RESTRICTED  WORLD TRADE  
ORGANIZATION  G/LIC/M/20 
19 November 2004 
 
 (04-5033) 
Committee on Import Licensing  
  
 
MINUTES OF THE MEETING HELD ON 30 SEPTEMBER 2004 
 
Chairperson: Victoria Campeanu (Romania)
 
   
 The Committee on Import Licensing held its twen tieth meeting on 5 May 2004.  The agenda 
proposed for the meeting, contained in WTO/AIR/2383, was adopted as follows:     
Table of contents
 
 
1. Members' compliance with notification ob ligations – Developments since the last 
meeting........................................................................................................................ ...............1  
2. Notifications.................................................................................................................. .............4  
(i) Notifications under Articles 1.4(a) and 8.2(b) of the Agreement................................................4  
(ii) Notifications under Article 7.3 of the Ag reement (replies to the Questionnaire on 
Import Licensing Procedures) ................................................................................................... .4 
(iii) Notifications under Article 5 of the Agreem ent (new import licensing procedures or 
changes to existing licensing procedures) ..................................................................................5  
3. Third Transitional Review under Paragraph 18 of the Protocol of Accession of 
the People's Republic of China ................................................................................................5  
4. Report (2004) to the Council for Trade in Goods ................................................................11  
5. Fourth Biennial Review of the Implementation and Operation of the Agreement...........11  
6. Other bus iness ................................................................................................................. ........11  
(i) Questions posed to the European Communities .......................................................................11  
(b) P igmeat Restrictions ............................................................................................................ .....11  
(c) U ranium Restrictions............................................................................................................ ....12  
(ii) Dates of the n ext meetings ..................................................................................................... ...12 
 
 
1. Members' compliance with notification ob ligations – Developments since the last 
meeting 
 
1.1 The Chairperson  stated that compliance with notification obligations under the Agreement on 
Import Licensing Procedures remained low. Since th e last meeting, 18 notifications were received 
under various provisions of the Agreement on Import Licensing Procedures.  As of the date of the meeting, out of a total Membership of 122 (cou nting the EC as one Member), 24 Members had not 
submitted any notification since joining the WTO. Only a cumulative total of 88 Members (counting 
the EC as one)  had submitted notifications c oncerning their laws and re gulations (under Articles 
1.4(a) and/or 8.2(b)).  Only four  Members  submitted notifications under th ese provisions since the last G/LIC/M/20 
Page 2  
 
meeting. Fifty-eight  Members had yet to submit their notifications. Only a cumulative total of 83 
Members (counting EC as one)  had submitted replies to the Questi onnaire (under Article 7.3) since 
the entry into force of the WTO Agreement. For Article 7.3 notifications, the annual deadline of 30 
September was not often respected. Only 15 Members had replied this year. Only 26  Members 
(counting the EC as one) notified new licensing pro cedures or changes in existing procedures (under 
paragraphs 1-4 of Article 5).  Of this, two  Members notified changes to import licensing procedures 
without submitting the initial notifications of legislati on or replies to the Questionnaire.  Article 5.5 of 
the Agreement allows Members to submit counter- notifications where a Member considers that 
another Member has not notified the institution of a licensing procedure or changes in the procedures.  
Up to now, no counter-notifications have been re ceived.  No Member requested technical assistance 
to fulfil the obligations.   
 1.2 The Chairperson
 urged all Members that have not pr ovided information on their laws and 
regulations relevant to import licen sing to submit their notifications without further delay.  Even if 
Members did not apply import licensing procedures, or  have no laws or regula tions relevant to the 
Agreement, they were required to notify the Committ ee of this fact in order to have a complete 
overview of the licensing regimes of all Members.  No tifications obligations were clearly stated in the 
Agreement although there were no san ctions for those not fulfilling th e obligations.  There was a need 
to improve the exchange of questions and respon ses following the circulation of notifications, which 
was another important activity of the Committee.  When the Committee agre ed to the notification 
provision in Article 7.3, it made a step forward by agreeing on the contents of the questionnaire (in 
Annex to G/LIC/3). The Chairperson stated that th e number of notifications was not very encouraging 
and there was need for improvement.   1.3 The Chairperson
 reminded the Committee that at the end of the year the Central Registry of 
Notifications sends to each Member a list of not ifications that should be made under all WTO 
Agreements; this is followed up with periodic re minders (twice a year) from the CRN to Members 
who have not submitted the require d notifications during the year.  In addition, the Secretariat 
reminded several delegations, informally, of their pending notifications in import licensing through a 
letter sent on 30 July 2004 that contained a table show ing the status of notifications up to that date 
with a request for notifications to be submitted well in advance of this meeting of the Committee.  The 
letter included a reminder that the Secretariat c ould provide assistance to those authorities meeting 
with difficulties. 
 1.4 The delegate from the United States
 expressed appreciation for the submissions that had been 
made since the last meeting, including Mexico's re cent notification;  as well as for answers received 
by Argentina, India, Brazil, Indonesia, Jamaica a nd China in response to the US questions.   He 
thanked the Secretariat for the continuing work to im prove compliance;  in particular the recent letter 
and offer for technical assistance.  He mentioned the overall low level of notifications and the fact that 
many members had never made important notifi cations further stating that import licensing 
constitutes a serious source of non-tariff restricti ons in some markets. Such notifications and 
responses were an essential element of WTO Me mbers obligations and tangible evidence of the 
respect Members owed one another. He also stated that Bahrain and the UAE had provided 
preliminary responses bilaterally but urged them to  formalise their comments and circulate them as 
WTO documents in the interest of transparency.  1.5 The delegate from India
 requested a copy of the letter that was sent to some delegations.  The 
Chairperson  stated that it was not issued as a formal document but India could have a copy. 
 
