international agreements or  after the expiry of their duration or their 
denunciation pursuant to the Presidential Decree  "On the Procedure for Conclusion, Execution and 
Denunciation of International Agreements of the Republic of Kazakhstan", and the Vienna 
Convention "On International Treaty Law" of 23 May 1969. 
[to be completed] 
- Authority of Sub-Central Governments 
79. In response to questions the representative of Kazakhstan noted that authority was divided 
between central and regional governments in Kaza khstan.  Local governmental power was divided 
between representative bodies called Maslikhats and executive bodies called Akimats.  Each Oblast 
(including major cities and the capital) has an  Akim (appointed by the President at the 
recommendation of the Prime-Minister) and a Maslikhat.  Each major city had an Akim appointed by 
an Oblast Akim.  The deputies of Maslikhats were elected to four-year terms on the basis of universal 
and equal suffrage by secret ballot. 
80. Governmental powers affecting foreign trade we re devolved from national to local authorities 
in accordance with the following six principles:  (a) relative autonomy to regulate region-specific 
economic relations; (b) delineation of specific jurisdictional activities in accordance with the 
Constitution and the Law on Local Representative and Executive Bodies; (c) reciprocal obligations 
among the different tiers of government to confor m business operations to requirements of social, 
environmental and moral standards; (d) State support of specific sectors and regions and the 
promotion of inter-relations among local aut horities, management bodies and business bodies; 
(e)allocation of budget resources a nd regional property within comme rcially sensitive margins; and 
(f) inter-governmental relations which promoted a unified approach to issues affecting, inter alia , 
foreign trade. 
81. Some members of the Working Party requested confirmation that sub-central administrative 
authorities had no jurisdiction or authority to est ablish regulations or taxes on good and services in 
Kazakhstan independent of central authorities.  In addition, some members requested a confirmation that in a situation where WTO provisions were not  being applied or were being applied in a non-WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/8 
Page 28  
 
 uniform manner, central authorities would elimin ate or nullify measures taken by sub-central 
authorities in Kazakhstan that are inconsistent with  WTO provisions.  In response, the representative 
of Kazakhstan stated that local bodies did not have the powers for establishing of instructions and 
taxes on goods and services in Kazakhstan.  Only the higher legislative body was competent to 
impose of taxes and only the central executive bodies ha d the authority to establish instructions.  He 
also stated that decisions of Akims (the representativ e of the Executive at the sub-national level) or of 
Maslikhats (local representative bodies) whic h may derogate from Kazakhstan's commitments 
pursuant to international agreemen ts may be annulled by the President, the Government, a Senior 
Akim, as well as through court procedures.  In a ddition, the General Prosecutor's Office exercised 
constant supervision over the exact and uni form application of laws and sub laws. 
[to be completed] 
IV. POLICIES AFFECTING TRADE IN GOODS 
A. IMPORT REGULATIONS 
- Registration 
82. Noting the representative of Kazakhstan's conf irmation that there were no State monopolies 
on foreign trade and that there were no restricti ons on the right of foreign and domestic individuals 
and enterprises to import and export goods and ser vices except as provided for in WTO agreements, 
some members of the Working Party asked what the requirements were for a firm or individual to trade in Kazakhstan.  The representative of Kazak hstan replied that according to the Presidential 
Decree No. 2021 of 11 January 1995 "On Liberali zation of Foreign Economic Activities", all 
enterprises of Kazakhstan were given the right to carry out foreign economic activities.   
83. He further stated that the state registrati on process of legal persons includes the following 
activities:  (i) checking the consistency of char ter and other documents submitted for registration 
purpose with the relevant legislati on of Kazakhstan; (ii) issuance of the registration certificate and 
assignment of the registration number; and (iii) inclusi on of data in the integrated State Register.  The 
registration procedure of legal pe rsons in Kazakhstan was regulated  by the Presidential Statutory 
Order No.2198 of 17 April 1995 "On State Registration of Legal Entities", and other legislative acts.  
Article 2 of the Statutory Order defined tasks and objectives of the state registration process.  
According to Article 3 of the Statutory Order, all legal persons establis hed in Kazakhstan were 
required to be registered, irrespective of the purpo ses of their establishment, the types of performed  WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/8 
 Page 29 
 
 
 activities, and the parties concerned.  Branches and representations of legal entities located in 
Kazakhstan had to be registered for record purposes only. 
84. More information was requested concerning the registration fees, the duration of the 
registration process, and the criteria used for re gistration of companies in Kazakhstan.  The 
representative of Kazakhstan stated fees could be le vied on the registration of legal entities, natural 
persons engaged in entrepreneuria l activities, and on the right to be engaged in certain types of 
activities.  He further noted that pursuant to Government Resolution No. 1660 of 19 December 2001 
"On establishing fees for state registration of legal entities", the registration fee for:  (i) state-financed institutions, public companies and cooperatives of  condominium owners was one monthly evaluation 
index; (ii) legal persons, their branches and repr esentative offices was twenty monthly evaluation 
indexes; (iii) children and youth public associations , their branches and representative offices was-two 
monthly evaluation indexes; (iv) legal entities in  the form of small businesses, their branches and 
representative offices was five monthly evaluation inde xes, effective on the date of payment.  The 
re-registration fee for legal entities, their branch es and representative offices was equal to 50 per cent 
of their corresponding registration fees.  The fee for issuing a duplicate of state registration (or 
re-registration) of legal entities, their branches a nd representative offices was equal to 25 per cent of 
their corresponding registration fees.  The fee for state registration of discontinuation of legal entities, their branches and representative offices, was mont hly evaluation index, e ffective on the date of 
payment.  All fees and procedures applied equally throughout Kazakhstan at both the central and local 
levels.  
85. Furthermore, according to Article 9 of the Presidential Decree No. 2198 "On State 
Registration" of 17 April 1995, the state registra tion and re-registration process of legal entities and 
their affiliates and representative offices for record  purposes was required to take no more than 
15 days from the day of submission of the complete d application.  According to Article 5 of the 
Presidential Decree, registration and re-registration process of small businesses were required to take 
no more than three days, while the terms for regi stration and re-registration of public associations 
could not exceed ten working days, from the day of submission of the completed application. Natural 
persons were entitled to undertake business activities without establishing a legal entity.  Under the 
Law of the Republic of Kazakhstan "On State Suppor t to Small Businesses", natural persons of the 
above category were recognized as small businesses.  Natural persons engaged in business activities 
without establishing a legal entity must be registered  as individual entrepreneurs with the local tax 
authority.  The representative of Kazakhstan further st ated that the criteria for registration, set out in 
the above-mentioned Presidential D ecree No. 2198 "On State Registrati on", were of nor mative nature, 
and applicable to all businesses in Kazakhstan. WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/8 
Page 30  
 
 [to be completed] 
- Other duties and charges levied on im ports but not on domestic production  
86. The representative of Kazakhstan stated that there were no other duties and fees on imported 
goods other than import customs duties currently in place, approved by the Resolution of the 
Government of the Republic of Kazakhstan No. 1389 of 14 November 1997, and fees for provided 
services.   
[to be completed] 
- Tariff rate quotas, tariff exemptions 
87. The representative of Kazakhstan stated that Ka zakhstan had applied, since 15 June 1997, as 
its tariff nomenclature the CIS Harmonised Sy stem nomenclature, which was based on "The 
Agreement on the Uniform Tariff Nomenclature  of Foreign Economic Activities of the 
CIS Countries" of 3 November 1995.  The CIS Harmoni zed System nomenclature  was consistent with 
the Convention and General Rules of Interpreta tion (HS 96.) developed by the World Customs 
Organization.  He further noted that the current ta riff nomenclature was submitted to the Secretariat in 
September 1997.  Furthermore, as of January 2005, Kazakhstan was expected to move from the 
9-digit to the 10-digit uniform tariff nomencla ture of the Euro-Asian Economic Community. 
88. In order to apply tariff and non-tariff regula tion measures for goods transported across the 
customs border of Kazakhstan and establish rul es for the customs classification of goods in 
accordance with the HS CIS, the Customs Control Agency issued the decree No. 210 of 15 May 2003 
on the Rules of adoption of preliminary decisions and on their standard forms. 
89. The representative of Kazakhstan noted that the import tariff rates were established by the 
amended Resolution of the Government of  the Republic of Kazakhstan No.1389 of 
14 November 1996 "On Rates of Customs Duties Le vied on Imported Goods".  Kazakhstan’s tariff 
policy was first of all aimed at satisfying the needs of consumers, and was therefore one of the most 
liberal in the CIS region and non-restrictive to foreign trade activities.  Commitments made by 
Kazakhstan within the framework of internati onal agreements as well as regional integration 
processes among the CIS and EurAsEC member countries were also incorporated into the country's 
tariff policy.  
90. The import tariff consisted of 10,500 tariff lines.  The significant majority of tariff items 
(9,382 items or 87 per cent) were subject to ad valorem  tariffs; 1,217 items (11 per cent) were subject  WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/8 
 Page 31 
 
 
 to compound (or mixed) rates; and 164 items (2 pe r cent were subject) to specific rates.  The 
ad valorem  rates ranged from 0 to 30 per cent, except for two categories of goods related to ethyl 
alcohol (HS  2207 10 000 and 2207 20 000) and beer. 
91. The import tariff rates for products imported from developing countries, eligible for special 
treatment under the general system of preferences (GSP) of Kazakhstan, were levied at the reduced 
MFN rates, while zero tariff rate applied to goods imported from the least developed countries.  The 
rates of customs duties applicable to the products of unknown origin amounted to double MFN rates.  
92. Under bilateral agreements c oncluded between Kazakhstan and the CIS countries (except for  
Turkmenistan), the products imported to Kazakhsta n were exempt from customs duties, except for 
instances specifically excluded from the free trad e regime.  These exceptions applied to certain 
products commonly agreed upon by the CIS countries and were stipulated in the Protocol to the 
Agreement. Exceptions from the fr ee trade regime applied toward certain products from Azerbaijan, 
Armenia, Georgia, Moldova, Uzbekistan, and Ukrain e.  For example, the list of imported products in 
Kazakhstan from the above-mentioned CIS countries,  which were not covered by the preferential 
treatment regime, included salmon and sturgeon, cav iar; fruit juices; mineral water and water with 
gas; alcohol and tobacco; certain types of clothes fro m natural leisure, clothes for children, footwear; 
bijouterie, cars, etc. 
93. Some members of the Working Party asked whether companies would have to pay duties on 
goods temporarily imported to Kazakhstan.  The re presentative of Kazakhstan replied that under the 
customs regime of temporary importation, certain cat egories of goods listed in the Resolution of the 
Government of the Republic of Kazakhstan No. 66 8 of 8 July 2003 "On A doption of the List of 
Temporarily Imported Goods Exempt from All Cu stoms Duties and Taxes and Temporarily Exported 
Goods Exempt from All Customs Duties", imported temporarily into Kazakhstan were exempt from 
all customs duties and taxes.  Also, leasing objects listed in the Resolution of the Government of the 
Republic of Kazakhstan No. 1092 of 21 August 2001 "On Adoption of the List of Leasing Objects 
Subject to the Customs Regime of Temporary Impor tation of Goods and Vehicles", were exempt from 
all customs duties and taxes provided that all provisi ons of the acting legislation of the Republic of 
Kazakhstan on financial leasing were met. 
94. The representative of Kazakhstan noted that goods not included in the above lists were 
subject to partial exemption from customs duties a nd taxes.  Under partial exemption from customs 
duties and taxes, an importer was required to pay 3 per cent of the duty chargeable, had the goods 
been entered for free circulation, for each full or  partial calendar month th at the goods remained in 
Kazakhstan.  WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/8 
Page 32  
 
 95.  Goods not eligible for the regime of temporary importation were:   
- industrial waste; 
- spare parts and components for temporarily im ported vehicles, consumables and samples, 
raw materials and semis, unless imported temporarily for promotion or demonstration purposes in single units;  
- foods and beverages (including alcoholic be verages and tobacco goods), unless imported 
temporarily for promotion or demonstration purposes in single units; and 
- goods prohibited for import into the Republic of Kazakhstan. 
The term of temporary importation was determined by an applicant based on its tasks and objectives, 
and could not exceed three years after goods entered th e territory of the Republic of Kazakhstan.  The 
term of temporary importation could be extended beyond three years at the request of an applicant, if 
an acceptable justification was provided.  To apply for extension of the term of temporary 
importation, an application was required to be lodg ed with the customs body not later than one month 
prior to the expiry of the initial term.  No requ irements on customs fees or resubmission of the 
customs declaration were applied to the extens ion of the term of temporary importation. 
96. Some members of the Working Party asked whether Kazakhstan's laws covering tariff 
exemptions were implemented in  regulations.  The representativ e of Kazakhstan replied that 
normative acts were issued to further implement the concerned statutory provisions that were related 
to all customs duty exemptions set out in the Customs Code.  He further confirmed that tariff rate 
quotas could be introduced in the future particular ly in relation to obligations arising from the 
Customs Union agreement. 
[to be completed] 
- Fees and charges for services rendered 
97. Numerous members of the Working Party ask ed how Kazakhstan pl anned to bring its 
licensing fee, its ad valorem  customs processing fee (0.2 per cent of customs value), and any other 
fees in line with requirements of  GATT Article VIII (that fees and charges should be related to the 
cost of services rendered).  The representative of Kaza khstan replied that in order to bring the customs 
legislation of the country into conformity with  WTO norms and rules, a new Customs Code was 
enacted on 1 May 2003.  Article 293 of the Customs Code 2003 stipulated that customs fees could be 
levied for rendering the following types of services:  (i) customs clearance; (ii) customs escort of 
goods; and (iii) services provided by warehouses owned by customs authority.  Fees were based on - WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/8 
 Page 33 
 
 
 the cost of services rendered in conformity with the Article VIII of GATT.  Revenues generated by 
fees for customs services were remitted to th e general revenues of the State budget.  
98. The representative of Kazakhstan stated th at the Government Resolution No. 669 of 
7 July 2003 "On Adoption of Customs Charges, Fees and Payments Levied by Customs Bodies" 
established the fee for customs clearance of good s and vehicles that had been moved across the 
customs border by natural persons and legal entiti es, at €50 for the main form of the customs 
declaration, and €20 for every additional page of the customs declaration. 
99. Some members of the Working Party requested  further information on the basis on which 
charges for accompanying goods in transit were calc ulated.  The representative of Kazakhstan stated 
that charges for customs escort of  goods in transit were based on the cost of services rendered by 
customs officers.  Under the Government Resolutio n No. 669, the following fees were applied for 
customs escort of goods:  two monthly calculation indices for 50 km; four monthly calculation indices 
for 50-100 km; seven monthly calculation indices fo r 100 to 200 km; 14 monthly calculation indices 
for 200-400 km; 21 monthly calculation indices for 400-600 km; 29 monthly calculation indices for 
600-800 km; 36 monthly calculation indices for 800 -1000 km; 54 monthly calculation indices for 
1,000-1,500 km; 72 monthly calculation indices for 1,500-2,000 km; 89 monthly calculation indices 
for a distance of more than 2,000 km.  The f ees included the salaries of customs officers who 
accompany the goods, as well as their travelli ng expenses, and per diem allowance.  
[to be completed] 
- Application of internal taxes to imports 
100. The representative of Kazakhstan stated that only Value Added Tax (VAT) and Excise were 
tax applied to imports.  He also stated that the sub-central authorities of Kazakhstan did not have the 
right to introduce any taxes on imports.  New ta xes could only be introduced via adoption of new 
legislation or amendments to the existing Tax Code by the central authorities.  He also noted that 
procedures set up for the collection of excise taxes were similar to the procedures established for the 
collection of VAT.  
[to be completed] 
- Value Added Tax  
101. Some members of the Working Party asked whether imports from other CIS countries were 
subject to VAT and excise taxes, or if they we re still exempted.  The representative of Kazakhstan WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/8 
Page 34  
 
 replied that under the Code of the Republic of Ka zakhstan "On Taxes and Other Mandatory Payments 
to the Budget" No. 209-II of 12 June 2001, VAT was levied on both domestically produced and 
imported goods.  The "country of d estination" principle used for imposition of indirect taxes was 
applied to all countries, excluding natural gas, oil and gas condensate, imported from the Russian Federation.  The imposition of VAT was regulated by Section III of the Tax Code 2001.  
102. The representative of Kazakhstan further noted th at the VAT rate was equal to 16 per cent 
and applied to the volume of taxable turnover. E xport turnover, except for export of ferrous and non-
ferrous scrap, were taxed at a zero rate. A taxa ble import value included the customs value of 
imported goods, determined in accordance with the customs legislation, as well as amounts of taxes 
and other mandatory payments to the budget effected  for imports of goods to the country, except for 
VAT.   
103. The following goods were exempt from VAT:  1) imported national cu rrency, and foreign 
currencies (except for cases where currencies are imported for numismatic purposes), and securities; 
2) goods, imported by natural pers ons within norms for duty-free im port, set by the Government of 
the Republic of Kazakhstan; 3) goods, except for excisable goods, imported as a humanitarian aid in 
accordance with procedures, set by the Government of the Republic of Kazakhstan; 4) goods, except 
for excisable goods, imported as charity on the initiative of the State, national governments, 
international organizations, including for purposes of  technical assistance; 5) goods imported for use 
by foreign diplomatic representative offices and offic es of the same status, as well as for personal use 
by foreign diplomats and general staff of representa tive offices, including family members, residing 
with them; exempted from excises under internati onal agreements to which Kazakhstan was party; 
6) imported goods, subject to declaration in accordan ce with the customs legislation of Kazakhstan, 
under customs treatments providing for tax exemptions ; 7) imports of drugs, including  medical 
substances; medical (veterinary) products, including prosthetic appliances,  devices for the deaf-blind, 
medical and veterinary equipment; materials and components required for production of drugs and 
diabetic products, medical (veterinary) products , including prosthetic appliances, and medical 
(veterinary) equipment.  The list of products listed in this Sub-Paragraph ha d to be approved by the 
Government; 8) imports  of mail stamps (except for imports for collection purposes); 9) imports of raw 
materials for production of paper currency perform ed by the National Bank of the Republic of 
Kazakhstan and by its subordinate  bodies; 10) goods, imported under gr ants, provided by the State, 
national governments, and in ternational organizations.     
[to be completed]  WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/8 
 Page 35 
 
