RESTRICTEDWORLD TRADE
ORGANIZATIONG/MA/M/24
20 July 2000
(00-2996)
Committee on Market Access
MINUTES OF THE MEETING OF 27 JUNE 2000
Chairman:  Mr. Christophe Kiener (Switzerland)
Table of contents            Page
1. Election of  Offi cers ......................................................................................................... ..........2
2. Submission of HS96 documentation........................................................................................2
3. Modalities and operation of the Integrated Data Base..........................................................5
(a) Status of submissions of th e required docu mentation.................................................................5
(b) Progress report on the work  done by the Secretariat ..................................................................5
(c) Review of the Operation of the IDB and IDB related Technical Assistance Activities
in accordance with paragraph 19 of document G/MA/IDB/3 entitled "Dissemination
of the IDB" (G/MA/ IDB/W/5/Rev.1) .........................................................................................8
4. Consolidated Tariff Schedules Database Project...................................................................8
5. Review of Paragraph 1 of the Understanding on the Interpretation of
Article XXVIII of the GATT 1994 ........................................................................................10
6. Observer Status of International Intergovernmental Organizations
(G/MA/W/11/Rev.1).............................................................................................................. ..11
7. Other business............................................................................................................... ..........12
(a) Australia – timely completio n of the Comm ittee's wo rk ..........................................................12
(b) India – lack of notification by the EC and the US of a mutually agreed solution in the
area of rules of or igin........................................................................................................ ........12
(c) Date of the next meeting.................................................................................................... .......13G/MA/M/24
Page 2
The above agenda as reproduced in document WTO/AIR/1332 was adopted with the addition of
items 7 (a), (b) and (c).  An annotated agenda wa s circulated in an informal document (Job No. 3738).
1. Election of Officers
1.1 The Committee elected Mr. Christophe Kiener (S witzerland) as Chairman and Mrs. Lourdes
Berrig (Philippines) as Vice-Chairperson for 2000.
2. Submission of HS96 documentation
2.1 The Chairman stated that according to the provisions contained in the General Council
Decision of 3 May 2000, extending the time-limit of the waivers granted to Members that had
requested it until 31 October 2000 (WT/L/351), it was envisaged that the Members concerned would
submit by this date the complete documentation related to the introduction of HS96 changes in theirWTO schedules, and that in special circumstances they could request technical assistance from the
Secretariat.  Document G/MA/TAR/2/Rev.22 refl ected the present situation concerning the
submission of the required documentation and it could be noted that five Members presently under
waivers had not yet submitted the required documentation. Some of these countries had requested
technical assistance from the Secretariat, and their documentation was being prepared and would becirculated shortly.  Since the last meeting of the Committee, the HS96 documentation submitted by
Costa Rica had been approved.  To date, apart from the five Members that had not yet submitted the
required HS documentation, the submissions of twenty Members, whether they had requested an
extension of waivers or not, remained pending due to ongoing consultations and/or negotiations.   In
addition, in accordance with what was agreed at the informal meeting of the Committee on17 March 2000, a revised detailed list giving an updated picture of the situation with respect to
pending HS96 submissions was faxed to Members on 13 June 2000.   In this regard he wished to point
out that a correction should be introduced to this document with respect to Malaysia where it should
be indicated that Malaysia still holds a reservation with respect to the EC schedule.  It was his
intention to organize an informal meeting to revi ew this informal list and the situation of HS96
submissions in the coming weeks.
2.2 The representative of Mexico informed the Committee that Mexico's HS96 documentation
was ready for submission.2.3 The representative of Canada stated that his delegation continued to attach great importance
to the HS96 exercise, in part because the HS 2002 exercise was looming ahead.  Therefore he fully
supported the Chairman's proposal to conduct informal consultations on how to move this issue
forward.
2.4 The Committee took note of the statements, and agreed  to continue informal consultations.
2.5 In response to a request by the Chairman for information on the Harmonized System version
2002 (HS2002), the representative of the World Customs Organization (WCO) stated that on
25 June 1999 the Council had accepted the Recommendation concerning the modifications to theHarmonized System which were to enter into force as of 1 January 2002.   There were in total 374 sets
of amendments. The category of goods to be modified varied because the WCO Harmonized System(HS) Committee had decided that apart from purely customs matters, there were several other changes
required in the HS, in particular with respect to goods connected to environmental problems.   So the
HS2002, apart from the traditional headings and subheadings, would have tariff lines which did not
have high levels of trade but which nevertheless were very important for organizations such as the
Convention on International Trade on Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES).Following a request by CITES, the HS Committee had modified Chapters 1 and 2 which related to
endangered animals.  As concerned scrap, on the basis of the Basel Convention and the OECD list,G/MA/M/24
Page 3
Chapters 26, 27, 38, 71 and 81 had been modified.  For example, Chapter 38 had been changed to
include new subheadings:  3825.10 pertaining to municipal waste which was accompanied by a new
Note 4 in Chapter 38;  3825.20 pertaining to sewage sludge; and 3825.30 pertaining to clinical waste.
