RESTRICTED  
  
S/C/M/144  
 
21 January 2021 
(21-0633) Page: 1/31 
Council for Trade in Services    
 
 
REPORT OF THE MEETING HELD ON 4 DECEMBER  2020 
NOTE BY THE SECRETARIAT1 
The Council for Trade in Services held a meeting on 4 December 2020, chaired by Ambassador Tan 
(Singapore ). The agenda was contained in document WTO/AIR/CTS/ 25. 
The agenda was a dopted . 
The Chairman  recalled that, as announced in the communication on organizational and technical 
arrangements for th e meeting he had  circulated on 2 3 November , delegations  were meeting in 
virtual mode.  He trusted that delegations attending virtually were , by then , all familiar with the main 
technical aspects of remote participation.   
 
For the benefit of the interpreters and, ultimately, of all Members , he urged delegates to speak at a 
reasonable, moderate pace and, if possible, to provide the interpreters with an advance copy of any 
written statements they intend ed to deliver , to help ensure that interventions were properly 
conveyed and understood when translated in the other two official languages.   
 
1  ITEM A: ANNUAL REP ORTS OF THE SUBSIDIARY BODIES TO THE COUNCIL FOR TRADE 
IN SERVICES  
1.1.  The Chairman  recalled  that, i n accordance with WTO reporting procedures, the Council for 
Trade in Services was to consider the Annual Reports of its subsidiary bodies. Accordingly, he drew 
Members' attention to the Annual Report s of, respectively,  the Committee on Trade in Financial 
Services (S/FIN/35) , the Committee on Specific Commitments (S/CSC/26) , the Working Party on 
Domestic Regulation (S/WPDR/24) and  the Working Party on GATS Rules ( S/WPGR/31).  
1.2.  He suggest ed that the Council take note of the four Reports, on the understanding that they 
would  be annexed to the CTS Annual Report and form an integral part of it.  
1.3.  It was so agreed . 
2  ITEM B : ANNUAL REPORT OF THE COUNCIL FOR TRADE IN SERVICES TO THE GENERAL 
COUNCIL  
2.1.  The Chairman  recalled that, i n accordance with WTO reporting procedures, the Council for 
Trade in Services was required to report each year to the General Council on its activities as well as 
those in its subsidiary bodies. Therefore, he drew Members'  attention to the draft Annual Rep ort of 
the Council for Trade in Services on its activities in 2020, contained in document S/C/W/384, which 
had been  circulated to delegations on 13 November.   
2.2.  The Report was factual and self -explanatory, covering the period from the 2019 Report up until 
the Council's  last meeting in October , and providing a snapshot of the C ouncil's  activities. However, 
it contain ed one small error, with regard to the document symbol for the Article V:7 notification by 
China and Hong Kong, China. Th at symbol was currently indicated as "S/C/N/264/Corr.1" but should 
instead have been "S/C/N/264/Add.11/Corr.1" because the Corrigendum concern ed only  Addendum 
11 of the notification.  Therefore,  he suggested that the Council adopt the 2020 Annual Report with 
 
1 This document has been prepared under the Secretariat's own responsibility and is without prejudice 
to the positions of Members or to their rights and obligations under the WTO.  S/C/M/144  
 
- 2 - 
 
  that error concerning the notification symbol rectified. Also, as  he had  mentioned under the previous 
item, the Annual Reports of the subsidiary bodies would  be annexed to th e Report for submission to 
the General Council.   
2.3.  He proposed that the Council adopt the draft 2020 Annua l Report to the General Council 
contained in document S/C/W/384 , as amended . 
2.4.  It was so agreed . 
3  ITEM C: NOTIFICATIONS PURSUANT TO ARTICLE S III:3  AND V:7 OF THE GATS  
3.1.  With regard to the notifications made pursuant to GATS Article III:3 (Transparency), the 
Chairman  drew the Council 's attention to the communications received from  Mauritius, in document 
S/C/N/102 2, and Brazil, in document S/C/N/ 1023. He suggested that the Council take note of the 
notifications.  
3.2.  It was s o agreed . 
3.3.  Concerning the notification s made pursuant to Article V:7 (Economic Integration), the 
Chairman  drew the Council 's attention to the communication received from Canada, Mexico and the 
United States  (in document S/C/N/ 4/Add.1) . He suggested that the Council take note of the  
notification.   
3.4.  It was so agreed . 
4  ITEM D: OPERATIONALIZATION OF THE LDC SERVICES WAIVER  
4.1.  The Chairman  recall ed that, at the Council's  October meeting, the LDC Group had put forward 
some ideas to advance the discussions on the operationalisation of the Waiver. First, LDCs had 
informed Members that they would organize a webinar on the impact of COVID -19 on LDC services 
trade. That event had been  held just a couple of days earlier , and he underst ood that it had been  
very informative.   
4.2.  Second, the Group had sought the Secretariat's assistance to update the information on LDC 
services trade initially prepared for the Dedicated Session of 2019 .  
4.3.  Finally, the Group had proposed that the Council organize a virtual workshop, in the second 
quarter of 2021, that would bring together LDC service suppliers and consumers of LDC services in 
preference -granting Members. Members had been generally open to  discussing the LDC Group's idea 
but, given the novelty of the suggestion, many delegations had called for the Group to provide 
further details, in writing.  
4.4.  On 16 November, the LDC Group had circulated the communication titled "Proposal to organize 
a CTS w ebinar", contained in document JOB/SERV/CTS/1.  The communication outline d the Group's 
proposal for the workshop. As the LDCs had also requested that he hold consultations on their 
initiative , on 25 November he had  convened an informal meeting, for Members to engage in a 
constructive exchange of views on the LDC proposal.  
4.5.  At that meeting, there had been  broad support for the LDC Group's suggestion to organize a 
virtual workshop. On the specifics of the event, however, clarifications had been  sought on some o f 
the issues mentioned in the LDC communication. A number of Members had also put forward 
suggestions for topics that they felt the event could usefully address.  At the end of the meeting, the 
LDC Group  had indicated that, in order to provide greater speci ficity, it would prepare an outline of 
the programme it was envisaging that would  also incorporate some of the suggestions made.  
4.6.  Just a day earlier, the Group had circulated its proposed elements for the webinar, in document 
JOB/SERV/CTS/2.  
4.7.  The representa tive of Uganda , speaking on behalf of the LDC Group , said that earlier that week, 
on 2 December, the LDC Group, assisted by the Secretariat Trade in Services Division, had held a 
webinar on " COVID -19, trade measures and LDC services trade: state of play, c hallenges, solutions, S/C/M/144  
 
