RESTRICTED
WORLD TRADE G/IT/M/2
23January 1998
ORGANIZATION(98-0244)
Committee ofParticipants ontheExpansion ofTrade
inInformation Technology Products
MINUTES OFTHE MEETING OF30OCTOBER 1997
Chairman: Mr.A.Hoda
Agenda oftheMeeting Page
1. Organizational Matters oftheCommittee ......................... 2
1.1 Chairmanship ..................................... 2
1.2 Status ofnon-participants, acceding countries, andother organizations
inthemeetings oftheCommittee ......................... 2
1.3 Document Distribution ................................ 3
1.4 Document Derestriction ............................... 4
1.5 Rules ofProcedure ................................. 4
2. Review oftheStatus ofImplementation oftheMinisterial Declaration onTrade
inInformation Technology Products ............................ 5
3. Future Work Programme oftheCommittee ........................ 5
3.1Divergences inclassifying information technology products ........... 5
3.2Review ofproduct coverage .............................. 5
3.3Consultations onnon-tariff barriers .......................... 6
4. NewParticipants ........................................ 7
4.1Procedures forbecoming aparticipant theMinisterial Declaration onTrade
inInformation Technology Products ......................... 7
4.2Schedule ofLatvia .................................... 7
4.3Schedule ofPanama .................................... 8
5. Other Business .......................................... 8
5.1Corrections totheMinisterial Declaration ....................... 8
5.2Dateofthenextmeeting ................................. 8
Introduction
TheChairman welcomed participants tothesecond formal meeting oftheCommittee of
Participants ontheExpansion ofTrade inInformation Technology Products. Henoted thatthismeeting
hadbeenconvened among onlytheparticipants totheMinisterial Declaration inTrade inInformation
Technology Products asthere hadbeen nodecision taken yetwith respect toattendance of
non-participants.G/IT/M/2
Page2
Withreference totheproposed agenda setforthinWTO/AIR/710, hesaidthathewould take
uptwoitems under "Other Business": correcting typographical errors andother technical corrections
totheMinisterial Declaration, andthedateofthenextmeeting. Theagenda, which wascontained
inWTO/AIR/710 dated 20October 1997, wasadopted withtheinclusion oftheitems mentioned by
theChairman under "Other Business".
1. Organizational Matters oftheCommittee
1.1 Chairmanship
1.1.1 TheChairman recalled thatatthelastmeeting oftheCommittee, delegations indicated that
additional timewasnecessary toconsult onthematter ofchairmanship. Hefurthermore asked if
participants were nowinaposition totakeadecision inthisregard.
1.1.2 Therepresentative ofCanada stated thatinformal consultations hadnotledtoaconsensus
ontheselection ofachairperson andtherefore asked thatMr.Hoda continue asChairman untilsuch
atimeastheCommittee isready totakeadecision onthematter.
1.1.3 Itwassoagreed.
1.2 Status ofnon-participants, acceding countries, andother organizations inthemeetings ofthe
Committee
1.2.1 TheChairman noted thatdiscussions hadtaken placeonthisissueattherecent informal meeting
andasaresult, adrafttextonthismatter wasfaxed todelegations andcirculated again intheroom
today. Withrespect tothetext,henoted thatthere weretwoalternative formulations forparagraphs
oneandtwo,andthere alsowasaphrase inthelastparagraph thatwasinsquare brackets.
1.2.2 Thedelegate oftheUnited States stated apreference forreferring inthefirstalternative to
"observers totheCouncil forTrade inGoods", inlinewithparagraph 4ofdocument G/L/160.
1.2.3 Thedelegate ofCanada proposed that"Governments which arenotMembers oftheWorld
Trade Organization" bereplaced with"Governments which areobservers totheCouncil forTrade
inGoods" andthencontinue "may follow theproceedings oftheCommittee ofParticipants onthe
Expansion ofTrade inInformation Technology Products, hereinafter referred toasthe'Committee ',
inanobserver capacity".
1.2.4 TheChairman stated thatinlightofthecomments made theparagraph would readasfollows:
"Members oftheWorld Trade Organization which arenotparticipants totheMinisterial
Declaration andGovernments which areobservers totheCouncil forTrade inGoods
mayfollow theproceedings oftheCommittee ofParticipants ontheExpansion ofTrade
inInformation Technology Products, hereinafter referred toasthe"Committee", in
anobserver capacity."
Heasked whether delegations were inaposition toadopt thistext?