1.6 The delegate of the EC  supported the United States' delegate concerning the low level of 
notification and also expressed appreciation and enco uragement to the Secretariat in the efforts to 
rectify the situation.   G/LIC/M/20 
 Page 3 
 
 
1.7 The delegate of the Philippines  echoed the appreciation for the efforts made by the 
Chairperson and the Secretariat to ensure that no tification requirements were  fulfilled and encouraged 
continuation of this work as well as the offer to provide technical assistance.  She noted that  
notification obligations were more important in view of the ongoing work in NAMA where the notifications by members of non-tariff barriers were  being reviewed, with many barriers found in the 
area of import licensing,  
 1.8 The Committee took note
 of all statements.  
 1.9 The Chairperson
 stated that since the last meeting qu estions from delegations on notifications 
of licensing systems had been circulated in the G/ LIC/Q/- series.  Although the Secretariat had sent 
reminders, only six delegations had provided replies to questions in writing.  The questions were from 
Argentina, India, Brazil, China, Indonesia and Ja maica to the US;  and from Indonesia to Australia.  
The US had submitted questions in writing to Argen tina in G/LIC/Q/ARG/1, India in G/LIC/Q/IND/8 
and Jamaica in G/LIC/Q/JAM/1 . Replies from Jamaica,  in G/LIC/Q/JAM/2, were received too late 
and would be considered at the next meeting .  The replies from Argentina to  the US were circulated  
in G/LIC/Q/ARG/2;  the replies from India to the US  in G/LIC/Q/IND/9; the replies from Brazil to the 
United States in G/LIC/Q/BRA/2; the replies from China to the United States in G/LIC/Q/CHN/10; 
the replies from Indonesia to the United States in G/LIC/Q/IDN/5; and the replies from Indonesia to 
Australia in G/LIC/Q/IDN/6 and Add.1.     
1.10 The United States
 delegate stated that if there were  follow-up questions for Argentina they 
would be presented at a later date.   He thanked Ja maica for its clarification stating that the response 
made it clear that no automobile parts could be impor ted except for the repair of a registered vehicle.  
If the United States had further questions for Jamaica they would submit them later in writing.  He 
also thanked India for making the full text version of the entire classification document available on 
the Directorate for Foreign Trade website.   
 1.11 The delegate of India
 stated that the entire compendium had been put on the DGFD website in 
the context of India's new five-year foreign trade policy for the period September 2004-March 2009.  As soon as all documents were received from the Capital they would be notified to meet the 
obligations to the Committee on Import Licensing. 
 
1.12 To follow-up on a request made at the Oc tober 2003 meeting, the delegate of the United 
States  requested Brazil to submit information conc erning import licensing requirements for certain 
lithium compounds, i.e. lithium carbonate and lithium hydroxide.  At the last meeting Brazil provided 
a preliminary response that was circulated in G/LIC/Q/ BRA/2.  The delegate of the US stated that this 
was a partial response to the original questions  on page 2 of document G/LIC/Q/BRA/1. Brazil had 
yet to notify some of its legislation covering au tomatic and non-automatic licensing requirements for 
lithium compounds and possibly other goods on the relevant SETES Secretariat de Commercial 
Exterior website.  The notifications made by Br azil in June 1998, February  2002, and September 2003 
did not cover all the laws and regulations concer ning import licensing giving the example that Brazil 
might maintain quotas on certain lithium compounds in cluding the provision of Portaria Number 279 
of 1997 and that these quotas were administered thro ugh import licensing procedures.  This legislation 
was not included in the above documents and it appeared  not to have been subsequently notified to the 
committee.  The US asked when Brazil would notify this legislation in regulations and provide the 
information on these requirements to the committee.  The justification given for the application of 
these restrictions in Document G/LIC/Q/BRA/2 was tenuous. The restrictions said that some 
components of lithium once enriched might have an a pplication in the production of nuclear energy;  
however this phrase did not demonstrate that the appli cation was related to nuclear issues rather than 
to common commercial use such as aluminium smelting, the production of glass, ceramics or pharmaceuticals.  The United States delegate did not understand why import licences on lithium 
carbonate were required by Brazil's nuclear regul atory agency when the product had no apparent 
nuclear related application.  In practice these lic ensing requirements acted as quantitative restrictions G/LIC/M/20 
Page 4  
 
and the delay they had receiving a more complete  response engendered some suspicion that there 
might be other more protectionist reasons for the requirement.  The US had approached Brazilian officials bilaterally on this issue.  The US de legate urged Brazil to fully and rapidly address the 
request for information and to clarify the opera tion of Brazil's import licensing system for lithium 
carbonate and lithium hydroxide, including but not limited to the following points: 
 