 
 - Excise Taxes  
104. Some members of the Working Party requested  information on the precise steps being taken 
by Kazakhstan to ensure its excise legislation and prac tice were consistent with the national treatment 
obligations of GATT Article III.  The representativ e of Kazakhstan stated that excise rates for 
imported goods and goods produced dom estically were the same with the exception of five categories 
of goods: alcohol, tobacco, automobiles, gasoline and diesel fuel and further stated that steps have 
been undertaken on elimination of discrimination in the context of excises imposed on goods of 
domestic production and imported from ab road.  He further noted that at  present, Kazakhstan is 
undertaking measures for a stage-by-stage unifica tion of excise rates for domestic and imported 
goods. Unification of excise rates levied on dom estic goods and goods imported to the Republic of 
Kazakhstan will inevitably result in the reduction of  legal production volumes and increase in the 
share of the "shadow" turnover.  This, in turn, w ill require development of improved mechanisms for 
administering excises levied on alcoholic products.  At present, the Ministry of Finance of the Republic of Kazakhstan works on the implementati on of account labels.  The completion of the 
implementation procedures is projected for 1 Ja nuary 2006.  Excises levied on domestic goods and 
goods imported to the Republic of Kazakhstan shall be harmonized by 1 January 2006.  
105. He later noted that Government Resolution No . 1108 "On Amendments to the Resolution of 
the Government of the Republic of Kazakhstan of 28  January 2000 No. 137" of 11 October 2002, had 
revised the excise duty rate on vodka produced in Kazakhstan from KZT 40 to 100 per litre.  
Moreover, under the Resolution of the Governme nt of the Republic of Kazakhstan No. 1257 of 
26 November 2002, the excise rate levied on beer a nd tobacco goods with (without) filter, produced in 
the Republic of Kazakhstan, had been raised from KZT 6 to 7 per 1 litre, and from KZT 145 to 180 
per 1,000 units  (KZT 95 to 100 per 1,000 units), r espectively. Information on current excise taxes 
were provided to the Working Party in document WT/ACC/KAZ/40.     
106. The representative of Kazakhstan added that ex cisable goods imported by natural persons 
within limits set by the Government of the Republic of Kazakhstan were exempt from excises. In 
addition, imports of the following goods were exempt from excises :  
- Excisable goods required for operation of vehicles, involved in international 
transportation, en route  and in the intermediate locations, as well as excisable goods, 
purchased abroad for repairs of damages cau sed by a road accident (breakdown);    
- Goods damaged prior to being transported across the customs border of the Republic 
of Kazakhstan and rendered non-usab le as products and materials;   WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/8 
Page 36  
 
 - Goods imported for use by foreign diploma tic representative offices and offices of the 
same status, as well as for personal use by foreign diplomats and general staff of 
representative offices, including family members, residing with them; exempted from 
excises under international agreements to wh ich the Republic of Kazakhstan is party; 
- Goods, transported across the customs bor der of the Republic of Kazakhstan, 
exempted under customs treatment set by th e customs legislation of the Republic of 
Kazakhstan, excluding for the "Issue of goods for free use"; and 
- Alcohol containing products used in medici ne (excluding balms) in containers of no 
more than 0.1 litre and registered in acco rdance with the requirements set out in the 
legislative acts of Kazakhstan.    
[to be completed] 
- Quantitative import restrictions, including  prohibitions, quotas and licensing systems 
107. The representative of Kazakhstan stated that quantitative import restrictions could be 
established in the interest of, inter alia , national security, ethics and hea lth.  Some members requested 
clarification of the specific restrictions which could be imposed on the basis of ethics.  The 
representative of Kazakhstan stated that import prohi bitions could be imposed against products such 
as printed or painted materials directed toward unde rmining state and public system, promoting war, 
terrorism, racism as well as pornography. 
108. Some members of the Working Party asked th e representative of Kazakhstan to identify the 
quantitative restrictions on imports that were curre ntly applied by Kazakhs tan, listing the products 
affected and the respective relevant GATT/WTO rati onale for each measure.  The representative of 
Kazakhstan replied that by the Government Resoluti on No. 1243 "On introduction of restrictions of 
import and export of individual goods" of 5 Decem ber 1998, the quota was set up in the size of 
3,000 tons for import of grinding and forged  spheres (HS Item code–7325 91 000, 7325 99, 
7325 99 990, 7326 11 000, 7326 19, 7326 19 100, 7326 19 900).  
109. Some members of the Working Party asked wh ether Kazakhstan still limited alcohol imports 
to 20 per cent of domestic consumption.  They stated  that such a practice was a violation of Article XI 
of the GATT, and that the practice should be elim inated as soon as possible.  The representative of 
Kazakhstan replied that under the Resolution of  the Government No. 1031 of 27 June 1997 "On 
Licensing of Import of Ethyl Alcohol and Alcoholic  Products (Excluding Beer) in the Republic of 
Kazakhstan", the share of imported ethyl alcohol a nd alcoholic products (exc luding beer) should not 
exceed 20 per cent of the annual volume of their pro duction in the customs territory of Kazakhstan.   WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/8 
 Page 37 
 
 
 This measure was introduced to regulate the increa sed imports flow, ensure collection of all tax 
receipts to the budget, and protect the rights of dom estic producers and consumers.  Government of 
Kazakhstan intended to remove th is restriction by the time of accession to the WTO.   
110. Some members of the Working Party request ed information on the possibility of the 
introduction of import quotas in cases connected with "an emergency measure according to Article XIX of the GATT".  The representative of Kaza khstan replied that as of the date of accession 
to the WTO, Kazakhstan would not introduce im port quotas except for cases related to emergency 
measures stipulated in the Article XIX of the GA TT.  He further stated that Law No. 337-1 "On 
Measures for the Protection of Domestic Markets in the Process of Imports of Goods" took effect as 
of 28 December 1998.  The content of the Law was drafted in full conformity with the norms and 
requirements set out in the corresponding WTO Agreements. 
111. In response to questions, the representative of Kazakhstan stated that the system of import 
licensing operating in Kazakhstan was not linked to  any quotas.  Except where otherwise permitted 
under WTO rules, Kazakhstan did not envisage us ing any systems other than certification and 
licensing in the future.  In response, members of the Working Party urged Kazakhstan to ensure that 
relevant legislation guaranteed that WTO-incompatib le restrictions could not be introduced in the 
future.  
[to be completed] 
- Import licensing procedures 
112. In reference to requests for an updated list of information concerning Kazakhstan's imports 
subject to import licensing, the representative of  Kazakhstan presented up-to-date information in 
Appendix 2 of WT/ACC/KAZ/37/ Аdd.1 of 20 September 2002 and stated  that list of goods, subject to 
import licensing, was approved by Government Resolution No. 1037 "On licensing export and import of goods and services in the Republic of Kazakhsta n" of 30 June 1997.  The licensing system of 
Kazakhstan regulated import of a limited number of  goods to ensure protection of human life and 
health, environmental protection, protection of ordre public , as well as for reasons of national 
security. 
113. The representative of Kazakhstan clarified that import licensing extended to chemical 
products for plant protection; veterinary drugs a nd equipment; narcotic, psychotropic products, and 
precursors; poisons; civil and in-service firearms  and cartridges, explosives, detonation, and 
pyrotechnical devices; industrial waste; x-ray units, devices and equipm ent using radioactive WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/8 
Page 38  
 
 substances and isotopes; raw opium; wine; ethyl al cohol; complex alcoholic half-finished products, 
excluding perfume based products, u sed in beverages; white spirit; other light distillates, average 
distillates for specific processing and chemical transformations (see Appendix 2 of 
WT/ACC/KAZ/37/ Аdd.1).     
114. More information was also requested on th e licensing regime for spirits, including WTO 
justifications, procedures, criteria, requirements and fees.  The representative of Kazakhstan replied 
that, as stipulated in the Government Resolution No . 1031, ethyl alcohol and vodka were subject to 
import licensing.  The following documents were nece ssary to obtain a licence:  (a) an application, (b) 
a document confirming the payment of licence fee, (c) a copy of certificate of state registration, (d) a 
copy of a contract (agreement) on sales-purchase with participants of international trade deal, (e) a 
licence of production of alcohol products in case of importing ethyl alcohol; and (f) a certificate of 
origin.   
115. Concerning licensing requirements, the representa tive of Kazakhstan stated that qualification 
requirements varied from one type of licence to a nother and that the state bodies, responsible for 
issuing licenses, elaborated qualification requirement s for each type of licence.  He noted, however, 
that to produce alcoholic products, an applicant for a licence had to submit an application, proof of 
payment of licence fee, copy of certificate of regi stration (if a legal entity was applying for licence) 
and documents demonstrating appropr iate qualification to apply.  The qualification requirements to 
produce alcoholic products included the following: 
- equipment and observance of production re gulations including bottling of alcohol 
products according to current rules; 
- water, steam, freezing, electricity and sewage capacities ensuring proper regulation of 
production; 
- scaling and measuring facilities; 
- wine storage and spirit storage facilities; 
- separate spirit reception unit in pouring department; 
- storage capacities ensuring storing of products , raw materials, packaging and auxiliary 
materials according to requirement of normative documents; 
- technological condition for production, bo ttling and storing of alcohol products; 
- stationary communications on all stages of production; 
- meteorological provision for all production including laboratory facilities; 
- control-testing equipment for accounting of production; 
- production laboratory for chemical and technological control over production;  WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/8 
 Page 39 
 
 
 - journal of chemical, technological and microbiological control of production; 
- qualified staff of technological ser vice and laboratory specialists; 
- control system internal regime; 
- trade mark of the entity registered in established order; 
- apparatus-technological scheme of production with explanation of equipment, equipment 
arrangement plans; and 
- observance of conditions ensuring quality of  products according to current documents. 
116. He further noted that in addition to the qualif ication requirements, the following were also 
required: 
- copy of reference from taxation body on registering as a taxpayer; 
- conclusion of sanitary, ecological and anti-fire supervision bodies; and 
- an act of reviewing of qualification leve l of production for correspondence to required 
requirements under production of alcohol prod ucts.  Such act shall be prepared by 
specialists of GosStandard. 
117. He further noted that the standard fee for a licence was six monthly evaluation indexed 
equivalent to US$40 (as of October 2003).  This fee was the same for obtaining any type of licensed 
products.  Licenses were granted on a national treatment and MFN basis.  The fee for a licence on implementation of certain defined activities was regul ated by Resolution of the Government of the 
Republic of Kazakhstan No. 100 of 24 January 20 02 "On approval of fees for licenses of defined 
activities".   
118. Concerning activity licensing, some members of the Working Party asked for an updated list 
of activities subject to licensing.  The representative of Kazakhstan replied that 31 modifications were made to Law No. 2200 "Concerning licensing" of 17 April 1995.  Activities previously subject to obligatory licensing, were withdrawn by Law No. 277-1 of 9 July 1998, Law No. 283-1 of 
10 June 1998, and Law No. 471 of 8 October 1999. 
119. Noting that a decision to issue the licence was required by various offices and ministries of 
the Government of Kazakhstan and that these licenses should therefore be considered as non-
automatic, some members of the Working Party request ed justification for this restriction including 
information on the specific criteria required by the deciding offices and ministries.  The representative 
of Kazakhstan replied that the licensing was non-au tomatic.  Import licenses for the above-mentioned 
goods were issued by the Ministry of Industr y and Trade of the Republic of Kazakhstan upon 
preliminary coordination with concerned ministries and agencies, except for import licensing for ethyl WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/8 
Page 40  
 
 alcohol and alcoholic products (excluding beer), performed by the Ministry of Finance of the 
Republic of Kazakhstan.  Licenses were valid for a term of no more than 12 months, but may be 
renewed at the request of an applicant to allow fulf ilment of contractual obligations for a term of no 
more than one calendar year.  Refusal to issue a licence, termination of validity, revocation and 
suspension were regulated by Law No. 2200 "Concerning Licensing" of 17 April 1995.  He finally stated that these measures were in conformity  with Article XXI of GATT 1994 and Agreement on 
Import Licensing Procedures. 
[to be completed] 
- Customs valuation 
120. Some members of the Working Party asked fo r additional details concerning the Customs 
Code in relation to the requirements of GA TT 1994 Article VII and the Customs Valuation 
Agreement, in particular Annex 1 of that Agreemen t.  Some members were concerned that the present 
situation appeared to rely on arbitrary valua tion methods and use of minimum prices.  The 
representative of Kazakhstan noted that the G overnment of Kazakhsta n had adopted a new 
Customs Code on 5 April 2003 (WT/ACC/KAZ/39/Rev.1 re fers).  He further stated that the customs 
valuation of goods imported to the customs territory  of the Republic of Kazakhstan was based on the 
principles of customs valuation set out in Article  VII of GATT and the Agreement on Implementation 
of Article VII of GATT.  Under Article 308 of the Customs Code, customs valuation of imported 
goods were based on:    
- cost of a contract on imported goods;  
- cost of a contract on identical goods;  
- cost of a contract on homogenous goods;  
- deduction of costs;  
- addition of costs; and 
- reserve. 
As a general rule, customs valuation was based on the transaction value of the imported goods.  
Where application of this method is impossible, othe r methods shall be used in the order shown above 
until determination of the customs value become s possible.  Article 309 of the Customs Code 
stipulated that customs valuation of goods must  include related costs (c ommission and brokerage), 
unless already included, in the cost of transaction.   
121. To trigger further improvement of customs valuation procedures applied to imported goods 
and implementation of an indepe ndent examination system, the G overnment of Kazakhstan adopted  WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/8 
 Page 41 
 
 
 the Rules for Independent Examination of Consiste ncy of Customs Value, Quality, and Quantity of 
Imported Goods (the Resolution of the Governme nt of the Republic of Kazakhstan No.782 of 
16 July 2002). These Rules determine procedures for independent examination of consistency of the 
customs value, quality, and quantity of goods importe d to Kazakhstan.  Issues relating to customs 
valuation of goods were also regulated by the Decr ee of the Customs Committee of the Republic of 
Kazakhstan No. 209 of 15 May 20 03 "On Adoption of Rules on Co mpletion of Declarations of 
Customs Value and Customs Value Adjustment Forms". 
122. More information was sought about the existing procedures for judicial review of customs 
measures.  In response, the representative of Kazakhstan noted that the Code "On Administrative 
Violations" was adopted by the Law of Kazakhstan of January 2001 No. 155- 11 and was published in 
official editions.  It established the legal and ad ministrative measures with a view of achieving the 
legitimate objectives determined by Article 2. 2 of the Agreement on TBT (national security, 
prevention of fraudulent practices, protection of he alth and people's security and the protection of 
environment) without having the effect of creati ng unnecessary obstacles to international trade.  It 
further identified the bodies aut horized to consider the cases of administrative violations and to 
impose sanctions and has provisions regulating administrative measures for violations of legislation 
on standardization, certification, unity of measure ments; veterinary and quarantine control; plant 
quarantine; and veterinary.  
[to be completed] 
- Rules of origin  
123. The representative of Kazakhstan stated that  his country used a uniform system for 
determination of the country of origin of all goods for tariff and non-tariff measures, applied to 
imported and exported goods.  The existing syst em was developed by the World Customs 
Organization and covered by the Kyoto Convention. 
124. The country of origin is the country where a good was produced in full or underwent 
significant processing, in accordance with criteria set out in the Cu stoms Code.  Goods produced in 
one country include natural products, e.g. live an imals, mineral resources, fruits, etc., while goods 
processed to a significant degree comprise goods produced  jointly by two or more countries.  In the 
latter case, the degree of processing is determined by numerous criteria, e.g. changes in tariff codes, 
value added, and listed operati ons involved in processing procedure.  Several countries, customs 
unions, regions, or parts of countries may be viewed  as the country of origin, provided that this is 
justifiable for purposes of determination of the country of origin. WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/8 
Page 42  
 
