WORLD TRADE  
ORGANIZATION  RESTRICTED  
 G/MA/M/15  
23 October 1998  
 (98-4136)  
  Committee on Market Access   
 
 
 
MINUTES OF THE MEETING OF 22 SEPTEMBER 1998  
 
Chairman:  Mr. Ole Lundby (Norway)  
 
 
Agenda of the meeting  
 
1. Adoption of the agenda  ................................ ................................ ................................ .........  1 
 
2. Periodic Report of the Committee to the Council for Trade in Goods including 
factual information on waivers expiring on 31 October 1998  ................................ ...........  1 
 
3. Submission of HS96 documentation  ................................ ................................ ....................  2 
 
4. Modalities and operation of the Integrated Data Base  ................................ ......................  3 
 
5. Consolidated Loose -leaf Schedules on Goods (Pilot Project)  ................................ ............  5 
 
6. Election of Vice -Chairperson  ................................ ................................ ...............................  7 
 
7. Other business  ................................ ................................ ................................ .......................  7 
 
 
1. Adoption of the agenda  
1.1 The above agenda, as reproduced in document WT O/AIR/911 of 9 September 1998, was 
adopted  with the addition of item 7.1.  
 
2. Periodic Report of the Committee to the C ouncil for Trade in Goods including factual 
information on waivers expiring on 31 October 1998  
2.1 Referring to document G/MA/SPEC/8 the Chairman  noted that the periodic report on the 
activities of the Committee contained tables summarizing the situation regarding the waivers and gave 
factual information, submitted by the Members concerned, on the waivers under process.  He 
explained that the waivers were divided into three different groups:  (1) the waivers granted in 
connection with the introduction of H S96 changes in the WTO schedules;  (2) the waivers related to 
the transposition of pre -Uruguay Round concessions into the Harmonized System (Bangladesh, 
Nicaragua and Sri Lanka); and  (3) a waiver concerning the renegotiation of the Schedule of Zambia 
following the introduction of the Harmonized System.  All waivers would expire on 31 October 1998. 
If approved, they would be extended until 30 April 1999.  The documents related to the requests for 
extension of the waivers had all been circulated and would be  considered by the Council for Trade in 
Goods at its meeting of 1 October and then forwarded to the General Council for decision.  He added 
that the report would be revised in light of today's discussion before transmission to the Council for 
Trade in Good s. 
 G/MA/M/15  
Page 2 
 
 
 2.2 Regarding the first group of waivers – on HS96 changes -  a draft decision for a further 
extension had been circulated in document G/MA/W/17 dated 17 September 1998.  The Chairman 
pointed out that despite the fact that delegations had worked hard t o specify or to lift their objections 
on the documentation submitted by the Members concerned, 36  Members had submitted detailed 
requests for the extension of the waiver. A revised version of the draft decision would be circulated 
before the next meeting o f the Council for Trade in Goods.  
 
2.3 The representatives of Bolivia , Guatemala  and New Zealand  requested to be added to the list 
of Members requesting an extension of their waivers in connection with the introduction of HS96 
changes into their WTO schedu les. 
 
2.4 The representative of Switzerland , noting from document G/MA/W/17 that the European 
Communities were no longer mentioned in the list of delegations that had requested an extension of 
their waivers for the introduction of HS96 changes in their sch edules, wished to recall that her 
delegation had raised an objection with regard to the EC submission, linked specifically but not 
exclusively to Article XXIV:6.  Since negotiations in that context were not yet concluded her 
delegation was not in a positio n to lift its objection.  
 
2.5 The representative of the European Communities  took note of the comments made by 
Switzerland and recognized that the Swiss delegation had a general reservation on EC's schedule in 
the context of Article XXIV:6 negotiations.  H owever, no specific comments had been received from 
the Swiss delegation related to the HS96 exercise.  Moreover,  since the present EC schedule had not 
been certified, his delegation found it difficult legally to request a waiver in this context.   The re ason 
for not asking for a waiver in this case was that the certification of HS96 changes would not have any 
impact until the whole EC schedule of 15 would be certified.  
 
