./.RESTRICTEDWORLD TRADE
ORGANIZATIONWT/REG45/M/2
WT/REG46/M/2
WT/REG47/M/2
WT/REG48/M/2WT/REG62/M/2
WT/REG63/M/2
8 November 1999
(99-4819)
Committee on Regional Trade Agreements
Twenty-Fourth Session
EXAMINATION OF THE FREE TRADE AGREEMENTS BETWEEN THE
CZECH REPUBLIC AND LATVIA, LITHUANIA, AND ESTONIA;
AND OF THE FREE TRADE AGREEMENTS BETWEEN THE
SLOVAK REPUBLIC AND LATVIA, LITHUANIA, AND ESTONIA
Note on the Meeting of 22 September 1999
Chairman:  Mr. Krirk-Krai Jirapaet (Thailand)
1. This meeting was convened in docume nt WTO/AIR/1166, dated 15 September 1999.
2. Under Agenda Items B.IV-IX, the Committee on Regional Trade Agreements (CRTA or
Committee) took up the examination of the six Free Trade Agreements (FTAs) between the
Czech Republic and Latvia, Lithuania and Estonia; and between the Slovak Republic and Latvia,Lithuania and Estonia.
3. The Chairman noted that the meeting was th e third round of the examination of the
six Agreements.  The Committee had already considered them in its 20th and 23rd  Sessions and the
corresponding minutes of these meetings  had been distributed (WT/REG/GEN/M/3 ; and
WT/REG45, 46, 47, 48, 62&63/M/1).  The set of responses to written questions received by the
Parties to each of the Agreements had been distributed in three documents:  WT/REG45&47/4,WT/REG46&48/4, WT/REG62&63/4.  He proposed that the Committee examine the six Agreements
in one group and suggested that delegations indicate whether their intervention related to a specific
Agreement or applied to all of them.  He recalled that in July 1999 Members had been requested to
submit additional questions in writing regarding the examination of the Agreements, but no question
had been received.  Noting the advanced stage of the factual review of the Agreements, he opened thefloor to comments of either a general or a specific nature.
4. The representative of the Slovak Republic, on behalf of the Parties, endorsed the Chairman's
opening statement regarding the advanced stage of the on-going factual examination and hoped for its
conclusion.  Responding to a previous query by the United States, he stated that the Slovak Republic
applied import surcharges in full accordance with the provisions of Article XII of GATT 1994, in anon-discriminatory and transparent manner and on an MFN basis.  The import surcharge was
calculated using the customs value of goods in accordance with the provisions of the
Slovak Republic's Customs Act.  He recalled that in recent consultations with the Slovak Republic on
its import surcharge, the Committee on Balance-of-Payments Restrictions had endorsed the
application of the import surcharge in accordance with the provisions of Article XII of the GATT.
5. The representative of the United States enquired about the status of the provision of trade
statistics requested by his delegation.  In regard to paragraph 12 of the minutes to the last meeting
(WT/REG45,46,47,48,62&63/M/1) relating to the use of preferential tariff rates, he stated that hisWT/REG45/M/2, WT/REG46/M/2,
WT/REG47/M/2, WT/REG48/M/2,
WT/REG62/M/2, WT/REG63/M/2
Page 2
delegation viewed Article XXIV as not providing for anything other than zero or MFN tariff rates.
His delegation was also interested in knowing more about the rules of origin regime of the
Agreements.  The representative of the Slovak Republic replied that the Parties had provided statistics
before the previous meeting which they believed were sufficient for purposes of examining the
Agreements' compliance with Article XXIV. He was not aware of any requests for additional
statistics.  The representative of the United States clarified that, in relation to the responses given in
paragraph 10 of the minutes to the last meeting  with respect to trade data, his delegation was
interested in a description of the content of the Annexes and Protocols that had been referred to.  He
added that paragraph 13 of the minutes to the last meeting carried a detailed description of his
delegation's query.
6. The representative of the Slovak Republic reiterated his previous statement that all the
relevant information relating to the six Agreements had already been provided.  Drawing the attention
of the Committee to the deadline for additional questions which had been set for 15 July 1999, he
remarked that his delegation had received no indication prior to the present meeting of additional
questions.  In response, the representative of the United States remarked that he had taken note of the
comments made by the Parties and would refer th em to his capital; however, he did not think his
delegation's questions related to the 15 July deadline.  His delegation had not based these questions on
new documents; they intended only to clarify items that were discussed orally at the last meeting and
were reflected in the minutes.  He specified that his delegation was particularly interested in a
response to the question relating to  the European system of cumulation of origin.  He stated that he
would submit any follow-up questions on the minutes  in writing.  The representative of the
Slovak Republic thanked the delegate from the United States for his clarification and hoped for the
prompt conclusion of the factual part of the examination of the six Agreements.
7. The representative of Hungary stated his dele gation's view that the information provided by
the Parties was sufficient and that the factual examination of these Agreements be concluded.  He
proposed that any outstanding issues be dealt with at the meeting scheduled to be held on
8 October 1999.  The representative of the Slovak Republic endorsed the statement made by the
representative of Hungary.
8. The Chairman declared the end of the factual round of examination of the six Agreements
under review.  He asked the Secretariat to begin drafting the reports for these examinations.
9. The Committee took note of the comments made.
__________