WORLD TRADE
ORGANIZATIONG/TMB/R/38
29 January 1998
(98-0318)
Textiles Monitoring Body
REPORT OF THE THIRTY-NINTH MEETING
1. The Textiles Monitoring Body held its thirty-ninth meeting on 11 and 12 December 1997.
2. Present at this meeting were the following members, alternates and observers: Mr. Babajide;
Mrs. Berrig/Mr. Tadpitakkul; Messrs. Kim/Tong;  Kobayashi; Malik/Miss Morais;
Messrs. Meemeduma;  Mukerji/Abdel Aziz Mohammed;  Miss Orozco Jaramillo/Mr. Da Costa;
Messrs.  Tagliani; Urkan/Varga;  Wentzel/Moroz.
3. The TMB adopted the report of its thirty-eighth meeting (G/TMB/R/37).
Notification under Articles 2.6 and 2.7 (a), 2.8(a) and 2.11 of the ATC: Communication Received
from the European Community in Response to a Recommendation Made by the TMB
4. The TMB started its consideration of the communication received from the European
Community in response to the recommendation made by the TMB at its meeting on 16 and
21 May 1997 requesting the European Community to re-examine its first stage integration programmein light of the TMB’s comments and findings, as reflected in its detailed report (see G/TMB/R/29).
The TMB, seeking clarification and explanation from the European Community, decided to revert to
the consideration of this matter at a later meeting.
Notifications under Articles 2.6 and 2.7 (b), 2.8(a) and 2.11 of the ATC: Communications Received
from Members in Response to Questions Put by the TMB
5. A number of Members, as noted in paragraphs 6 to 13 below, responded to questions put by
the TMB with a view to verifying whether the stat istical information provided regarding integration
referred, where appropriate, to those portions of the HS lines covered by the ATC and not to the entire
respective HS 6-digit lines (G/TMB/R/29, paragraphs 43 to 45).
6. The TMB took note of the communicat ion by Brazil (G/TMB/N/49/Corr.1 and
G/TMB/N/227/Corr.1), relating to the notification of its first and second stages of integration.  Brazil
had identified the HS lines at the 10-digit level of the Brazilian nomenclature that had been integratedin the two stages but did not fall under the coverage of the ATC;  in addition, Brazil had also
examined all the products that comprised the volume  of its 1990 imports notified to the TMB, and had
verified that in some cases there were other parts of HS lines that did not fall under the coverage of
the ATC. Therefore, due to corrected data, the total import volume for 1990 amounted to
9,296,458 kg and, consequently, the volume of imports integrated in Stage 1 (with the exclusion oftrade that did not fall under the coverage of the ATC, i.e. item 7019200200 of the Brazilian
nomenclature) corresponded to 19.93 per cent of Brazil’s 1990 total import volume of the products
covered by the ATC.   For Stage 2, with the exclusion of trade corresponding to part of an HS line that
did not fall under the coverage of the ATC (i.e. item 7019109900), the volume integrated, as
originally notified, amounted to 6.21 per cent of the volume of Brazil’s total imports in 1990 ofproducts covered by the ATC.  Therefore, in order to rectify this shortfall, Brazil had integratedG/TMB/R/38
Page 2
additional parts of HS lines, so that the revised volume of integration for Stage 2 corresponded to
17.01 per cent of the volume of Brazil’s total imports in 1990 of products covered by the ATC.
7. The TMB took note of communications by the Dominican Republic (G/TMB/N/250/Adds.1,
2 and 3) relating to the notification of its second stage integration, in which the Dominican Republic
stated, inter alia , that the headings corresponding to "ex HS lines" related precisely to  the description
of those products contained in the Annex to the ATC, as was also confirmed by theDominican Republic’s 1991 import data and National Ta riff.  Furthermore, in order to avoid any
confusion, one such heading had been replaced by five other tariff lines.