2.6 As one of the countries that had placed a reservation on the EC schedule of 15, an d with 
reference to the comments made by the delegate of the European Communities on the issue of 
Article  XXIV:6, the representative of New Zealand  requested how the Communities intended to 
resolve the differences of opinion regarding the incorporation of changes in subsidy commitments into 
the new Schedule CXL, following the accession of  the three countries concerned.  
 
2.7 The representative of the European Communities , pointing out that the matter raised by 
New  Zealand was different from the one raised b y Switzerland, said that he would report the 
comments to his authorities.  
 
3. Submission of HS96 documentation  
3.1 The  Chairman  recalled that, according to the provisions contained in the General Decision of 
24 April 1998 (document WT/L/268) extending the ti me-limit of the waivers granted to Members that 
had requested it until 31 October 1998, it had been envisaged that the Members concerned would 
submit  by that date the complete documentation related to the introduction of HS96 changes in their 
WTO schedule s, and that in special circumstances Members could request technical assistance from 
the Secretariat for the preparation of the required documentation.   He referred to document 
G/MA/TAR/2/Rev.15 which reflected the present situation in this respect and no ted that ten Members 
presently under waivers had not yet submitted the required documentation, i.e. Bolivia, El Salvador, 
Guatemala, Honduras, Mexico, Morocco, Panama, Pakistan, South Africa and Zimbabwe.  Four of 
those countries had requested technical as sistance from the Secretariat.  Their documentation was 
being processed and would be circulated shortly.  Moreover, the documentation submitted by 
Colombia, Hungary, Macau, Poland, Romania, Singapore and Turkey had been approved and 
forwarded to the Legal Division for certification.  To date, apart from the ten Members that had not 
yet submitted the required documentation, the submissions of 28 Members, whether they had 
requested an extension or not, remained pending due to ongoing consultations and/or nego tiations.    G/MA/M/15  
 Page 3 
 
 
 The Chairman urged delegations concerned to speed up the process so that the number of waivers 
could be further reduced.  
 
4. Modalities and operation of the Integrated Data Base  
4.1 The Chairman , before taking up the agenda items on the IDB, asked  the Secretariat to report on 
its activities in the area of technical assistance.  Mrs Gagliardi said that nine Members had requested 
assistance to prepare their IDB submissions or to conduct regional seminars on the IDB.  The 
submissions of five of these Members had been processed.  The Secretariat had participated in a regional 
seminar organized by APEC and in three WTO regional seminars related to market access issues. 
Representatives of ten least -developed African countries, nine Caribbean countries and  eight Central 
American countries had attended the WTO regional seminars. Following these seminars, a further nine 
Members had either provided IDB submissions or had indicated that they would do so shortly.  The 
Secretariat had also held discussions with t he Inter -American Development Bank and the Permanent 
Secretariat of the General Treaty on Central American Economic Integration (SIECA) regarding the 
preparation of a windows version of the software developed for the Free Trade Area of the Americas 
databas e, which could be used by WTO Members to prepare their IDB submissions.   
 
Status of submissions of the required documentation  
 
4.2 The Chairman  noted that document G/MA/IDB/2/Rev.2, describing the situation of submissions 
as of 1  September  1998, had been circulated to all Members.  It showed that thirty -four Members and 
three acceding countries had provided IDB submissions.  After the document had been circulated, 
submissions had been received from Guatemala (imports for 1996 and 1997, revised applied tari ffs for 
1996, 1997 and 1998), Singapore (imports for 1996 and 1997, bound and applied tariffs for 1996, 1997 
and 1998), Switzerland (current bound duties for 1997 and 1998, national correlation tables and product 
descriptions) and Zambia (revised applied t ariff for 1996).  The Chairman proposed to send a letter to 
those delegations that had not yet provided their IDB submissions, to seek clarification on problems 
these Members were facing in this regard and on their requirements for technical assistance.  H e would 
report to the Committee on the situation at its next meeting.  He also reminded delegations that the 
deadline for furnishing 1997 import data was 30  September 1998.     
 