- 3 - 
 
  and opportunities". The Group thanked the team of the Services Division , for the excellent service 
and assistance in making the event a success , and all Members that participated in the webinar.  
4.8.  The panellists  at the webinar emanated from different spheres . The  WTO Secretariat' s 
Ms. Barbara D’Andrea ; Mr. Lino Criel Icila  and Ms. Farhana A Rahman , LDC Group representatives 
from, respectively,  Uganda’s logistics sector and Bangladesh's  software industry ; Ms. Prachi Agarwal 
and Mr. Mulenga Chonzi  from academia ; Mr. Quan Zhao from the International Trade Centre ; and 
Ms. Zoritsa Uresovic, UNWTO Special Representative to the United Nations in Geneva and New York , 
all made excellent and highly informative presentations  on a number of important topics.  
4.9.  Ms. D'Andre a's presentation provided a picture of the state of play , including the latest data on 
LDC services trade, with a focus on the impact of COVID -19. It  also explained the importance of 
export diversification. Mr.  Icila and Ms. Rahman shared the experience of LDC services suppliers in 
terms of the impact of the COVID -19 measures that ha d been taken by many governments , including 
effects like the breakdown of global supply chain s due to great disruptions on inbound/outbound 
logistics in all transport modes. They also highlighted notable opportunities , including the 
establishment of hubs of wireless, remotely engaged comm erce, technology -driven and robust 
communication firms. The panellists  from academia , Ms. Prachi and Mr. Mulenga , shared useful 
insights about the  impact of  COVID -19 on SMEs  and on LDCs generally , as well as lessons learnt 
from the International Trade Centre interventions on the ground, with examples from tourism and 
digital companies.  Ms. Urosevic provided an overview of the impact of COVID -19 on the tourism 
sector , which was one of the most critical sectors for many LDCs and , finally,  Mr. Quan shared , 
among other things,  valuable insights on the road to recovery.  
4.10.   There were many valuable takeaways from the webinar , but one thing was and remain ed very 
clear, namely that LDCs were not doing well at all. Indeed, while global services trade had fallen  by 
30% in the second quarter of 2020, LDC services exports were estimated to  have dropped by up to 
60 to 65 %. Tourism alone had fallen by 81 % and transport services  by 31 %. The only notable upside 
had been for computer services exports, which,  thanks to accelerat ed digitalisation, were up 4%.  
4.11.   Indeed, as some of the panellists had  pointed out, the road to recovery would  require digital 
solutions . Yet, even in that respect , LDCs still faced  numerous challenges , which  they had  previously 
illustrated to Members. These included, to mention but a few, limited access to credit cards as a 
critical tool for online payments , the high incidence of unbanked consumers , limited experience with 
online payments and general ly inadequate onlin e payments facilities. It was indeed for th at reason 
that the LDCs continue d to see significant value in the discussions under 1998 e-commerce W ork 
Programme.  
4.12.   Turning to the LDC Group 's proposals contained in document JOB/SERV/CTS/1 , titled 
"Proposal to O rganize a CTS Webinar ", and in document JOB/SERV/CTS/2 circulated to Members  
prior to th at meeting, the Group wished to  thank the Chairman for the informal meeting  that he had  
convened on 25 November. LDCs had initially reached out to all notifying Members  and were very 
grateful to all those that  had responded, seeking further clarifications and offering new valuable 
ideas both at the bilateral level and at the informal CTS meeting.  
4.13.   Document JOB/SERV/CTS/2 , titled "Elements for a CTS Webinar " built on the first LDC 
submission. It provided a programme outline and greater detail on elements for the webinar , to 
enable M embers to have a clear er picture of the  kind of  event that the Group  was foreseeing , 
particularly in terms of the role Members  could play and the overall topics that could be discussed.  
4.14.   LDCs' services trade continued to account for  less than 1 % of global services trade : for a total 
of more than 36 countries, business as usual simply could not do.  It was for th at reason that the 
LDC Group welcomed and continue d to look to the Waiver Nairobi D ecision in document WT/L/982 , 
on "Implementation of Preferential Treatment in Favour of Services and Services Suppliers of Least 
Developed Countries and Increasing LDC Participation in Services Trade ". In the Group's  view, in 
order for th e Waiver to achieve a meaningful impact as intended by Members, it was critical that 
new ways of engaging were at the very least attempted by all Members at that momen t, while the 
Waiver still run.  
4.15.   In 2019, the CTS had initiated the process for the review of operation of notified preferences, 
in pursuance of the mandate contained in the aforementioned Nairobi Ministerial Decision. It had S/C/M/144  
 