(i) What were the criteria for the application and granting of import licences on lithium carbonate 
and lithium hydroxide? 
(ii) On what basis were requests for these licences denied?   (iii) Provide specific information for the period from the year 2000 on the quantity of imports for 
which import licences had been requested and for which import licences were actually 
granted.   
(v) Provide more complete import statistics for 2003 and 2004, insofar as statistics for 2004 had 
been compiled for lithium by value and by volume for lithium compounds by the supplying 
country.   
 
 The United States would circulate these issues in writing and expected to receive more complete responses to the questions  and requested relevant notifications to the Committee concerning 
licensing requirements for lithium compounds.  1.13 The delegate from Brazi
l stated that when the new questi ons from the United States were 
received in writing they would be sent to the capital so further clarification can be provided as soon as 
possible.  1.14 The Committee took note
 of all statements.   
 
1.15 The Chairperson  stated that replies to the US from Bahrain and UAE had been received the 
day before the last Committee meeting in May 2004.  The responses had not been circulated pending clarifications from Bahrain and UAE.  The delegate  of the US urged both delegations to submit 
formal responses as soon as possible.  
2. Notifications 
(i) Notifications under Articles 1.4(a) and 8.2(b) of the Agreement 
2.1 The Chairperson
 recalled that Articles 1.4(a) and 8.2(b) and procedures agreed to by the 
Committee required all Members to notify the Committ ee of their laws, regulations and administrative 
procedures, and submit copies of any relevant publi cations or laws and re gulations upon becoming a 
Member of the WTO.  Any subsequent changes to  these laws and regulations also needed to be 
notified.   
 2.2 The Committee noted that notifications we re received from the Dominican Republic and 
Chinese Taipei and reminded Members that copies of laws and regulati ons submitted under these 
provisions were available in the Secretariat for consultation by interested Members. 
 
(ii) Notifications under Article 7.3 of the Agreement (replies to the Questionnaire on Import 
Licensing Procedures) 
2.3 The Chairperson
 stated that there were notifications from seven Members listed in the 
airgram:  from Colombia (G/LIC/N/3/COL/2), C uba (G/LIC/N/3/CUB/2/Add. 1), Dominican Republic 
(G/LIC/N/3/DOM/2), Chinese Taipei (G/LIC/N/3/ TPKM/2), Guatemala (G/LIC/N/3/GTM/2), Saint 
Lucia (G/LIC/N/3/LCA/2), and Trinidad and Toba go (G/LIC/N/3/TTO/4).  In addition, copies of 
China's latest notification submitted under Article 7.3 we re available at the meeting, in English only.   G/LIC/M/20 
 Page 5 
 
 
The Chairperson suggested that this issue be cons idered under the TRM and would be reverted to at 
the next meeting.  2.4 The Committee took note
 of the notifications. 
 (iii) Notifications under Article 5 of the Agreement (new import licensing procedures or changes 
to existing licensing procedures) 
2.5 The Chairperson
 recalled that under paragraphs 1 to 4 of Article 5, Members which instituted 
licensing procedures or changes in these procedur es had to notify the Committee within 60 days of 
publication of these procedures.  Paragraph 2 of Article 5 listed the information that should be 
included in such notifications.  Members also ha d to submit copies of publications in which the 
information required in Article  1.4 would be published. 
 2.6 The Chairperson
 stated that there were two notifi cations submitted under this provision, 
received from Argentina (G/LIC/N/2/ARG/7) and Australia (G/LIC/N/2/AUS/1). 
 
2.7 The delegate from Australia  stated that the notification related to ozone-depleting substances 
and synthetic greenhouse gases. Australia introduced some non-automatic import licensing requirements for certain products ( i.e. hydrofluoro carbons).  The new requirements were an extension 
to the existing non-automatic licensing programme for ozone-depleting substances, previously 
notified to this Committee.  The requirements we re limited to what was necessary to discharge 
Australia's international obligations in this area. 
 2.8 The Committee took note
 of the notifications and statement made. 
 
