RESTRICTEDWORLD TRADE
ORGANIZATIONG/SCM/W/485
8 February 2002
(02-0620)
Committee on Subsidies
and Countervailing MeasuresOriginal:  English
MEMBERS' DIFFICULTIES IN MAKING SUBSIDY NOTIFICATIONS,
AND THE PLANNED SUBSIDY NOTIFICATION SEMINAR
Reply to Questions in document G/SCM/W/473
of 18 December 2001
Paper Submitted by Egypt
The following communication, dated 4 February 2002, has been received from the Permanent
Mission of Egypt.
_______________
B. QUESTIONS CONCERNING DIFFICULTIES IN NOTIFYING
Q1. Does your government face resource constraints in trying to make subsidy notifications?
If so, what are the major bottlenecks in the notification system of your government?  Is the
problem primarily an insufficient number  of staff to handle the notifications, or is it more a
question of insufficiently trained  staff?
Reply
Egypt, as a developing country, seeks to interact in world trade and fulfil its international
obligations.  In doing so, it faces resource constraints regarding the subsidy notifications; although
there is a sufficient number of staff, they are, however, not sufficiently trained for such matters.
Q2. Depending on your answer to question 1, above, if the notification questionnaire format
could be simplified, would this make a difference to your government’s ability to make the
required subsidy notifications?
Reply
Yes, it would make a difference to government ability, as it would facilitate the required
subsidy notifications.
Q3. Balancing your government’s needs for as simp le a format as possible against its needs
to be able to understand other Members’ notifications when it reviews them, how muchsimplification could be introduced without sacrificing transparency?G/SCM/W/485
Page 2
Reply
Simplification shall be introduced to the extent  that Egypt, and other developing countries
which face a lack of experience regarding this matter, would absorb the requirements of the subsidy
notifications, since Egypt lacks sufficient experience in this matter.
Q4. Considering the notification format itself, and the concepts underlying it as found in
SCM Articles 1-3, in your government’ s experience, do individuals responsible for making
notifications have difficulties understanding the requirements due to the language used in the
Agreement to define “subsidy”, “specificity”, etc. ?  For example, do these individuals believe
that subsidies are in the nature of cash grants  only, and do not encompass revenue foregone via
tax and duty incentives?  Could some sort of explanation be introduced into the questionnaireformat to make more clear the scope of measures that are subject to notification?  How might
such an explanation be worded?
Reply
Please refer to the abovementioned comment.
Q5. Does your government experience general pr oblems due to the formatting requirements
of the notification questionnaire?  In particular, does your government maintain any pre-
existing information that addresses the substance of the notification questionnaire, but does notcorrespond to the questionnaire’s format?  If so, what are the specific problems that your
government encounters when it tries to fo rmat the information as required by the
questionnaire?  If the information were to be notified in its pre-existing format, could it
nevertheless be keyed to the data elements of the subsidy questionnaire?
Reply
No.  Egypt does not maintain any pre-existing information that addresses the substance of the
notification questionnaire.  Egypt seeks technical assistance in this field.
Q6. In reviewing other Members’ notifications, would your government find it problematic
to review information that was formatted in a way other than the way foreseen in the subsidy
questionnaire, but that comprehensively ad dressed the substantive elements of the
questionnaire?  How important would it be for this information to be keyed or coded to the
questionnaire format?
Reply
We think that applying one general format will simplify the notification questionnaire, since
applying different formats might create problems which will raise a lot of questions and answers.  One
general, simple and clear format will avoid all such future problems.  In addition to this, it will assist
the country in fully preparing the notification, and other countries' understanding of it.
Q7. Does your government maintain any info rmation about its subsidy or incentive
programmes on official web sites?  How much wo uld your notification of subsidies be simplified
if such information could be submitted in its pre-existing format?  As a reviewer of
notifications, what sorts of limits should there be to the substitution of information from websites for completed notification questionnaires?  Would references to web sites be a useful
supplement to substantive information provided in a notification?G/SCM/W/485
Page 3
Reply
The Egyptian Government does not maintain any information about its subsidy or incentive
programmes on official web sites.  It uses the manual method regarding the gathering of information
and data.