- 4 - 
 
  held a dedicated session for th at purpose , which had consisted of two events.  The workshop that 
had constituted the first part of the session  had brought together LDC service suppliers, 
representatives from international organisations as well as Members’ development agencies , who 
had all shared information about programmes and strategies in place as well as best practices and 
lessons learnt to enhance LDCs ' export performance. LDC services exporters had shared success 
stories and challenges that needed to be addressed. Th at was the conve rsation the Group sought  to 
take forward with its proposal in JOB/SERV/CTS/1.  
4.16.   As mentioned in paragraph 2.1. of its proposal , the Group believe d that continued efforts to 
orient LDCs suppliers , as well as consumers in notifying Members , about the existenc e and benefits 
of the preferences was critical for promoting notified preferences and for getting the most out of the 
Waiver. It was one thing to have preferences notified and it was quite another for LDC service 
suppliers and potential consumers in notifying Members to be aware and meaningfully utilise th ose 
preferences. It was certainly impossible to do so if they were not made aware of the existence of 
those preferences.  
4.17.   Indeed, i n the past the LDC Group ha d engaged with its  Members about the Waiver. The 
demarche to raise awareness in LDC capitals had been  developed by the LDC Group in Geneva. The 
Group  also recognise d that orientation and awareness raising were not a one -time even t or a 
one-way street. Notifying Members were LDC  partners and their initiative was well appreciated by 
the Group . LDCs wished to ensure the realization of those efforts with their services suppliers.  
4.18.   Furthermore, Members could appreciate that while many in Geneva might be able to work out 
what the notified preferences mean t and what was required of LDC services suppliers to benefit from 
those preferences , that was not the case on the ground in the different LDCs,  for the actual services 
suppliers. It was for th at reason that the Group  also sought  to have Members share efforts 
undertaken to enable LDC services suppliers to understand the requirements of the preferences , and 
how to use them to their benefit.  
4.19.   In paragraph s 2.2. and 2.3. of JOB/SERV/CTS/1 , the Group  envisage d taking a look at the 
data. It was for this reason that in paragraph 2.1. of JOB/SERV/CTS/2 they had  listed some of the 
details they would find useful , including the latest statistical updates on LDC s' exports broken down , 
to the extent possible , by sector and bilateral partner , taking into consideration also the latest 
available data at the time of the event about  the impact of COVID -19, especially focu sing on the 
sectors in the preferences.  
4.20.   In paragraph 2.2 of JOB/SERV/CTS/2, the Group  envisage d the  sharing of experiences 
between exporters and importers of LDC services. The Group  would like Members to hear from LDC 
service suppliers about their experie nces with business opportunities that they ha d taken advantage 
of and about accessing other markets , including what ha d been easy and what obstacles they h ad 
met. In addition, experiences could be possibly  shared about  how LDC suppliers  had overcome th ose 
obstacles or how they though t such obstacles could be overcome. Tied to th at, case examples of 
successful LDC exporters  would also be helpful because the picture was not all bad.  
4.21.   The Group  also envisage d hearing from businesses in notifying Members that im ported 
services from LDCs. The Waiver was a rare and grand opportunity for LDCs to go a step further from 
what they were  accustomed to doing. The Group  believe d that there was great value to be gained 
from hearing the experiences of the users of LDC servic es, if for no other reason than to hear about 
why LDC services were not a preferred choice by business consumers in notifying Members. Where  
they are, the lessons to be learnt for other LDC service exporters was very valuable.  
4.22.   LDCs knew  that notifying Members  had access to their trade associations , and the latter 
included  businesses with partners in LDCs that suppl ied services to their regiona l operations or at 
home. For example, Amazon, Microsoft, and major companies in Europe outsource d to LDCs.  The 
Group encourage d Members to do a little homework to make the webinar in 2021  an opportunity to 
learn more about how LDCs were coming together in the business world, rather than apart.   
4.23.   Such exchanges would  go a long way in helping to know , first,  if indeed the Waiver  preferences 
were being utilised and , secondly , how to truly meaningfully promote them , having learnt  what was 
working well and what was not. The LDC Group realize d that there might  not be an exact relationship 
with the preferences, but it could certainly gain valuable information about what was happening on S/C/M/144  
 
- 5 - 
 
  the ground where markets were accessed and where interest in LDC services exist ed in notifying 
Members.  
4.24.   In Paragraph 2.3 , and as LDCs had heard from their engagements with Members, the Group  
envisage d a session to share information on government support and initiatives to assist  LDC 
services suppliers , including domestic policies, technical assistance and capacity building measures 
targeted at orienting LDC services suppliers to the notified preferences , as well as initiatives by 
governments to support LDC services suppliers in taking advantage of expor t opportunities. 
Members would  agree that th at information had been  helpful during  previous sessions and updates 
in that regard would be equally useful.  
4.25.   Finally, as indicated in paragraph 2.4 , in the last session the Group  envisage d a reflection on 
the les sons learnt and on how to move forward to take LDCs ' share of global services trade well 
beyond 1 %.   
4.26.   The LDC Group once again look ed forward to hearing from Members at that meeting , and to 
continued engagement with all Members to reach agreement on modali ties for a successful event in 
April 2021. The LDC Group also wishe d once more to thank all notifying Members for their genuine 
and continued engagement on the Waiver, especially regarding the review of the operation of notified 
preferences . It also took t hat opportunity once again to request Members in a position to do, who 
had not yet done so, to notify preferences which ha d commercial value,  and which promote d 
economic benefits to LDCs pursuant to paragraph 1.2. of the Nairobi Ministerial Decision.  
4.27.   The Chairman  thanked the LDC Group for its update on the webinar  that it had held earlier 
that week . It was noteworthy that LDC services exports had been disproportionately affected by 
COVID -19, particularly in the  tourism and transport sectors . He thanked Uga nda for introducing the 
Group's latest communication, providing elements for a CTS webinar on that important issue, and 
expressed the view that there was quite a compelling case for Members to support the LDC s' 
proposal.  
4.28.   The representative of Bangladesh  echoed the statement made by Uganda on behalf of the 
LDC Group  and thank ed the Council for keeping th at item on its agenda. LDCs were grateful to all 
notifying Members for their granting of preferences to LDCs.  
4.29.   Because of the COVID -19 pandemic, LDCs were in an extremely difficult situation . The 
progress towards sustainable development they had achieved until then had started a reverse 
journey. With severe job loss es, increasing poverty and aggravating public health situations , LDCs 
were facing severe chall enges , and the s ervices sector was no exception .  
4.30.   Bangladesh  support ed the idea of  holding  CTS webinar in April 2021 as proposed in 
JOB/SERV/CTS/1. As stated, the objective of the event was  clear, namely  to better orient LDC service 
suppliers and consumers  in notifying Members  about the existence of the Waiver preferences and  to 
obtain first -hand information and interaction among th ose actors.  
4.31.   Bangladesh also welcome d any further initiative by the Secretariat on updating LDCs ' services 
trade data on a quarterly basis , to better inform Members on LDC trade by sector and mode of 
supply.   
4.32.   The representative of Japan  expressed his appreciation to Uganda and the LDC Group for 
tabling the ir proposal in writing . His delegation  was flexible on the proposal to organi se a webinar in 
2021. 
4.33.   Japan was one of the Members  that had notified preferences under the Waiver , and in order 
to facilitate the increasing participation of LDCs in trade in services, it was important to recognize 
the ch allenges and restrictions facing LDC Members.  
4.34.   From th at perspective, his delegation had  appreciated the dedicated session and the workshop 
held in 2019 . Moreover, t he webinar on "COVID -19, Trade Measures and Services Trade " that had 
just been held that week had also been  very useful and informative  and had illustrated  the challenges 
and opportunities facing LDCs in the time of the COVID -19 crisis.  S/C/M/144  
 