3. Third Transitional Review under Paragraph 18  of the Protocol of Accession of the 
People's Republic of China  
3.1 The Chairperson  reminded Members that the second transitional review of China's 
implementation of the WTO Agreement and related pr ovisions of the Protocol, under Paragraph 18 of 
the Protocol of Accession of China, was carried out in 2003 by the subsidiary bodies of the WTO.  
This included the Committee on Import Licensi ng, which had a mandate covering China's 
commitments under the WTO Agreement or China's Protocol of Accession.  The report to the Council 
for Trade in Goods on last year’s review was circul ated in document G/LIC/11.  The third  transitional 
review was conducted at this meeting.  3.2 The Chairperson stated that China was require d to provide relevant information, including 
information specified in Annex 1A, to each subsid iary body in advance of the review.  Each 
subsidiary body was required to report the results of  such review promptly to  the relevant Council (for 
this Committee the Council for Trade in Goods) whic h in turn reported promptly to the General 
Council.  According to Paragraph 18  of the Protocol, the transitional review takes place each year 
after accession for eight years, followed by a final review in the tenth year or at an earlier date decided by the General Council.  Under paragraph 3(a) of Annex 1A  China was required to notify the 
Committee on Import Licensing of "implementation of the provisions of the Agreement on Import 
Licensing Procedures and the WTO Agreement applying the measures set out in Section 8 of the 
Protocol including provision of the time taken to grant an import licence".  Paragraph 1 of Section 8  
of the Protocol set out the measures which China was to undertake to facilitate compliance with the 
WTO Agreement and provisions of the Agreement on Import Licensing Procedures.  China was also 
required, inter alia , to submit the notification of its import licensing procedures to the Committee  and 
to report annually to the Committee on its automatic import licensing procedures, explaining the 
circumstances which give rise to these requirement s and justifying the need for their continuation.  
This report should also provide the information lis ted in Article 3 of the Licensing Agreement.   
 G/LIC/M/20 
Page 6  
 
3.3 In addition, Section VII(a) of Annex 1A of the Protocol  referred to responses to specific 
questions in the context of the transitional review mechanism, which should be notified to the relevant 
subsidiary body.  The Chairperson informed the members that since the last meeting, the Secretariat received three submissions containing questions and comments, G/LIC/Q/CHN/11 from Japan, G/LIC/Q/CHN/12 from the United States and G/LIC/Q/CHN/13 from the EC. 
 
3.4 The Chairperson suggested that the review be conducted  in two parts: first, under 
Section IV.3(a) of Annex 1A, and ther eafter under Section VII(a) of Annex 1A. 
 3.5 China submitted a communication late in th e day of 27 September 2004 which was available 
in English at the meeting.   
 3.6 Taking the floor under Section IV.3(a) of Annex 1A
, the first representative of China  stated 
that this was not the first time for this Committee to conduct a transitional review;  this was the third 
year.  He did not feel it was necessary to quote a ll paragraphs from the China's Protocol of Accession 
and felt it might be useful just to remind the members of the Committee which questions, comments, 
and documents from Members, including China, had b een received in advance of the review so that  
Members could follow the practice of the Tran sitional Review as was done in the past.   
 3.7 He offered a brief account of China's e fforts in implementing its WTO commitments and 
obligations pursuant to this committee and intr oduced the Administrative Licensing Law of the 
People's Republic of China, which entered into fo rce on 1 July 2004.  The enactment and enforcement 
of this law was of great importance for implem enting China's obligations under the WTO Import 
Licensing Agreement.  It demonstrated the firm commitment and earnest efforts on the part of the 
Chinese Government to establish and maintain a transparent open and non-discriminatory import 
licensing procedure and other trade-related aspects of the licensing process.  It was designed to 
regulate the Chinese Government's activities of administrative licensing at various levels.  
Trade-related administrative licensing, including im port licensing, naturally fell into the jurisdiction 
of this law.  Under the relevant WTO rules and China's accession commitments, administrative 
licensing should be carried out in a transparent and regular manner.  The restrictive effect of 
administrative licensing conditions and procedures should be no more than is necessary.  This 
understanding of the Chinese Government was one of th e key reasons that led to the enactment of the 
law.  This law contained specific provisions on the right of agencies to carry out such administration 
of the procedures and fees concerned.  Thanks to th is law and the newly revised Foreign Trade Law of 
the People's Republic of China, the import licensing regime of the country was further streamlined.   
 
3.8 Prior to this session China had submitted to the Committee its responses to the questionnaire 
on import licensing procedures for 2004 pursuant to Article 7.3 of the Agreement on Import Licensing 
Procedures.  China also elaborated on its 2004 import licensing regime through the provision of relevant information pursuant to Annex 1A of its Accession Protocol.    The questionnaire responses 
and Annex 1A information made reference to quite a number of Chinese laws, regulations and 
proclamations for which translation efforts were underway.  It was estimated that the work of 
translation could be completed in a couple of months .  Then notifications would be submitted to this 
Committee.   In the context of this transitional review the delegation received a number of questions 
from some Members.    3.9 A second delegate from China
 made a comment concerning the avoidance of unnecessary 
repetitive work under the transitional review and different Committees in the WTO.  A number of the 
questions that were received under the Import Li censing Committee had already been raised under the 
Market Access Committee and had already been replied to  clearly and in detail by China.  There was  
a clear distinction among the mandates of the Comm ittees or Councils and other bodies in the WTO.  
The relevance between the impl ementation of China's commitment of accession and each body's 
sphere of mandates was also clearly defined.  Chin a was serious about answering the questions raised 
by Members, but did not agree that Members could raise the same questions repetitively in different  G/LIC/M/20 
 Page 7 
 