Q8. Concerning General Rule 6, which requires that  notification of subsidies provided “to
specific products or sectors” be organized on a product- or sector-specific basis, does this rule
pose problems for your government when notifying subsidies that are provided on a horizontal,
rather than a product- or sector-specific basis?   What are the specific steps and difficulties in
preparing sector- or product-specific informatio n for subsidies provided on a horizontal basis?
Reply
Egypt can not answer this question as there is a lack of experience in this field.
Q9. Does this rule present problems for notifi cation of subsidies that are provided on a
product- or sector-specific basis (e.g., some agricultural subsidies)?
Reply
Egypt can not answer this question as there is a lack of experience in this field.
Q10. Would a redrafting of General Rule 6 to refer to subsidies "provided on the basis of
specific products or sectors" help to resolve this  problem?  (The idea would be to clarify that
programme-based information, rather than product- or sector-specific information would be
required for subsidies provided on a horizontal basis, which product- or sector-specificsubsidies would continue to need to be notified on that basis.)
Reply
Egypt can not answer this question as there is a lack of experience in this field.
Q11. Would such a redrafting pose problems for the review of subsidy notifications, and if so,
what would those problems be?
Reply
Egypt can not answer this question as there is a lack of experience in this field.
Q12. To what extent does the general requirement to provide statistical information on the
trade effects of notified subsidies (chapeau of item 9) impede or delay the presentation of
subsidy notifications?
Reply
We think that although the said requirement does impede and delay the presentation of the
notification, it is an essential requirement, and therefore there should be sufficient clarification of this
requirement, in addition to the technical diffic ulty of developing statistical information on
expenditures or budget amounts of subsidies.
Q13. To what extent does the need to compile the specific kinds of statistical information
referred to in items 9(a) and 9(b) impede or delay the presentation of subsidy notifications?G/SCM/W/485
Page 4
Reply
No comment.
Q14. How important is this statistical information about other Members’  subsidies to your
government when reviewing subsidy notificati ons?  Could these reporting requirements be
made less stringent in some manner?  If so, how?
Reply
No comment.
Q15. Does your government find, in preparing s ubsidy notifications, that there is conceptual
overlap or redundancy in some of the information elements as currently drafted?
Reply
Egypt has no experience in this field.
Q16. If your government believes there to be overlap, how might this be eliminated?  What
drafting improvements might be introduced to clarify such situations, while preserving the
substantive requirements of Article 25 from which the questionnaire is drawn?
Reply
Please refer to the above reply.
Q17. Do the requirements to provide information on the policy objective or purpose of the
subsidy, its background and authority, and to whom and how it is provided pose significant
difficulties to your government in preparing its subsidy notifications?  How might these
requirements be simplified?
Reply
Yes, we think there are difficulties in regard ing this matter as all data is manually gathered
from all sources.
Q18. Does the requirement to furnish an explanation where a particular element of
information cannot be provided pose particular difficulties to your government in preparing itsnotifications?  If so, is there a way to simplify this requirement while preserving its substantive
content?
Reply
Yes, it poses difficulties in preparing the notification, therefore we call for more flexibility on
this matter.
Q19. Is there sufficient flexibility in item 7 of the subsidy questionnaire (information on the
amounts of subsidies provided) for your government to be able to notify such informationwithout undue difficulty?  If not, is there a way to simplify this requirement while preserving its
substantive content?G/SCM/W/485
Page 5
Reply
We think it is flexible enough, however we refer to our comments regarding the difficulties
raised from the submission of statistical data, that is  to say there are technical difficulties in providing
the required information.
C. QUESTIONS PERTAINING TO THE SUBSIDY NOTIFICATION SEMINAR
Q1. Concerning the number and nature of pa rticipants in the seminar, how many
individuals in your government have day-to-day responsibility for gathering information about
subsidies and for preparing and submitting subsidy notifications based on that information?  If
more than one, please describe the differen ces in these individuals ’ responsibilities.