 125. He further noted that imports of goods to the customs territory of Kazakhstan required a 
certificate of origin only for instances where: (i) preferences are granted in respect of the customs 
tariff on goods, transported across the territory of Kazakhstan; (ii) the customs body has sufficient 
grounds to believe that goods originate in a count ry, imports of which shall be subject to non-tariff 
measures; (iii) such requirement is stipulated by  international agreements to which Kazakhstan is 
party, as well as by the legislation of Kazakhs tan on sanitary and epidemiological safety, 
environmental protection, protection of human health, consumer rights, ordre public and national 
security. A certificate of origin shall not be required for any other cases.     
126. The representative of Kazakhstan fu rther noted that a certificate of origin should state that the 
good in question originates in a given country, and c ontain: (i) a written declaration of the applicant 
certifying that the good conforms with the corresponding criteria of origin; (ii) a written certification, 
issued by the competent body of the country of export, to the effect that the information contained in 
the certification of origin is correct and reliabl e.  The customs body has the right to prohibit 
transportation of the good across the customs body of Kazakhstan only where it has sufficient grounds 
to believe that the good originates in a country, whose goods may not be allowed for transportation 
under international agreements to  which Kazakhstan is party, or  under the national legislation .  The 
grounds for the above action should be  made available to the applicant in writing.  Failure to provide a 
correctly drafted certificate (hygiene certificate) or  information on the origin of a good should not be 
viewed as a  sufficient reason for  denial of transportation of the good across the customs border of 
Kazakhstan. 
127. Some members of the Working Party noted that the provisions on rules of origin of the 
Customs Code 2003 did not fully meet the provisions of the WTO Agreement and Annex II of the WTO Agreement, in particular Article 2(h) and A nnex II, paragraph 3 (d).  Under these provisions, 
any request for an assessment of the origin of the import would be accepted even before trade in the 
goods concerned began, and any such assessment would be binding for three years.  The 
representative of Kazakhstan replied that preliminar y decision by customs authority on the origin of 
goods were made upon the request of an applicant.  As  stipulated in Article 49 of the Customs Code 
2003, preliminary decision made by customs authority  was valid for the period of three years. In case 
there was no need for additional information or e xpertise, customs authority must reply to the 
applicant  within ten working days.  If there was s till need for further information, the applicant had to 
provide required documents by the date shown in the written notice from customs authority.  In case 
of the rejection of the application, the customs authority must provide the applicant with a written 
explanation of the reasons for rejection within seven  days.  Thus, the provisions of the Customs Code 
of Kazakhstan concerning rules of origin were  in conformity with the WTO agreement.  WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/8 
 Page 43 
 
 
 [to be completed] 
- Other customs formalities 
128. Concerning Kazakhstan's requirement for trader s to have an import or export "Transaction 
Passport" which contained a copy of certain information contained on customs documentation 
normally required for clearance, some members of th e Working Party expressed their concern that this 
instrument duplicated documentation already availa ble to customs authorities and constituted a burden 
to trade.  The representative of Kazakhstan stated  that the purpose of a transaction passport was to 
assure compliance with the foreign currency le gislation of Kazakhstan.  The transaction 
passport/certificate contained information on foreig n economic operations and allowed  to monitor 
movements of goods and money invol ved in export and import operations .  Currency controls ensured 
that currency earnings flowed into the country in full and in a timely fashion as well as ensured a 
proper use of foreign currency and KZT for the purpose of import.  
129. Under the Law of Kazakhstan No. 54-1 of 24 December 1996 "On Currency Regulation" and 
the Resolution of the Board of the National Ba nk of the Republic of Kazakhstan No. 343 of 
5 September 2001 "On Approval of the Instruction on Organization of Import and Export Currency 
Control in the Republic of Kazakhstan" a transacti on passport/certificate were issued based on the 
submitted sales contract for a sum exceed ing US$5,000.  The issue of transaction 
passports/certificates represented an automatic proc ess and was performed unconditionally within one 
day upon submission of the contract.  The process of obtaining a transaction passport/certificate was 
not related to the registration of companies with the bodies of justice.  The former was issued by 
customs authority for each foreign trade operati on exceeding a sum of US$5,000, while the latter 
represented a one-time measure related to the registra tion of a legal entity with the justice authorities.  
130. The representative of Kazakhstan further stated that a transaction passport/certificate was not 
used to balance trade in any way and as such did not represent an obstacle to foreign economic 
activities or "an additional burden on trade".  E ach transaction passport/certificate had its unique 
number and included brief information on the contr act.  Electronic monitoring based on the database 
of transaction passports/certificates allowed to  reveal "fictitious" fore ign economic operations, 
involving transfers of the "shadow" capital to offshore zones.  
131.  Concerns were also expressed by some memb ers of the Working Party regarding the required 
provision of an electronic copy of the import and export declaration as part of the mandatory customs 
documentation, the granting of an exclusive licence to provide these electronic copies declarations to 
the "Accept Corporation", the cost to the importer of the electronic copy and the requirement that 
importers present a paper copy of the import declar ation which undermines the rationale for requiring WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/8 
Page 44  
 
 an electronic copy in the first place.  They furt her requested more information on what steps the 
Government and the State Customs Committee have ta ken to ensure the confidentiality of the customs 
value information that importers were required to present to the "Accept Corporation" in order to 
obtain an electronic copy of their declarations, as required by Article X of the GATT 1994, Article 10 
of the WTO Valuation Agreement, and Article  124 of the "Law on Customs Business".  The 
representative of Kazakhstan stated that the introduc tion of a Unified Automated Information System 
("UAIS") was necessary to fulfil the obligation of the Customs Agency to provide full and reliable 
information and statistics and to comply with intern ational standards (electronic copies are used in the 
United States, European Union and other members.   In order to establish UAIS, the government 
granted an exclusive licence to the "Accept Corporation" to create electronic copies of customs 
documents.  In 1999, the Government disconti nued an exclusive licence granted to the "Accept 
Corporation". Currently, services related to provision  of electronic copies of customs documents were 
based on competitive principles.  The project on implementation of the Unified Automated 
Information System ("UAIS") was being implemented independently by the Customs Control Agency of Kazakhstan.  In 2004, Kazakhs tan planned to start implementati on of the "Electronic Customs" 
project which will serve as a framework for trans ition to the use of electronic customs documents. 
Measures on protection of confidential information of th e participants of external trade activities were 
envisaged for the UAIS.  The introduction of ne w technologies required gradual cancellation of the 
previous one and that is the reason of  use of paper customs declaration.  
132. Some members of the Working Party asked ques tions on the results of the review of the 
temporary customs warehouse storage regime.  The representative of Kazakhstan replied that 
temporary storage regime was regulated by Chap ter 13 of the Customs Code of the Republic of 
Kazakhstan (Articles 87-111).  Temporary storage of goo ds was not limited or restricted to the use of 
temporary storage warehouses, but may also invo lve storage in vehicles, warehouses owned by a 
receiver of goods, as well as special quarters allo cated and equipped either  for indoor or outdoor 
storage.  Furthermore, licensing requirements and fees charged for temporary storage did not extend 
to storage of goods in vehicles, warehouses owned by a receiver of goods, as well as in special quarters allocated and equipped either for indoor or outdoor storage.  Pre-arrival declaration 
procedures, periodic declaration procedures, and proc edures related to the customs clearance of urgent 
consignments stipulated that goods and vehicles cl eared under high-priority and simplified procedures 
be released directly without placement in a temporary storage location (temporary storage warehouses).  No physical placement of goods a nd vehicles in a temporary storage warehouse was 
required where they are cleared by Customs within one business day.  WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/8 
 Page 45 
 
 
 133. Temporary storage of goods is regulated by Chapter 13 of the Customs Code of Kazakhstan 
(Articles 87-111).  Temporary storag e of goods is not limited or restricted to the use of temporary 
storage warehouses, but may also involve storage in vehicles, warehouses owned by a receiver of 
goods, as well as special quarters allocated and equipped either for indoor or outdoor storage.  Furthermore, licensing requirements and fees charged for temporary storage do not extend to storage 
of goods in vehicles, warehouses owned by a receive r of goods, as well as in special quarters allocated 
and equipped either for indoor or outdoor storage.   Pre-arrival declaration procedures, periodic 
declaration procedures, and procedures related to the customs clearance of urgent consignments 
stipulate that goods and vehicles cleared under high -priority and simplified procedures be released 
directly without placement in a temporary storage location (temporary storage warehouses).  No physical placement of goods and vehicles in a temporary storage warehouse is required where they are 
cleared by Customs within one business day. 
[to be completed]  
- Preshipment inspection  
134. The representative of Kazakhstan stated that on 31 January 1997 the Program of Pre-shipment 
Inspection (PPI) was eliminated.  However, in order to further improve the customs valuation 
procedures applied to imported goods and implementa tion of an independent examination system in 
Kazakhstan, the government by its Resolution No. 782 of 16 July 2002 set up the Rules for Independent Examination of Cons istency of Customs Value, Quality, and Quantity of Imported 
Goods.  The independent examination of customs value, in contrast to the pre-shipment inspection, 
implied a price audit (control over the compliance of  declared information to their real cost) of 
imported goods upon their arrival in Kazakhstan.  Independent pr ice audit of imported goods was 
introduced to increase the flow of customs and ta x revenues to the state budget, minimise wrongful 
acts on the part of customs officials and to prevent capital flight.  The rules determined procedures of 
an independent examination of whether customs value of goods imported to the country corresponded 
to their quality and quantity. 
[to be completed] 
- Anti-dumping, countervailing duties safeguard regimes 
135. The representative of Kazakhstan noted that  the use of anti-dumping, safeguard, and 
countervailing measures was regulated by the La ws "On Anti-Dumping Measures" No. 421-1 of 
13 July 1999, "On Measures for the Protection of Domestic Markets in the Process of Imports of 
Goods" No. 337-1 of 28 December 1998, "On Subsidies and Counterv ailing Measures" of No. 441-1 WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/8 
Page 46  
 
 of 16 July 1999.  The above laws defined rules and procedures for use of anti-dumping, safeguard, 
and countervailing measures for purposes of protection of  the domestic market against adverse effects 
of the increased share of imports or supplies of dumped or subsidized goods.  Under these laws, anti-
dumping, safeguard, and countervailing duties may only be introduced when th ere was evidence that 
serious damages had incurred or were highly possible for domestic producers, resulting from the increased share of imports, dumping, or subsidized imports.  These measures could be implemented 
for a limited term, sufficient for remedial actions  relating to incurred damages and adaptation of 
domestic producers to the competitive environment.   Thus, the legislation of Kazakhstan was in 
conformity with the relevant WTO norms and requi rements.  Some members of the Working Party 
noted that the Laws "On Anti-Dumping" appeared to conform to the provisions of the Agreement on 
Implementation of Article VI of the GATT 1994 but that further clarification of certain provisions 
was still necessary. 
136. In respect to questions concerning judici al review of an anti-dumping matter, the 
representative of Kazakhstan stated that it was performed by courts which were neutral and 
independent from the executive power, like the judicial review of any administrative or other decision 
of an executive body of Kazakhstan.  Accordi ngly, the executive body involved in anti-dumping 
investigation could not interfere with any le gal proceedings pending before a court.   
137. He further explained that the Law "On Anti-Dumping" stipulated that all issues concerning 
the investigation of anti-dumping case were w ithin the competence of the executive power.  
Specifically, review or cancellation of anti-dum ping measures should be carried out by the 
Government upon submission of the case by an Authorized Body.  Under Article 53 of the Law, in case the complainant disagreed with the decision of  the executive body on anti-dumping investigation, 
he/she had the right to appeal to the court.  The current Code of Civil Procedure set forth the general 
procedures for filing inter alia a complaint in court to review administrative actions.  In the case of an 
anti-dumping action filed by a foreigner or non-resi dent, Articles 15 and 118 of the Code of Civil 
Procedure provided that such a claim could be brou ght to the court having jurisdiction and located as 
close as possible to the decision-making body.  Oblast courts and the Almaty city court were considered to be courts of first instance.  All deta ils of court procedures were regulated by the Law on 
the Procedure for Consideration and Settlement of Economic Disputes and the Code of Civil 
Procedure.  Where the complainant was a legal entity , the claim would be considered by the Board of 
Economic Disputes within the court of first instan ce.  Where the complainan t was a physical person, 
then (in addition to the aforementioned procedures) such individual could also be guided by the Law 
on the Procedure for Appealing in a Court Against Actions of the Bodies of State Administration.  WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/8 
 Page 47 
 
 
 [to be completed] 
B. EXPORT REGULATIONS - Customs tariff, fees and charges for services rendered, application of internal taxes to 
exports 
138. The representative of Kazakhstan stated that export customs duties were introduced for a 
limited number of goods and applied based on the principle of the most favourable treatment, except 
for goods, exported to the countries of the Customs Un ion.  Any changes in rates of export customs 
duties were officially published.  
139. The representative of Kazakhstan further noted that in order to balance domestic demand on 
wool, the Resolution of the Government of Kaza khstan No. 841 of 5 June  2000 introduced export 
customs duties on goods exported to countries, othe r than member-countries of the Customs Union, 
including: cattle hides or hides of animals of the family Equidae , sheepskins or lambskins, other raw 
hides and skins, un-carded and uncombed wool, restor ed wool.  In order to normalize the market of 
ferrous and non-ferrous scrap and waste, ensure s upply of raw materials to domestic enterprises, the 
Resolutions of the Government No. 1713 of 14 November 2000 and No. 841 of 5 June 2000 
introduced export customs duties on ferrous scrap a nd waste, iron-and-steel products, copper scrap 
and waste, secondary unprepared aluminium, parts of railway and tram locomotives.  
140. Some members of the Working Party requested that Kazakhstan provide a WTO justification 
for the non-imposition of export duties on wool expor ted from Kazakhstan to the European Union.  
The representative of Kazakhstan replied th at, according the Government Resolution  No. 841, goods 
exported to member-states of the Customs Union, including wool, were exempt from export duties.  
The representative of Kazakhstan further clarified that under the Agreement between the Government 
of the Republic of Kazakhstan and the European Co al and Steel Community on Trade in Certain Steel 
Products (Article 2. p.3), quantitative restrictions, customs duties, charges or any similar measures on 
the export of ferrous scrap and waste under the EC Combined Nomenclature heading 7204 were 
prohibited among the parties.  Based on the above-m entioned Agreement, the Government Resolution 
No. 841 stipulated that customs duties were exempt from the export of ferrous scrap and waste to the 
European Union member-states.  However, this pr ovision did not apply to the export of wool from 
Kazakhstan to the European Union. WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/8 
Page 48  
 
 141. Rates of customs duties levied on exported goods  were established by the Government based 
on the proposal of the Ministry of Industry and Tr ade, submitted upon coordinati on with all interested 
ministries and agencies, and had to enter in for ce in 30 days after their official publication.  
[to be completed] 
- Export restrictions 
142. Some members of the Working Party requested information on any mechanisms in place that 
could operate to restrict the free exportation of go ods from Kazakhstan.  These members stated that 
Article XI of the GATT 1994 provided that "oth er measures", including minimum export prices, 
could not be used to prohibit or restrict the exportation of any product destined for the territory of another member.  They also noted that alt hough minimum export prices had previously been 
eliminated, it appeared that the authorities were still operating a system with a similar effect.  In 
response, the representative of Kazakhstan stat ed that Government Resolution No. 994 of 
19 July 1997 had eliminated contract registration at the commodity exchange .   
143. The representative of Kazakhstan further noted that for the purposes of preservation of 
forests, reduction of instances of illicit lumber ing, export of lumber, sawed timber, and wood 
materials, listed under groups 4401, 4404, 4406-4409,  and 4418, was prohibited by the Resolution of 
the Government No. 785 of 16 July 2002.  In pursuance of the Agreement concluded with the 
European Union on trade in products of steel, a nu mber of quantitative restri ctions were introduced on 
specific types of steel products exported from Ka zakhstan to the European Union countries.   
[to be completed] 
- Export licensing 
144. The representative of Kazakhstan stated that  export licenses were automatic and not linked to 
quotas.  The licensing system of Kazakhstan regul ated import and export of a limited number of 
goods.  To ensure protection of human life and hea lth, environmental protection, protection of law 
and order, as well as for reasons of national security, the Government Resolution No. 1037 of 
30 June 1997 introduced licensing on the export of the following goods: wild animals; wild growing 
plants; veterinary drugs and equipment; ivory, horns, hoofs, antlers of Siberian stags, corals; vegetable 
and animal raw materials of recognized medical  value; narcotic, psychotropic products, and 
precursors; poisons; yellow phosphorus; civil and in -service firearms and car tridges; explosives, 
detonation, and pyrotechnical devices; semi-precious  stones and products thereof.  The representative  WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/8 
 Page 49 
 
 
 of Kazakhstan added that certain types of textile an d steel products were also subject to licensing in 
pursuance of the international obligations of Kazakhstan.  
145. Export licenses were issued by the Ministry of Industry and Trade upon preliminary 
coordination with corresponding ministries and agenci es.  Licenses were valid for a term of no more 
than 12 months, but may be renewed at the request of  an applicant to allow fulfilment of contractual 
obligations for a term of no more than one cale ndar year.  The standard fee for export licence was 
six monthly evaluation indexed equivalent to US$40 (as of October 2003 ).  The fee for licence on 
execution of defined activities was regulated by R esolution No. 100 of 24 January 2002 "On approval 
of fees for licensing activities".  
146. In response to questions concerning the rationa le for the introduction of export duties and 
export licensing on scrap in November 2000, the re presentative of Kazakhstan stated that Kazakhstan 
had adopted Resolution No. 1713 "O n measures for regulating of sec ondary non-ferrous and ferrous 
metals" of 14 November 2000 to simplify the wast e market of nonferrous and ferrous metals, raw 
materials supply of domestic enterprises, pr oducing copper products.  The representative of 
Kazakhstan later added that export licensing on scrap  was cancelled by the Government Resolution 
No. 924 of 19 August 2002 "On Introd uction of Amendments to the R esolution of the Government of 
the Republic of Kazakhstan No 1037 of 30 June 1997". 
147. While noting that export licensing of pharmaceutical and medical products was for "medical 
safety'', some members of the Working Party ask ed what the purpose was for monitoring medical 
safety of its exports.  The representative of Kazakhs tan replied that the purpose of monitoring safety 
of pharmaceutical and medical products was to prevent the export of low quality pharmaceutical and medical products and prevent unfavourable economi c consequences for Kazakhstan in the form of 
penalties and damages. 
148. Noting that Kazakhstan required export licen ses for the reason of "economic safety" for 
several groups of products, and recalling Artic le XI of the GATT 1994, providing that export 
licensing may not be used to prohibit or restrict the exportation or sale for export of any product destined for the territory of another member, so me members requested more information concerning 
the "economic security" reasons for restricting expor t.  The representative of Kazakhstan replied that 
"economic security" reasons were used with the pu rpose to monitor the export of natural resources, 
but not to reduce internal prices of inputs or to favour the raw material needs of domestic firms. 
149. To fulfil the country's international obligati ons on non-proliferation of nuclear materials, 
technologies, armaments, and weapons of mass dest ruction, the Government adopted a schedule of WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/8 
Page 50  
 