 
Committees.  Members should try their best to obser ve the relevance between their questions and the 
mandates of each of the 17 bodies that had the ma ndate to conduct the transitional review.  The 
Chinese Delegation would make an objective judgmen t concerning the advance questions raised and 
decide the most relevant or most appropriate  Committee or Council where discussions would be 
addressed.  In doing so they would avoid repetitive wo rk on the same work raised in other bodies.  
They would bear in mind the question's relevance to  the mandate of each of the Committees as well as 
whether the representative of the relevant author ities was available in the Chinese delegation present 
at the transitional review in different Committees.  He requested the understanding and cooperation of 
Members concerned in this regard.    
3.10 China responded to questions recei ved in advance from Members as follows: 
 (a)   Question concerning the entities responsible for authorization of tariff rate quotas for the 
importation of agricultural products :  this information was contained in announcement No. 54 
of 2003 which was jointly promulgated by th e Ministry of Commerce (MOFCOM) and the 
National Development and Reform Commission (NDRC).  
 (b)   Question concerning the entities responsible  for the authorization of tariff quotas for the 
importation of fertilizers:   this information was found in Decree No. 27 of 2002, jointly 
promulgated by the former State Econom ic and Trade Commission and the General 
Administration of Customs.   
 
(c)  Question concerning the entities responsible for the authorization of automatic import 
licensing:   this information was found in the Measures on Administrati on of Automatic Import 
Licensing for Goods  promulgated by the former Mini stry of Foreign Trade Economic 
Cooperation, now MOFCOM as Ministry Degree No. 20 of 2001.  
 
(d)  Question concerning the entities responsible for the authorization of import licences and 
import quota licences:   this information was found in the Measures on Administration of 
Import Licences for Goods  promulgated as Ministry Degree No. 22 of 2001, also by the 
former Ministry of Foreign Trade a nd Economic Cooperation, now MOFCOM.   
 
 All of these announcements could be found in the China Foreign Trade and Economic 
Cooperation Gazette and on the website of MOFCOM.  Some had already been translated and submitted to the Committee as notifications and those not yet notified were in the process of translation and would be notified in the coming few months.  The delegate pointed out a typographical 
error in Annex 1A of the Protoc ol of Accession document G/LIC/W/23.  The website address in the 
fourth line of the  last paragraph of the document should read www.mofcom.gov.cn not ch.   
 (e)  Question concerning the buying, selling and transferring of import licences:
  it was explicitly 
stipulated as illegal in article 34 of the newl y revised Foreign Trade Law and Articles 66 and 
67 of the Regulations on Administration of Impor t and Export of Goods.  In addition, these 
stipulations were again embodied in the implem enting rules of these laws and regulations that 
included the Measures on Administration of Import Licences for Goods, the Measures on 
Administration of Automatic Import Licensing for Goods, the Interim Measures on Administration of Tariff Rate Quota for Importa tion of Agricultural Products and the Interim 
Measures on the Administration of Tariff Rate Quota for Importation of Fertilizers etc. 
 
(f)  Questions concerning the newly revised
 Foreign Trade Laws , the issuer of trading rights  and  
quantitative restrictions on importation of automobiles:   these issues were repetitive and the 
Committee on Market Access and the Council for Tr ade in Goods were respectively the right 
places to deal with thes e issues.  In the transitional review conducted a few days previously in 
the Committee on Market Access, the delegate had responded to these questions in detail 
where he also made it clear that the responses di d not in any way affect their  judgment on the G/LIC/M/20 
Page 8  
 
relevance of these questions in the sphere of  the Committee's mandates.  He concluded by 
saying that, firstly, the Foreign Trade Law will be  implemented in a way consistent to China's 
WTO commitments and obligations.  Secondly, China would continue to implement it's 
commitments made on the reduction of non-tariff measures in 2005. 
 
(g)  Question concerning the Measures on Administration of Foreign Investment in Commercial 
Fields :  this fell into the sphere of distributio n service which should be dealt with under the 
Council for Trade in Services and should not be dealt with in the Import Licensing 
Committee. 
 
(h)  Question concerning the quarantine inspecti on and related certificate of China's quarantine 
authorities:   this was an SPS issue and should be dea lt with in the transitional review of the 
SPS Committee to avoid repetitive travel to Ge neva of officials from the quarantine and 
inspection authorities. 
 