There was a new structure for Chapters 41 and 48 and the changes related to technological
development.  New products of high technology and  high levels of trade, such as digital cameraswere to be found under 85.25.  There were other types of modifications, for example in Chapters 12,
15 and 23 the text of certain tariff lines had been adapted to reflect trade reality.  He  referred to, in
particular, a product canola, which would be mentioned in the Explanatory Notes to Chapters 12 and
23.  Chapters 88, 89 and 93 would now include certain products for military use.  With reference to
Chapters 84 and 87, the terminology of certain tariff lines had been modified in order to use more
current terminology.  Certain tariff lines and subheadings had been eliminated.  Twenty million
dollars worth of trade volume was the criteria used to create a new subheading or to eliminate it if thisthreshold was not met. The WCO Secretariat was finalizing the correlation tables between the HS96
and HS2002 versions.  The Committee should finish work on the Explanatory Notes at its November
2000 meeting.  During the first half of 2001, the correlation tables and the Explanatory Notes would
be published and sent to the contracting parties to the HS Convention.   National legislations would
have to be adapted and in this connection, the WCO would provide technical assistance to, inparticular developing countries.   There had been a reservation by the United States on one of the
amendments, but in the final text there were no reservations.  Finally, he added that he would give to
the WTO Secretariat copies of the recommendations for the HS2002.  The HS Committee would also
be initiating the consideration of the first amendments to enter into force on 1 January 2007.
2.6 The Chairman thanked the WCO representative for his presentation and for the documents.
He stated that the latter containing the HS2002 changes would be circulated as an official WTO
document1.  He recalled that at the previous Committee meeting of 23 March 2000 the question of
HS2002 changes had been raised and the possibility of informal consultations on these future changes
mentioned.  The statement from the WCO representative revealed that there might be need for thoseinformal consultations.
2.7 The representative of the European Communities  thought it useful for the Committee to have
regular updates on the progress of work on the HS2002.  He requested the WCO representative to
provide a written version of his statement and any other relevant documents.  He realized that the
WCO representative had suggested circulating the HS2002 recommendation but in the future, he
hoped to have in this Committee and in informal meetings on the HS96, regular reports on theHS2002.  The reports should be less technical and more information should be provided on the
procedure and the time-frame of work, as most delegations present at this meeting had access to
technical information through their experts in Brussels. His delegation would be ready to discuss the
procedures to be followed for the introduction of HS2002 changes.
2.8 The representative of India looked forward to receiving regular updates from the WCO on
HS2002 changes.  She believed that the consultations that the Chairman was proposing would be
useful for deciding the procedure to be followed  for the transposition of HS96 into HS2002.  The
consultations could also see how the regular updates that the Committee would be receiving from the
WCO could feed into this transposition process.  She also wished to have more information on thereservation raised by the US on the text.
2.9 The representative of the WCO stated that each contracting party to the HS Convention had
the right of veto under Article 16 of the Convention. Contracting parties held this right for six months
after approval of a Recommendation by the Council.   The Council had accepted the Recommendation
amending the HS on 25 June 1999, so from July to December 1999 contracting parties had the right to
veto an amendment.  If a contracting party was unable to accept an amendment, it was removed from
                                                     
1 G/MA/W/24.G/MA/M/24
Page 4
the Recommendation.  Only the US had introduced a reservation concerning one of the amendments
which related to the question of software. As a result, there were no references to a new note on
Chapter 85 or new subheadings for 85.24 where software was described. For the HS2007 changes, the
question could perhaps be raised again.  In response to the question by the representative of the
European Communities on time-frames and work agenda,  he added that the HS Committee wouldcomplete the  Explanatory Notes in November 2000 at its 26
th session.  The WCO Secretariat had
finalized the correlation tables which would be put before the HS Committee for its approval also in
November 2000.  These materials would be published in 2001.
2.10 The representative of Hong Kong, China noted that in connection with the circulation of the
374 amendments, the correlation tables and Explanatory Notes, it would be useful to have an
indication from the WCO representative of the status of  these documents, in particular whether theywere final decisions. As indicated by the WCO representative, Members were maintaining
reservations on some of the items.  Given the time WTO Members had spent on the HS96 exercise, it
would not be too early to start preparations for the HS2002 exercise.  As a first step he agreed with the
EC representative that in addition to the information provided by the WCO representative on the
overall time-frame it would be useful to have the de tails of the WCO's agenda of work.  It would also
be useful if at the same time the WTO Secretariat could advise Members on the time-frame for this
body to tie in with the work being done in the WCO.  It would be useful to consult on the procedures
for the transposition and the introduction of HS2002 and on the question of regular reports from the
WCO Secretariat.
