00-4865 MOREPRESS RELEASE
PRESS/TPRB/148
14 November 2000
TRADE POLICY REVIEW BODY
REVIEW OF POLAND
TPRB'S EVALUATION
The Trade Policy Review Body of the World Trade Organization (WTO) concluded its
second review of Poland's trade policies on 3 and 5 July 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 Poland and will be available from the WTO Secretariat,
Centre William Rappard, 154 rue de Lausanne, 1211 Geneva 21.PRESS/TPRB/148
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/148
Page 3
MORETRADE POLICY REVIEW BODY
REVIEW OF POLAND
CONCLUDING REMARKS BY THE CHAIRPERSON
We have had an open and informative discussion of Poland's trade policies.  TPRB Members
were clearly impressed by Poland's economic transformation to a market economy.  The economy is
performing robustly and future growth prospects are favourable.  This has been achieved by generally
prudent macroeconomic policies combined with structural reforms, particularly trade and investment
liberalization.  Members acknowledged the remarkable results of the Polish transition process,
including in the privatization of state-owned enterprises; this has undoubtedly played a significant rolein attracting foreign investment.  Members commented favourably on Poland's priority target of
accession to the EU which would create the opportunity for further reform as Poland increasingly
harmonized its policies with EU requirements.  This  was to be expected given Poland's cultural and
political ties.
On trade-related policies, Members appreciated Poland's active efforts within the WTO and
noted its support for a broad-based round of multilateral negotiations.  Members also appreciated
Poland's overall commitment to liberal trade and investment policies.  Some Members expressed
divergent views on the net trade-creating effects of Poland's regional liberalization to date and of EUaccession.  While some Members justified Poland's high and increasing level of agricultural support
on the grounds of multifunctionality and food security, others questioned the adverse impact these
policies were having on Polish efficiency and consumers.  These Members encouraged Poland to
reduce market distortions on such commodities, including the use of high tariffs, price support and
direct outlays, such as export subsidies and deficiency payments.  Poland's application of strict SPSmeasures were also questioned as being overly restrictive.
Members appreciated that Poland's tariffs were generally low.  Nevertheless, some Members
noted that Poland's preferential rates were well below MFN levels, thereby raising concerns of
possible trade diverting effects, for example, on motor vehicles.  Members invited Poland to reduce
the gap between preferential and MFN tariffs.  They also commented on the wide tariff disparities,including high tariff peaks, and the advantages to Poland of also simplifying its tariff structure by
reducing the high number of different MFN and preferential rates.  Members also invited Poland to
facilitate imports from developing countries, and from LDCs in particular.
Members also sought additional details in a number of areas, including:
- the balance of Poland's regional trade objectives within its multilateral goals;
- effects of EU accession on other trading partners;- recent increases in tariffs, especially on agricultural products;
- the absence of bindings on certain products, such as motor vehicles;
- preferential tariffs, including product coverage, for developing trading partners;
- possible discriminatory impact on imports of domestic excise and other taxes;
- technical standards and conformity testing procedures;- delays in customs clearances, including imposition of fees;
- privatization plans for difficult areas, such as hard-coal mining, steel and chemicals;
- intellectual property protection, including enforcement;
- subsidies;
- liberalization of services under GATS, and progress on ratification of the Fifth 
Protocol;  and
- preference margins on government procurement, and Poland's intended membership 
of the WTO Agreement on Government Procurement.PRESS/TPRB/148
Page 4
ENDMembers appreciated the comprehensive written and oral responses provided by the Polish
delegation at the meeting and its undertaking to follow up with written responses as soon as possible.
In conclusion, it is my view that Members were very appreciative of Poland's successful
economic transformation, and were greatly impressed by its economic performance since the last
Review in 1992.  Members now have a much greater understanding of Poland's trade and trade-relatedpolicies, and encouraged Poland to continue with the reforms.  While Members accepted the
beneficial impact on Poland of its regional arrangements, they encouraged Poland to pursue a
vigorous multilateralization of regional preferences.  This would benefit not only Poland's long term
economic interests but also the overall multilateral trading system.