3.11 The Chairperson  noted that she was encouraged by China's commitment taken in this 
Committee that China would fully ob serve its obligations taken at the moment of accession to the 
WTO.   3.12 The delegate from the United States
 asked whether there was any one place or particular 
Gazette citations that compiled all the laws, items and regulations or whether it was necessary to go to 
the various sources. 
 3.13 The delegate from the European Communities
 acknowledged receipt of the answers to the 
agreement C3 and stated that they might raise extra questions later.  She further stated that she had 
consulted the MOFCOM website but found that the most recent rules dated from 1991, and she had 
not found information about the implementation or pu blication of legal texts.  She questioned whether 
the website would be updated.  3.14 She affirmed that the EC did raise questi ons in another context such as the Committee on 
Market Access but they still had issu es pending, such as the right to tr ade and certain restrictions to 
importing and exporting especially with regard to the right to trade, referring to Article 9 of the new 
revised trade law.  The EC would like explanations  as to when and in what way detailed provisions 
concerning the right to trade would be made public.  She stated that apparently this was not the case 
so far, and that they would like to have an indica tion of the content of these provisions.  She stated 
that they had taken note of the fact that article 9 of the Foreign Trade Law said that registration would 
not be required if the rules and administrative pr ovisions and laws otherwis e provided.  She would 
like an explanation of this or an explanation on wh en registration would not be required.  Could they 
have assurances that this would not give rise to discrimination?  In additi on they had concerns about 
restrictions to imports and e xports and wondered about the comp atibility with WTO rules of any 
possible restrictions that might be introduced by  China under the revised version of the new Foreign 
Trade law.  The EC also had very serious con cerns about the services sectors and would be raising 
questions in a communication that would be a ddressed to the Councils on Goods and Services. 
 
3.15 The delegate from Japan
 requested clarification on two points.  First, since the first 
Transitional Review was held, Japan expressed concern about China's implementation of import quotas of automobiles.  Since the phasing out period of the non-tariff measures was coming soon, rather than raising the issue of import quotas of au tomobiles, Japan requested that China confirm that 
on 1 January 2005 it would completely eliminate non- tariff measures on their automobile sector and 
would thereafter not implement new measures.  In pa rticular, the delegate wanted clarification that 
after 1 January 2005 there would be no need for Jap anese automobile manufacturers or importers to 
apply for any non-automatic import licences.     G/LIC/M/20 
 Page 9 
 
 
3.16 Second, Japan was concerned about reports  from Japanese manufacturers regarding the lack 
of transparency in issuing import licences on automobiles shown in document G/LIC/Q/CHN/11 we  
understand  that a  certain automobile with 30 seat s or more had been subject to automatic import  
licensing procedures.   In  practice only a limited number of Jap anese applications were approved.  
The reasons behind this were unknown but Japan hoped that the concerns prevailing within Japan's 
auto industry will disappear quickly.  If such misa pplication occurs again, Japan directed China to 
request  further opportunity to take up this issue bi-laterally for more profound discussion.  
 3.17 Finally, the delegate expressed  Japan's str ong desire that China ensure that automatic import 
licensing procedures shall not have trade-restricting effects.  
 
3.18 The Chairperson
 announced that there would be a correction or a revision to G/LIC/W/23, 
correcting the website address.  3.19 The delegate from Canada
 raised a problem that Canada had experienced in the application of 
China's import licensing procedures.  It was Canada 's understanding that China required all shipments 
of recyclable materials destined  for China markets to be certified for quality prior to export under 
requirements set out in AQSIQ notices 48-2002 an d 115-2003.  The Chinese certification agency in 
the US, China Certification and Inspection Compan y (CCIC), had informed Canadian Government 
officials that they would provide inspectors for Cana dian shipments of recyclable materials only if the 
Canadian facility would pay for the inspectors' travel and accommodation expenses.  The Canadians 
confirmed with US exporters and US association re presentatives that US-based  recyclable material 
exporters were charged only for the inspection service and not for any travel or accommodation expenses.  This meant that there was preferential tr eatment provided to US based recyclable material 
exporters in their shipments to China, in comparis on to that provided to Canadian exporters. Canada 
noted that the Agreement on Import Licensing Pro cedures provides for non-discriminatory treatment, 
equitable administration, neutral impact on trade, an d equal eligibility across firms.  In addition, the 
Preshipment Inspection Agreement provides for inspec tion in the customs territory of the exporter.  
This issue was raised bilaterally with Chinese offi cials in Ottawa.  Canada requested that this 
particular situation be investigated and that Ca nadian recycling companies be accorded treatment 
consistent with the Agreement on Import Licensing Procedures and that this treatment should be as 
favorable as that extended to US exporters.   
 