- 6 - 
 
  4.35.   On the LDC  proposal  in JOB/SERV/CTS/2, his delegation  appreciate d the new communication 
on the elements for a CTS webinar, which clarifie d the intention of the webinar, reflecting comments 
that Members had shared at  the informal  CTS meeting.  
4.36.   In summary, Japan was  open to the organization of the proposed webinar  and wou ld continue 
to engage with Members on the event .  
4.37.   The representative of Turkey  thanked the LDC Group for its written proposal and expressed 
her delegation's full support for the suggestion to hold a CTS seminar in April 2021. Her delegation  
had found the programme outline extremely beneficial and was examin ing it carefully in order to 
identify areas where Turkey  could contribute to the webinar content. Turkey hoped that the webinar 
could assist in promoting the implementation of the preferen ces notified under the Waiver.  
4.38.   The representative of India said that her delegation attache d the  utmost importance to the 
meaningful implementation of the preferences granted under the LDC services Waiver by all 
preference granting Members , with the ultima te objective of increasing the LDCs' share in global 
export s of services.  
4.39.   India was committed to mak ing concrete contributions to the effective implementation of the 
Waiver. In that regard, as already stated during  the informal meeting, India fully suppor ted the 
request by the LDC Group , as contained in the communication JOB/SERV/CTS/ 1, for a CTS w ebinar 
to facilitate implementation of preferences notified under the Waiver.  
4.40.   India also thank ed the LDC Group for the programme outline in document  JOB/SERV/CT S/2, 
which  would  allow Members to prepare adequately so that  the webinar could lead to  fruitful 
outcomes.  
4.41.   The representative of China  said that, a s a developing Member, China ha d always firmly 
supported the better integration of LDC Members into the multilateral trading system and attached 
great importance to the LDC services Waiver. In 2015, within its capacity, China had notified the 
WTO of the preferential treatment granted to services and service suppliers of LDCs  under the 
Waiver . Since then, China ha d actively implemented th ose preferential measures and provided 
strong support to LDCs in such areas as tourism -related infrastructure construction, services trade 
capacity buildi ng, and construction of medical, educational, sports and cultural facilities.  
4.42.   China welcome d the LDC proposal to hold a webinar on the implementation of the W aiver in 
April 2021, so that Members could  better understand the practical difficulties faced by  LDCs and 
provide capacity building and technical assistance to them in a more targeted manner. With the aim 
of helping LDCs promote their economic development through participation in the multilateral trading 
system , China would  continue to engage and would  like to encourage Members to exchange their 
relevant experiences and practices in the Council's  future discussions.  
4.43.   The representative of Singapore  expressed her delegation's support for the LDC proposal and 
appreciation to the LDC Group for considering f urther the comments that had been shared by 
Members at the informal Council meeting. Singapore remained very open to discussing with the 
LDCs. As a notifying Member, Singapore supported the idea of helping LDCs better understand some 
of the issues involved  and provide further information sharing and capability building.   
4.44.   The representative of Canada  congratulated the LDC Group on the webinar on "COVID -19, 
trade measures and LDC services trade ", which Canada had  attended and found informative.  
4.45.   Canada thank ed the LDCs for their contributions and engagement during the informal CTS  
meeting, and for their proposal to organize a CTS webinar. Canada also  welcomed the informal 
communication. Th at continued work underli ned the importance of trade in services for LDCs ' 
economic growth and ways to further the integration of LDCs in the multilateral trading system.  
4.46.   Canada could  support a CTS webinar  that built on the successful October 2019 Dedicated 
Session , which  had offered valuable insights into the state of LDC services trade. Her delegation  
highlight ed the importance of continuing to facilitate the exchange of information , particularly as it 
relate d to the experiences of LDC service suppliers and to where key opportun ities and challenges, 
including challenges related to C OVID -19, exist ed for th ose suppliers.  S/C/M/144  
 