2.11 The representative of Mexico sought clarification on the US reservation on a specific
amendment.  Additionally, he asked for confirmation th at one of the criteria to determine the inclusion
or exclusion of lines in the HS was the volume of trade, i.e. when a product had more than 20 million
dollars worth of trade then it became a tariff line, but when it fell below that amount the tariff line was
eliminated. Finally, he wondered whether the 20 million dollar criteria did not create a conflict withother types of criteria, such as for example requests by other international organizations. He wished to
know whether the tariff lines included upon the requ est of certain international organizations had
more than 20 million dollars of trade volume.
2.12 The representative of the WCO stated that the right to veto an amendment was held by all
contracting parties to the HS Convention. The US had made its reservation within the regular period
for introducing a veto, i.e between July and December 1999.  The veto related to one set ofamendments concerning a note on Chapter 85 which described software.  Whenever a contracting
party objected to an amendment, the latter was removed from the Recommendation.  There were now
374 sets of amendments which had been approved by all HS contracting parties, and no more
reservations could be introduced with respect to any of these amendments. On the 20 million dollar
criterion, during discussions on the amendments for HS2002, the WCO Secretariat had suggested athreshold of 20 million dollars for the introduction of a new product.  For example, if Mexico wanted
to introduce a product under a HS subheading it had to send documentation to the WCO on the
product and had to show that this product had more than 20 million dollars worth of trade per year.
The WCO Secretariat would introduce this question to the HS Committee which would decide
whether to accept or not accept this proposal. If a product had a trade volume inferior to 20 milliondollars, determined by information received from the UN statistical office, the WCO Secretariat
would propose elimination of the relevant subheading.   However, if a country wished to retain this
subheading irrespective of the volume of trad e, then the subheading would be maintained.
Concerning new tariff lines related to waste and CITES, these were exceptions.  It concerned the
possibility for customs to have some control on dangerous materials or endangered animals.   Forthese products there was no threshold.
2.13 The representative of India stated that it was unfortunate that the sector in which the US had
placed a reservation was a sector of enormous interest to India.  With respect to the informalG/MA/M/24
Page 5
consultations proposed, she hoped that these would be on all aspects of this matter, including when
such a procedure for transposition should start, what its linkage would be with HS96 transpositions
which were as yet not complete, how the Committee would take stock of regular updates from the
WCO, as this important matter progressed, and also how the transposition would impact on other
work that was being carried out in the WTO.  Her delegation hoped that the informal consultationswould be comprehensive and open-ended.
2.14 The Committee took note of the statements and agreed
 to hold informal consultations.
3. Modalities and operation of the Integrated Data Base
(a) Status of submissions of the required documentation
3.1 The Chairman stated that document G/MA/IDB/2/Rev.8, which presented the situation of PC
IDB submissions as of 9 June 2000, had been circulat ed to all Members.  He noted that 72 Members
and 2   acceding countries had provided IDB submissions.  He encouraged those delegations that had
not yet made their submissions to do so as early as possible.
3.2 The representative of the United States expressed his delegation's continuing support for the
IDB and also its concern that participation was lagging.  He encouraged further consultations on this
issue.
3.3 The representative of Hong Kong, China stated that his authorities had submitted Hong Kong,
China's 1999 import data on 15 June 2000, which for obvious reasons had not been reflected in
document G/MA/IDB/2/Rev.8.  He also supported the points made by the US representative.
3.4 The representative of Uruguay informed Members that his delegation had just circulated trade
statistics for the years 1998 and 1999, and tariff information for 1999 and 2000.
3.5 The representative of Canada thanked both delegations for updating the Committee on their
submissions.  However, his delegation supported the US concern both in terms of how the Committee
could help Members that had not made any submissions, and also the fact that there seemed to be a
lack of follow-up on submissions. His delegation supported the US proposal for informal
consultations.
3.6 The representative of Venezuela stated that his authorities were working hard to update the
information to be introduced in the IDB, but had encountered technical problems in the gathering and
classification of information.  They hoped to be in a position to submit to the IDB in the next few
months.
3.7 The Committee took note of the statements.
(b) Progress report on the work done by the Secretariat
3.8 On IDB dissemination, the Secretariat  reported that since the last Market Access Committee
meeting of 23 March 2000, it had continued to load IDB files onto the internet on a monthly basis.