1.2.5 Thedelegate ofSwitzerland responded thatthetextcould beadopted withtheunderstanding
thatunder paragraph 3,theCommittee would needtoagree astowhatwould beconsidered tobea
"confidential matter" when deliberating inaspecial restricted session.G/IT/M/2
Page3
1.2.6 Thedelegate ofCosta Ricaraised concerns regarding paragraphs 3and5withrespect tothe
word "participate" when referring totherights conferred totheobservers intheCommittee. Heasked
whether theword "participate" meant merely therighttoattend andbepresent inthemeetings, and
whether theobserver would fullyparticipate oronlywhen invited todoso.Furthermore heemphasized
thatrequests forobservership ofinternational intergovernmental organizations should beexamined
onacase-by-case basis andthattheCommittee should revert tothecriteria forgranting thisstatus
atalatertime.
1.2.7 TheChairman responded thatthere wasclarification already inthetextwithrespect the
participation ofobservers. Inparagraph 2,thesecond sentence stated that"observers mayparticipate
inthediscussions butdecisions shallbetaken onlybyparticipants." Furthermore, intherulesofthe
General Council, there wasaprovision thatobservers mayspeak onlyafterparticipants hadspoken.
1.2.8 Thedelegate ofCosta Ricaagreed withtheclarification provided bytheChairman.
1.2.9 TheChairman further clarified thattheAnnex totheRules ofProcedure fortheGeneral Council
contained areference totheroleofobservers, which stated "representatives ofgovernments accorded
observer status maybeinvited tospeak atmeetings ofthebodies towhich theyareobservers normally
afterMembers ofthatbody havespoken. Theright tospeak doesnotinclude theright tomake
proposals, unless agovernment isspecifically invited todoso,nortoparticipate indecision-making".
1.2.10 Thetextwasadopted withtheagreed-upon amendments andisattached todocument G/IT/3
(Rules ofProcedure).
1.2.11 TheChairman noted thatnowthatthedecision wastaken withrespect toobservers, the
Committee should address therequests forobserver status which ithadreceived. Itappeared from
thediscussions, thatwhile therequest forobserver status fromEgypt wasaddressed automatically by
theadoption ofthisdecision, theCommittee would havetotakeaposition ontheobserver status of
theWorld Customs Organization (WCO). Hefurther noted thatthedecision justtaken provided that
requests forobserver status byinternational organizations would beconsidered onacase-by-case basis
andthattheannex totheRules ofProcedure oftheGeneral Council provided thattheinternational
intergovernmental organizations concerned should haveadirect interest orrelevance inthematter.
With respect totheWCO, therequest forobserver status waslimited tomeetings oftheCommittee
where questions relating toHSclassification andHSamendments weretobetaken up.Itseemed that
theWCO metthecriteria setoutintherules ofprocedure forobserver status.
1.2.12 Thedelegate ofJapan supported theobserver status oftheWCO, mentioning specifically
paragraph 5oftheMinisterial Declaration which referred tothecontribution oftheWCO, andto
Annex 3oftheRules ofProcedure oftheGeneral Council which referred tothedirect interest of
international intergovernmental organizations.
1.2.13 TheChairmanstatedthattherewasagreementtoinvitetheWCOasanobservertotheCommittee
whenever theissues ofHSclassification orHSamendments were ontheagenda.
1.3 Document Distribution
1.3.1 TheChairman recalled thatthisissuewasraised atthelastmeeting andthatdocuments related
tothework oftheCommittee werebeing distributed toparticipants under theG/ITsymbol andinpaper
form only. Itwasalsouseful tonotethatother committees under plurilateral agreements dealtwith
documentdisseminationinvariousways.SomehadopencirculationtoallWTOMembersandobservers,
while others restricted documents orcertain series ofdocuments tosignatories only. Thedecisions
ondocument dissemination hadbeentaken bytherespective Committee.G/IT/M/2
Page4
1.3.2 Thedelegate oftheEuropean Communities, recalling whatwassaidattheprevious informal
meeting, proposed three different types ofdocuments fortheCommittee. TheG/IT series should be
thegeneral documents oftheCommittee andwould havethewidest distribution inboththerestricted
andderestricted forms. Theneedforamore selective distribution ofdocuments toparticipants only
could bemetbyaSPEC series andinformal room documents. Inthecaseofthelatter twotypes of
documents, theparticipant requesting thecirculation could however indicate totheSecretariat thatthe
document could receive awider distribution.
1.3.3 TheChairman summarized thattherewould bethreetypes ofdocuments; theG/ITseries would
bedistributed toallWTO Members andobservers, andtheroom andSPEC documents would be
restricted intheircirculation toparticipants only, withtheobservation thattheparticipant thatcirculates
thepaper hadtherighttorequest awider circulation. Itwassoagreed.