- 7 - 
 
  4.47.   As had been heard at the October 2019 Dedicated Session, LDC trade remain ed primarily a 
regional activity. Canada was keenly interest ed in hearing more from LDCs , to inform how to 
construct programming related to services and contemplate ways to better enable services trade 
with and between LDCs more broadly. Therefore, hearing from successful LDCs exporters would be 
valuable. Canada also remain ed engaged in learni ng more about  concrete obstacles faced by LDCs 
seeking to use the Waiver preferences.  
4.48.   The representative reiterate d the importance of LDC -specific and sector -specific data , as it 
could  help to inform potential programming. Canada acknowledge d that t hat data gap figure d into 
broader data gaps across services trade. Her delegation  continue d to encourage work on that issue, 
as well as with relevant international organizations as appropriate.  
4.49.   Her delegation was pleased to see a number of its comments being int egrated in the  LDC 
proposal in document JOB/SERV/CTS/2. While it was important for Members to consider ways to 
facilitate services trade for LDCs, Canada  also acknowledge d LDCs' interest in further market access 
opportunities and said that Members  that had not yet notified preferences should be encouraged to 
do so.  
4.50.   The representative of the European Union  thanked the LDC Group for their proposal to hold a 
webinar on the operatio nalisation of the LDC services Waiver. The EU had appreciate d the 
opportunity to discuss the proposal further at the informal CTS meeting held the previous  week and 
also wished to thank the LDC Group for their communication in JOB/SERV/CTS/2 , which provid ed 
further clarification on the objectives and envisaged structure of the proposed webinar.  
4.51.   The EU attache d great importance in assisting LDC s to strengthen their services economies 
and services trade. The Waiver was a very important instrument in that resp ect, in addition to the 
development and capacity -building  programmes.  
4.52.   The EU had  found the exchange of views on that topic at the CTS seminar of October 2019 
fruitful and could agree with the LDC Group that a webinar in 2021 could be a good opportunity to 
continue discussions on the operationalisation of the Waiver and on LDC services trade.  
4.53.   Her delegation would need to consult a bit further the proposed outline . However, g enerally, 
the EU  thought  that the proposed outline for the event was a good starting  point. From the proposed 
outline the EU understood  that the objective of the event was rather broad , and it was generally 
supportive of having a  broad objective. The EU also  appreciate d that the LDC Group had taken into 
account its suggestions communicated at the informal  CTS meeting and bilaterally.  
4.54.   The representative congratulated the LDCs for the successful webinar  held earlier that week, 
and thanked Uganda for highlighting the main elements that had been  discussed  at that event .  
4.55.   The representative of Australia  thanked Uganda and the LDC Group for th e new 
communication and the further explanation s provided at that meeting . She was very grateful for the 
efforts of Uganda and the LDC Group in taking on board some of her delegation 's feedback , discussed 
bilaterally and at the informal meeting the previous  week, particularly Australia's  interest in hearing 
from LDCs on any challenges they face d in taking up the preferences , to facilitate a comprehensive 
discussion of th ose issues, as  well as hearing about the latest data developments.  
4.56.   Her delegation was  still considering the specifics of the communication in Capital and how it 
could participate, but Australia  was very supportive of continuing th ose kinds of discussions and 
discussing  further with Uganda and the LDC Group.  
4.57.   The representative of Brazil  thanked the LDC Group for their written communication and 
Uganda for the presentation provided at that meeting. His delegation had noted and appreciated 
that the programme outline reflected the discussions that had been held at the informal meeting 
and had taken  into account many of the elements proposed by Members. Brazil supported the 
initiatives and the outline; his delegation was analysing the document carefully and would be ready 
to engage in the discussions and look at a possible participation in the webinar.  
4.58.   The representative of South Africa  thanked the Group for the insightful webinar held earlier 
that week and supported the LDC proposal circulated for that meeting. Her delegation was of the S/C/M/144  
 
- 8 - 
 
  view that monitoring and evaluation were critical to check meaningful implementation of the 
preference s granted under the Waiver , with a view to effectively tracing the impact of the Waiver 
with respect to increasing LDCs' share in global services trade.  
4.59.   Building on what Uganda had highlighted, South Africa proposed discussing the introduction 
of an on -line, WTO-hosted portal for LDC service suppliers and importers of such services , so that 
they could  record bottlenecks or challenges in activating the preferences granted. The portal could 
facilitate the real -time collection of sector and mode -specific data and could also give preference -
granting Members the opportunity to look into ways to address issues recorded therein .  
4.60.   The representative of  the Republic of Korea  appreciated Uganda's comprehensive 
explanations. As a notifying Member, Korea believed that t he proposed workshop would help shed 
light on the significance of nurturing capacity in the poorest countries, LDCs in that case, for them 
to fully enjoy the benefits of the preferences granted under the Waiver. Korea wished to continue to 
engage with the LDC Group and other notifying Members to make the webinar most useful.  
4.61.   By way of initial reaction, his delegation was generally content with what the LDC Group had 
proposed in the programme outline in JOB/SERV/CTS/2 and intended to review it further to ma ke a 
greater contribution to enrich its substance, especially in consideration of the recovery from the 
COVID -19 pandemic.  
4.62.   The representative of the United States  thanked the LDCs for the ir communication  and the 
new draft agenda for a CTS webinar on the Wa iver in 2021 . The United States was still reviewing 
the proposal.  While his delegation did  not, in principle, oppose webinars to help inform Members on 
various issues and exchange information, it had  not fully reviewed the proposed agenda  yet and 
therefore  was not in a position to support the webinar agenda as presented  until it had had a chance 
to see if the concerns it had with the initial proposal ha d been adequately addressed.  That day's 
explanation by the LDC Group had been very helpful and his delegation would reflect on those inputs, 
but the United States had some concerns and wished to see if those had been resolved.  
4.63.   The United States was open to learning more about the ch allenges LDC service suppliers were 
having in expanding their service offerings, both from a domestic regulatory perspective , given that  
domestic reform help ed build services markets, as well as challenges facing LDC services exporters. 
Were those challeng es a result of the pandemic, or something more systemic , such as regional 
barriers, or restrictive domestic policies that hinder ed exporters ? LDCs had mentioned digitization ; 
were restrictive practices in that area restraining the opportunities for  LDC service suppliers ? Any 
future webinar might possibl y build upon the information shared at the LDC webinar held earlier that 
week.  
4.64.   The draft agenda  mention ed the examination of  data, and more data and analysis that helped 
Members deal with the issue constructi vely would certainly be  opportune . His delegation would 
particularly welcome more information from those notifying Members where LDCs ha d used 
preferences about what  their experiences ha d been. Had  the use of preferences been a benefit to 
LDC services supp liers? The United States would wish to hear about those experiences.  
4.65.   In sum, his del egation still needed to examine the agenda before it could move  forward 
concretely with the webinar but in principle his delegation did not oppose webinars as long as the 
discussion added value for all Members to understand that important issue. The United States looked 
forward to working with the LDCs and interested delegations in developing a program me for a 
possible webinar in 2021 that add ed value to the discussion of th at topic.  
4.66.   The representative of Uganda , speaking on behalf of the LDC Group , thanked once again all 
Members for their support for the proposed  2021 webinar. LDCs value d their partnership with all 
Members in taking LDC services  trade  performance forward and were very encouraged by the 
support expressed at that meeting . She especially thanked all the Members that had put forward 
additional ideas that could be included in the webinar. As had been  mentioned earlier , LDCs saw the 
Waiver as  a great way to move forward  and were ready to engage in various ways to make the most 
of it. LDCs remain ed available to speak more with notifying Members on any specifics of the role  
they could play  in the webinar and offer any further clarifications as w ell as ideas for making the 
event foreseen for April 2021 a great success.  S/C/M/144  
 