 goods subject to export control. Under the Resolutions of the Government No. 1282 of 
18 August 2000 and No. 1999 of 14 December 1999, goods included in the schedule were subject to 
licensing requirements.   
[to be completed] 
- Export subsidies 
150. The representative of Kazakhstan stated that  the Development Bank of Kazakhstan granted 
soft loans for export of non-ferrous products and gold.    
 [to be completed] 
C. INTERNAL POLICIES AFFECTING FOREIGN TRADE IN GOODS 
- Industrial policy, including subsidies  
151. Some members of the Working Party requested more information on any subsidies and on the 
objective criteria and guidelines that governed the ava ilability of regional subsidies and their use by 
regional bodies.  The representative of Kazakhstan rep lied that pursuant to the Law of the No. 373-II 
of 8 January 2003 "On Investments", government supported private investment projects in top priority 
sectors of the national economy.  Under contract s concluded between th e authorized body and 
investors, government granted tax privileges, soft  loans, exemption from customs duties for imported 
products, rescheduling of debts of industrial ente rprises as well as railroad transportation preferences 
for a term calculated based on the amount of in vestments into fixed assets of Kazakhstani legal 
entities. 
152. In selecting investment projects for preferential treatment, the following set of criteria was 
used:  (i) whether investment project belonged to th e list of top priority sectors; (ii) whether the 
investor made investments into fixed assets of a legal entity of Kazakhs tan to enable either 
establishment of a new enterprise or expansion and modernization of existing enterprise using 
advanced technologies; and (iii) whether the invest or submitted a complete set of required documents, 
proving that his company had sufficient financial, technical, and administrative capacity to implement 
the investment project. 
153. He further noted that tax privileges allowed i nvestors to apply additional deductions from its 
aggregate annual income and exemptions from the pr operty tax on new fixed assets put into service as 
part of the investment project, and the land ta x on lands acquired and used to implement the 
investment project.  The exemptions from custom s duties were granted for imported products which  WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/8 
 Page 51 
 
 
 were not produced domestically and when domestic enterprises could not supply sufficient quantity of 
goods required for implementation of the investment project.   
154. In response to questions, the representative of Ka zakhstan clarified that the list of priority 
sectors of the Kazakhstani economy included:  (i) th e chemical industry, (ii) metallurgical industry, 
(iii) machinery construction, (iii) textile industry, (iv) production of furniture, (v) paper industry, 
(vi) construction and (vii) pharmaceutical industry.   In 2002, tax benefits and preferences were 
granted to the chemical, textile, metallurgical  industries, machinery construction, etc.  
155. In addition, the Development Bank of Kazakhsta n granted soft loans for implementation of 
investment projects in priority sectors of economy, including machinery construction, metallurgy, textile industry, production of leather, leathe r goods, and footwear, production of electric and 
electronic equipment, as well as a number of soft loans guaranteed by the State.  
156. Members of the Working Party requested more information on the legal basis of the existing 
subsidies and specific proposals for their eliminati on.  Members stressed the importance of such 
information to help discussions to move forward.  In response, the representative of Kazakhstan stated 
that Kazakhstan is a land-locked country, and its remoteness from major commodity markets, lack of 
direct access to major commercial seaports, and the vast ness of its territory, all resulted in a very high 
share of transportation costs in the products value.  In this connection, the decree of the Chairman of 
the Agency of Kazakhstan for Regulation of Na tural Monopolies, Protection of Competition and 
Support of Small Business of 30 September 1999 No. 24-OD "On Establishing the Rules on 
Introduction and Cancellation of Discount Coefficients  to the Tariffs on Transportation by Railroad, 
Subject to State Regulation" envisaged granting na tural monopolists discounts on tariffs.  These rules 
were developed in accordance with Law No. 156-X III "Concerning Transport in the Republic of 
Kazakhstan" of 21 September 1994 (WT/ACC/KAZ /4 refers), Law No. 272 "On Natural 
Monopolies", and the Law "On Development of Co mpetition and Limitation of Monopoly Activities" 
(WT/ACC/KAZ/4 refers) for the purpose of establishing the unified system of introduction and 
cancellation of discount coefficients for tariffs on transportation by railroad, subject to state 
regulation.   
157. The representative of Kazakhstan clarified that the main criteria of expediency of the 
establishment of discount coefficients were the main tenance of tax payments to the budget, attraction 
of transport flows, increasing transport flows, possi bility of using unutilised  or under-utilised sections, 
ecological danger of by-product of industrial produ ction.  The discount coefficients were applied 
under the condition that the client did not have de bt accounts receivable or if they were settled in 
accordance with the adopted schedule, and under th e condition of increasing (or maintaining) the WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/8 
Page 52  
 
 volume of transport flows in comparison with the previous period.  In 2001-2002, discount 
coefficients were granted for iron ore products, ro lled products, coal, sulphuric acid, copper ore, and 
fuel oil.  The discount coefficients represented te mporary measure and were established for limited 
periods of time.  The criteria of expediency fo r cancellation of discount co efficients were economic 
inefficiency of further application of the discount  coefficients for the state and/or the transport 
company or disparity with the main criteria.   
158. The representative of Kazakhstan further stat ed according to the decree No. 24-OD, the 
procedure of granting discount coefficients were not contingent on export performance of companies 
and applied to transportation of goods for both domestic consumption and export.  Therefore, granting 
discount coefficients could not be considered as prohibited export subsidies within the meaning of 
Article 3 of the WTO Agreement on Subsidies a nd Countervailing Measures and Article XVI of the 
GATT 1994. 
159. He further presented renewed informatio n of domestic subsidies in document 
WT/ACC/KAZ/37/Add.3 of 25 April 2003. 
Subsidy Amount (in thousands US$) 
I. Tax exemptions and privileges provided under the Law "On State 
Support of Direct  Investments"   9,433.8 
(total) 
Textile industry and production of garments  1,134.2 
Production of leather, leather goods, and footwear  8.9 
Woodworking and manufacturing of wood products  100.5 
Cellulose and paper industry;  publishing   1,092.3 
Chemical industry  2,499.5 
Production of rubber and plastic goods  427.0 
Production of other non-metallic mineral goods   941.5 
Metallurgy and production of finished hardware  66.0 
Machinery and equipment production  3,001.5 
Production of electric, electroni c, and optical devices  4.4 
Production of transportation means and equipment  0.0 
Other  158.0 
II. Total value of soft loans granted by the Development Bank of the 
Republic of Kazakhstan under the Law "On Development Bank" 16,436.0 
(total) 
Textile industry and production of leather, leather products, and footwear  4,740.0 
Metallurgy  4,417.0 
Production of electric and el ectronic devices   3,762.0 
Production of machinery and equipment  3,517.0 
III. Subsidies for railroad transportation of industrial goods under the Decree 
"On Adoption of Rules for Establishi ng and Cancellation of Decreasing 
Coefficients to Tariffs on Cargo Transportation by State Regulated 
Railroad Transport" 14,886.7 
(total) 
Coal 13,700.0 
Ore 291.3 
Slag 895.4  WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/8 
 Page 53 
 
 
 Subsidy Amount (in thousands US$) 
IV. Rescheduled Debts under the Law "on Taxes and Other Compulsory 
Payments to the Budget"   22,200.0 
(total) 
Total 62,956.5 
 
160. Some members of the Working Party requested  confirmation that the so-called regional 
subsidies were budget transfers to regional gove rnments for the sole purpose of carrying out 
governmental activities.  The representative of Ka zakhstan confirmed that in accordance with Law 
No. 3571 "On Budgetary System" of 1 April 1999, so- called regional subsidies were official transfers 
which lower level budgets received from higher le vel budgets within the limits of the approved 
amounts for the purpose of carrying out governmental activities, e.g., creating local infrastructure, running schools, making social income support paym ents unrelated to production of goods, etc. 
[to be completed] 
- Technical barriers to trade, sa nitary and phytosanitary measures 
161. In response to questions, the representative of Kazakhstan provided information on the 
conformity of legislation of Ka zakhstan with the Articles of WT O Agreement on Technical Barriers 
on Trade (TBT) in document WT/ACC/KAZ/37, as well as document WT/ACC/KAZ/40 (Survey of 
the Foreign Trade Regime of the Republic of Kazakhs tan).  The legislation regulating relations arising 
in the context of standardization, metrology, and certification is based on the Laws of the Republic of 
Kazakhstan No. 433-1 of 16 July 1999 "On Standard ization" (WT/ACC/KAZ/23 refers), No. 434-1 of 
16 July 1999 "On Certification" (amended by th e Laws of the Republic of Kazakhstan No. 141-II of 
15 January 2001; No. 230-II of 11 July 2001; No. 272-II of 15 December 2001; No. 3788 of 
10 June 2003) (WT/ACC/KAZ/23 refe rs) and normative acts containing specific norms in this area.  
162. In response to questions concerning measures take n to meet the transparency and publication 
requirements of the TBT Agreement, the representa tive of Kazakhstan stated that the Centre for 
collaboration with WTO on issues of accreditation,  standardization, metrology and certification 
started its work in 2002.  Databases were being created according to international, regional and 
foreign standards.  Interstate and state standards and part of international ones were transferred to 
electronic forms. Moreover, the representative of Kazakhstan stated that a draft program of standards development was being printed in the specialized Gosstandard publication:  monthly "Informational 
Catalog (register) of Standards" (ICS), to enable  interested persons to submit comments on draft 
standards.  The comments were taken into account in  the process of finalizing draft standards and the 
standards were only adopted after comments were re ceived, listed and attached thereto, and agreement 
was reached between the interested organizations.  He further noted that Law "On Standardization" WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/8 
Page 54  
 
 established a procedure to process and analyse comment s.  Moreover, drafts of state standards were 
published in the official publication of Gosstanda rd and electronic versions were placed on the 
website of Gosstandard www.memst.kz
. Subordinate enterprises issu ed periodic publications, 
including the magazines "Gosstandard News", "M etrology", and "Monthly Informational Index of 
Standards", which contained draft standards, news, Articles and normative documents regulating 
standardization, metrology, and certification . 
163. The representative of Kazakhstan further stated th at there were no criteria to be eligible to 
receive draft standards and conformity assessments.   Any interested organization could request and 
receive draft standards and conformity assessment procedures.  Moreover, according to the requirements of the state system of standardizati on of Kazakhstan (ST RK 1.2-93 "SSS RK.  An order 
on approval of state standards" item 2.3.3.) an or der on approval of state standards and conformity 
assessment procedures were distributed to the following parties:  
- the customer of the developed standard (e.g. ministries, producers associations); 
- the enterprises introducing the standard; 
- consumers associations; 
- the bodies of State supervision, ministries and organizations if the draft of the standard 
establishes requirements related to their competence; 
- the bodies having approved current interconnect ed normative documents that shall be 
revised or amended due to developm ent of the draft standard; and  
- other organizations and entities upon their requests.  
164. In response to questions, the representative of Kazakhstan stated that compulsory certification 
applied to, products and services potentially danger ous for people's health and environment (motor 
transport, agricultural technique, weapons, sports, electro-technical, radio-technical electronic items, 
communication means, household chemistry, consumer  goods in contact with persons' skin, food and 
water, construction materials a nd constructions, light industry pr oducts, medical products, raw fuel, 
toys, special technical guarding means etc.).  An  alteration was also made to Law No. 434-1 "On 
Certification", granting the right to producers to c onfirm the conformity of the products by declaration 
of conformity .  
165. He further noted that the Committee on Standardization, Metrology and Certification of the 
Ministry of Industry and Trade was the only authorized body on standardization, metrology, and certification empowered to issue standards offici ally.  He further added that under the Law "On 
Standardization" international a nd national standards of foreign countries were included into the 
categories of normative documents, effective in Kaza khstan.  Thus, physical and legal persons were  WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/8 
 Page 55 
 
 
 granted the right to use directly international, regional and national sta ndards and other normative 
documents on standardization of foreign countri es as state standards or through registration for 
concrete user. 
166. In response to questions concerning a clear di stinction between technical regulations and 
standards required by the TBT Agreement, the repr esentative of Kazakhstan stated that under the Law 
"On Standardization", a "technical regulation"  was a normative document establishing obligatory 
requirements either directly or by reference to a sta ndard or rule, or by reiteration of its content.  It 
could also include or exclusively contain the re quirements related to terminology, designations, 
package, marking to such extent, in which they we re applied to the products, process (work), service 
or method of production.  A "standard" was a docum ent developed under agreement of all interested 
parties and approved by the authorized body on sta ndardization, metrology, and certification. It 
established general rules, principles or characteristics as well as rules, principles or characteristics for 
repeated use regulating various forms of activities and its results.  He further noted that in the 
standardization system of Kazakhstan, a "sta ndard" included both mandatory and recommended 
requirements.  He also noted that the modificati ons to the Law "On Standardization" established the 
technical regulations and requirements to products , processes and services that were applicable on 
physical and legal persons of Kaza khstan.  Any interested party could obtain necessary information at 
the Enquiry Point. 
167. The representative of Kazakhstan clarified that  Article 11 of the Law "On Certification" 
provided for two types of certification: obligatory cer tification and voluntary certification.  The latter 
was performed on the initiative of an applicant (pro ducer, vendor) or consumer of a good, in order to 
determine its conformity with existing standards, while the former is absolutely required for safety 
reasons, to ensure protection of human life a nd health, as well as property and environment. 
168. In response to questions posed concerning th e procedure for mandatory certification, the 
representative of Kazakhstan stated that a manufactur er's self declaration could be filed for products, 
for which relevant tests could be easily performed  by the producer and which could be adequately 
tested by any of the accredited bodies of the Go sstandard.  Records of the testing procedures 
performed and documents that guaranteed safety of th e product were also needed.  Upon review of all 
necessary documents, a certificate could be issued  by an accredited certification body.  He further 
noted that there was no predetermined list of products that could not be tested by the accredited bodies of the Gosstandard, and that decisions as to whet her a product could be tested, were made on a case-
by-case basis.  He noted that the testing laboratories were constantly being modernized, thus expanding the profile of th eir testing capabilities.  WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/8 
Page 56  
 
 169. Some members of the Working Party asked why it was necessary to receive separate 
permissions from the chief veterina rian to transport imports within the Kazakhstan market even after 
obtaining a valid certificate of conformity, and why new certificates of conformity were needed for 
pharmaceutical imports that also already had obtain ed certificates of conformity.  The representative 
of Kazakhstan replied that these requirements were le gally justified under Article 2 of the Agreement 
on Technical Barriers to Trade, namely the intentio n to protect the health and safety of people or 
animals.  These procedures were obligatory for importers as well as domestic producers of goods in 
transporting goods that are subject to the state veteri nary control or included in the official list of 
products that require mandatory certification.  
170. More information on what government bodies were  responsible for which products and what 
certification was required was requested by some me mbers of the Working Party.  The representative 
of Kazakhstan replied that Gosstandard (the Committee on Standardization, Metrology, and 
Certification) was the only authorized body on standardization, metrology, and certification.  Product certification procedures were performed by certificat ion bodies accredited by Gosstandard.  The list of 
accredited certification bodies and laboratories along with  the list of products they certify or test was 
provided in Attachment A of document WT/ACC /KAZ/14 of 20 February 1998.  Gosstandard 
published the list of accredited certification bodies and laboratories.   
171. In reference to marking and labelling requireme nts, the representative of Kazakhstan stated 
that there were marking and labelling requireme nts for all merchandise that was subject to 
compulsory certification.  The marking and la belling requirements were set out in the product 
standards.  
172. Some members of the Working Party noted the ex istence of standards agreements with China 
and Turkey and asked whether the provisions of  these agreements would be applied on a most-
favoured-nation basis.  In response, the representativ e of Kazakhstan stated that there was a Protocol 
of Cooperation with the Turkish Institute of Standa rds of 6 March 1996 and an Agreement with China 
on cooperation to provide quality and mutual inspec tion of import-export goods dated 5 July 1996.  
Kazakhstan was ready to negotiate and enter in to agreement with any WTO Member regarding 
standards and affirmed that, once a Member of WTO, Kazakhstan would be ready to provide WTO 
Members on a mutual basis with MFN treatment in connection with technical barriers to trade.   
[to be completed] 
173. Some members of the Working Party noted that the legislative basis for complying with the 
Agreement on Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures (" SPS") was not yet in place.  They particularly  WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/8 
 Page 57 
 
