RESTRICTEDWORLD TRADE
ORGANIZATIONS/FIN/M/33
13 December 2001
(01-6320)
Committee on Trade in Financial Services
REPORT OF THE MEETING HE LD ON 27 NOVEMBER 2001
Note by the Secretariat
1. The Committee on Trade in Financial Services held a meeting on 27 November 2001, under
the Chairmanship of Mr Jan-Peter Mout (The Netherlands).  The agenda is contained in airgramWTO/AIR/1676.
A. A
CCEPTANCE OF THE FIFTH PROTOCOL TO THE GENERAL AGREEMENT ON TRADE IN
SERVICES EMBODYING THE RESULTS OF THE FINANCIAL SERVICES NEGOTIATIONS
2. The Chairman recalled that seven WTO Members had not yet ratified the Fifth Protocol,
namely:  Bolivia, Brazil, Dominican Republic, Jamaica, Philippines, Poland, and Uruguay.  In the
previous meeting, the Committee heard updates on the status of domestic procedures from the
delegations of Brazil, the Philippines and Uruguay.  Additionally, the Dominican Republic announced
at the last meeting that its Senate had already approved the Protocol, therefore concluding the
domestic ratification procedures.  The Chairman expected that the Dominican Republic would shortly
send a formal communication to the Council for Trade in Services, requesting the re-opening of theProtocol for acceptance.
3. The representative of Uruguay said that the Protocol was still before the Commission of
International Affairs of the House of Representatives.  He reiterated that the content of the offer
presented by Uruguay under the Fifth Protocol had already been incorporated in Uruguay's legislative
framework.
4. The representative of the United States expressed his disappointment for the lack of any
additional information from the other six WTO Members who had not ratified the Protocol.
5. The representative of the European Communities noted that some of the Members mentioned
by the Chairman were not present at the meeting,  and suggested that the Chairman contact them in
order to have an update of their situation and feed that information back to the Committee at the next
meeting.
6. The Committee decided that the Chairman would contact the delegations referred to by the
European Union, and would report to the Committee at the next meeting.  The Committee also
took note of the statements made.
B. TECHNICAL ISSUES
7. The Chairman recalled that at the last mee ting, the Committee decided to set the issue of
classification aside for the time being, but to keep an agenda item entitled "technical issues", under
which delegations would be able to raise any technical issue.
8. No interventions were made under this agenda item.
9. The Committee decided to revert to this item at the next meeting.S/FIN/M/32
Page 2
C. RECENT DEVELOPMENTS IN FINANCIAL SERVICES TRADE
10. The Chairman recalled that at the previous meeting the Committee had heard presentations by
the delegations of the European Union and the United States.  Additionally, the delegation of
Argentina presented an informal note, JOB(01)/151, entitled Argentina and the International
Financial Architecture.  A detailed description of these three presentations could be found in the
report of the last meeting, contained in document S/FIN/M/32.  He also recalled that, as indicated in
the annotated agenda issued for the previous meeting (document JOB(01)/126), he considered that
this agenda item represented a good opportunity for Members to discuss national experiences
regarding regulatory reform processes, which may provide additional background information for the
current negotiations.  One issue of particular concern to him was how to make discussions more
interactive, and it was clear that most delegations shared that concern.
11. The representative of the United States presented an informal document, identified as
Job(01)/161.  The communication was essentially a follow-up of the discussion held at the previous
meeting, in which his delegation described the process by which the United States Executive Branch
had developed regulations for the implementation of the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act.  This
communication provided more detail on that regulatory process, and was submitted with the intention
of encouraging other Members both to consider the United States particular experience and to provideinformation in the future on their own experience in this area.
12. The Chairman proposed to revert to this item at the next meeting, and to open the floor to
delegations for comments on both the communication submitted by the United States at this meeting
and on the presentations and communications submitted at the meeting held on 11 October.
13. The Committee so agreed.
D. DATE OF THE NEXT MEETING
14. The Chairman announced that he intended to raise the issue of the organization of future work
at the next meeting of the Committee.  In that regard, he appealed delegations to reflect seriously on
this issue, taking into account decisions taken by Ministers at the last session of the Ministerial
Conference.  He also said that he would consult delegations before the next meeting to seek theirviews on these matters.  Additionally, he proposed that the Committee hold its next meeting during
the next cluster of services meetings.
15. The representative of the United States requested that, in terms of future scheduling of
meetings, consideration be given to the idea of holding the meetings of the Committee with proximity
to the discussion of proposals on financial services at the Special Session of the Council for Trade in
Services, in order to facilitate the participation of financial services experts.
16. The representatives of Switzerland and the European Communities  supported the suggestion
made by the United States.
17. The Chairman suggested asking the Secretariat to take into account the participation of
capital-based experts in the meetings, and to try to schedule the next meeting of the Committee as
closely as possible to the planned discussions on financial services in the special session of the
Council for Trade in Services.
18. The Committee so agreed.
E. OTHER BUSINESS
19. The representative of the International Monetary Fund said that his request to speak at this
meeting had been inspired by the briefing session by international standard-setting organizations inS/FIN/M/33
Page 3
financial services, held in October.  That session was very useful in providing a broad picture of the
efforts undertaken by standards-setting bodies in banking, insurance, and securities.  However, as was
also clear at the session, the actual assessment of countries’ compliance with relevant standards was
an element in the joint IMF-World Bank work within the framework of the Financial Sector
Assessment Program (FSAP).
20. In view of the many comments made both at the session and more informally afterwards, he
informed the Committee that the Fund staff was available to provide a briefing session on the
Fund/Bank Financial Sector Assessment Program.  Su ch a session could include a discussion of the
background to the FSAP, its relationship with the Fund’s economic surveillance, country coverage,
procedures, and the main components of the analysis, including, for example the institutional and
legal framework, macro-prudential analysis, and stress tests.  Particular attention could be placed on
the role within the FSAP on the methodology of assessments of compliance with international
financial sector standards and codes, and the relationship with programs of financial sector reforms
and liberalization, as well as follow-up technical assistance.  The IMF saw such a session as not
country specific, but rather as one that would describe the main features of the FSAP process and be
based on publicly available information released by the Fund with an explicit consent of the
authorities.  He said that it was of course up to WTO Members to decide on the need for such a
session, and on its modalities.  He expressed confidence that such a cross-fertilization in experience
would be useful for the WTO financial sector negotiators and could contribute to improving
coherence in international policymaking, as called for most recently in Doha.
21. The representative of the European Communities expressed an interest in having a written
proposal by the IMF, outlining the points made at this meeting. She said that it was useful to hear that
no country-specific information would be involved, because that was a particular concern raised
before deciding on the organization of the seminar held in October.
22. The representative of Pakistan said that the idea put forward by the IMF seemed to be
acceptable, but he wondered what the timeframe for such a session was.
23. In response to that query, the representative of the IMF said that no particular timeframe was
envisaged, but suggested that the briefing session could be held within a relatively near timeframe of
one of the meetings of the Committee itself.  He agreed with the suggestion made to have his
statement circulated to Members.  He finally said that if the Committee wanted to go forward with the
briefing session, the IMF could engage in a dialogue to decide on a convenient time.
24. The Chairman proposed that the statement made by the IMF be circulated to all Members,
and that the Committee revert to this issue at the next meeting.
25. The Committee so decided.
__________