Thirteen files were loaded in April 2000, 11 in May 2000, and by the end of this week, a further 17
would have been loaded.  By the end of June 2000, and after one year of operation, the IDB Internet
site would contain 177 country period files of which 167 were in the approved area.  These files
contained information for 60 Member countries.G/MA/M/24
Page 6
3.9 As had been mentioned at the last Market Access Committee meeting, the passwords for the
Internet File Transfer Facility had been changed in accordance with the IDB dissemination policy.
Delegations were notified of their new passwords by letter of 27 April 2000.  The new passwords
came into effect on 19 June 2000.  No problems had been notified to the Secretariat.  Concerning the
IDB CD-ROM Release 3, a further two international agencies, the OECD and the World CustomsOrganization, had accepted the publishing restrictions outlined in the IDB dissemination policy.
Accordingly, copies of Release 3 had been sent to them. The next update of the IDB CD-ROM,
Release 4, was being reproduced and would be distributed to Members at the end of this week.
Release 4 contained tariff and import information for 128 country periods, up from the 75 county
periods contained in Release 3.  It also contained the PC application for analysing the information.
Release 4 replaced Release 3.  Two copies would be supplied to each delegation.  Extra copies would
be available on request.
3.10 On technical assistance, she recalled from the last meeting of this Committee that IDB
seminars for Geneva based delegations had been requested. Three half-day seminars were held on
22 and 23 May 2000. Another seminar and workshops were requested by delegations at the informal
Market Access Committee meeting of 23 May 2000.  The Secretariat had therefore arranged foranother seminar to be held on 28 June 2000.  Regarding the workshops, the Secretariat, in its fax
to delegations of 20 June 2000, had announced that the first workshop would be held on 11 July 2000.
Eight places were available, and would be filled on a first come first served basis.  As of the previous
day, seven delegates had registered for this workshop, leaving one place to be filled.  If more demand
was forthcoming, further workshops could be arranged.  Other technical assistance activitiesundertaken by the Secretariat since the last meeting of this Committee included a mission to
Barbados, that had resulted in additional trade and tariff information that could be used for the IDB.
At the moment, three requests for national technical assistance (Congo, Côte d'Ivoire, and Qatar) and
one regional seminar, to be held in Namibia, were under preparation.  It was planned to complete all
of them by the end of 2000.   A request for an IDB seminar by APEC was still pending.
3.11 Regarding the use of information provided to the Secretariat in the context of trade policy
reviews, she reported that beginning that month, th e formal Secretariat requests sent to Members for
trade policy review information now included a reque st for authorization to use that information for
the IDB.  Previous submissions of information for trade policy reviews were being screened.  Subject
to authorization by Members, and depending on the completeness of the information, this information
would be included in the IDB.
3.12 The Secretariat recalled that the IDB Internet File Transfer Facility contained an electronic
bulletin board, the IDB Forum, which provided a means for Members to post references to sources of
publicly available tariff and trade information.  To date, it had been used infrequently, usually to pose
questions on the use of the site.  At the previous meeting of the Committee, one delegation noted thatmany Members had posted their tariff schedule on their internet homepage, that this practice should
be encouraged, as it would improve overall transparency and facilitate the submission of such
information.  The Secretariat pointed out that any Member that so wished could post the address of its
government's Web site on the IDB Forum.  There was an index entry for Web sites in the IDB Forum
that could be used for this purpose.
3.13 With regard to technical matters, the Secretariat had been notified by two delegations that
they were unable to download a large file of seven megabytes.  The Secretariat had asked the
International Computing Centre (ICC), the organizati on that maintained the site, to investigate.  The
ICC had discovered that there was a time limit of 20 minutes set for downloading a file, after whichthe downloading operation would terminate before completion.  The time limit had since been
increased to 120 minutes, to avoid such problems in future.G/MA/M/24
Page 7
3.14 With respect to the IDB CD-ROM, some users had informed the Secretariat that they could
not run the setup program for Release 3 of the IDB CD-ROM.  The Secretariat had provided these
users with a fix to get around this problem.  Since then, Microsoft had provided the Secretariat with a
solution and the problem should not re-occur.  However as a precaution, the Secretariat had included
the fix in Release 4 of the IDB CD-ROM.
3.15 On the IDB Reporting Tools, the English-language version of the reporting tools had been
posted to the IDB Internet file Transfer Facility on 4 April 2000.  The French-language version of the
application had been posted to the Internet on 10 May 2000.  The Spanish version of the application
was now ready.  Recently, the Secretariat had discovered a minor technical error in one of the reports.