4.3 The delegate of the European Communities , supporting the proposal by the C hairman, said that 
not all thirty -seven submissions were complete.  While there had been some improvements in this regard 
since the Committee's last meeting, there was readily available information that had not been supplied to 
the WTO.  He believed that t he WTO ought to be the paramount place where tariff information and 
trade data could be found.  
 
4.4 The representative of the United States  supported efforts to complete the database and to have 
all Members comply with the notification requirement. Her del egation believed that the IDB information 
provided a basis to confirm that the tariff concessions that had been made in the Uruguay Round were 
being implemented.  She agreed with the comments of the European Community as to the WTO being 
the main base for information on tariffs and trade.  
 
4.5 The delegate of Canada  fully supported actions to encourage all Members to fulfill their 
commitments to provide IDB data.   The database was a valuable tool for the current and future work of 
Members.  To fully realiz e its value and to put Members on an equal footing, all Members needed to 
supply the information. He informed the Committee that Canada would be submitting its 1997 import 
data before the deadline of 30 September.  
 
4.6 The representative of Japan  supported  the Chairman's proposal and the statements made by 
other delegations.  He emphasized that the IDB was the basis for current and future work.  
 G/MA/M/15  
Page 4 
 
 
 4.7 The representative of Australia  supported the comments of the other delegations and the 
Chairman's initiative . In light of the Ministerial Declaration of 20 May 1998, the IDB needed to become 
fully operational as rapidly as possible.  
 
Dissemination of the IDB  
 
4.8 The Chairman , noted that the Secretariat had revised the informal note, which the Committee 
had exam ined at its last meeting, to take into account comments and suggestions made by delegations at 
that time and during informal consultations that had been held on 16 September 1998.  The revised note 
entitled "Dissemination of the IDB" (Job no. 1483/Rev.2) h ad been distributed to all Members. He 
recalled that during the informal consultations, agreement had been reached on most of the points 
covered in the paper.  He indicated that, in light of what he felt was an emerging consensus, it was his 
intention to p ut forth the paper for adoption by the Committee and to circulate it as an addendum to 
document G/MA/IDB/1/Rev.1, which set out the modalities and operations of the IDB.   He invited the 
Secretariat to summarize the revised paper.  
 
4.9 Mrs de Verteuil of th e Secretariat  said that t he IDB would be disseminated through file copies 
at the tariff line level and via the IDB CD -ROM.  The file copies would be distributed via the 
password -protected Internet File Transfer Facility that had been developed by the Secre tariat. In 
future, the Secretariat would develop an IDB dissemination database that would be made available to 
Members through a reporting application using Internet technology. With respect to the passwords to 
be used, it had been suggested that the passw ords used for the Document Dissemination Facility 
(DDF) could also be used for the IDB File Transfer Facility and, in future, for the IDB dissemination 
database.  In this regard, she pointed out that, should the DDF passwords be used, the audience having 
access to IDB files would be considerably broadened.  All DDF users would need to be made aware 
of the confidential nature of the IDB.  With respect to Members' approval of their processed 
submissions, a period of sixty days would be allowed for Members to approve their processed files or 
submit their revisions, after which the files would be automatically deemed approved.  Pending the 
receipt of approval, the unapproved files would be circulated to those Members that had provided IDB 
submissions with a "pro visional" status.  As concerned the distribution of original submissions, these 
would not be distributed as a general practice, but could be transferred to others with the written 
approval of the Member that had supplied the data. With respect to dissemina tion practices, Members' 
access to tariff line level files would be contingent upon Members having provided their IDB 
submissions of tariff and trade data.  Additionally, those Members that had requested technical 
assistance for the preparation of their su bmissions could have access to tariff line level data, with the 
written authorization of the Member that had supplied the data. Furthermore, all WTO Members 
would have access to the IDB CD -ROM.  During future trade negotiations, a different approach might 
need to be adopted. The WTO Secretariat would have full access to the IDB for internal use and when 
IDB information at the detailed tariff line level was to be published, agreement would be sought from 
the concerned parties.  The Secretariat would make ava ilable to authorized users any processed 
information that was ready for dissemination, regardless of whether the submission had fully 
complied with the notification requirement.  With respect to international and other organizations' 
access to the IDB, the  Committee would approve all requests for access.  As a condition for acquiring 
access, those organizations would agree to inform the Committee through the Secretariat, of their 
intention of any publication of IDB aggregated data, prior to publication.  Mo reover, organizations 
would need to obtain individual Members' approval for the publication of any information more 
detailed than the level of HS four -digit headings.  Organizations would be provided with access only 
to the IDB CD -ROM.  The organizations t hat would be granted access to the IDB CD -ROM would 
be: the International Monetary Fund, the World Bank, the United Nations Conference for Trade and 
Development, the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development, the United Nations 
Food and Agricul ture Organization, the Inter -American Development Bank and the World Customs 
Organization. Moreover, the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund would also be granted 
access to the detailed tariff line level files in view of the formal cooperation a greements that had  G/MA/M/15  
 Page 5 
 