- 9 - 
 
  4.67.   The Chairman  expressed  his appreciation to  all delegations  who had taken the floor to share  
their comments and views, which had been very useful . He noted th at there was  broad support  for 
the LDC Group 's proposal to organize a webinar  that would allow for a dialogue, and an exchange of 
views and experiences, between LDC service exporters and importers in notifying Members.  
4.68.   The LDC proposal in JOB/SERV/C TS/2 contained fou r key elements. First, trade data, which 
provided the information  and essential foundation for the discussion s. Second, experience  sharing, 
by exporters and importers , which would bring together key stakeholders, including , importantly,  
business es. The third element, which took on board the inputs from several Members, was to get  
the perspective from the  LDC service suppliers. Fourth, lessons learnt and next steps.  
4.69.   The LDC proposal addressed and incorporated most of the comments and elements put 
forward  by delegations during the informal meeting and in bilateral consultations. Members had 
found the outline very useful in providing greater clarity about the objective and scope of workshop , 
and some delegations  had also made additional  comments.   
4.70.   He was of t he view that there was sufficient basis to ask the Secretariat to try its hand at 
prepar ing a draft programme for the workshop,  which would be circulated for Members ' 
consideration. Th e draft would be drawn up on the basis of the LDC outline in JOB/CTS/SER V/2, as 
well as the views shared by Members  at that meeting , and would provide greater clarity to all 
Members.  Once the outline had been circulated, delegations  would be able to offer any further 
comments and views. He suggested that Members agree to that course of action, and that the 
Council take note of the statements made.   
4.71.   It was s o agreed . 
5  ITEM E: WORK PROGRAMME ON ELECTRONIC COMMERCE  
5.1.  The Chairman  recalled that,  at its previous  meeting, the Council had continued its deliberations 
of the joint communication from a group of Members titled 'Exploratory discussions on supporting 
digital capability of business and consumers', circulated as document JOB/SERV/296/Rev .3, and 
which  had first been addressed by the  Council at its July meeting . A revision of the communication , 
Revision 4,  had been  issued to add Korea as a co -sponsor.  
5.2.  He indicated that the  communication had generated significant interest and discussion.  Many 
Members had provided answers to the quest ions posed in the document, with several delegations 
presenting detailed information and follow -up accounts of the initiatives they had undertaken to 
support digital capability of business and consumers. Other Members had also shared their own 
experiences in the e -commerce ecosystem, and China had provided information on its efforts to 
promote the development of the e -payment sector. Members had emphasised that the role of e -
commerce in fostering economic growth and development w ould continue to  expand, while also 
acknowledging its benefits . A few Members had affirmed that the Work Programme discussions had 
mainly centred on the gains of e -commerce and had not sufficiently addressed the significant 
challenges that it posed.  
5.3.  Against this background, the mate rial that had been shared in the Council's most recent 
discussions had offered a useful contribution to help Members' reflections and understanding of e -
commerce.  Members  had also provided valuable information about the various measures that they 
had taken to enhance digital capabilities, both to reap the opportunities  and tackle the challenges 
that e-commerce  present ed.   
5.4.  The Chairman was of the view that  it would be a pity to leave th e wealth of information that 
had been provided by Members scattered in the records of the meetings . Compiling such material in 
a more structured manner would enhance transparency of the various initiatives that had been taken 
in the e -commerce sphere and would represent a useful follow -up to the Council's most recent 
discussi ons on this important subject.   
5.5.  As such, the Chair  suggest ed that Members request  the Secretariat to collate the information 
and materials that ha d been shared during the  deliberations and to compile them in to a stand -alone 
document.  Th e document could become a living text, updated as additional relevant information 
was made available to the Council. In addition , Members might identify pertinent materials that they S/C/M/144  
 