This had been corrected in all language versions of the application.  The corrected English and French
versions would be posted to the internet at the same time as the Spanish version was posted.  Thiswould be carried out in the coming days.
3.16 The Secretariat reported that it was progressin g with the IDB Internet Reporting Application.
The Secretariat had tested a number of development tools and methods and had selected Microsoft
(MS) Visual InterDev as the main development to ol and MS SQL server as the backend.  The client
part (that ran on the User's PC from the browse r) would be developed using HTML, Java and Java
Script, to achieve browser independence.  The server part (that ran on the WTO internet server) would
be developed using Active Server Pages (ASP), Visual Basic, Visual Basic Script and, where
necessary C++.  The Secretariat had created an IDB Web site on the WTO Intranet and was
developing a prototype application, starting with the query part.  The query would allow users to filterthe data that they wished to extract from the data base.  Where possible, the Secretariat was trying to
use off-the-shelf components for the development, a lthough this sometimes resulted in performance
problems.  For instance, the Secretariat had used a standard component to present the nomenclature
for product selection, using a tree-view similar to that used for product selection in the IDB CD-
ROM.  However, using this component, it took more than five minutes to transfer the full HSnomenclature to the client PC.  To get around this problem, the Secretariat was obliged to develop
Java code to accomplish this function in a more efficient manner.  Once the query was developed and
information could be presented at the tariff line level, the Secretariat would be in a position to provide
a demonstration of the software. The Secretariat expected to reach this point around
end-September 2000.  The next step would be to develop a summary report, such as tariff averages.
Before the prototype could be made available to Members, the Secretariat would need to resolve some
security issues and transfer the dissemination database and the application prototype to the serverlocated at the ICC.  Some technical work would al so be required to set up this server at the ICC.
3.17 The representative of Australia expressed his delegation's appreciation for the continued
technical and difficult work that the Secretariat had undertaken in these areas, and thanked the
Secretariat for responding so efficiently to his delegation's suggestion for a hands-on workshop whichhis delegation looked forward to participating in.
3.18 The representative of the United States expressed his appreciation for all the hard work that
the Secretariat had done in this area.  He enquired whether the software that had been developed for
the IDB was also going to be compatible or usable with the Consolidated Tariff Schedules database.
3.19 In response to the US question, the Secretariat stated that the database formats of the IDB and
the CTS were different in some aspects.  Therefore, the software developed for the IDB would need to
be modified for use with the CTS.
3.20 The Committee took note of the statements.G/MA/M/24
Page 8
(c) Review of the Operation of the IDB and IDB related Technical Assistance Activities in
accordance with paragraph 19 of document G/MA/IDB/3 entitled "Dissemination of the IDB"
(G/MA/IDB/W/5/Rev.1)
3.21 The Chairman stated that, as agreed at its last formal meeting on 23 March 2000, the
Committee had held an informal meeting on 23 May 2000 to review the operation of the IDB and IDB
related technical assistance activities.  In this connection, the Secretariat had prepared a revision of its
document G/MA/IDB/W/5.
3.22 For the record, he wished to report on the discussions which had taken place at that informal
meeting which, he believed, had been very constructive. All Members had agreed on the usefulness
and importance of the IDB.  The importance of technical assistance, in assisting Members make their
IDB notifications, was also noted.  Useful information was provided by certain delegations on thedifficulties faced by them in making an IDB submission.   An example of one such difficulty was that
of tariff information being available only in the national language and the problem of translating it
into one of the official WTO languages for the purposes of making an IDB submission.   The point
was also made that Members recently having undergone a trade policy review might consider
authorizing the Secretariat to use information provided  in that context, for the IDB.  As a conclusion
to the discussions, it was agreed that he, in his capacity as Vice-Chairman, would write to Members
reminding them of their notification obligations to the IDB and indicating that technical assistance
was available for those needing it.  It was also agreed that a second letter would be sent to Members
recently having undergone a trade policy review seeking authorization from them to use for the IDB
any relevant information submitted in connection with the TPRM exercise.   The letters, having beentranslated only very recently, were being sent out today. It was also agreed that the Secretariat Note
on "Guidelines for Supplying PC IDB Submissions" , which had been issued under a job number in
November 1997, would be re-issued as a WTO document  (G/MA/IDB/W/6).   Finally, it was felt that
it was too early to reach any conclusion with respect to the review and that another informal meeting
should be held in July in this connection.
3.23 The representative of Canada stated that his delegation wished to underline its growing
concern that gaps in the IDB were increasing because of a lack of follow-up submissions and updates.
His delegation looked forward to participating in the informal consultations, and looking for ways to
address this problem.