 
 noted the lack of compliance with  the transparency requirements of the SPS Agreement, such as the 
publication of proposed measures, provision of information for economic  operators and the 
opportunity for them to comment.  In response, the representative of Kazakhstan replied that work on 
bringing the legislative base in lin e with the SPS Agreement is being currently carried out.  Thus, the 
Republic of Kazakhstan has adopted a number of new Laws, including Law No. 339 II "On 
Veterinary" of 10 July 2002 and Law No. 331-II "On Plant Protection" of 3 July 2002.  Amendments 
and alterations to the Law "On Plant Quarantine", in which the norms and rules of the SPS Agreement 
were taken into account, entered into force in Febr uary of 2002.  Following these developments, work 
will be initiated to harmonize and adapt subordinat e legislative acts with the WTO requirements.  
Provisions on publication of measures, info rmation for economic operators, and comment 
opportunities will be included in the subordinate legisla tive acts.  Furthermore, he  stated that with the 
view of harmonization of sanitary and phytosanita ry measures, the Government of Kazakhstan has 
elaborated the "Program on Agriculture Standa rdization", for the period 2001-2006, aiming further 
reformation and improvement of the state standard ization systems, creation of necessary conditions 
for the transition to the application of internati onal standards and systems of quality control, and 
implementation of foreign recognized systems of  valuation of goods, processes and services.  
174. The representative of Kazakhstan added that th e state sanitary and epidemiological control 
system had a database regularly updated with data submitted by regional branches.  This information 
was accessible for all interested parties.  Also, a monthly bulletin entitled "Environment and Human 
Health" was published.  Overall, the sanitary m easures of the Republic of Kazakhstan do not run 
counter to  international standard s, regulations, and recommendations, contained in provisions of  the 
SFS Agreement and the GATT 1994.   
175. In response to questions, the representative of  Kazakhstan stated that the legislation of 
Kazakhstan contained no restrictions  on foreign participation in the development of standards (e.g. 
participation in technical committees meeti ngs, providing comments) including sanitary and 
phytosanitary standards. 
176. The representative of Kazakhstan stated that, in accordance with the Government Resolution 
No. 1627 of 30 October 2000, the Ministry of Ag riculture established the Information Marketing 
System to enhance transparency th rough regular exchange of analytic marketing information between 
agricultural producers, public bodies, and other partic ipants of the agricult ural market; effective 
regulation of the sectoral developm ent and development of a national agricultural business system, as 
well as interaction with internationa l organizations.  Thus, the web-site www.minargri.kz  was 
established.  The Ministry of Agriculture started publication of the analytical bulletin "Agroinform" WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/8 
Page 58  
 
 which contained all legal acts, approved by the Ministry of Agriculture, including veterinary, 
quarantine and plant protection legislation.  All inte rested parties and participants of the agricultural 
market could send their questions and comments to the Ministry of Agriculture using the following 
web-address: strategy@minagri.kz.
. 
177. Some members of the Working Party stressed th at Kazakhstan would have to implement and 
enforce the WTO Agreement on SPS from the date of accession .  In response, the representative of 
Kazakhstan stated that the implementation of the provisions of the SPS Agreement demanded a 
transition to international standards for risk assessmen t.  To achieve this, a sufficient period of time 
was necessary as the program required significant public and private financial investments.  He further noted, that not less than a seven-year transitional period woul d be necessary for a step-by-step 
implementation of the Program of agriculture sta ndardization, modernization of test centres, and 
training of staff in scientific methods of risk asse ssment.  In response, some members of the Working 
Party stated that such a transition period was not appropriate.  
 [to be completed] 
- Trade-related investment measures 
178. Some members of the Working Party noted the existence of local-content and import 
substitution aspects to the Law "Concerning the Subs urface and its Utilisation" of 27 January 1996 
and the Law "On Oil" of 28 June 1995, and request ed information as to how Kazakhstan would bring 
these TRIMs inconsistent measures into conformity with WTO obligations.  They further noted that 
Kazakhstan could not apply the transition provisions provided by Article 4 of the TRIMs Agreement 
because Kazakhstan was not an original Member of the WTO and therefore requested that the 
representative of Kazakhstan fully describe its meas ures to the Working Part y and justify its position 
that a transition period should be allowed.  Th e representative of Kazakhstan replied that the 
legislation of Kazakhstan required the use of dome stically produced products and services provided 
that they meet the standards and other requirements,  as a result of the biddin g process.  Both national 
and foreign companies were equally entitled to participate in the bidding process.  
179. The representative of Kazakhstan further stated that the structure of industrial production was 
dominated by extraction and processing of hydroc arbon and mineral products , which provided the 
bulk of receipts to the Republican budget.  The oil s ector was the most attractive for foreign investors 
and forecasts showed that the volume of foreign investments to oil production would keep increasing.  Hence, in order to ensure rational restructuring of  the subsurface use, the government introduced the 
above mentioned provisions in its legislation with the view to achieve sustainable economic  WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/8 
 Page 59 
 
 
 development through diversification of the nati onal economy and reduction of the economy's heavy 
dependence on mineral resources, creation of an e nvironment conducive to development of processing 
industries and production of high value added goods, which would be  competitive in both domestic 
and foreign markets.  
180. The representative of Kazakhstan added that  the Government launched an industrial 
innovation program for the period of 2003-2015, which was aimed at boosting the real sector of the 
economy through implementing innovative industria l projects, ensuring a strong linkage between 
Research and Development and industrial sector, an d building high-tech production facilities, all of 
which required a sufficient period of time to bring the national legislation into conformity with the 
provisions of the TRIMs Agreement.  
[to be completed] 
- State-trading entities 
181. The representative of Kazakhstan stated that th ere were no enterprises in Kazakhstan, either 
state-owned or privately-owned, in the meaning of Article XVII of GATT 1994.  No exclusive or 
special trade and distribution rights or privileges were given to enterprises, including marketing 
agencies, so they could through purchase or sale in fluence foreign trade operations.  Both public and 
private commercial enterprises functioned in a compet itive market environment.  Several members of 
the Working Party stated that they considered that many enterprises in Kazakhstan might be 
considered to enjoy de facto (if not de jure ) exclusive or special privileges and requested that the 
representative of Kazakhstan provide a draft notificati on pursuant to Article XVII of the GATT 1994.   
[to be completed] 
- Free zones, special economic areas 
182. In response to questions, the representative of K azakhstan stated that at present, the Republic 
of Kazakhstan hosts only two special economic zone s, namely "Astana – New City" and the "Aktau 
Seaport", established by the Decrees of the Preside nt of Kazakhstan No.645 of 29 June 2001 for a 
five-year- term from 2002- 2007 and No.853 of 26 April 2002 for a four-year-term from 2003-2007 correspondingly.  Issues on establishment, legal regu lation, and operation of special economic zones 
were covered by the Statutory Order of the Presi dent of the Republic of Kazakhstan No. 2823 of 
26 January 1996 "On Special Economic Zones in the Republic of Kazakhstan", Customs and Tax 
Codes of the Republic of Kazakhstan and other le gislative acts of the Republic of Kazakhstan. 
 WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/8 
Page 60  
 
 183. Some members of the Working Party asked wh ether the Government of Kazakhstan intended 
to use its discretion to terminate, by decree, speci al economic zones, as a means to impose informally 
export performances or import substitution as conditi ons for continued activit y within the special 
economic zones.  The representative of Kazakhstan re plied that the government of Kazakhstan did not 
intend to use this practice.  
184. The special economic zone ("SEZ") "Astana – New City" was established to facilitate the 
development of the left bank area of the river Ishym in the new capital of Kazakhstan through 
attraction of investments and use of advanced technologies in construction, as well as through 
building modern infrastructure.  The Law of the Republic of Kazakhstan of 5 July 2001 "On Changes 
and Amendments to Legislative Acts of the Re public of Kazakhstan on the Special Economic Zone" 
"Astana – New City" through Introduction of Chang es and Amendments to Customs and Tax Codes 
of Kazakhstan provided for tax a nd customs benefits for construc tion of infrastructural assets, 
administrative and residential sectors in the territo ry of the established SEZ.  Tax preferences were 
granted for:  (i) VAT levied on the turnover of good s, (works, services) sold in the territory of the 
SEZ if consumed in full in the pro cess of construction; (ii) land tax levied on land lots located in the 
territory of the SEZ used as construction sites; and (iii) property tax, levied on objects constructed 
within the operations of the SEZ.  Customs duty ex emption was granted for imports of machinery and 
equipment required for construction works and services in  accordance with the project cost estimates.    
185. He further noted that the legislation of Kazakhstan on free economic  zones contained no 
restrictions on participation of foreign parties, except for the restriction related to the place of 
registration of the recipients of benefits whic h was a common requirement in many free economic 
zones all over the world.  In particular, as fo r the SEZ "Astana – New City", customs and VAT 
exemptions were granted to legal entities of K azakhstan, non-residents operating through an entity 
with a long-term presence and registered in th e city of Astana, natu ral persons engaged in 
entrepreneurship without establishment of a legal en tity, and residing on a long-term basis in the city 
of Astana. 
186. The representative of Kazakhstan stated that the Decree "On Special Economic Zones in the 
Republic of Kazakhstan" and other legislative acts di d not provide special preferences due to  export 
performance of companies  in special economic zon es.  Attracting investment, modern technology, 
and know-how to these zones were considered as the primary means to ensure that the 
accomplishment of objectives set by creating special economic zones.  To this end, the Tax Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan stipulated exemptions  from the payment of land tax and property tax  WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/8 
 Page 61 
 
 
 levied on fixed assets, and a reduced rate of the corporate income tax (50 per cent) applicable to 
entities engaged in the following activities in special economic zones: 
- design, development, and implementation of pilot production and production of software, 
databases, and hardware; 
- IT development based on artificial immune and neuron systems; and 
- Research and Development for the devel opment and implementation of IT projects 
187. The special economic zone "Aktau Seaport"  was created to facilitate socio-economic 
development of the region through building high-tech industry, attracting new investments, creating new jobs and introducing modern administration an d economic management me thods.  The legislation 
on the establishment of the SEZ "Aktau Seaport" granted only duty free regime for goods imported 
for the needs of the SEZ, and did not envisage any tax preferences. 
[to be completed] 
- Government procurement 
188. The representative of Kazakhstan noted that  the acting legislation of Kazakhstan on 
government procurement consisted of the Law of Kazakhstan "On State Procurement" No. 321-II ЗРК 
of 16 May 2002 and legislative acts defining procedures of state procurement of goods, works and 
services.  The acting legislation of Kazakhstan corre sponded to the requirements of international law, 
specifically, the Model Law of the United Na tions Commission on International Trade Law 
(UNCINTRAL).  The legislative acts regulating the issues of state procurement were the Rules for 
Organization and Holding of State Procurement of  Goods, Works, and Services, approved by the 
Resolution of the Government of Kazakhstan No. 1158 of 31 October 2002; the Resolution of the 
Government of Kazakhstan No. 1163 of 3 Nove mber 2000 "On Special Procedures for State 
Procurement", the Standard bidding documentation,  approved by the Order of the Chairman of 
Agency of Kazakhstan on State Procurement No. 8 of  31 October 2002, registered in the Ministry of 
Justice of Kazakhstan No. 2041 of 14 November 2002.  
189. The representative of Kazakhstan added that  under the Law on State Procurement of 
16 May 2002, government procurement was define d as procurement of goods, works, and services 
effected by public bodies and agencies, public en terprises, and joint stock companies with the 
controlling share owned by the state, as well as by their affiliated legal entities,  using available funds.  
A certain portion of goods, works, and services procured by public bodies and agencies, public WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/8 
Page 62  
 
 enterprises, and joint stock compan ies with the controlling share owned by the state, as well as by 
their affiliated legal entities, was used for their own production purposes.  
190. The representative of Kazakhstan further stated that the Agency for State Procurement was 
the body responsible for development and implem entation of state policies in the sphere of 
government procurement in accordance with the releva nt national legislation.  The main mechanisms 
of government procurement were implemented through public bidding, limited bidding (public and 
limited bidding may consist of two stages), proc urement from one source, selection of a supplier 
based on requests of price offers, and market procur ement.  According to Article 3 of the Law of 
Kazakhstan "On Government Procurement", the main principles used in the process of procurement 
were:  (i) the principle of equal opportunities for participation of potential suppliers of goods and 
services, unless there were provisions to the contrary in the legislation, (ii) the principle of fair 
competition among potential suppliers; and (iii) th e principle of openness and transparency of 
government procurement procedures.  
191. In response to questions, the representative of K azakhstan stated that it was the intention of 
Kazakhstan to bring its legislation governing stat e procurement of goods and services into conformity 
with WTO-provisions and that Kazakhstan w as considering whether to accede to the WTO 
Agreement on Government Procurement after accession to the WTO.  
[to be completed] 
- Transit 
192. In response to questions from members of the Working Party, the representative of 
Kazakhstan stated that goods in transit across the territory of his country were exempt from customs 
charges and fees, VAT, and excise taxes.  Kazakhstan allowed free transit to reflect provisions of GATT 1994 Article V, as well as of the international tr eaties to which it was a party.  The only charge 
applied to transit of goods was levied for trans portation services, and as such was limited to cover 
solely administrative costs or costs of services provided. 
193. In response to questions, the representative of Kazakhstan noted that under the Customs Code 
of Kazakhstan, certain types of imported goods liste d in the Resolution of the Government could only 
transit the customs territory of Kazakhstan provide d that there was a guarantee of payment of all 
chargeable customs duties and taxes.  Under the Government Resolution No. 524 of 4 June 2003, the 
above mentioned types of imported goods included alcohol and brands  of alcoholic products, cigars 
and tobacco.  As stipulated in the Article 339 of  the Customs Code, payment of customs duties and 
taxes may be guaranteed in one of the following  forms:  (i) bonds, (ii) bank guarantee letter,  WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/8 
 Page 63 
 
 
 (iii) deposit on the deposit account of the customs body; and (iv) insurance contract.  Procedures 
applied by customs bodies to enforce payment of cu stoms duties and taxes were defined in the Order 
of the Customs Control Agency of Kazakhstan No . 199 of 13 May 2003 "On Adoption of Procedures 
of Customs Bodies to Enforce Payment of Customs Duties and Taxes".  In response, some members 
of the Working Party requested th at Kazakhstan review these requirements as they acted as they had 
excessively burdensome impact upon traders.    
[to be completed] 
- Government-mandated counter-trade and barter 
194. The representative of Kazakhstan stated that th e approval of the Government of Kazakhstan 
was not required to engage in coun ter-trade and barter transactions.  Moreover, where barter trade was 
permitted, such products were subject to the same tariff and non-tariff measures as like products 
imported through normal channels .  Kazakhstan applied the same WTO customs valuation-based 
system for such transactions as was applied to goods  imported through normal channels; that is, if a 
transaction value of the imported merchandise could no t be determined, then the goods were valued 
on the basis of one of the other valuation methods  provided under the WTO value code, applied in 
sequential order.  Barter and counter-trade, howev er, were not mandatory and were only company-to-
company. 
[to be completed] 
- Agricultural policies 
195. Information concerning domestic support and e xport subsidies in the agricultural sector was 
circulated in documents WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/6/R ev.1 and WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/7 and its addenda. 
In reply to questions from some members of th e Working Party, the representative of Kazakhstan 
stated that no import licenses were required for ag ricultural purposes and, currently, there were no 
tariff rate quotas for any products.  
196. The representative of Kazakhstan stated that w ith the view to provide financial support to 
agricultural producers, the state has allocated KZT 20 billion from the state budget in 2001, and 
KZT 21.9 billion in 2002, seeking to increase the volume of subsidies to KZT 49.2 billion in 2005 
within the framework of the national prog ram on agro-industrial sector development.  
197. Some members of the Working Party stated that  they held concerns about the use of a "base 
period" that was not the most recent three-year period.  Kazakhstan's use of the period 1996-1998 WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/8 
Page 64  
 
 seemed to be inappropriate, characterized as it w as by a large-scale debt forgiveness program that 
operated to artificially inflate AMS levels.  T hose members requested that Kazakhstan provide 
domestic support and export subsidy information for the period 2000-2002.  The representative stated 
that an assessment of the situati on in agricultural sector in 1991-20 02 showed that difficult conditions 
had not only dominated throughout the so-called "b ase period" of 1996-1998, but also continued to be 
present until these days.  Deferred debts therefore mu st not be viewed as characteristic only for this 
specific period.  Deferred debts continued to be an  outstanding issue for a long time due to the fact 
that many debtors were insolvent.  The government maintained the firm position that it would be ineffective to forgive outstanding debts.  On the contra ry, debts had to be collected in the shortest time 
possible so that agricultural producers were not tempte d to accumulate new debts.  In this connection, 
the base period used by Kazakhstan was representa tive and there was no WTO document which called 
for a regular review of the submitted information.  Moreover, at the request of WTO members, the 
government of Kazakhstan once reviewed the base period and changed it from 1994-1996 to 
1996-1998.  The representative of Kazakhstan further stated that the frequent review of the base 
period entailed substantial amount of additional work, caused unneces sary delays in the negotiation 
process and did not reflect the interests of all parties concerned.  
198. In response to questions, the representative of  Kazakhstan stated that preferential credits 
through the State Eximbank, state guarantees for fo reign loans, and preferential loans through the 
Fund in support of agricultural small and medi um-size businesses were u sed to subsidize the 
agricultural sector.  These tools were used to strengthen reforms in the agricultural sector and 
implement a single medium-term investment policy.  A set of criteria used for competitive selection 
of investment projects included:  (i) the compliance of investment projects with restructuring goals in 
the agriculture sector; (ii) creation of competitive markets for agricultural commodities; (iii) use of 
modern machinery and technologies, and (iv) economi c viability of projects. Furthermore, preferential 
loans and credits to lease agricu ltural machinery were provided in accordance with the ADB Program 
Loan for the agricultural sector.  Likewise, the Agriculture Support Fund (ASF), set up in 
December 1994, assumed the debts of agricultural producers in the amount of over US$500 Million 
on the basis of individual agreements that sti pulated the procedure, timing and conditions of 
repayment. 
199. Some members of the Working party requested additional information on the support system 
for high-grade seeds, pedigree cattle and a farm ing development program.  In response, the 
representative of Kazakhstan stated that subsidies ha d been granted through the ASF, and that its main 
goal was to increase the efficiency  of agricultural production by compensating the costs incurred by 
seed breeding stations and livestock breeding stations as a result of price falls on seeds and breeding  WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/8 
 Page 65 
 