3.20 The delegate from China
 provided follow-up to the questi ons.  First he addressed the issue 
raised by the US concerning a compilation list of en tities by stating that these entities were listed in all 
relevant decrees and announcements of all the releva nt authorities.  To facilitate the work of the 
Committees China was preparing the translations of all these relevant documents.  Some of them had 
been completed and the rest would be completed in a couple months.  He felt that the translations of 
the full texts of these documents would give Members a clear understanding of the information provided in the earlier statement.  On the questi on of the difficulty the EC representative had when 
surfing the website of MOFCOM, the delegate thought the information was very much up to date.  He 
had  personally been in Geneva for about thre e weeks and used the website a lot to update 
information, but could recognise the difficulty because the language could be a difficult point for 
Members, and as he had stated they were doing the translation of all the documents related to this 
Committee and making the notifications.  This could also be addressed.  3.21 On the question of the trading rights, the Chinese delegate did not know whether the 
representative of the EC had communicated with th eir  representative who would be representing the 
EC in the Market Access Committee meetings beca use they have already responded to exactly the 
same questions in that Committee's meeting and al so they did not think that the committee on Import 
Licensing was the appropriate body to address the tradi ng rights issue.  He did not repeat in detail 
what he had said in that Committee's meeting but assured the Committee that the newly revised 
Foreign Trade Law would be implem ented consistently with their WTO obligations and commitments 
and the implementing rules with regard to the tradi ng rights had also been promulgated.  For that he G/LIC/M/20 
Page 10  
 
hoped the EC delegate could consult the inform ation they had provided in the Market Access 
Committee.  3.22 On the questions from Japan, the Chinese dele gate thought he had made  a very clear response 
in his statement when he said that in the y ear 2005 they would continue to implement their 
commitments with regard to the reduction of their non-tariff measures.  Concerning another point that 
the Japanese delegate had raised in his interventi on, the Chinese delegate thought the non-automatic 
licensing regime in China was consistent with thei r obligations or commitments within the Agreement 
on Import Licensing Procedures and they did not see any reason why they should abolish this 
automatic import licensing regime.  Because of the large amount of non-tariff measures eliminated in 
the short period of time after China's accession they be lieved that the monitoring of the trade of these 
products was very important and the automatic import licensing regime was a good way through 
which they could closely monitor the latest developm ents of trade in these products.  He did not see 
the necessity to abolish the auto matic import licensing regime but he assured the Committee that this 
regime would be implemented in a way consistent with the obligations for this Organization. 
 
3.23 In response to the question from the Canadian  delegate, the Chinese delegate stated that he 
could not get into the details because they did not  have the information available.  This question 
related to the measures adopted by their quarantin e and inspection authorities and he hoped that they 
could deal with this issue in the coming month in the SPS or TBT Committee meetings in order to 
avoid repetitive travel to Geneva of their people fro m that authority.  He also suggested that more 
detailed information be provided in advance of th e meeting so they could prepare for the responses. 
 3.24 The delegate from Japan
 stated that there had been a misunderstanding between their 
questions and the answers.  Japan did not deny Ch ina's right to conduct automatic import licensing as 
mentioned but acknowledged that in 2004 a certain type of automobile had been subject to automatic 
licensing.  They had found a case of misapplication because their industry had stated that in some 
cases only limited numbers of applications had be en approved this year.  This should not have 
happened under automatic licensing so it was requested that the message go to Beijing. 
 3.25 The delegate from Canada
 stated that they would be prepared to put their issue in writing so 
that it could be addressed more readily.  In Canada's  view, it did not appear to be an SPS issue as it 
concerned quality standards.  She stated that it was not clear if it was a TBT issue either, as it was 
inspection for quality prior to export, but in th is case the concern was about access to inspection 
services to get an import licence.  3.26 The delegate from the United States
 stated that  the AQSIQ issue had licensing components.  
He would like responses in one month's time and w ould revert to the issue in a later meeting. 
 3.27 The delegate from China
 thought he recalled that in the Market Access Committee or in the 
questions provided, the request was made that th ey abolish or eliminate the automatic licensing 
provision.  Concerning the issue raised  by the Japanese delegation, he had  checked with Chinese 
licensing services and they didn't find that their practi ces are inconsistent with stipulations in their 
own decrees or announcements or regulations no r the obligations under this committee and he 
reminded Members they have the new law of admi nistrative licensing and the law on administrative 
procedures which provide the procedures that can be relied on by the Japanese companies for their 
difficulties.  
3.28 The delegate of Japan
 felt that discussion would be difficult at the meeting because it was 
really to be debated based on actual facts of what they are doing at customs and other occasions.  He 
also conveyed the message to the capital and would like  further discussion on this issue in the future. 
 3.29 The Committee concluded the review.  In accordance with the practice used after the two 
previous reviews the Committee requested the Secr etariat to prepare a brief factual report for  G/LIC/M/20 
 Page 11 
 
 
submission to the CTG, with references to the docu ments concerned and the portion of the minutes of 
the meeting which relate to  the transitional review. 
 
4. Report (2004) to the Council for Trade in Goods 
(G/LIC/W/21) 
 4.1 The Chairperson
 stated that the Committee was required to submit an annual report on its 
activities to the Council for Trade in Goods.  A draf t report to the CTG covering the activities of the 
Committee in 2004 was circulated in document G/LI C/W/21 for the Committee's consideration.  After 
this document was circulated submissions were received from Bulgaria, Singapore, Chinese Taipei, 
the EC, Hong Kong China, Jamaica and Mexico.  The report would be updated to include these 
submissions, the work at this Committee meeting a nd any other submissions received up to the date 
the report was issued.   4.2 The Committee adopted
 the report, subject to updating, for presentation to the Council for 
Trade in Goods. 
  