3.24 The Committee took note of the statements and agreed   to hold further informal consultations.
4. Consolidated Tariff Schedules Database Project
- Status of Members' schedules
4.1 The Chairman recalled that at the June 1999 meeting of the Committee it was agreed to
update Annex 2 of document G/MA/63, which reflected in a table format information on the status of
Members' schedules.   This had now been done and the updated information pertaining to Members'
schedules was now circulated in document G/MA/W/23, which would be periodically updated. He
pointed out that this work had been done on the Secretariat's own responsibility and had no legal
implications regarding Members' rights or obligations.
4.2 The representative of the European Communities wished to underscore the Chairman's last
comment on the fact that this document had been dr awn up under the responsibility of the Secretariat
and had no particular legal implications.  In this connection, his delegation expressed a general
reservation on the manner in which the status of the Communities' schedule was described in thisdocument.G/MA/M/24
Page 9
4.3 The representative of Hong Kong, China stated that his delegation had found document
G/MA/W/23 extremely useful and were looking forw ard to a regular updating of it.  He hoped that
when it was next updated, the concern by the European Communities could be duly reflected in the
updated document so that a complete picture of th e status of Members' schedules could be obtained.
4.4 The Committee took note of the statements.
- Report by the Secretariat
4.5 The Chairman reported on the informal consultations held, as agreed at the last formal
meeting of the Committee on 23 March 2000, on the matter of agricultural commitments and the CTS.
At these informal consultations, which were held on 3 April 2000, Members were of the view that: (1)agricultural commitments were part of the schedules and therefore should be part of the database; (2)
that discussions on this question should not prevent work from continuing on the current project; (3)
the Secretariat would prepare, in consultation with technical experts, a possible format for the
inclusion of agricultural commitments in the database and (4) the Secretariat would speak to potential
donors for funding of this exercise.  On the third point, an informal document containing theSecretariat's proposed format for inclusion of agricultural commitments had been distributed at this
meeting. He proposed that an informal meeting should be held soon to have Members' reactions to
this document.   In the interim, he urged those delegations having any technical questions to contact
the Secretariat (Mrs de Verteuil).
4.6 The Committee took note of Chairman's statement and agreed
 to his proposal.
4.7 The Secretariat recalled that at the last meeting, the Committee on Market Access was
informed that 99 out of the 107 schedules, which the Secretariat had committed to process for the
Consolidated Tariff Schedules database, had been completed and sent to Members for approval.Since then, the remaining eight schedules had been processed and sent to Members.  In addition, the
schedules of two more Members had been processed.  One schedule related to a new Member.  The
other schedule was processed at the request of the developing country Member concerned and sent for
approval on 15 June 2000. The schedule of the latest WTO Member was also currently being
processed. On completion of the processing of the last-mentioned schedule, and including
Switzerland, the Secretariat would have processed a total of 111 schedules.  As of 27 June 2000, 77
schedules had passed the 90-day approval period without modifications being proposed by Members.
They were therefore deemed to be approved.  Eleven Members had notified to the Secretariat
modifications to be incorporated in their schedules.  Twenty-two schedules had yet to be approved.
Basing calculations on the last schedule sent for approval on 15 June 2000, one could expect the
approval phase to be finished by mid-September.  With respect to the schedules being processed by
Members themselves, three Members had submitted their processed schedules to the Secretariat forinclusion in the CTS database.  Seven more were due.
4.8 In terms of the resources devoted to the CTS project, she recalled that the bulk of the work
was being done by short-term staff under the supervision of the Secretariat.  With savings made from
the original funds, the Secretariat was able to extend the contracts of the statisticians and theprogrammer until 30  June 2000.  However, one stat istician had left at the end of May 2000.  The
team was down to two full-time and one half-time statisticians, and a replacement programmer.
4.9 Between April and June 2000, the main tasks that had been accomplished were processing as
already mentioned; reviewing modifications received up until the end of June 2000 for incorporationin the database; doing some advance work on a procedure for linking the CTS and the IDB, and on
reporting tools.  She mentioned that the final CTS database would combine the schedules prepared by
the Secretariat with the schedules prepared by Members themselves into one database that was
expected to become available to all Members at the same time.  This implied a number of additionalG/MA/M/24
Page 10
tasks that need to be undertaken, for example, the introduction of modifications to schedules sent to
Members that could come in only between end June and mid-September 2000; the integration of the
schedules of developing and developed Members into one database; and the completion of
documentation.  These wrapping up tasks could be undertaken more effectively using the CTS Project
Team under the continued supervision of Secretariat staff.  She was pleased to report that theGovernment of the United Kingdom had agreed in principal to fund this phase of the project, which
was expected to take around three months.  Allowing for some holidays for the project team, it should
be completed by the end of October 2000.