 
 stock sold to agricultural producers.  The subsidies were also used to stimulate farmers to purchase 
pedigree cattle, use new equipment, technology, high quality seeds, mineral fertilizers and to protect 
plants under the farming development program.    
200. Some members of the Working Party request ed information demons trating how domestic 
support measures for which exemption from the redu ction commitments was claimed, met Annex 2 
criteria for such exemptions.  They further asked K azakhstan to confirm that no direct payments were 
made to farmers or processors.  More informa tion concerning state procurement under "public 
stockholding for food security purposes" was also requested including how it met the paragraph 3 
criteria of Annex 2 of the Agreement of Agriculture. 
201. The representative of Kazakhstan referred to th e revised Tables DS:1 and stated that funds 
listed in Table DS:1 under "general services" we re allocated for implementation of measures of 
general nature as well as for maintenance of services provided by the Ministry of Agriculture.  These 
measures did not involve direct payments and did not grant price support to producers.  They met the requirements of Paragraph 1 and 2 of Annex 2 of the Agreement on Agriculture.  Furthermore, the 
representative of Kazakhstan stated that the public stockholding of grain was created to ensure food 
security in Kazakhstan and followed procedures set by the decision of the government for the 
corresponding year.  The mechanisms of the govern ment procurement of gr ain were determined by 
the Government decision adopted based on an appropria te level of transparency in terms of financial 
costs.  Government procurement of grain in the "b ase period", i.e. in 1996, was realized at market 
prices on the commodity exchange.  Grain from the state food security reserve was sold in the 
domestic market at market prices through open tenders  or the commodity exchange.  The export price 
for grain set by the "Food Contract Corporation" al so reflected the situation in the world market as 
well as concluded contracts on grain supply.  Theref ore, the sale procedures of grain from the state 
reserve were in compliance with the WTO Agreemen t on Agriculture (paragraph 3, Article 2), which 
requires that "sales from food security stocks shall be made at no less than the current domestic 
market price for the product and quality in question" . 
202. Some members further reiterated their belief that Kazakhstan did not have recourse to 
Article 6.2 provisions of the WTO Agreement on Agriculture.  The representative of Kazakhstan 
replied that the aftermath of implementation of structural reforms had been devastating for the 
agriculture sector of Kazakhstan.  The current policy was therefore aimed at attracting long-term 
investments in the agricultural sector.  This wa s being achieved with the participation of the 
international banks, in particular  the Asian Development Bank (ADB ) and the International Bank for 
Reconstruction and Development (IBRD ).  The representative of Kazakhstan stated that all the above WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/8 
Page 66  
 
 investment projects completely conformed to the pr ovisions of Article 6.2 of the WTO Agreement on 
Agriculture.  He further stated that given the inte rest shown by international credit organizations in 
direct long-term investments into the agricultura l sector, Kazakhstan was willing to create favourable 
investment conditions.  This attitude gave ample reasons for inclusion of this policy as a measure 
exempt from the reduction commitment.  Moreover, the Kazakhstan policy of leasing agricultural machinery and the development thereof, ensuring av ailability of agricultural machinery, was one of 
the top priority objectives for which a long-term plan  had been established.  Therefore, any reduction 
of these public expenditures was abso lutely unacceptable to Kazakhstan. 
203. The representative of Kazakhstan confirmed that Kazakhstan did not maintain any market 
price support measures or interference programs.  He  referred to Article 18 of Law No. 1543-XII "On 
Protection and Support of Private Entrepreneurship" of  4 July 1992.  Direct state regulation of prices 
of goods was, however, permitted only in cases wh ere entrepreneurs abused their monopolistic 
position in the market.  This was regulated following guidelines of the anti-monopoly legislation.  
204. On the reiteration of some members of the Working Party that Kazakhstan should make a 
commitment not to apply export subsidies on the date of accession, the representative of Kazakhstan 
stated that Kazakhstan needed to use export subsid ies due to its geographical location (land-locked), 
the vastness of its territory, its remoteness from ma jor agricultural markets and high transportation 
costs which drastically decreased the competitiv e power of Kazakhstan agricultural products.  
Furthermore, the production of main export products  exceeded by far the level of domestic demand, 
while export sales of agricultural products cons tituted one the main sources of income for the 
population of rural areas.  The representative further noted that WTO Members (including the United States, the European Union) extensively exer cised their right to subsidize export products. 
205. Some members of the Working Party noted that the neighbouring Kyrgyz Republic had 
agreed to treatment as a developed country for its  agriculture commitments, and had agreed to use 
5 per cent de minimis .  They therefore requested that Kaza khstan make the same commitment.  The 
representative of Kazakhstan replied that given objec tive criteria, such as its GDP per capita and its 
low level of economic development, particularly in  the agricultural regions, Kazakhstan would like to 
be granted benefits at the time of its accession to the WTO allowed for a "developing country". 
[to be completed]  WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/8 
 Page 67 
 
 
 - Trade in civil aircraft 
206. In response to questions, the representative of  Kazakhstan stated that Kazakhstan did not 
intend to join the WTO Agreement on Trade in Airc raft prior to its accession date to the WTO.  
[to be completed] 
- Textiles regime 
[to be completed] 
V. TRADE-RELATED INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY REGIME 
- General 
207. The representative of Kazakhstan stated that policies of Kazakhstan in the sphere of 
protection of intellectual property rights were targeted at the fulfilment of the following three 
objectives:  (i) bringing the legislation regulating ad ministration of intellectual property rights in line 
with international standards, (ii) developing mech anisms ensuring enforcement of provisions of the 
laws on protection of intellectual pr operty rights; and (iii) training experts for every specific sector of 
protection of intellectual property rights.  The fu ndamentals of the state policy aimed to ensure 
legitimate use and protection of in tellectual property subject matter in Kazakhstan were set forth in 
the Concept of Protection of Intellectual Property Rights, approved by the Resolution of the 
Government of Kazakhstan No. 1249 of 26 September 2001.    
[to be completed] 
- Industrial property protection 
[to be completed] 
- Responsible agencies for policy formulation and implementation 
208. The representative of Kazakhstan stated that the Committee on Intellectual Property Rights of 
the Ministry of Justice of Kazakhstan, establis hed by Government Resolution No. 411"On Issues 
Relating to the Committee on Intellectual Property Rights of the Ministry of Justice of the Republic of 
Kazakhstan" of 29 March 2001, was the authorized bod y in the sphere of protection of intellectual 
property rights.  It performed specific executive,  monitoring, and supervisory functions, as well as 
general administration in the sphere of protection of intellectual property rights.  The Committee took 
over the functions and authority of the now abolished Committee on Copyright of the Ministry of WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/8 
Page 68  
 
 Justice of Kazakhstan and the Republican State Ente rprise on Patents and Trademarks "Kazpatent" of 
the Ministry of Justice of Kazakhstan.  Furthermore, Kazakhstan established the Republican State 
Enterprise "National Institute on Intellectual Pr operty of the Committee on Intellectual Property 
Rights of the Ministry of Justice of the Republic of Kazakhstan" by the Government Resolution of 
11 July 2002 (officially enforced since 19 September 2003) .  Its main functions comprised scientific 
activities relating to intellectual property issues.   
[to be completed] 
- Participation in international intellectual property agreements 
209. The representative of Kazakhstan confirmed that Kazakhstan was a party to a number of basic 
treaties, agreements, and conventions, including: the Convention on the Establishment of the World 
Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO); the Pa ris Convention for the Protection of Industrial 
Property; the Madrid Agreement on International re gistration of Trademarks; the Patent Cooperation 
Treaty (PCT); the Berne Convention for the Protec tion of Literary and Artistic Works; the Nice 
Agreement Concerning the International Classificati on of Goods and Services for the Purposes of the 
Registration of Marks; the Strasbourg Agreement C oncerning the International Patent Classification; 
the Budapest Treaty on the International Recogn ition of the Deposit of Micro organisms for the 
Purposes of Patent Procedure; the Universal  Copyright Convention; the Locarno Agreement 
Establishing an International Classification for In dustrial Designs; the Trademark Law Treaty; the 
Eurasian Patent Convention; and the Conventi on for the Protection of Interests of Phonogram 
Producers against Illicit Reproduction of Phonogram s. Kazakhstan was furthermore engaged in 
bilateral agreements on cooperation in the sphere  of intellectual property with Azerbaijan,  
Uzbekistan, the Kyrgyz Republic, Georgia, the United States and the Russian Federation.  The 
1999-2009 Program for Cooperation between the Repub lic of Kazakhstan and Ukraine also covered 
issues connected with bilateral cooperation in  the sphere of intellectual property.  
210. In response to questions concerning obligations  pursuant to the cooperation agreement with 
the Russian Federation and to the Eurasian Patent Convention, the representative of Kazakhstan stated 
that the agreement introduces national treatment for applicants from the Russian Federation in 
connection with issuing safeguard documents and the payment of fees.  He further stated that in 
acceding to the Convention, Kazakhstan did not und ertake any obligations , which extend beyond the 
framework of the Paris Convention.  Furthermore, there were no specific obligations contained in the 
bilateral agreements that Kazakhs tan had signed with other CIS countries, which it did not wish to 
extend to other countries.  WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/8 
 Page 69 
 
 
 [to be completed] 
- Application of national and MF N treatment to foreign nationals 
211. The representative of Kazakhstan stated that Article 12.4 of the Cons titution of Kazakhstan, 
Article 3.7 of the Civil Code of Kazakhstan,  Article 4.1 of Kazakhstan's Law "On Foreign 
Investments" (WT/ACC/KAZ/4 refers), as well as Article 38 of the "Patent Law" (WT/ACC/KAZ/23 refers), Article 48 of Law No. 456-1 "On Tradem arks, Service Marks and Appellation of Places of 
Origin of Goods" (WT/ACC/KAZ/23 refers) and Artic le 5 of the Law "Concerning the Copyright and 
Allied Rights" (WT/ACC/KAZ/4 refers) of 10 June 1996 granted physical and legal persons national 
and most-favoured nation treatment.  
212. Some members of the Working party noted that  nationals of the Russian Federation and the 
Kyrgyz Republic did not need to engage the services of a patent or trademark agent (trustee) in order 
to submit applications to the Committee on Intell ectual Property Rights (previously, National Patent 
Office).  Additionally, the patent fees could be paid  in Russian Rubles or Kyrgyz Som, pursuant to the 
schedule applicable to Kazakhsta n nationals. In response to ques tions enquiring how the government 
intended to bring its legislation in conformity  with WTO most-favoured nation requirements, the 
representative of Kazakhstan stated that these provisions  were in conformity with Article 4A.2 of the 
"Paris Convention" and Article 4.d of the WTO TRIPS Agreement. 
213. Concerns were also expressed regarding the diffe rence in fees charged for certain industrial 
property rights, to nationals a nd non-nationals of Kazakhstan, a nd how this difference could be 
justified if Kazakhstan's Constitution, Civil Code  and Law on Foreign Investments required that 
physical and legal persons be gi ven national treatment.  The repr esentative of Kazakhstan responded 
that these legal texts guaranteed national treatment unl ess an exception was stipulated by another law. 
Government Resolution No. 889 of 20 October 1992  and No. 266 dated 6 April 1993 made exceptions 
to national treatment in establishing the fee schedule with regard to Kazakhsta n and foreign nationals. 
The representative of Kazakhstan further stated that the government planned on eliminating the 
existing discrepancies in payment over a trans itional period determined in connection with 
Kazakhstan's WTO accession negotiations.  He note d, however, that certain preferences could be 
obtained by applicants from countries where the annual GDP per capita was less than US$3,000, 
according to United Nations classifications, in orde r to account for the differences in the so-called 
"purchasing power/capacity" between de veloped and developing countries. 
[to be completed] WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/8 
Page 70  
 
 - Copyright and related rights 
214. The representative of Kazakhstan stated that th e definitions of the copyright subject matter 
contained in the Law "On Copyright and Related Rights"  had been scientifically extended to 
incorporate all forms of copyright covered by the TRIPS Agreement and the Berne Convention. 
215. Questions were posed as to the protection of work s that were still protected in their country of 
origin and that have not had a full term of pr otection in Kazakhstan.  The representative of 
Kazakhstan stated that since the accession and ratification of the Be rne Convention, the terms of the 
Convention were directly applicable within Ka zakhstan in accordance with Article 4 of the 
Constitution. Accordingly, the terms of protection ex tended to authors by virtue of Article 28 of the 
Law "On Copyright and Related Rights" applied to wo rks, which at the moment of enforcement of the 
Convention within Kazakhstan, have  not yet fallen into the public domain in the country of their 
origin.  Those works, which had already fallen into the public domain by virtue of the principle of the 
expiry of terms, were deemed to be national pr operty in accordance with Article 29 of the Law "On 
Copyright and Related Rights ".   As such, these works could be used free of charge.  Furthermore, 
Kazakhstan has developed a draft law "On Changes and Amendments to Legi slative Acts of the 
Republic of Kazakhstan on Intellect ual Property" introducing a number  of modifications to the Law 
"On Copyright and Related Rights", including the in troduction of retroactive protection procedures. 
At present, the draft law has been submitted to th e Parliament of Kazakhstan for consideration.  
216. In response to questions as to how computer  programs and databases were protected, the 
representative of Kazakhstan stated that computer programs (including operational systems for 
electronic calculating machines) were protected by Article 7.1 of the Law "On Copyright and Related 
Rights" and databases (a collection of information, including Articles, calculations, facts, etc. which 
due to selection and/or organization of the materi als represent results of a creative work and are 
systematized in such a manner that  the information may be retrieved and processed with the help of a 
computer) were protected by Article 7 of the said Law.    
217. One member of the Working Party urged the government of Kazakhstan to increase the 
penalties for copyright piracy and impose penalties that were sufficient to act as an effective deterrent 
to potential pirates and counterfeiters.  The repres entative of Kazakhstan responded that the penalties 
were sufficiently strict and referred to Article 49 of the Law "On Copyright and Related Rights", 
Article 184 of the Criminal Code and Article  8 of the Law "On Unfair Competition". 
[to be completed]  WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/8 
 Page 71 
 
 
 - Trademarks, including service marks 
218. The representative of Kazakhstan stated that on 26 July 1999 the Parliament of Kazakhstan  
adopted a new Law "On Trademarks, Service Marks and Appellation of Places of Origin of Goods", 
in which all requirements of the Articles 5(3) a nd 15-24 of the TRIPS Agreement were taken into 
account. 
219. Some members of the Working Party enquired as to how well known marks were protected in 
Kazakhstan.  The representative of Kazakhstan re plied that legal protection of trademarks was 
provided on the basis of the registration and issuan ce of a trademark certificate in accordance with the 
procedures set forth in the Law "On Trademarks, Service Marks and Appellation of Places of Origin of Goods" of 26 July 1999.  Article 7(1) of that  Law specifically prohibited the registration of marks 
as trademarks that were similar or identical to thos e which were protected by virtue of international 
conventions to which Kazakhstan was a party.  Furt hermore, he noted that the terms of the Paris 
Convention, specifically Article 6 bis and 10 bis, were directly applicable in accordance with Article 4 
of the Constitution.  As such, the owners of well- known marks were afforded protection regardless of 
whether those rights were registered as such in K azakhstan.  To invoke this protection, the owner 
could file a plea with the Committee on Intellectual Property Rights (previously, the National Patent 
Office) to prevent the registration of the offending mark.  The owner could also file a plea with courts of Kazakhstan to recognize the mark as well-known a nd prevent its continued unauthorized use.  The 
criteria for determining what was ‘well known' not yet completely defined by WIPO, the trademark 
owner beard the burden of establishing that the ma rk was "well known".  For a trademark to be 
recognized as well-known in Kazakhstan, its owner was required to prove the existence of production 
and sales of goods with this trademark, the cost/val ue of the trademark, the extent to which the 
trademark was recognizable by wide circles of cons umers and the presence of intensive advertising of 
the trademark and its distribution.  
220. The representative of Kazakhstan further st ated that Kazakhstan protected well-known 
trademarks without restrictions by classes of products and services in accordance with the TRIPS 
Agreements.  In response to questions refe rring to exceptions from protecting a mark, the 
representative of Kazakhstan referred to Article 6 and 7 of the Law "On Trademarks, Service Marks 
and Appellation of Places of Origin of Goods".  
221. Members of the Working Party also enquired if  Kazakhstan law recogni sed any valid reasons 
for non-use by the trademark owner.  The representa tive of Kazakhstan responde d that the owner of a 
trademark, challenged for the non-use thereof, ma y submit evidence demonstrating that non-use was 
due to circumstances beyond the control of the ow ner.  The Board of Appeal of the Committee on WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/8 
Page 72  
 
 Intellectual Property Rights (previously, the Pa tent Office), in rendering its discretionary 
determination of non-use, will take the evidence into consideration.  
222. The representative of Kazakhstan further stated that for licensing and assignment of rights to 
a trademark the written agreement must contain prov isions stipulating that the quality of the goods 
associated with the licensee's use of the trademark would not be inferior to those of the licensor's as 
well as provisions providing to the licensor the right  to supervise compliance with the terms of the 
agreement.  This agreement must also be regi stered with the Committee on Intellectual Property 
Rights (previously, National Patent Office). 
[to be completed] 
- Geographical indications, including appellations of origin 
223. A number of members of the Working Party enquired about the nature of the rights acquired 
with registration.  The representative of Kazakhstan stated that according to the Law "On Trademarks, 
Service Marks and Appellation of Places of Orig in of Goods" geographical indications may be 
registered as designating a good whose specific qualiti es were mainly or exclusively associated with 
its place of origin (where place of origin is unde rstood to be the good's source of natural occurrence, 
manufacture or both).  Only the geographical indication's association with a particular good may be 
registered.  As such, the certificate of registration conferred the right to use the name of the place of 
origin of a good in association with that good.  Geographical indications, moreover, may only be 
registered if they did not mislead consumers regard ing the place of origin or encroach upon the rights 
of third parties.  Finally, geographical indications , which were obviously fic titious, may be applied to 
goods but will remain unprotected as such. 
224. Regarding questions posed as to who may a pply for registration, the representative of 
Kazakhstan stated that an applicant (regardless of  nationality) for regist ration of a geographical 
indication, should submit to the Committee on In tellectual Property Rights (previously, National 
Patent Office) a written application c ontaining the following information: 
- a single name indicating the place of origin of a good; 
- the name of the applicant(s) and the applicant(s)'s place of residence; 
- the designation which is applied to the goods; 
- the type of good for which the registration of the place of origin was sought including 
its place of manufacture (or natural occurrence or both) and a description of the specific properties of the good;  WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/8 
 Page 73 
 