 
 already existed between the WTO and those institutions.  The United Nations Statistical Division 
would be granted access to IDB import files only with the written authorization of the Member that 
had provided the data.  As concerned dist ribution of the IDB database design and software to other 
organizations, this would only take place when it benefitted the IDB and the WTO.  With respect to 
making available electronic information from public sources, the Secretariat would establish an 
electronic "bulletin board" where Members and the Secretariat could introduce references to sources 
of public information on tariffs and trade.  
 
4.10 With respect to requesting authorizations to obtain the tariff line level files of other Members, 
the delega te of Morocco  suggested that such requests be handled at official meetings of the Committee. 
This would give Members that did not agree to the release of their files an opportunity to object, rather 
than the Member requesting the data having to seek author izations from individual Members.  
 
4.11 The Chairman  noted that should a large number of authorizations be involved, the Secretariat 
could be approached for assistance. Three options could be available for requesting authorizations – 
direct requests to the  Members concerned, requests through the Secretariat and requests through the 
Committee.  
 
4.12 The representatives of Canada , Columbia , New Zealand , the Philippines  on behalf of ASEAN , 
and the United States  supported this approach.  
 
4.13 With respect to aggregated analyses of IDB information that had been published by the 
Secretariat, the representative of the United States  suggested that an annual listing of such analyses 
could be provided to Members on an informal basis.   
 
4.14 In response to a questio n of the representative of Canada  regarding the use of DDF passwords 
for the IDB, the Secretariat  recommended using a different set of passwords in order to enhance the 
security of IDB information.  
 
4.15 In response to a question of the delegate of New Ze aland whether the decision of the Committee 
of Market Access on the dissemination of the IDB needed to be confirmed by a higher body, the 
Chairman  replied that unless a Member felt this was necessary, he did not see the need to  do so.  
 
4.16 In view of the  comments made by delegations and the explanations provided by the Secretariat, 
the Chairman  asked whether the Committee could approve the elements that had been described 
concerning the dissemination of the IDB.  It was so agreed .  The Committee took note  of all comments 
made.  
 
5. Consolidated Loose -leaf Schedules on Goods (Pilot Project)  
5.1 The Chairman  recalled that at previous meetings of the Committee, d elegations had noted that 
there were problems and gaps in the procedures for verification and certific ation of schedules, problems 
with the consolidation of Members concessions and that an electronic solution was required for 
Members to work on a comparable basis.  At the meeting of 26 March 1998, the Committee had 
examined an informal note by the Secretar iat entitled "Preparation of Consolidated Schedules of 
Tariff Concessions" (Job  no. 1484).   The note had described practical problems relating to the 
loose -leaf schedules and their consolidation, and had offered possible solutions to improve the situation.   
It had also described how the information contained in the tariff schedules might be incorporated into 
the IDB.  The note had not touched on the legal aspects of the decisions adopted by the Committee and 
the Council for Trade in Goods in this regard, or  on the resources that would be required.  At the 
meeting of 26 March 1998, it had been agreed that the Secretariat would undertake a pilot project to 
create a database of tariff concessions for the schedules of two Members.  The Chairman invited the 
Secre tariat to provide the Committee with an update of the situation regarding the pilot project.  G/MA/M/15  
Page 6 
 