4.10 On the possible extension of the CTS database to include agricultural commitments, the
Secretariat had developed the database format.  The proposed format circulated to the Committee in
an informal Secretariat note dated 27 June 2000 was compatible with the current CTS format.  Shehad had informal discussions with the UK Government department concerned on the possibility of
financing the inclusion of the agricultural commitments of 31 developing country Members in the
CTS database.  She understood that they would be willing to consider a proposal from the Secretariat
after agreement to such an extensio n had been reached in this Committee.
4.11 The representative of Paraguay requested an extension of the 90-day approval time-period for
his authorities to examine Paraguay's schedule as prepared by the Secretariat.  He also requested that
the Secretariat give his delegation a new diskette containing the electronic schedule, as his authorities
had been unable to open the previous one sent to them by the Secretariat.
4.12 The representative of Uruguay informed Members that his authorities had received the
documentation sent by the Secretariat and were examining it but had not yet completed this work.
4.13 The representative of Canada stated that his delegation had submitted to the Secretariat the
electronic loose-leaf format for its tariffs as required by G/L/138.4.14 The representative of the Philippines, speaking on behalf of ASEAN Members, stated that
they attached great importance to this work.  Sh e wished to place on record the fact that this
Committee was grateful to the UK Government for agreeing to fund this very important project.
4.15 The Committee took note of the statements and agreed  to hold informal consultations.
5. Review of Paragraph 1 of the Understanding on the Interpretation of Article XXVIII of
the GATT 1994
5.1 The Chairman recalled that at its last meetin g, the Committee, in light of statements made by
some Members, had agreed to revert to this item at this meeting.  He had also invited  interested
delegations, in the interim, to submit to the Secret ariat any proposals in writing in light of the text
contained in paragraph 1 of the Understanding.   No written submissions had been received.
5.2 The representative of Hong Kong, China noted that the Secretariat had advised the Committee
at the March 2000 meeting that this criterion had not been officially invoked.  Nevertheless,  his
delegation thought that it might be useful if Members who had made reference to this criterion duringprevious consultations could share with others their experience to help consider whether and if so
what improvements were necessary.
5.3 The representative of the European Communities proposed that if by the time of the next
formal meeting of the Committee, no Member had raised this matter, then the Committee could
consider this item closed.
5.4 The representative of Switzerland supported the EC proposal.G/MA/M/24
Page 11
5.5 The representative of Korea supported the EC proposal.  He added that his delegation did not
intend to pursue the idea it had advanced at the last Market Access Committee meeting.
5.6 In response to a clarification sought by the representative of Hong Kong, China, the Chairman
stated that it was his understanding that the EC was not suggesting that this item by taken off the
agenda of the next Committee meeting but that if by that time nothing was forthcoming from
Members, then the Committee should consider the agenda item closed.
5.7 The representative of the United States had hoped that discussions on this agenda item could
have been concluded at this meeting. Sufficient opportunity had been given to delegations to make
any proposals.  Members who had originally wished to keep this item on the agenda no longer desiredthis.  His delegation was not going to object to the proposal by Hong Kong China, but it seemed to be
an empty exercise at this point.
5.8 The Committee agreed to revert to this item at its next meeting and that if no submissions
were received on this item by that time, then it would be considered closed at that meeting.
6. Observer Status of International Intergovernmental Organizations (G/MA/W/11/Rev.1)
6.1 The Chairman drew the Committee's attention to document G/MA/TAR/W/11/Rev.1 which
set out the situation with respect to requests for observer status from international intergovernmental
organizations.   The two new requests received concerned WAEMU, i.e. West African Economic andMonetary Union and COMESA, i.e. Common Market for Eastern and Southern Africa.
6.2 He  recalled that the General Council had adopted procedures for observer status for international
intergovernmental organizations in July 1996.  Those guidelines appeared in Annex 3 of document
WT/L/161.  According to those procedures, requests for observer status were to be considered on a case-by-case basis by each WTO body to which a request had been addressed, taking into account such criteria
as the nature of the work of the organization concerned, the nature of its membership, the number of
WTO Members in the organization, reciprocity with respect to access to proceedings, documents and
other aspects of observership, and whether the organization had been involved in the past with the work
of the GATT.
6.3 At its meeting on 7 February 1997, the General Council had agreed, with regard to international
intergovernmental organizations,  (a)  that the organizations which already had observer status in the
General Council on an ad hoc basis be granted observer status immediately;  (b) that for international
intergovernmental organizations whose requests had not yet been considered, the Chairman would
conduct consultations;  (c)  to invite the other WTO bodies to proceed in a similar way.
