00-4869 MOREPRESS RELEASE
PRESS/TPRB/147
14 November 2000
TRADE POLICY REVIEW BODY
REVIEW OF PERU
TPRB'S EVALUATION
The Trade Policy Review Body of the World Trade Organization (WTO) concluded its
second review of Peru's trade policies on 30 and 31 May 2000. The text of the Chairperson's
concluding remarks is attached as a summary of the salient points which emerged during the
discussion.
The review enables the TPRB to conduct a collec tive examination of the full range of trade
policies and practices of each WTO member countries at regular periodic intervals to monitor
significant trends and developments which may have an impact on the global trading system.
The review is based on two reports which are prepared respectively by the WTO Secretariat
and the government under review and which cover all aspects of the country's trade policies, including
its domestic laws and regulations, the institutional framework, bilateral, regional and other
preferential agreements, the wider economic needs and the external environment. A record of thediscussion and the Chairperson's summing-up together with these two reports will be published in due
course at the complete trade policy review of Peru and will be available from the WTO Secretariat,
Centre William Rappard, 154 rue de Lausanne, 1211 Geneva 21.PRESS/TPRB/147
Page 2
MORESince December 1989, the following reports have been completed: Argentina (1992 and
1999), Australia (1989, 1994 and 1998), Austria (19 92), Bahrain (2000) Bangladesh (1992 and 2000),
Benin (1997), Bolivia (1993 and 1999), Botswana  (1998), Brazil (1992, 1996 and 2000), Burkina
Faso (1998), Cameroon (1995), Canada (1990, 1992, 1994, 1996 and 1998), Chile (1991 and 1997),
Colombia (1990 and 1996), Costa Rica (1995), Cô te d’Ivoire (1995), Cyprus (1997), the Czech
Republic (1996), the Dominican Republic (1996), E gypt (1992 and 1999), El Salvador (1996), the
European Communities (1991, 1993, 1995, 1997 and 2.000), Fiji (1997), Finland (1992), Ghana(1992), Guinea (1999), Hong Kong (1990, 1994 and 1998), Hungary (1991 and 1998), Iceland (1994
and 2000), India (1993 and 1998), Indonesia (1991, 1994 and 1998), Israel (1994 and 1999), Jamaica
(1998), Japan (1990, 1992, 1995 and 1998), Kenya (1993 and 2000), Korea, Rep. of (1992, 1996 and
2000), Lesotho (1998), Macau (1994), Malaysia (1993 and 1997), Mali (1998), Mauritius (1995),
Mexico (1993 and 1997), Morocco (1989 and 1996) , New Zealand (1990 a nd 1996), Namibia (1998),
Nicaragua (1999), Nigeria (1991 and 1998), Norw ay (1991, 1996 and 2000), Pakistan (1995), Papua
New Guinea (1999), Paraguay (1997), Peru (1994 and 2000), the Philippines (1993), Poland (1993and 2000), Romania (1992 and 1999), Senegal ( 1994), Singapore (1992, 1996 and 2000), Slovak
Republic (1995), the Solomon Islands (1998), South Africa (1993 and 1998), Sri Lanka(1995),
Swaziland (1998), Sweden (1990 and 1994), Switzerl and (1991 and 1996), Tanzania (2000), Thailand
(1991, 1995 and 1999), Togo (1999), Trinidad and T obago (1998), Tunisia (1994), Turkey (1994 and
1998), the United States (1989, 1992, 1994, 1996 a nd 1999), Uganda (1995), Uruguay (1992 and
1998), Venezuela (1996), Zambia (1996) and Zimbabwe (1994).PRESS/TPRB/147
Page 3
MORETRADE POLICY REVIEW BODY
REVIEW OF PERU
CONCLUDING REMARKS BY THE CHAIRPERSON
We have had very open and constructive discussions.  Members commended Peru for the
consolidation of its economic stabilization and liberalization programme implemented since the early
1990s.  Despite external shocks, including El Niño and international financial crises, Peru has
achieved significant growth, sharply reduced inflation and attracted considerable foreign capital.  No
doubt major factors in this performance have been sound macroeconomic policies, continued
liberalization of Peru's trade and investment regimes, the privatization process and efforts to develop a
reliable regulatory framework.
Members viewed Peru's trade and investment regimes as relatively open.  They noted that the average
applied tariff has been reduced since the previous Review and that the use of non-tariff barriers
remained confined.  The liberalization of investment  rules and the establishment of a favourable legal
framework for the promotion and protection of investment have had impressive results, with foreigndirect investment increasing five fold since 1993.  Members welcomed Peru's strong commitment to
the multilateral trading system.  In particular they noted Peru's full implementation of the Agreement
on Customs Valuation in April 2000.  They also welcomed Peru's efforts to liberalize services
activities, in particular the financial and telecommunication sectors.
Against this positive assessment, Members raised some concerns.  Members noted that the application
of tariff surcharges and variable specific duties on several agricultural products acted as a disincentive
to trade.  Members also invited Peru to consider undertaking new multilateral engagements to close
the wide gap between applied and bound tariff rates.  Some urged Peru to sign the plurilateral
Agreement on Government Procurement.  In relation with the latter, Members noted that despite therecent adoption of a new legal framework, some provisions departed from the national treatment
principle.
Peru provided orally and in writing detailed clarifications on a number of additional features of its
trade and investment regime, including:
• importance of concessions granted under preferential regimes such as the EU Generalized System
of Preferences and the U.S. Andean Trade Preference Act;
• customs valuation and the preshipment inspection regime;
• revision of final antidumping duties, and non-preferential certificates of origin for goods subject
to these measures;
• fiscal incentives, in particular under the new free zones regime;
• lower excise tax on used vehicles imported through the new free zones;
• local content and trade-related investment measures;
• INDECOPI's responsibilities, including the Commission on Technical and Trade Regulations;
• competition policy practices, in particular with respect to interconnection rates to the fixed
telephony;PRESS/TPRB/147
Page 4
END• participation in regional fora;
• the intellectual property regime;
• problems faced by the fishing industry;
• suspension of rice imports;
• schedule of commitments under the GATS Agreement;
• conditions applying to professional services provided by foreigners.
Members appreciated the clarifications and responses provided by the delegation of Peru.
In conclusion, it is my feeling that this has been a very successful second Review of Peru's
trade policies.  Economic reform has paid off in  the form of growing GDP, trade and investment.
Nevertheless, this has only been sufficient to brin g real GDP per capita back to its relatively modest
level of the mid 1960s.  I believe that the view of  several Members that there is need to achieve
further improvements in the quality of life of the Peruvian people deserves Peru's attention.  I am
pleased to note that this has met with concurrence from the Peruvian delegation.  It was to this end
and to secure the flexibility necessary to withstand and ride out future external shocks that led
Members to encourage Peru to press on with its domestic reform process including further tradeliberalization.  As Peru pursues such policies, I hope that other Members will be able to support Peru's
efforts by extending open access for its exports.