 
 - if the applicant (whether foreign or dom estic) was seeking a geographical indication 
in association with goods originating with in the territory of the Republic of 
Kazakhstan, then a conclusion of the local administrative body certifying that the 
applicant resided in the territory specifi ed in the application and produced goods, 
whose specific qualities were associated with  environmental or climate characteristics 
of the place of origin, and characteristics of the place of manufacture;  
- if the applicant (whether foreign or dom estic) was seeking a geographical indication 
in association with goods originating out side the territory of the Republic of 
Kazakhstan, then a document certifying the right of the foreign applicant to the 
geographical indication in association with a good from the country where the good originates; and 
- a document confirming the authority of a patent trustee to act on behalf of the 
applicant (while domestic applicants may s ubmit their applications directly to the 
Committee on Intellectual Property Rights (previously, National Patent Office), 
foreign applicants must submit their a pplications through a patent trustee). 
225. In respect to wines and spirits, the representativ e of Kazakhstan stated that the requirements 
of Articles 22 and 23 of TRIPS Agreements, concerning the protection of the geographical 
indications, including geographical indications for wi nes and strong beverages, were included in the 
Law "On Trademarks, Service Marks and Appellation of Places of Origin of Goods".  Some members 
of the Working Party asked whether geographical indications were protected against unfair 
competition.  In response, the representative of K azakhstan referred to Article 9 of the Law "On 
Development of Competition and Restriction of Monopoly Activities" of 11 July 1991. 
226. The representative of Kazakhstan further stated that the criteria to refuse or to recognize a 
trademark also extended to a trademark that cont ained or consisted of ge ographical indication.  
Moreover, geographic names or marks, which were  able to mislead a consumer, could not be 
registered.  
 [to be completed] 
- Industrial designs 
227. The representative of Kazakhstan stated that the ri ghts to industrial designs were regulated by 
the Patent Law of the Republic of Kazakhstan an d certified by provisional patents and patents, 
provided that industrial designs met the patentabilit y requirements, including novelty, inventive steps, 
and industrial applicability (this provision implem ents Article 25(1) of the TRIPS Agreement). WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/8 
Page 74  
 
 Provisional industrial design patents were  valid for five years, industrial design patents – for ten years, 
following the submission of an application, and may be extended at the request of the patent owner 
for a period not exceeding five years.  The owner of the industrial design patent had an exclusive right 
to use the industrial design.  Any other party, other than the patent owner, had the right to use the protected industrial design only upon authorization of the patent owners and under the licensing agreement subject to registration with the Committee.  
228. The representative of Kazakhstan added that one of  the categories of industrial designs were 
textile designs protected in acco rdance with the Patent Law. 
 [to be completed] 
- Patents 
229. The representative of Kazakhstan stated that th e Patent Law of the Republic of Kazakhstan of 
16 July 1999 contained all the requirements of Article s 25-34 of the TRIPS Agreement.  In particular, 
the Law contained provisions, regulating conditions and procedures for judicial granting of 
compulsory licenses to use inventions, as well as othe r forms of utilization without a permission of a 
patent holder pursuant to the requirements of Article 31 of the TRIPS Agreement.  It also specified 
the extended list of manners to protect patent holders' rights and extended the subject matter 
comprising inventions, industrial designs, and utility models.  The provisions of the Law extended to industrial property subject matter, comprising inve ntions, industrial designs and utility models.  The 
subject matter of an invention may be a device, a pr ocess, a substance, a micro-organism strain or a 
culture of plant or animal cells, and also the use of a known device, process, substance or strain for a 
new purpose.  An invention was granted legal protec tion if it was new, involved an inventive step and 
was industrially applicable (this provision implemen ts Article 27(1) of the TRIPS Agreement).  In 
pursuance of Article 27(2) and (3) of the TRIPS Ag reement, the Patent Law stipulated that the 
following could not be recognized as patentable inventions:  discoveries, scientific theories, 
mathematical methods; methods of economic organi zation and management; symbols, schedules, and 
rules; rules and methods of mental activities; algorithms per se  and computer programs; projects and 
plans of buildings and structures, and land development; proposals concerning solely the outward appearance of manufactured goods; and proposals, th e prevention of the commercial exploitation of 
which was necessary to protect ordre public  or morality.   
230. Some members of the Working Party asked fo r more information regarding the difference 
between preliminary and full patents.  The repres entative of Kazakhstan stated that the degree of 
protection provided by a preliminary patent was func tionally equivalent to that provided by a full  WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/8 
 Page 75 
 
 
 patent.  The principal difference was in the procedur e for issuance and period of validity.  Preliminary 
patents for industrial designs may be issued after fo rmal expertise of the a pplication and were valid 
for a period of five years.  Full patents for industr ial designs were issued af ter conducting an expertise 
in essence of the patent application, provided that  the full patent application was received within 
four years of the date the Committee on Intellect ual Property Rights (previously, National Patent 
Office) originally received the application for the preliminary patent.  The expertise in essence 
included verification of the patent ability conditions of the industrial design (novelty, originality and 
industrial application).  The patent was then valid fo r a period of ten years.  If the preliminary patent 
holder, however, did not timely submit an applica tion for conducting a full expertise (four years from 
the date of initial application for a preliminary pa tent), the preliminary patent was cancelled from the 
moment of the preliminary patent's  date of expiration (five years fro m the date of application).  He 
further noted that it was possible to prolong the validity of an industrial design patent for up to five 
years upon receipt of a petition by the patent holder.  
231. The representative of Kazakhstan further stated th at  an application for a provisional patent 
had to be examined after a term of two months following the date of receipt within which time the 
applicant had the right to amend or correct the elements of the application on his own initiative, 
provided that the amendments or corrections di d not modify the subject matter of the claimed 
industrial property subject matter.  In case where th e preliminary examination resulted in a decision to 
issue a provisional patent and following payment of set  fees, the details were published in the Gazette 
of the patent office.  The substantive examination of the subject matter was carried out by the patent 
office at the request of the applicant or the owner of the provisional party, filed within three years 
after the receipt of the application or within five years in case of renewal of the term of the provisional 
patent.  Where the substantive examination rev ealed that the subject matter complied with the 
conditions of patentability, the patent office granted a patent for a term of 20 years starting on the date 
when the application was filed (this provision impl ements requirements of Article 33 of the TRIPS 
Agreement).  
232. The representative of Kazakhstan added that right s to utility models were certified by utility 
model patents, if utility models met the patentab ility requirements, including novelty and industrial 
applicability.  Utility model patents were granted fo r a period of five years, subject to subsequent 
renewal at the request of the patent owner for a pe riod not exceeding three years.  Exclusive rights to 
use protected utility models and covered infring ements were identical with the rights and 
infringements determined for protected  inventions and industrial designs. WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/8 
Page 76  
 
 233. Under the Patent Law, the owner of a provisional patent or a patent had an exclusive right to 
use the industrial property subject matter at his ow n discretion (this provision implements Article 28 
of the TRIPS Agreement).  Under the Law, the fo llowing actions were deemed  as infringing exclusive 
rights of the patent owner manufacturing, utilization, sale, stocking, and any other form of distribution 
for commercial purposes of goods produced by mean s of the unauthorized use of the protection 
invention.  Any party, other than the patent owner, had the right to use the protected invention only 
upon authorization of the patent owner and under th e licensing agreement subject to registration with 
the Committee on Intellectual Property Rights, while any interested party had the right to file with the 
court of law an application for an obligatory licence to use the invention, if supported by evidence of 
an uninterrupted period of four years of non-use, immediately preceding the date of the filing of an application, after the first publication of pa rticulars of the issued title of protection.  
234. Following questions raised as to protection against a petition for a compulsory licence for 
non-use of a patent, the representative of Kazakhstan stated that the owner of the patent may, in 
accordance with the Patent Law, submit evidence demonstrating th at non-use was due to respectful 
reasons.  Unless a patent holder could present an evidence showing a good reason for the non-use of 
an invention, the court issued a compulsory licence to  an interested party specifying the term of use, 
as well as terms and conditions of payments.  If the court decided to issue the obligatory licence, it 
had to be non-exclusive, while the amount of payment could not be lower than the market value of the 
licence. 
[to be completed] 
- Plant variety protection 
235. The representative of Kazakhstan stated that on 13 July 1999 the Law "On Protection of 
Selective Breeding Achievements" was adopted. It pr ovided for protection to new plant varieties and 
breeds of animals.  This Law was awarded positiv e legal opinion of the International Union on 
protection of new plant varieties, because to its conformity with the International Convention on 
Protection of New Plant Varieties (Geneva, 2 Dece mber 1961 reviewed in 1972, 1978, 1991).  Having 
adopted this law, Kazakhstan met the requirement of Article 27 (3) (c) of the TRIPS Agreement, 
according to which the WTO Members must provide fo r the protection of plant varieties either by 
patents, effective independent single system, or the combination thereof. 
[to be completed]  WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/8 
 Page 77 
 
 
 - Layout designs of integrated circuits 
236. The representative of Kazakhstan stated that lega l protection of layout designs of integrated 
microcircuits in Kazakhstan was covered by the Law No. 217 "On Legal Prot ection of Layout Design 
of Integrated Microcircuits" of 29 June 2001 (WT/ ACC/KAZ/36/Add.1 refers),  and was implemented 
on the basis of Articles 1013-1016 of the Civil Code of Kazakhstan (Special Part), in which the requirement of Article 35-38 of th e TRIPS Agreement was reflected. 
[to be completed] 
- Requirements on undisclosed information,  including trade secrets and test data 
237. The representative of Kazakhstan stated that th e legislation of Kazakhstan did not include a 
separate law for the protection of commercial secre ts.  However, Article 126 of the Civil Code 
stipulated the protection of information of real  or commercial value under the civil legislation 
provided that it was unknown to third parties, that co nfidentiality was strictly preserved, and that the 
free access to such information was denied.  Th us, corresponding provisions of the Civil Code 
implemented requirements of Article 39(2) of th e TRIPS Agreement.  He further stated that 
undisclosed data or other information which was re quired by Kazakhstan in the process of approving 
the marketing or sale of chemical, pharmaceuticals, or agricultural produc ts was also protected and, as 
such, complied with Article 39(3) of the TRIPS Agreement.  Employees of ministries and other State agencies who disclosed protected information we re held administratively responsible and the 
Ministries and other State agencies, which employed the individual making such an unauthorized 
disclosure, were also held liable for the employee's unauthorized action. 
238. Some members of the Working Party asked  how a person in control of undisclosed 
information could enforce his rights.  The represen tative of Kazakhstan stated that the laws of 
Kazakhstan provided civil remedies to  persons in control of undisclosed information.  Accordingly, a 
person in control of undisclosed information who wish ed to enforce his rights had to file a complaint 
with the court having jurisdiction over the person w ho allegedly violated those rights.  Remedies, 
which the court could provide, included the payment of damages and the costs of enforcing the rights. Furthermore, a person who acquired undisclosed in formation knowingly or under circumstances in 
which that person should have known that it was undisclosed could be liable for acts constituting 
unfair competition in accordance with Article 193(3) of the Law "On Administrative Violations" and 
Article 168(2) of the Criminal C ode (WT/ACC/KAZ/4 refers).  More over, Article 200 of the Criminal 
Code prohibited collection of information that constituted a commercial or banking secret by the 
person who received such information in a job or work capacity, including disclosure or use of such WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/8 
Page 78  
 
 information for mercenary or other personal inter est without the consent of the owner.  Such 
disclosure was punishable by imprisonment for up to  three years, fines, arrest, or sentencing to 
correctional works. 
[to be completed] 
- Measures to Control Abuse of Intellectual Property Rights 
239. The representative of Kazakhstan stated that in  general, intellectual property rights were 
protected by civil legislation in the course of common court procedures (procedures initiated in the 
form of a lawsuit).  Also, the legislation of Kazakhs tan provided for criminal, administrative, and civil 
liabilities for the infringement of intellectual property rights, stipulated in Articles 184 and 199 of the 
Criminal Code, Articles 128, 129, 145 of the Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan "On Administrative 
Violations", requirements of the Law "On Copyri ght and Related Rights", "On Trademarks, Service 
Marks and Appellation of Places of Origin of Goods" , the Patent Law, and other legislative acts. 
Furthermore, on 26 September 2001 the Government  of the Republic of Kazakhstan approved the 
Intellectual Property Protection Concept by the Reso lution No. 1249.  Also, within the framework of 
implementation procedures, the Government of K azakhstan adopted the Progr am of Implementation 
of Intellectual Property Protection Concept by its Resolution No. 591 of 29 May 2002. 
240. The representative of Kazakhstan stated that the a doption of the special part of the Civil Code 
in 1999, in which the whole section was dedicated to the issues of intellectual property and which 
contained the fundamental norms, regulating the relations  in this area, was the most important stage in 
the formation of domestic legislative base in the area of intellectual property objects. 
241. Some members of the Working Party asked what  efforts were being made to educate the 
public to avoid activities that infringe the rights of intellectual property owners.  The representative of 
Kazakhstan responded that the Committee on Intellect ual Property Rights (previously, National Patent 
Office) conducted a series of regional seminars to e xplain the legislation of Kazakhstan relating to the 
area of protection of objects of intellectual propert y.  These seminars were conducted on the premises 
of regional scientific and technical libraries for a wi de segment of inventors, scientific and technical 
workers, specialists and professionals.  Officials of the Committee on Intellectual Property Rights (previously, National Patent Office) also appeared  on radio and television shows, and published and 
disseminated materials related to the area of protec tion of industrial property through the mass media 
in Kazakhstan.  Furthermore, the Committee held regular regional seminars for employees of local 
bodies of justice as a part of advanced training programs and for purposes of communication of experience in the area of protection of intellectual property rights.  Seminars were also held for  WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/8 
 Page 79 
 
 
 judges, customs officers, police and the CIS pate nt offices in cooperation with the WIPO and the 
European Patent Office (EPO).  A set of materi als was also prepared and published and further 
circulated and distributed for public notice.  The Mi nistry of Justice of Ka zakhstan planned to conduct 
a national campaign, called "Intellect", scheduled fo r October 2003.  This was planned to be the first 
large-scale campaign of the Ministry of Justice of  Kazakhstan with the active participation of other 
interested public bodies, international agencies,  public associations, commercial organizations, 
educational institutions, mass media, and the populati on of Kazakhstan, aimed to promote concepts of 
intellectual property, enhance public intolerance to ward piracy, strengthen the role of intellectual 
property as well as the status of authors, innovators, inventors, etc. 
242. Moreover, the representative of Kazakhstan stated  that registration of licence agreements for 
use of objects of copyright and neighbouring rights was being inte nsified and work on security of 
state policy in the sphere of protection of i ndustrial property rights was being carried out. 
243. Some members of the Working Party asked a bout measures to control the importation of 
infringing works into Kazakhstan.  The representa tive of Kazakhstan replied that pursuant to the 
Customs Code of Kazakhstan, the Central Customs Body of Kazakhstan kept a register of goods, 
covering the objects of intellectual property and ensu red its periodical publication.  He further noted 
that pursuant to the Customs C ode, the Customs Control Agency of Kazakhstan could suspend the 
customs processing of goods, including the objects of intellectual property if it found that these goods 
violated the rights to objects of intellectual propert y of an applicant.  While suspending processing of 
goods, including objects of intellectual property, the legal owner within three working day upon 
receiving of a notification of such suspension was oblig ed to effect payment at the rate, sufficient for 
compensation of losses of the declarant in connectio n with suspension of goods output.  The above 
rate was specified by the Customs Control Agency  of Kazakhstan.  Furthermore, under the Customs 
Code, the decision of the Customs Control Agency on inclusion of goods containing intellectual 
property subject matter into the register for a term specified by an applicant guaranteed that the rights 
of the possessor of rights was protected by customs bodies during a term of not more than two years after the day on which goods were included in the register. 
[to be completed] 
- Civil judicial procedures and remedies 
244. In response to a request for a description of th e structure of Kazakhstan's judicial system 
dealing with disputes concerning intellectual propert y rights for domestic and foreign parties at all 
levels, the representative of Kazakhstan firstly noted  that there was no distinction between domestic WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/8 
Page 80  
 
 and foreign parties who were parties to the aforemen tioned type of dispute.  Foreign investors may, 
however, be accorded additional dispute settlement  alternatives in accordance with the Law on 
Foreign Investment.  He further stated that under Article 33 of the Patent Law of the Republic of 
Kazakhstan, Article 42 of the Law "On Trademar ks, Service Marks and Appellation of Places of 
Origin of Goods", and provisions of the Civil and Criminal Codes of  the Republic of Kazakhstan, an 
owner of intellectual property rights had the right to settle disputes arising from the following in the 
court of law:  
- authorship of industrial property subject matter;  
- legality of the grant of a title of protection for industrial property;  
- infringements of the exclusive right to use th e protected industrial property subject matter 
and of other economic rights of the owner of the title of protection; 
- identification of the patent owner;  
- grant of a compulsory licence;  
- conclusion and execution of licence contract s for the use of the protected industrial 
property subject matter;  
- payment of compensation and damages incurre d as a result of infringement of exclusive 
rights; and 
- other disputes on protection of rights arising from the title of protection.  
245. Moreover, the owner of the title of protection to  the industrial property subject matter had the 
right to apply for the protection of his economic rights to local authorities or administration, which 
was not viewed as an action preventing his applying to  the court of law, unless there were provisions 
to the contrary set out in the legislation of Kazakhstan.   
246. Some members of the Working Party asked what tr aining, if any, had been provided to judges 
to enable them to consider disputes involving intellectual property rights.  The representative of 
Kazakhstan responded that Kazakhsta n did not institute yet a special training program on intellectual 
property matters for judges.  In November 1998, however, an international seminar was held in 
Tashkent to address a variety of issues related to patents, trademarks, and copyright.  This seminar 
was also attended by judges, customs and police officials, and officials of the Committee of 
Intellectual Property Rights (previously, Nationa l Patent Office and Copyright Committee). The 
representative of Kazakhstan later added that the Program on implementation of intellectual property 
protection concept stipulated that seminars for j udges on protection of intellectual property rights be 
held annually.  In 2002, the Committee, with the support of the World Intellectual Property  WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/8 
 Page 81 
 