5. Fourth Biennial Review of the Implementation and Operation of the Agreement 
 
5.1 The Chairperson  referred to the background document prep ared by the Secretariat, containing 
factual information for the period of 12 Octobe r 2000 to 15 September 2004, and circulated as 
document G/LIC/W/22, in preparation for the review foreseen under Article 7.1 of the Agreement.  
She stated that the document would be updated to  take into account the discussion at the present 
meeting, as well as notifications received by the Secr etariat before the final version of the document 
was issued in the G/LIC/- series.   Annex 4 would be updated to reflect other documents issued in the 
G/LIC/Q/- series.  5.2 The Committee agreed to adopt
 the report as updated. 
 6. Other business 
 
(i) Questions posed to the European Communities 
 
(b) Pigmeat Restrictions 
 
6.1 The delegate from the United States
 posed questions to the European Communities 
concerning pig meat and enriched uranium.  He pr omised to circulate the questions in writing and 
expects a written response.  Beginning with pig meat , he stated that in May the EU had notified its 
licensing procedures with respect to agricultura l Tariff Rate Quotas in G/LIC/N/3/EEC/6/Add.1 
which included TRQs for imports of pigmeat.  In  a recent official publication, 1458/2003, additional 
provisions were enacted addressing the administration of the TRQ system in the pig meat sector, e.g. a 
limit of ten per cent of the total quota on the amount  for which each importer was allowed to request 
licences. The US was concerned that this practi ce imposed additional trade distorting effects on 
imports, was administratively burdensome and appear ed to be more restrictive than necessary.  Its 
application discouraged the full utilization of the quo ta.  These concerns were also shared with the 
Committee on Agriculture. He noted to the Import Licensing Committee that none of these provisions 
were included in G/LIC/N/3/EEC/6/Add.1, which di d not reference 1458/2003 nor indicate any fixed 
limit for import allocations within the TRQ.  He requested that the EU delegation provide information 
on the TRQ licensing procedures authorized by 1458/2003 and update its notification to the Committee providing answers to the following:  (1) How was the ten per cent limit calculated and 
why was it used as the ceiling for categories placed in  group 2, particularly when that category was G/LIC/M/20 
Page 12  
 
not being fully utilised?  (2)  How could parties seek ing to export more than ten per cent of the quota 
volume be afforded the opportunity to do so?   (c) Uranium Restrictions 
6.2 The United States
 delegate's second issue concerned Restrictions on Sales of Enriched 
Uranium.  He stated that since 1992, the EU had ma intained strict quantitative restrictions on imports 
of natural and enriched uranium to  protect its domestic producers.  Since 1994, import restrictions had 
been applied in accordance with the terms of a ne ver published declaration, the Corfu Declaration, 
which reportedly imposed explicit quotas for imports of both natural and enriched uranium.  With 
respect to enriched uranium, the US believed that  only about 20 per cent of the European market was 
open to imports of enriched uranium.  The quot as were enforced through licensing restrictions 
administered by the Euratom Supply Agency.  Th ese restrictions had a negative impact on import 
suppliers and the United States would like more info rmation on these restrictions.  The United States 
had approached the EU bilaterally  but been unable to receive any further information.  The United 
States sought clarification of the content and pur pose of the Corfu Declaration, in particular 
concerning the quantitative restriction placed on impor ts of enriched uranium, notification to the 
Committee of the licensing requirements that enfor ced its quotas, and provision to the Committee of 
the legislation that enforced them.   He asked th e EU to provide a copy of the Corfu Declaration and 
relevant annexes addressing the issue of import acc ess to the EU market fo r natural and enriched 
uranium.  
6.3 The delegate of the EC
 stated that the TRQ's administration for pig meat was an issue which 
had been raised by the US delegation partially  at the Committee on Agriculture on 22 September 
2004, to which they had responded in writing and di stributed to all Members.   There was nothing 
new in this system, which dated back to 1995.  The date of the last licensing notification was 1 July 2003 and this regulation 1458/2003 was published in A ugust 2003.  The full contents of the previous 
regulation were in 1456/1995 which was also included in pages 80-90 in AG/N/EEC/1/2, 
CC/N/3/EEC/4Add.1 and EEC/15Add.1 of the 14 June 2001, which the EC would provide in writing.  
She would respond to the questions concerning enriched uranium at the next meeting.  
(ii) Dates of the next meetings 
6.4 The Chairperson
 informed Members that the Secretariat had tentatively reserved 18 May and 
28 September 2005 for the next meetings of the Committee, on the understanding that additional 
meetings would be convened if necessary.  6.5 The Committee took note
 of the above. 
 
__________