 
  
5.2 Mrs Gagliardi of the Secretariat  said that the pilot projected had begun on 14 September 1998 
and was due to be completed in three months.  The objectives of the project were: (1) to estimate the 
resources that would be required to prepare the database for all Members; (2) to identify the types of 
problems that might be encountered; (3) to identify the extent of computerized assistance that could 
be developed; (4) to assess the input that might be made by Members in terms of data, correlation 
tables and verification.  Initially the project was to have covered the schedules of two Members.  
However, one delegation had not received the necessary authorization from  its authorities.  To avoid 
delays in the project schedule, the Secretariat would base the pilot project on the schedule of one 
Member.  The remaining time would be used to analyze typical problems associated with 
standardizing schedules and to produce a g eneral methodology for their electronic treatment. The 
schedules of all Members would then be analyzed to determine the frequency of these problems.  
From this analysis, a global estimate of costs and necessary resources to establish the full database of 
the consolidated schedules would be produced.  
 
5.3 The representative of the United States  said that there were many dimensions to this issue.  
She had hoped that the results of the pilot project would have already been available, since all 
Members would ne ed to do a lot of work in this exercise. She encouraged the Chairman to consult 
informally with the Secretariat and Members in order to develop a framework that could be used by 
all Members to understand the problems, provide practical solutions and develo p possible alternatives.  
She wished to have something in place by the time of the next meeting of the Committee, since much 
time would be required in national capitals to complete and validate the work.  She expected that the 
information would need to be available in time for the 1999 Ministerial Conference.  She wished to be 
in a position to begin the work and to assist the Secretariat as much as possible in accomplishing this 
task. 
  
5.4 The representative of Switzerland  stated that her delegation attach ed considerable importance 
to this project.  This work would contribute to the well functioning of the future IDB by providing 
accurate bound duties.  The incorporation of information that would accurately reflect Members 
concessions into the IDB would pro vide a valuable reference.  Furthermore, the pilot project would 
also be an important step towards future electronic verification of changes to tariff schedules.   
 
5.5 The representative of the Philippines  suggested that informal consultations should not delay 
but accelerate the work that the Secretariat would be carrying out for the pilot project.  
 
5.6 The representative of Mexico  pointed out that his delegation wished to be kept informed of 
developments in this context.  
 
5.7 The delegate of Morocco  stressed that interpretation into the official WTO languages would 
be required for this type of informal consultations.  
 
5.8 The Chairman  indicated that he would follow up on the suggestion to have consultations with 
Members on how to best move along at the pr actical level and to look at solutions and alternatives.  
With respect to having the framework ready by the date of the next meeting, he pointed out that the 
time frame for completion of the pilot project was mid -December 1998.  However, it would be 
possib le to have a status report at the next meeting of the Committee.  
  G/MA/M/15  
 Page 7 
 
 
 6. Election of Vice -Chairperson  
6.1 The Chairman  informed the Committee that after having consulted delegations over a long 
period of time with a view to finding a Vice -Chairperson, he regrett ed to report that he had not been 
able to find a person available to assume the task of the Vice -Chairperson. In view of the present 
circumstances, he asked whether, without creating a precedent, the Committee could agree not to elect 
a Vice -Chairperson d uring this term.  
6.2 The representatives of Canada and of the European Communities  endorsed the suggestion 
made by the Chairman and agreed that this situation should not set any precedent for the election of a 
Vice -Chairperson for the Committee.  
 
 It was s o agreed.  
 
7. Other business  
7.1 The Chairman  informed the Members that, subject to confirmation, the Committee's next 
meeting would be held on Friday, 27 November 1998.  
 
__________