8. The TMB took note of communications by  Hungary (G/TMB/N/84/Add.2 and Corr.1, and
G/TMB/N/209/Adds 1, 2 and Corr.1) which related to th e notifications of its first and second stages of
integration.  Hungary stated, inter alia , that the statistical information it had provided in relation to the
first and second stage integrations referred to the whole HS subheadings concerned, and not only,
where applicable, to those portions of the HS lines covered by the ATC.  For Stage 1, findings basedon a detailed examination of the relevant HS lines had shown a shortfall of 0.23 per cent, which
Hungary had compensated by the addition of two HS  lines in the integration programme. As a result
of these changes, integration for Stage 1 amounted to 16.08 per cent of the volume of Hungary’s 1992
imports of the products covered by the ATC.  With respect to Stage 2, four "ex HS lines", for which
no distinction could be made between the products covered and those not covered by the ATC, werewithdrawn from the original noti fication by Hungary and would be integrated on 1 January 2005.  In
order to make up for the resulting shortfall, Hungary had added one HS line to its second stage
integration programme which, consequently, amounted to 17.65 per cent of the volume of 1992
imports of ATC products.
9. The TMB took note of communications by Japan (G/TMB/N/39/Adds.1 and 2) which related
to the notification of its first stage of integration, in which Japan stated, inter alia ,  that it was not
possible to identify perfectly trade covered and that not covered by the ATC with respect to some
"ex HS lines".  Therefore, in order to avoid any doubts about the fulfilment of its obligations under the
ATC, Japan had decided to add products to its first stage integration programme.  As a result, the
products integrated by Japan for Stage 1 amounted to 17.2 per cent of the volume of Japan’s importsin 1990 of the products covered by the ATC, so that even if the volume of imports of the "ex HS
lines" with statistical difficulties were to be deducted from the integrated volume, it would still be
above the requirement defined in Article 2.6.
10. The TMB took note of a communication by  Liechtenstein (G/TMB/N/203/Add.1) which
related to the notification of its first stage of integration, in which Liechtenstein stated that thenotification by Switzerland of 21 October 1997
1 should also be taken to cover Liechtenstein.
11. The TMB took note of communications by Poland (G/TMB/N/218/Add.1 and Rev.1) related
to the notification of its second stage integration, in which Poland stated that since statistics on
imports of the products in the Annex to the ATC had not been available at a level detailed enough to
make a distinction between the ATC covered and non-covered products, the statistical information
provided by Poland referred to the whole HS 6-digit subheadings concerned and not only to that
portion of the respective HS line covered by the ATC.  In view of this, Poland had amended its secondstage of integration by adding five tariff lines, so that the volume of products to be integrated would
amount to 19.53 per cent of the total volume of Poland’s 1990 imports of the products in the Annex,
and that even if all "ex HS lines" were not taken into account, the amount integrated would be
17.04 per cent.
                                                     
1See G/TMB/N/50/Add.2.G/TMB/R/38
Page 3
12. The TMB took note of  communications by  Slovenia (G/TMB/N/129/Adds.1 and 2 and
Rev.1, and G/TMB/N/243/Adds.1 and 2, and Corr.1)which we re related to the notifications of its first
and second stage integrations.  Slovenia stated, inter alia , that the volume of 1992 imports, specified
in its notifications of the first and second stages of integration for the "ex HS lines", reflected the
imports of the entire HS lines concerned and not of the products covered by the ATC.  Furthermore, it
was not possible to subclassify these "ex HS lines" or to determine the import volume of the preciseproducts covered by the ATC.  Therefore, with respect to Stage 1, Slovenia had revised its integration
programme by adding one tariff line, so that the products integrated accounted for 19.04 per cent of
the total volume of Slovenia’s 1992 imports of the products covered by the ATC.  The TMB observed
that, with this addition, the volume of imports  integrated would still amount to not less than
16 per cent of the total volume of Slovenia’s 1992 imports of the products in the Annex even if all the
imports of the "ex HS lines" were not counted. With respect to Stage 2, Slovenia submitted a revised
list of products to be integrated, in which the products corresponding the "ex HS lines" had beenexcluded, and would be integrated on 1 January 2005.  The share of the products to be integrated by
Slovenia for Stage 2, therefore, amounted to 17.99 per cent  of the volume of 1992 imports of the
products covered by the ATC.
13. The TMB in some cases started, and in other cases reverted to its consideration of the relevant
communications received from Cypr us, Israel, Mexico and Sri Lanka.