- 10 - 
 
  had shared at earlier meetings to be included  in such a  compilation. The Chair looked forward to 
hearing Members'  views and reactions to the suggestion. He opened the floor to any delegation 
wishing to revert to the communication, as well as to Members wishing to speak to the sub -item on 
"exchange of  information and experiences" , or to the Work Programme more broadly.   
5.6.  The co -sponsors who took the floor thanked Korea for co -sponsoring the communication.  
5.7.  The representative of Mexico  shared her delegation's experience with the programme 'Mujer 
Exporta MX', which had been  recently launched and consisted of business rounds for Mexican 
businesswomen and training courses to help them export by electronic means to the North American 
region under the recent agreement signed between Mexico, the United States a nd Canada (USMCA). 
The project aimed to promote business opportunities in the region and the establish ment of contacts 
with businesswomen from Canada and the United States. Importing companies had to be registered 
in the United States or Canada and have a website to offer products.  
5.8.  The program me was managed by the Ministry of Economy of Mexico, the Mexican Institute for 
Women, the Ministry of Culture, the Ministry of Finance and Public Credit , in collaboration with the 
Inter-American Development Bank and C onnectAmericas.  A website called MIPYMES.MX - DIGITAL 
TRAINING had also been created by the Ministry of Economy, where resources had been made 
available to help micro, small and medium -sized enterprises (MSMEs) strengthen and increase their 
participation in domestic and foreign markets, including through e -commerce. In addition, 
workshops had been held for the empowerment and digital literacy of women. The website also 
disseminated information on the use of fintech tools for electronic payments in cooperation with 
Banco d e Mexico; cooperation programme s with other governments ; the existence of financing funds 
for MSMEs (such as in the context of the  Pacific Alliance) ; as well as on support, credits and measures 
undertaken by the government to alleviate some of the adverse economic effects of COVID -19 . 
Mexico looked forward to continuing sharing  information on these issues in the context of e -
commerce and its evolution as a result of the COVID -19 pandemic.   
5.9.  Regarding the proposal by the Chairman for a compilation of informa tion shared by Members 
under the Work Programme, Mexico was of the view that the proposal  was very relevant , as the 
compilation  would facilitate access to the valuable information contained in the minutes of the 
meetings. Mexico  also considered that such a tool could be enriched with information provided by 
Members at future  meetings, classifying such information, in order to  help delegations , including in 
Capital, to visualize the rich exchange taking place on this matter at the Council.  
5.10.   The representative  of the Republic of Korea  stated that his delegation was pleased to co -
sponsor the communication in document JOB/SERV/296/Rev .4 and to hav e the opportunity to share 
with Members information on its experiences and policy tools. In the era of COVID -19 and po st-
COVID -19, business enterprises and consumers depended on digital transactions more than ever. 
Well-prepared companies with digital competitiveness savoured more opportunities to effectively 
approach consumers. At the same time, consumers with digital ca pabilities were  able to survive th e 
pandemic a s they could more easily acquire essential goods and services,  as well as secure their 
jobs through remote work and other similar modes of work. In Korea, the mobile distribution rate 
was very high, the IT infr astructure was well established, and delivery services were highly 
developed. In th ose circumstances, Korean consumers were able to effectively procure essential 
goods, such as food products, and non -essential goods,  such as daily commodities and electroni c 
products, without any physical contact.  
5.11.   In terms of share in online shopping in all retail sales, Korea had one of the highest in the 
world. The proportion of online shopping was around 22% before the pandemic. Th at ratio had 
skyrocketed to around 28% in February and March 2020. In the second quarter of 2020, it had  
relatively stabilized to around 26%, which was still much higher than before the pandemic. Overall, 
online shopping had greatly contributed to the daily lives of Ko rean people. And this contactless way 
of shopping was part of the reasons why Korea had  had a relative low rate of COVID -19. As a result, 
a well -functioning e -commerce had acted as a preventive measure against COVID -19 and, at the 
same time, had led to a r esilient economy.  
5.12.   In this pandemic, the bottom line was how business enterprises, especially MSMEs, were well -
equipped with digital capabilities for their daily business activities and how consumers, especially 
the elderly, acquired digital literacy for th eir daily lives. The Korean government had in fact upgraded S/C/M/144  
 
- 11 - 
 
  its digital literacy facilitation program in 2020. In th at regard, Korea  had started a new program me 
named the 'Digital Education Laboratory' in September. In th at program me, local governments 
utilized the available space within their community centres and hired instructors to teach digital 
literacy to all citizens.  
5.13.   The Korean government had announced in July a 5 -year national development strategy, so -
called 'K -New Deal' aimed at stimulating the e conomy on the macro -level and upgrading business 
competitiveness on the micro -level. The strategy comprised three components: the Digital New Deal, 
the Green New Deal, and strengthening the social safety net. There were numerous program mes in 
the Digital N ew Deal, but at that juncture his delegation would focus on two of them. The first 
program me was the 'MSMEs remote work facilitation program'. The method of remote work was 
inevitably becoming a kind of business standard. The program me focused on giving MS MEs more 
opportunity to carry out their regular tasks , as they were able to receive voucher -based consulting 
services related to virtual communications, working from home, cyber security, etc. The annual 
ceiling amount was USD 40,000 per company and the nu mber of companies expected to receive 
that service was 160,000 in 2021.  
5.14.   The second program me was the 'Online business support program for small business', 
covering also small non -corporations and micro and small corporations. As small businesses 
experienc ed difficulties in marketing, especially online marketing, the Korean government had been 
providing program mes to support them penetrating private and public online platforms. His 
delegation had initiated a program me for supporting small businesses to ente r private online 
platforms several years earlier . In addition, Korea had started a new program me for adding the 
broadcasting function onto the existing public e -commerce platform, which was a sort of 'live 
commerce'.   
5.15.   The representative of Brazil  reiterat ed his delegation's  appreciation for Australia's leadership 
as co -sponsor of the communication, which offered an opportunity for all Members to share their 
experiences in fostering digital inclusion and the development of the digital economy. At the previo us 
meeting, Brazil had shared information on its domestic and regional initiatives in the fields of digital 
payment systems and interoperability, as well as on the mutual recognition of electronic signatures.  
At that juncture, his delegation would focus on  a related issue, that of digital government, a matter 
that was considered crucial for building digital capabilities and promoting a better business 
environment through a more efficient, less bureaucratic and paperless relationship between the 
government, companies and citizens.  
5.16.   The incorporation of ICTs in Brazilian public agencies and their use for the provision of 
digitized public services had been established by the Brazilian Digital Government Strategy (2020 -
2022). Its main objective was to make all public services available on digit al channels by 2022 at 
the federal, state and municipal levels. The Strategy was intended to complement, and not to 
replace, the provision of face -to-face public services, which continued to be offered to citizens who 
did not have access to the internet .  
5.17.   Brazil had  the 4th largest connected population in the world, although it occupied  an 
intermediate position (44th) in the United Nations ranking in the provision of electronic public services 
by digital govern ments. Th erefore, there was room for improvement and a remarkable growth had 
taken place in the context of the COVID -19 pandemic, the Government having digitized 345 types 
of services, with an average of three new services every two days  since March 2020.  In that regard, 
the 'Gov.br' portal had been an important initiative aimed at unifying  the federal government's digital 
channels. The portal gathered in one place services for the citizens and businesses and information 
on the performance of all areas of government . The Government 's websites were being integrated 
to make the 'gov.br ' portal the single entrance to the institutional pages of the federal ad ministration, 
offering citizens and businesses a direct and quick channel of relationship with federal agencies. I n 
January 2019, there were 918 out of a total of 3,700 public services that could be accessed by 
citizens over the internet. At that time , 60% of the 3 ,700 federal government services were digital. 
This would  also be an important platform for access to and  use of open government data.  
5.18.   The estimated savings from digitizing public services were more than R$ 2 billion (around 
USD 400 million) per year. Most of this, or more than R$ 1.5 billion (around USD 300 million) 
corresponded to cost reductions for citize ns and business, who could access services in a full digital 
manner. For the Government, the savings were approximately R$ 531 million (USD 100 million), 
with the reduction of expenses regarding staff, electricity, water and paper. Furthermore, it was S/C/M/144  
 