1.3.4 Thedelegate ofSwitzerland stated thatbecause theG/IT series would bemade available to
allMembers, forpractical purposes theseries should alsobeavailable electronically byposting them
ontheDDF (Document Dissemination Facility).
1.3.5 TheChairman stated that,inprinciple, documents would beavailable onlyelectronically; hard
copies would bemade available attherequest ofparticipants.
1.4 Document Derestriction
1.4.1 With respect todocument derestriction, theChairman referred totheWTO Decision onthe
derestriction ofWTO documents contained inWT/L/160/Rev.1. Forthepurposes oftheCommittee 's
work, heproposed thattheCommittee follow theprocedures forderestriction setforthinthisdocument.
1.4.2 Thiswasagreed.
1.5 Rules ofProcedure
1.5.1 TheChairman noted thattheCommittee hadbefore it,theDraft Rules ofProcedure, asprepared
bytheSecretariat, which werebased ontheRules ofProcedure oftheGeneral Council andofother
Committees under theWTO. These draftrulescould befound indocument G/IT/W/1. Asadecision
wasalready taken withrespect toobservers, theDraft Rules would havetobeamended, especially
inrespect ofrule2.Heproposed thattheRules ofProcedures oftheGeneral Council beadopted with
theexceptions listed indocument G/IT/W/1.
1.5.2 Onthebasis ofsuggestions made bythedelegates ofCanada andCosta RicatheChairman
proposed thatthedecision onparticipation ofobservers intheCommittee beamended tomake reference
totheAnnexes oftheRules ofProcedure oftheGeneral Council inbothparagraphs 2and4.In
paragraph 4,thereference toAnnex 3toWT/L/161 would bemade inbrackets aftertheword WTO,
andinparagraph 2,thechange would betoinsert "inaccordance withparagraphs 9to11ofthe
guidelines inAnnex 2toWT/L/161" aftertheword 'discussions 'inthesecond line. Theonlychange
tobemade tothedraftRules ofProcedure inG/IT/W/1 would betoparagraph (iv),where itwould
say"Rule 10ofChapter IV(Observers) isnotapplicable. Seeattached Decision". There would also
beanother consequential change inparagraph (i),whereby thephrase "except asprovided forinRule
10below" should bedeleted asthiswasnolonger applicable.
1.5.3 TheRules ofProcedure wereadopted withtheamendments outlined bytheChairman. They
arecontained indocument G/IT/3.G/IT/M/2
Page5
2. Review oftheStatus ofImplementation oftheMinisterial Declaration onTrade inInformation
Technology Products
2.1 TheChairman drewparticipants 'attention todocument G/IT/1/Rev.1 which updates thestatus
ofimplementation oftheMinisterial Declaration. Hefurther noted thatthedocument alsoincluded
information withrespect totheformal certification ofschedules. Since theissuance ofthisdocument,
theCzech Republic andtheSlovak Republic hadrecently submitted theirschedules under theformal
procedures forrectification andmodification ofschedules. Itappeared thatimplementation was
proceeding asplanned.
2.2 Thedelegate ofIsrael gaveapproval toderestrict Israel'sschedule andtopostittotheinternet
site; aformal letter would besentinthisrespect.
2.3 Thedelegate ofSwitzerland noted thatitsITAschedule wassubmitted totheSecretariat today
andthatthefirstratereduction would takeplace, asagreed, asof31December 1997.
3. Future Work Programme oftheCommittee
3.1 Divergences inclassifying information technology products
3.1.1 TheChairman recalled thatatthelastmeeting oftheCommittee, therewasarequest byCanada
toprepare anaddendum todocument G/IT/2, toinclude theinformation onanHS-code basis andby
participant. Thisaddendum hadbeenprepared.
3.1.2 Thedelegate ofCanada expressed appreciation fortheaddendum todocument G/IT/2 andstated
thatthiswould beuseful toexamine boththedivergences andconvergences ofclassifying information
technology products.
3.1.3 Thedelegate oftheUnited States stated thatconsultations wereincourse withindustry and
other participants concerned onthismatter. Heexpected thatby31December 1997 apaper would
beputforth onaproposal withrespect toinitial work thatcould beundertaken onthisissue.
3.1.4 TheChairman summarized thatmore timewasneeded toreflect onthematter; theCommittee
would revert toitatalatermeeting.