Notifications under Articles 2.8(a) and 2.11 of the ATC
14. The TMB reviewed pursuant to Article 2.21 the notification made under Articles 2.8(a)
and 2.11 by Brazil (G/TMB/N/227 and Add.1). During this review 2, the TMB noted that, in
accordance with Article 2.8(a), the volume of the products integrated amounted to 17.01 per cent of
the volume of imports in 1990 of the products falling under the coverage of the Agreement.  The
TMB also noted that, in accordance with Article 2.8(a), the products integrated included products
from each of the four groups:  tops and yarns, fabrics, made-up textile products and clothing.
15. The TMB reviewed pursuant to Article 2.21 the notification made under Articles 2.8(a)
and 2.11 by the Dominican Republic (G/TMB/N/250, Adds.1, 2 and 3).  During this review 3 , the
TMB noted that the volume of products integrated amounted to 17.68 per cent of the volume of
imports in 1991 of the products falling under the coverage of the Agreement.  The TMB also noted
that, in accordance with Article 2.8(a), the products integrated included products from each of the four
groups:  tops and yarns, fabrics, made-up textile products and clothing.
16. The TMB reviewed pursuant to Article 2.21 the notification made under Articles 2.8(a)
and 2.11 by Hungary (G/TMB/N/209, Adds 1, 2 and Corr.1).  During this review 4, the TMB noted
that the volume of products integrated amounted to 17.65 per cent of the volume of imports in 1992 of
the products falling under the coverage of the Agreement.  The TMB also noted that, in accordance
with Article 2.8(a), the products integrated included products from each of the four groups:  tops and
yarns, fabrics, made-up textile products and clothing.
                                                     
2See also paragraph 6.
3See also paragraph 7.
4See also paragraph 8.G/TMB/R/38
Page 4
17. The TMB reviewed pursuant to Article 2.21 the notification made under Articles 2.8(a)
and 2.11 by Poland (G/TMB/N/218, Add.1 a nd Rev.1).  During this review 5, the TMB noted that, in
accordance with Article 2.8(a), the volume of products integrated amounted to 19.53 per cent of the
volume of imports in 1990 of the products falling under the coverage of the Agreement.  The TMB
also noted that, in accordance with Article 2.8(a), the products integrated included products from each
of the four groups:  tops and yarns, fabrics, made-up textile products and clothing.
18. The TMB reviewed pursuant to Article 2.21 the notification made under Articles 2.8(a)
and 2.11 by Slovenia (G/TMB/N/243, Adds.1 and 2, and Corr.1).  During this review6, the TMB
noted that the volume of products integrated amounted to 17.99 per cent of the volume of imports in
1992 of the products falling under the coverage of the Agreement.  The TMB also noted that, in
accordance with Article 2.8(a), the products integrated included products from each of the four
groups:  tops and yarns, fabrics, made-up textile products and clothing.
19. The TMB reviewed pursuant to Article 2.21 the notification made under Articles 2.8(a)
and 2.11 by South Africa (G/TMB/N/307).  During this review, the TMB noted that, in accordance
with Article 2.8(a), the volume of products integrated amounted to 17.00 per cent of the volume of
imports in 1990 of the products falling under the coverage of the Agreement.  The TMB also noted
that, in accordance with Article 2.8(a), the products integrated included products from each of the four
groups:  tops and yarns, fabrics, made-up textile products and clothing.
20. The TMB reviewed pursuant to Article 2.21 the notification made under Articles 2.8(a)
and 2.11 by Turkey (G/TMB/N/228, Corr.1 and Adds.1 and 2).  During this review, the TMB noted
that, in accordance with Article 2.8(a), the volume of products integrated amounted to 18.03 per cent
of the volume of imports in 1990 of the products falling under the coverage of the Agreement.  The
TMB also noted that, in accordance with Article 2.8(a), the products integrated included products
from each of the four groups:  tops and yarns, fabrics, made-up textile products and clothing.
21. With regard to those notifications mentioned in paragraphs 15, 16 and 18 above for which the
calculation of the share of the products integrated had been made on the basis of the volume of
imports of a different base-year other than that of 1990, the TMB ensured that no better data were
available and that the Members concerned had followed the same approach as the notifications they
had made pursuant to Articles 2.6 and 2.7(b).