 
 Organization (WIPO) and the Coalition for Intell ectual Property Rights (CIPR), conducted a national 
seminar for judges of Kazakhstan.  
[to be completed] 
- Provisional measures 
247. Some members of the Working Party enquired if judges and administrative authorities had the 
authority to grant provisional relie f in order to prevent serious harm and to preserve evidence.  The 
representative of Kazakhstan stated that judges a nd administrative authorities already had the power 
to grant provisional relief in order to prevent serious  harm and to preserve evidence.  Civil legislation 
of the Republic of Kazakhstan, the Law of the Re public of Kazakhstan "On Copyright and Related 
Rights", implementing provisions of Article 50 of the TRIPS Agreement, provided judges with the 
power to take the following measures to meet a cl aim at the request of the complainant (or upon the 
initiative of the judge): 
- to arrest the defendant's property; 
- to prohibit a defendant from taking certain actions such as the sale of goods bearing a 
trademark belonging to the complainant;  
- to prohibit other persons from transferring property to the defendant or from fulfilling 
other commitments with rega rd to the defendant; and 
- to confiscate infringing copies of works or phonograms, as well as materials and 
equipment used for their reproduction. 
[to be completed] 
- Administrative procedures and remedies 
248. Some member of the Working Party asked wh at activities in connection with intellectual 
property rights were considered an abuse of those rights.  The representative of Kazakhstan stated that 
the following activities were considered an a buse of intellectual property rights and entailed 
administrative responsibility: 
- illicit use of an invention, industrial design or model, disclosure without consent of an 
author or an applicant of the subject matter of   a scientific discovery, invention, industrial 
design or model prior to its official publication,  as well as usurpation of the authorship or 
coercion into joint authorship unless the above actions provided ground for institution of 
criminal proceedings (Article 128 of the C ode of Administrative Violations of the 
Republic of Kazakhstan);    WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/8 
Page 82  
 
 - sale, hire and other illegal use of objects of  copyright or related rights unless the above 
actions give ground for institu tion of criminal proceedings (Article 129 of the Code of 
Administrative Violations of the Republic of Kazakhstan); and 
- illicit use of a trademark, service mark, appella tion of origin or similar designations for 
goods (services), as well as illicit use of a bra nd name unless the above actions resulted in 
severe damages (Article 145 of the Code of Ad ministrative Violations of the Republic of 
Kazakhstan). 
249. The members further asked what administrative actions were available to the owners of 
intellectual property rights to enforce those rights, what agencies were resp onsible for such actions 
and how foreign parties could invoke  such actions.  The representative of Kazakhstan responded that 
an applicant had the right to apply with objecti ons to the Board of Appeal of the Committee on 
Intellectual Property Rights (previously, Na tional Patent Office) (Articles 22, 23 , and 29 of the Patent 
Law and Article 12, 23, and 31 of the Law "On Tr ademarks, Service Marks and Appellation of Places 
of Origin of Goods").  If the applicant remained uns atisfied with the decision of the Board of Appeal, 
the applicant had the right to further appeal that  decision in the courts.  He further noted that 
violations were considered by the courts of the Republic of Kazakhstan.  Nevertheless, violations 
concerning the rights to other objects of industrial property than those considered in the Administrative Code were considered within  the framework of the Civil Legislation. 
250. More information concerning the procedures fo llowed by the administrative Commissions in 
reviewing allegations of violation and the reme dies the Commissions could impose were also 
requested.  The representative of Kazakhstan stated  that under the Administrative Code, a case-to-case 
review of violation of the Code  may be initiated on the basis of direct findings by the concerned 
official of the fact of commitment of an administrative violation, information from law-enforcement agencies as well as from other state bodies, a nd self-governing (non-governmental) bodies, or 
notification or application received from natural persons and legal entities and also notice received 
through the official press.  Protocols on administ rative violations may be drawn up only by those 
bodies so authorized by the Administrative Code (Ar ticles 128, 129, 145).  Any foreign party may file 
a complaint on violations of copyright and related ri ghts with the court of Kazakhstan.  To start court 
proceeding on a case of violation of its industrial prope rty rights, a foreign party first had to file an 
application with the Board of Appeal of the Comm ittee on Intellectual Property Rights of the Ministry 
of Justice of Kazakhstan.  Based on the review of  an application, the Board of Appeal made its 
decision.  If the party was not satisfied with the decision of the Board of Appeal, it may proceed to 
challenge it in the court of law.      WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/8 
 Page 83 
 
 
 251. He noted that any such case was then revi ewed by the body, which could include 
Administrative Commissions. Review of the case started with the introduction of members of a 
Commission or other review body, or individual officials in cases where the Administrative Code 
permitted such review.  Then, the Protocol on Ad ministrative Violation was announced.  Petitions 
were permitted during meetings and th e persons that participated in the review of the case were given 
a hearing, and the evidence was examined.  After consideration of the case, the administrative body 
terminated the proceedings or imposed an ad ministrative sanction. The body could impose the 
following sanctions: 
- for violations covered by Article 128 – fi nes: for natural persons – 15-20 monthly 
calculation indices, officials – 20-50 monthly calculation indices, legal entities – 300-400 monthly calculation indices; 
- for violations covered by Article 128 – fi nes: for natural persons – 3-5 monthly 
calculation indices, officials – 5-10 monthly calculation indices, legal entities – up to 100 monthly calculation indices with confiscation of copies of works and phonograms; for repeated violations - fines: for natura l persons – 5-10 monthly calculation indices, 
officials – 10-20 monthly calculation indices, legal entities – up to 200 monthly 
calculation indices with confiscation of copies of works and phonograms; 
- for violations covered by Article 145 – fin es: for natural persons – up to 5 monthly 
calculation indices, officials – up to 15 monthly calculation indices, legal entities – up to 
100 monthly calculation indices;  
- if the parties disagree with the court decision,  they may proceed to challenge it in a higher 
court of law. 
[to be completed] 
- Special border measures 
252. The representative of Kazakhstan stated that th e Customs Code included Articles establishing 
a mechanism of customs control putting an end to im ports of goods, violating the rights of proprietors 
of intellectual property.  Furthermore, the normat ive base regulating relations in this sphere was 
represented by Articles 410 – 420 of the Customs Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan.  They defined 
main elements of the mechanism of customs control applied to goods containing works of intellectual 
property, transported across the border of Kazakhsta n.  They also provided for adoption of a number 
of legislative acts targeted at control enforcement. 
[to be completed] WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/8 
Page 84  
 
 - Criminal procedures 
253. Some members of the Working Party asked wh at activities in connection with intellectual 
property rights were considered an abuse of those rights.  The representative of Kazakhstan stated that 
the following activities were considered an abuse of  intellectual property rights and entailed criminal 
responsibility: 
- illicit use of copyrighted works and works c overed by relating rights, illicit use of an 
invention, industrial design or model, disclosure without consent of an author or an 
applicant of the subject matter of a scientific discovery, invention, industrial design or model prior to its official publication, as well as usurpation of the authorship or coercion into joint authorship shall result in fines e qual to 100-500 monthly calculation indexes, or 
to the amount of wages or other income receive d by the convict for a period of one to five 
months, or in public works for 180 to 240 hours, or in a prison term of up to two years, if 
the action was performed with the view to receive profits and resulted in severe damages.  Repeated actions and actions committed by a group of persons upon preliminary agreement or by an organized group resulted in fines equal to 500-800 monthly 
calculation indices, or to the amount of wages or  other income received by the convict for 
a period of five to nine months, or in detenti on for four to six months, or in a prison term 
of up to five years with or without confisca tion of the property of the convict (Article 184 
of the Criminal Code of Kazakhstan); and 
- illicit use of a trademark, service mark, bra nd name, appellation of origin or other 
designations of goods (services) of the same  nature resulted in fines equal to 200-500 
monthly calculation indexes, or to the amount of wages or other  income received by the convict for a period of two to five months, or  in public works for 180 to 240 hours, or in 
detention for up to 6 months, or in a prison term of up to 2 years, if the action was 
performed repeatedly and resulted in severe damages.  Illicit use of labels with respect to 
trademarks and appellations of origin not regi stered in Kazakhstan resulted in fines equal 
to 100-200 monthly calculation indexes, or to the amount of wages or other income received by the convict for up to two months, or in public works for 120 to 180 hours, or 
in detention for up to three months, or in a pr ison term of up to one year, if the action was 
performed repeatedly and resulted in severe damages (Article 199 of the Criminal Code 
of the Republic of Kazakhstan). 
254. Some members of the Working Party noted that  there was a criminal penalty for pirated 
copyright works and related rights (Article 184 of th e Criminal Code) but remarked that there did not  WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/8 
 Page 85 
 
 
 appear to be a criminal penalty for counterfeit trademarked goods.  They further stated that the 
administrative fine, provided by the Administrativ e Code, was clearly insufficient to serve as an 
effective deterrent.  The representative of Kazakhs tan responded that criminal penalties to prevent 
trade in counterfeit trademarked goods were provi ded in Article 199 of the new Criminal Code 
(Special Part) and included sufficient criminal pe nalty to serve as an effective deterrent.  The 
representative of Kazakhstan further stated that although the fines were of relatively little amount, 
such amounts were significant in Kazakhstan taki ng into account the current level of economic 
development.  Nevertheless, if experience prove d that the established fines were not effective 
deterrents, fines would be raised accordingly. 
[to be completed] 
POLICIES AFFECTING TRADE IN SERVICES 
255. The representative of Kazakhstan referred that the service sector was one of the most dynamic 
sectors of the economy, and its role was expected to  grow in the future.  Starting from 1990, the share 
of services in the GDP kept growing to reach th e highest level of 60 per cent in 1998, while the 
average level for the last decade constituted 50 per cent.  In 2001 and 2002, the balance of foreign 
trade in services was negative for Kazakhstan, wi th exports amounting to US$1,588 million, and 
imports amounting to US$3,667 million in 2002.  In th e sphere of trade in services, enterprises with 
foreign direct investments (FDI) accounted for more  than 90 per cent of the turnover in construction 
and business services.  Among services provided by foreign suppliers were geological prospecting 
and product certification, legal and other consulting services, elec tronic data processing, engineering 
and technical services.  
256. The statistical base of service sectors was also at the initial stage of development.  At present, 
it could not ensure adequate reflection of the dy namics of service sectors, and provide reliable 
information on the level of presence of foreign servi ce suppliers in any given service sector.  Taken 
together, all of the above set serious complications  for determination of exact criteria for further 
liberalization and undertaking by Kazakhstan of co mmitments to this effect.  Hence, Kazakhstan 
intended to apply provisional measures of state re gulation of trade in services in order to ensure 
development of competition, based on well-balanced le vels of development of the market of services 
and labour so as to prevent adverse economic a nd social effects in the national economy.   
257. Noting the growing role of services in the na tional economy, the representative of Kazakhstan 
emphasized that the existing legislative framework  was not adequately developed for services sector 
and for certain new types of services there was no re levant legislation.  G overnment of Kazakhstan WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/8 
Page 86  
 
 therefore was actively developing national legisl ation governing the services sector, which would help 
to proceed with further liberalization of services.  The last five years showed some progress in the 
development and adoption of laws  regulating some service sectors, based on which Kazakhstan 
undertook commitments for market access in services.  
258. The representative of Kazakhstan referred that in  a number of service sectors, liberalization 
has had adverse effects on the level of employment, in particular, in the sector of construction 
services, where the bulk of large projects was implemented by foreign contractors using foreign 
workforce.  One of the mechanisms for regulation of trade in services was represented by licensing.  
Under the Schedule of Commitments of Kazakhstan in Services, providing for licensing of certain 
types of activities, foreign natural persons and legal entities must obtain licenses under the same 
procedures as those set for natural pe rsons and legal entities of Kazakhstan. 
259. With respect to the Law of Kazakhstan "On Cu lture" (hereafter – the Law) the representative 
of Kazakhstan stated that this law defined national policies in the sphere of culture, regulated public 
relations arising from creation, revival, preservatio n, development, use, and dissemination of the 
national culture.  The Law stipulated a special trea tment for sites of the national cultural heritage, 
under which all forms of negotiations with sites entered in the State Register including their 
demolition, relocation, alteration, reproduction, an d restoration shall be prohibited unless authorized 
by the responsible body.  All forms of exploitatio n of sites of the nationa l cultural heritage for 
purposes inconsistent with their historical, artistic, a nd religious value shall also be prohibited.  Sites 
of special cultural value owned by religious orga nizations may be used for religious purposes.  
Cultural institutions shall have priority in exercisi ng their rights to use architectural monuments.  
Owners and users of sites of the national cultural he ritage shall be responsib le for their maintenance 
and preservation.  Rights of owners of sites of th e national cultural heritage shall be exercised under 
control and following procedures, determined by the le gislation, while the State shall have a priority 
right to buy sites of the national cultural heritage of Kazakhstan in cases where they should be offered 
for sale. 
260. He added that special activity treatment could be set up in special economic zones or similar 
territories under separate order of economic activity determined in accordance with the relevant  
Kazakhstan legislature.   
261. Ministries and agencies involved were required to monitor the activities of foreign service 
suppliers, to ensure that they fulfil the requireme nts stipulated in concluded contracts on foreign 
investments, including:    WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/8 
 Page 87 
 
 
 - use of modern technologies and machinery;  
- attraction of Kazakhstani experts;  
- implementation of environmental protection meas ures (land re-cultivation, construction of 
treatment facilities, waste utilization); and 
- development of the social sphere and local infrastructure, etc.   
[to be completed] 
- Transparency  
262. The representative of Kazakhstan stated th at under Article 3 of the Constitution of 
Kazakhstan, all laws, international treaties, to wh ich the Republic of Kazakhs tan was party, must be 
published.  Official publication of normative le gislative acts affecting rights, freedoms, and 
responsibilities of the population, must be a pre-requi site for their application.  Under Article 30 of 
the Law of Kazakhstan of 24 Marc h 1998 "On Normative Legislative Acts", official publications 
comprised the Journal of the Parliament of Kazakhsta n and the Corpus of the Decrees of the President 
of Kazakhstan and Resolutions of the Government of Kazakhstan. 
263. He further noted that legislation and regula tions may also be published officially in 
periodicals, granted this right based on the results of bidding, in accordance with procedures set by the 
Government of Kazakhstan.  Legislative acts of the President of Kazakhstan, resolutions of the 
Government of Kazakhstan, central executive and ot her central public bodies of Kazakhstan must be 
officially published in national mass media.  Decree s of the President of Kazakhstan, resolutions of 
the Government of Kazakhstan shall be officially published in the Corpus of the Decrees of the 
President of Kazakhstan and Resolutions  of the Government of Kazakhstan. 
264. The representative of Kazakhstan also added th at normative legislative acts of Maslikhats, 
normative legislative resolutions of Akimats, a nd normative resolutions of Akims could be also 
officially published in local mass media.  
- Trade Agreements 
265. The representative of Kazakhstan noted that at present, trade relations of Kazakhstan with 
other CIS countries (excluding Turkmenistan) developed in the free trade environment, under which imported or exported goods are exempt from custom s duties, except for a number of goods included 
in the Schedule of Exemptions.  This Schedule is  covered by the protocols on exemptions from the 
free trade environment under bilateral agreements on free trade. WT/ACC/SPEC/KAZ/8 
Page 88  
 
 266. He also added that Kazakhstan was a party to a number of agreements with Belarus, 
Kyrgyzstan, Russia, and Tajikistan, providing fo r a stage-by-stage establishment of the Customs 
Union. 
267. The Agreement on the Unified Customs Tariff (UCT) in force since 1 January 2001 within 
the Customs Union of Byelorussia, Kazakhstan, Ky rgyzstan, Russia, and Tajikistan sets unified rates 
of import customs duties.  The unified customs tari ff shall be formed within five years following the 
date of enactment of the Agreement, which term  may be extended under an agreement reached by 
parties. 
268. The representative of Kazakhstan further stated that on 10 October 2000 the Heads of the 
Customs Union member-countries signed the Agreemen t on Establishment of the Eurasian Economic 
Association (EurAzEs), which provides for invigo ration of the processes aimed at the establishment 
of the Customs Union and the Single Economic Space. 
269. The EurAzEs was designed to help solve the is sues relating to a full-scale implementation of 
the free trade environment; development of comm on procedures of foreign trade regulation; and 
creation of the common customs territory governed by the common mechanism of functioning of the 
common customs territory. 
[to be completed] 
CONCLUSIONS 
[to be completed] 
__________