3.2 Review ofProduct Coverage
3.2.1 TheChairman noted thattheCommittee wastoundertake areview ofproduct coverage, as
envisioned inparagraph 3oftheAnnex totheMinisterial Declaration andparagraph 7ofthedocument
ontheImplementation oftheMinisterial Declaration (G/L/160). Herecalled thatbeginning
1October 1997 andnolaterthat31December 1997, participants maysubmit totheCommittee lists
ofadditional information technology products forpossible additional tariff concessions. Discussions
atthelastmeeting indicated thatworkwasongoing incapitals andthatproposals would beforthcoming.
Atthistime, hewasnotaware ofanysubmissions. Atthelastmeeting, Switzerland hadnoted that
certain proposals thatweresubmitted inJanuary thisyearremained onthetable. Itappeared thatmore
timewasneeded before thelistswould beforthcoming.
3.2.2 TheCommittee agreed torevert tothematter atthenextmeeting.G/IT/M/2
Page6
3.3 Consultations onNon-Tariff Barriers
3.3.1 TheChairman recalled thatadiscussion hadtaken place lasttimeonthisissue andanumber
ofdelegations hadindicated theirdesire topursue thematter. Specifically, henoted thatthere was
aproposal putforthbytheUnited States ontheissueofasurvey ontheuseoftwospecific standards.
Atthattime, some delegations indicated theyneeded more timetoconsider theproposal. Progress
wasmade onthisissue ininformal discussions.
3.3.2 Thedelegate oftheJapan indicated thatwhile hisdelegation hadreserved itsrights onthis
matter atthelastmeeting, itconsidered ituseful toconduct thesurvey withrespect totechnical standards
andtherefore supported theproposal.
3.3.3 TheChairman noted thatthere wasagreement tocarry outthesurvey proposed bytheUnited
States.
3.3.4 Thedelegate oftheEuropean Communities indicated thathisdelegation hadcirculated aroom
documentonnon-tariffmeasuresattheinformalmeetingandrequestedthatitbegivenawidecirculation.
Inthisdocument, theECproposed thatinthenextstage oftheITAcertification andtesting ofIT
products bediscussed, astheITindustry hadincreasingly required mandatory testing andcertification
procedures forproducts. These requirements often created unnecessary trade obstacles andtherefore
there wasmerit infinding lesstrade restrictive alternatives topre-market certification ofITproducts.
Specifically, theECproposed toexamine within theframework oftheITAthefeasibility ofreducing
oravoiding these pre-market certification requirements, infavour ofanapproach involving a
manufacturers 'declaration ofconformity. Thisconcept hadbeenendorsed inverygeneral terms within
theframework oftheTBT Agreement, andanITAspecific initiative would becompatible and
complimentary totheTBTwork. With respect tothesurvey onspecific standards proposed bythe
United States, theEuropean Communities believed thatitwould beuseful atthesame time, toextend
thesurvey tocover thetypes ofconformity assessment procedures which different ITAparticipants
usedfortheapproval ofITproducts.
3.3.5 Thedelegate oftheUnited States supported theproposal made bytheEuropean Communities
andagreed thatitwould becomplimentary totheTBTAgreement.
3.3.6 Thedelegate ofJapan tooknoteoftheproposal bytheEuropean Communities andstated that
asitincluded abroader content thantheUnited States 'proposal, more timewasneeded toexamine it.
3.3.7 Thedelegate ofCanada tooknoteofthepaper bytheEuropean Communities andsupported
theproposal withrespect tothesurvey asitwould compliment work going oninother Committees.
3.3.8 Thedelegate ofThailand, speaking onbehalf ofASEAN, agreed withtheproposal made by
theUnited States delegate ontheissueofthesurvey onstandards; however, withrespect tothedocument
distributed bytheEuropean Communities, more timewasneeded toreflect ontheimplications, in
particular asconcerned possible overlapping withother bodies oftheWTO. Therefore, theASEAN
members reserved theirrights tocome backtothisissue ofconformity assessment, asraised bythe
European Communities.
3.3.9 Thedelegate ofKorea noted thatwhile more timewasneeded toexamine theEuropean
Communities 'proposal, hecould agree togoahead withthesurvey.
3.3.10 Insummarizing thediscussions onthematter, theChairman stated thatbecause thisproposal
bytheEuropean Communities wasonlymade informally veryrecently, delegations needed more time
toreflect. TheCommittee would revert tothismatter atthenextmeeting.G/IT/M/2
Page7
3.3.11 Thedelegate ofCanada recalled thatatthelastmeeting oftheCommittee hisdelegation had
expressed aninterest inexploring import licensing inrelation toITproducts, astheCanadian industry
hadraised anumber ofconcerns. Pursuing work inthisareawould befully consistent withthe
Ministerial Declaration. Canada 'sinterest concerned thepurpose androleofimport licenses, especially
howtofacilitate andstreamline theprocess forobtaining suchlicenses. Canada intended toputforth
apaper toinitiate work inthisarea.