Reply
The participant will be from the competent authority according to Article 25 of the Anti-
Dumping and Safeguard and WTO Unit, which is newly established, in The Ministry of ForeignTrade, which is responsible for the investigation subsidy notification according to Article 25.  There is
no programme notification from Egypt.
Q2. Would it be sufficient for your government to have two participants in the seminar?  If
not, why not, and how many participants would be optimal from your government’s point ofview?
Reply
Two participants are sufficient for the seminar.
Q3. Would two days be a sufficient/appropriate length for the seminar?  If not, what would
be more appropriate?
Reply
The length of the seminar must be from 3 to 5 days, which means that it must be extended as
Egypt and the developing countries need more time to cover the clarification they need.
Q4. Would the following schedule be appropriate:  First session:  detailed presentation of the
basic definitions in Articles 1, 2 and 3 of the SCM Agreement, and presentation of the subsidy
notification obligations in the light of these definitions.  Second session:  Presentations by
Members concerning the specific problems they experience in preparing subsidy notifications.
Third session:  Information-sharing and brainstorming among Members as to possible practical
solutions for the identified problems (ways to coordinate and streamline gathering and
formatting of subsidy information).  Fourth session:  Follow-up steps to ensure that information
shared and lessons learned would be retained and implemented.  (It has been emphasized that
to be effective, such follow-up should be immediate and intensive.)  Ideas suggested to date have
included establishment of informal contacts am ong capital-based officials, planning of future
focused technical assistance activities, etc.
Reply
In this regard, the same schedule would be divided over five days for more clarification.G/SCM/W/485
Page 6
Q5. Does your government normally send capital-based representatives to the Committee’s
regular meetings?  If not, why not?
Reply
The Egyptian Government has sent capital-based representatives to the Committee's regular
meetings since 1996.
Q6. Does your government view this subsidy noti fication seminar as an important event in
improving its ability to understand the subsidy rules, and to make subsidy notifications in a
complete and timely manner?  (That is, does your government view the seminar as a priority
event for its participation?)  Does your government  plan to send capital-based participants to
the seminar?  If so, how many and what are their functions?  If not, why not?
Reply
The Egyptian Government considers the subsidy notification seminar as an important event in
improving ability to understand the subsidy rules, and to make the subsidy notification in a complete
and timely manner.  However, the Egyptian Government insists on the participation of the WTO Unit,
which is newly established in the Ministry of Foreign Trade, in order that they gain more experience.
Q7. In the view of your government, would financial sponsorship only of participants from
least-developed country Members be appropriate?  If not, why not?  What other objective
criteria for eligibility for financial sponsorship could be developed that might be more
appropriate?
Reply
We suggest that the proposed financial sponsorship for the officials of the LDCs must include
the officials of the developing countries, and for the same reason there should be at least one official
from each developing country.
Q8. If your government would be prevented from sending participants to the seminar due to
financial constraints, what is the minimum level of financial sponsorship that would make itpossible to send participants (e.g., airfare only, airfare and subsistence for the days in Geneva,
etc.)?
Reply
The minimum level of financial sponsorship that would make it possible to send participants
must include airfare and subsistence for the days in Geneva.
Q9. Assuming that it is not possible to finance the seminar out of existing trust funds in the
WTO (a possibility currently being explored), and assuming a total budget of approximatelyCHF 225,000, would your government consider making  a donation to finance it?  If so, how
much would your government be in a position to contribute?
Reply
The Egyptian Government could not contribute due to financial constraints.
Q10. If the seminar were financed by earmarked contributions from individual Members,
and there were a surplus in the budget for the seminar (due to fewer than expected participantsG/SCM/W/485
Page 7
from Members eligible for financial sponsorship,  however they might be identified), how should
any such surplus be disposed of?  Two possible  options have been discussed (I) returning the
surplus to the sponsors on a pro-rata basis; or (ii) making the surplus available on a first-come,
first-served basis to other developing countr y Members.  Are there other, more appropriate,
options?
Reply
The second option is better for Egypt and the developing countries.
__________