Notification under Articles 2.8(b), 2.10 and 2.11 of the ATC
22. The TMB reviewed under Article 2.21 the notification made pursuant to Articles 2.8(b), 2.10
and 2.11 by Turkey (G/TMB/N/240).  During this review, the TMB noted that Turkey had availed
itself of the provisions of Article 2.10 to integrate with effect from 1 January 1998 some products,
amounting to 29.07 per cent of the total volume of the Turkey’s 1990 imports of the products covered
by the ATC, which would form part of Turkey’s third stage of integration.
Notification under Article 2.15 of the ATC
23. The TMB reviewed the notification made by the United States, under Article 2.15, of the
elimination of restraints applied on imports of several product categories from Romania
                                                     
5See also paragraph 11.
6See also paragraph 12 .G/TMB/R/38
Page 5
(G/TMB/N/310). Effective 1 January 1998, the bilatera l restraints on eleven US product categories
would be eliminated. Romania had also been informed in advance, in accordance with Article 2.15.
Notifications under Article 2.18 of the ATC
24. The TMB considered notifications made pursuant to Article 2.18 by Canada and the
United States on improvements in access for exports of Members subject to restrictions on the day
before the entry into force of the WTO Agreement, and whose restrictions represented 1.2 per cent or
less of the total volume of the restrictions applied by an importing Member as of 31 December 1991
and notified under Article 2 of the ATC.  The corresponding Members, and the implementation of this
provision for Stage 2 of the integration process, were as follows:
- for Canada:  Costa Rica, the Czech Republic, the Dominican Republic, Hungary,
Jamaica, Lesotho, Macau, Mauritius, Myanmar, Poland, the Slovak Republic,
South Africa, Sri Lanka, Swaziland and Uruguay.  The growth rates for the
restrictions in effect on 31 December 1997 would be increased by 27 per cent
(G/TMB/N/312)7 ;
- for the United States:  Bahrain, Bulgaria, Colombia, Costa Rica, the Czech Republic,
the Dominican Republic, Egypt, El Salvador, Fiji, Guatemala, Haiti, Hungary,
Jamaica, Kenya, Kuwait, Macau, Mauritius, Poland, Qatar, Romania, the
Slovak Republic, the United Arab Emirates and Uruguay.  The growth rates for the
particular small supplier’s quotas would be increased by 27 per cent for the second
stage (G/TMB/N/311).
Notification under Article 3.2(b) of the ATC
25. The TMB considered a notification made pursuant to Article 3.2(b) by Hungary
(G/TMB/N/147/Add.1).  Acco rding to this notification, Hungary would, in addition to the phase-out
programme previously notified8, liberalize as of 1 January 1998 not only a further 25 per cent of the
import volume of textiles and clothing subject to global quota, but all remaining textile and clothing
global quota restrictions as notified under Article 3.1 vis à vis  all WTO Members.  The TMB
commended Hungary for the early elimination of its restrictions.
Notification under Article 3.3 of the ATC
26. The TMB received a joint communication from the European Community and Turkey under
Article 3.3. This communication consisted of a copy, for the TMB’s information, of the standard
format notification made to the Chairman of the Committee on Regional Trade Agreements
concerning the customs union between the two parties, as well as of the details of certain new
quantitative limits introduced by Turkey with effect from 1 January 1996 in respect of imports of
certain textile and clothing products from certain WTO Members which, according to the notification,
were necessary to give effect to the customs union in accordance with Article XXIV of GATT 1994.
The TMB took note of this information (G/TMB/N /308). The TMB recalled that notifications under
Article 3.3 have to be provided to the TMB within 60 days of any new restrictions or changes in
existing restrictions on textile and clothing products, taken under any GATT 1994 provision, coming
into effect.
                                                     
7In determining eligibility for this treatment, Canada further included those Members that accounted for
less than 1.2 per cent of Canada’s total restraints in effect on 31 December 1994.
8See G/TMB/N/147 and the TMB’s observations in G/TMB/R/9, paragraph 12 .G/TMB/R/38
Page 6
Dates of the Next TMB Meeting
27. The TMB decided to reschedule its meeting, previously scheduled for 12 to 14 January, to 19
to 21 January 1998.
____________