4. NewParticipants
4.1 Procedures forbecoming aparticipant intheMinisterial Declaration onTrade inInformation
Technology Products
4.1.1 TheChairman noted thattheCommittee would needtoaddress theprocedures required todeal
withapplications ofWTO Members andacceding countries thatwanted tobecome participants.
4.1.2 Onthebasis ofatextprepared bytheSecretariat andcommented onbyparticipants, the
Committee agreed onthefollowing understanding concerning procedures forbecoming aparticipant:
"Any WTO Member, State orseparate customs territory intheprocess ofacceding
totheWTO, hereinafter referred toasgovernment, thatwould liketobecome a
participant totheMinisterial Declaration onTrade inInformation Technology Products
should sendaformal request totheDirector-General oftheWTO andsubmit adraft
schedule ofitscommitments forverification. Ifthedraftschedule isinlinewiththe
conditions setoutintheMinisterial Declaration, itwould onlyneedtobeverified in
theusual way,firstinformally bytheSecretariat1andthenintheCommittee, andunless
there areobjections, thegovernment inquestion could become aparticipant. If,
however, thegovernment inquestion would wanttodeviate from theconditions set
forth intheDeclaration, thiswould havetobenegotiated between thegovernment
concerned andtheparticipants before itsdraftschedule issubmitted forverification."
4.2 Schedule ofLatvia
4.2.1 TheChairman noted thattheschedule ofLatvia waselectronically verified bytheSecretariat
andafter being revised, wascirculated along withtheverification sheets, toallparticipants on
6October 1997. Hefurther drew attention tothenoteintheschedule ofLatvia which indicated that
theimplementation ofthecommitments would become effective from thedateofLatvia 'saccession
totheWTO.
4.2.2 Thedelegates oftheEuropean Communities andtheUnited States indicated thatfurther
consultations would havetotakeplace asconcerned theabove mentioned note.
4.2.3 TheChairman stated thattheCommittee hadtaken noteoftheobservations made andwould
revert tothesubject atthenextmeeting.
1With respect toverification, ifdiscrepancies were found intheSecretariat verification, theywould be
communicated tothegovernment concerned aswellastotheparticipants. Thegovernment concerned could
thencorrect these discrepancies andtheschedule tobecirculated would contain anotebytheSecretariat tothat
effect. Alternatively, ifthegovernment concerned sodesired, theschedule would becirculated asoriginally
submitted withthediscrepancies.G/IT/M/2
Page8
4.3 Schedule ofPanama
4.3.1 TheChairman stated thatwithrespect totheschedule ofPanama, theSecretariat alsoperformed
anelectronic verification andtheresulting discrepancies wereconveyed tothedelegation ofPanama
on6October 1997. Atpresent, arevised schedule hadnotyetbeenreceived from Panama, andhe
proposed thatthematter bepursued atafuture meeting after theschedule hadbeen revised and
circulated.
4.3.2 Itwassoagreed.
5. Other Business
5.1 Corrections totheMinisterial Declaration
5.1.1 TheChairman saidthatontheissue ofcorrecting typographical andtechnical errors inthe
Ministerial Declaration, adraftwascirculated todelegations. Following Secretariat examination of
theDeclaration, ascontained inWT/MIN(96)/16, itwasnoted thatanumber oftypographical and
technical errors existed intheDeclaration inthethree official languages. Since theDeclaration and
itsAnnex formed theessential basis ofwork inthisarea, andwould becontinually referred tointhe
years tocome, itseemed appropriate tocorrect these inaccuracies. Heasked ifanydelegation had
anycomments onthecorrections.
5.1.2 Thedelegate ofSwitzerland asked tohavemore timetofurther reflect onthese issues and
enquired whether thecorrections werealready incorporated intheschedules, orwhether changes would
needtobemade.
5.1.3 TheChairmanrespondedthatthecorrectionswerealreadyincorporatedintheverifiedschedules.
Itwasagreed thatiftheSecretariat didnotreceive anycomments within twoweeks, thecorrections
totheMinisterial Declaration would bemade.
5.2 Dateofthenextmeeting
5.2.1 TheChairman proposed thatthenextmeeting beheldon12December 1997.
5.2.2 Itwassoagreed.
__________