6.4 WAEMU and COMESA had requested observer status in other WTO bodies, and the
Chairpersons of those bodies, including the General Council and the Council for Trade in Goods, were
consulting with Members concerning the request.   In one Committee, the Committee on Trade and
Development, WAEMU was granted observer status on an ad hoc basis.
6.5 The representative of the United States stated that without prejudice to the merits of either of
these organizations, he believed that consultations in the General Council on the question of regional
groups' observership in the WTO Committees were still ongoing and so his delegation would at this
point not support their inclusion as observers in this Committee.
6.6 The Committee took note of the statements and agreed  to revert to this matter at an
appropriate time in the future.G/MA/M/24
Page 12
7. Other business
(a) Australia – timely completion of the Committee's work
7.1 The representative of Australia stated that the Market Access Committee had within the scope
of its work and its mandate the task of seeing through the completion of the IDB, the consolidated
tariff schedules exercise, and the HS96 transposition work.  His delegation believed that the timelycompletion of these three elements of the Committee's work would provide Members with valuable
analytical tools for full engagement in any future industrial tariff negotiations.  A considerable amount
of progress had been made with respect to each of the three elements just outlined but his delegation
believed that work should be intensified on each so that they could be completed within an agreed
timeframe and become available to all Members.  This work was quite separate from any broader
processes relating to the launching of a new round, which could include non-agricultural tariffs, and in
this context he reported that one of the key out comes of the most recent APEC meeting held in
Darwin was a call for the commencement of preparatory work on industrial tariffs and other related
areas to begin in the WTO.  This would be without prejudice to the overall agenda for negotiations.
His delegation considered this APEC position to be a strong encouragement to the Market Access
Committee to complete this valuable work.
7.2 The representative of Hong Kong, China stated that his delegation agreed that timely
completion of the three elements of the Committee's work would assist Members to prepare for any
future industrial tariff negotiations.  He was pleased to note that considerable progress had been made
on those three elements.  His delegation would intensify its efforts in this regard and he agreed with
Australia that Members should aim at completing this technical work within an agreed timeframe.
Enhanced market access through further reduction and/or elimination of industrial tariffs was an
important facet of trade liberalization, germane to the core business of the WTO.  He noted too that
APEC trade ministers had recently called for a commencement of preparatory work on industrial
tariffs without prejudice to the overall agenda for any future negotiations.
7.3 The representative of India noted that the APEC meeting at Darwin seemed to have reached a
decision for separating out possible future industrial tariff negotiations from any broader process for
launching of a new round.  Her delegation took note of this information but thought that the Market
Access Committee had no role to play at this point of time in either of the matters.
7.4 The representative of Norway  thanked the re presentative of Australia for the information
provided from the APEC meeting.  Norway shared the Australian view that the completion of the
HS96 transposition as well as having an updated IDB and CTS available would be very important for
any future work on lowering tariffs for industrial products.
7.5 The Committee took note of the statements.
(b) India – lack of notification by the EC and the US of a mutually agreed solution in the area of
rules of origin
7.6 The representative of India stated that it was with great concern that her delegation was
bringing the following matter to the Market Access Committee.  Her delegation had raised it more
than nine months ago in the Dispute Settlement Body (DSB) and also rep eatedly in the Rules of
Origin Committee.  In 1998, the EC had initiated formal consultations under the DSU with the US on
the matter of changes to rules of origin which had been introduced by the US in 1996 mainly in the
textiles and clothing sectors.  India and a few other WTO Members were third parties to this dispute.
Her delegation had heard from the parties concerned that a mutually agreed solution had been reached
to the dispute.  However despite repeated requests th at the mutually agreed solution be notified to all
the relevant bodies of the WTO under Article 3.4 of the DSU, India had not  seen any suchG/MA/M/24
Page 13
notification.  Since the changes to the rules of origin were introduced by the US in 1996, her
delegation had been making it evident that there had been trade distortion in a sector of particular
importance to India. The mutually agreed solu tion reached between the two parties in 1996 was
notified two years later and a fresh dispute was initiated because the changes made by the US
subsequent to the mutually agreed solution were also not compatible with the US rights andobligations under the WTO Rules of Origin Agreement.  It was unfortunate that Members were still in
the same sorry situation of not knowing what furt her agreements and changes had been introduced by
the US.  Her delegation urged this body to request the US and the EC to make their notification as
soon as possible.  Any further delay would create unwarranted precedents.
7.7 The representatives of Hong Kong, China and the Philippines
 supported India's request and
encouraged the interested parties to submit the required notification as soon as possible.7.8 The Committee took note of the statements.
(c) Date of the next meeting
7.9 The Committee took note that the date of its next meeting was 12 October 2000, subject to
confirmation.
__________