- 12 - 
 
  estimated that digital services were 97% cheaper, as all the processing and analysis of orders was 
no longer done by staff.   
5.19.   Other advances in connectivity had been noted at the municipal level. According to the results 
of the ICT Electronic Government 2020 Su rvey carried out by the Regional Centre for Studies on the 
Development of the Information Society (Cetic.br), the proportion of city halls connected via optical 
fibre and with up to 10,000 inhabitants had gone  from 32% in 2017 to 63% in 2019. Among 
municip alities between 10,000 and 100 ,000 inhabitants, the number had risen  from 52% to 79%. 
Likewise, there had been advances in the provision of electronic services among municipalities with 
a website, such as issuing of electronic invoices and bills (from 51% to 69%), filling or sending forms 
via the website (from 55% to 61%) and issuing tax invoices or other fees (from 38% to 53%).   
5.20.   Brazil would share information regarding some domestic e -government initiatives related to 
trade, such as the ongoing work of est ablishing paperless customs procedures, in the future. At the 
regional level, Brazil was working with its Mercosur partners on the digital interoperability of customs 
procedures, which would further facilitate trade within the region.  Brazil remained avail able to share 
further information with interested Members. His delegation also looked forward to hearing from 
other Members on how the digitalization of government services could help to mitigate the economic 
challenge and social impacts presented by the COVID -19 pandemic.  
5.21.   Finally, Brazil welcomed the suggestion put forward by the Chairman for a compilation of 
domestic and regional experiences aimed at supporting digital capabilities, which could further 
facilitate the participation and sharing of experienc es from developing countries under th at agenda 
item. 
5.22.   The representative of Singapore  stated that her delegation considered that a very constructive 
exchange on Members' domestic measures, experiences and cooperation initiatives had been taking 
place under th at agenda item. The next step would be for Members to consider how they could use 
the wealth of information shared at the meetings in a useful and productive manner.  
5.23.    First, as it was envisaged that the discussions would continue, Singapore encouraged 
Members to continue their engagement, sharing information under the Work Programme. Se cond, 
very valuable information had been provided over the years and it would be good to contextualize 
and present such information in a structured manner. Information exchange and discussions on e -
commerce had been going on for decades in the WTO and the amount of information was massive. 
Given the pace of digital developments, Members should ensure that the discussions were 
maintained up to date, taking into consideration digital and policy developments from all around the 
world. While Members might have some differences in perspectives, it would be important to look 
ahead in order to plan the future meetings of the Council.  
5.24.   To that end, her delegation could explore the idea of organizing the information in a structured 
and focused manner, bearing in mind  that all information had already been made available online, 
for example through governments websites , cover ing a wide spectrum of topics. Therefore, it would 
be worth exploring how to start such an exercise in a focused and specific way,  for instance, by  
starting with the most recent information submitted in 2020  given the richness  of the discussions. 
Singapore looked forward to further discussing the proposal with other Members.  
5.25.   The representative of Chile thanked the co -sponsors  of the communication for  the significant 
contribution that it was making to the discussions in t he Council, especially in the current 
circumstances. In recent years, there had been a significant and sustained growth in online 
commerce, which had accelerat ed as a result of the COV ID-19 pandemic in a rapid and unexpected 
way. This ha d posed a series of challenges for goods and services providers, especially for MSMEs.  
5.26.    In that context, Chile considered the exchange of information on national program mes to 
increase digital capacity a  very useful and timely cooperation initiative. Since the first question in 
the communication had already been adequately answered by other delegations, at that juncture, 
Chile wished to make a contribution based on the second question in the document , related to 
national program mes, policies or practices that had been implemented to increase digital capability 
and reduce the digital divide, including different types of assistance provided to MSMEs.  S/C/M/144  
 
- 13 - 
 
  5.27.   The e -commerce support program me 'ExportaDigital' develope d by the Chilean export 
promotion agency, ProChile, aimed to facilitate Chilean exports of goods and services through the 
use and development of digital channels, be it an autonomous online store or with a presence in 
electronic markets. ExportaDigital pro vided practical and relevant information for exporting MSMEs, 
for example, on how to create a virtual store, which platforms were the most suitable, how to attract 
customers to a store, what digital payment methods were used in the most important markets, and 
how to address logistics. Likewise, ExportaDigital presented testimonies of successful cases, with 
practical recommendations from the perspective of entrepreneurs, and invited MSMEs to learn more 
about the operation of the onli ne channel , so that they could search and select the most relevant 
electronic markets for their products and services, design and execute commercial promotion and 
sales actions in those markets. This information was  presented through simple and accessible 
means, such  as guides and tutorials available on the initiative's website 
www.prochile.gob.cl/exportadigital . 
5.28.   The representative of India thanked the proponents of the communication and stated that the 
COVID -19 pandemic had disrupted the normal life of citizens and services globally. The Indian 
Information Technology (IT) landscape had not been left untouched by th at global phenomenon. 
During th at period, IT had evolved as a major tool for the government, busin esses and consumers.  
5.29.   As part of the Digital India programme, the Government had been making use of digital 
solutions and digital delivery of services for G2C, G2B, G2G and G2E services, thereby facilitating 
good governance through better efficiency and tr ansparency in governance. Some of the challenges 
faced by India in the digital delivery of services include d the digital divide, particularly in rural, 
remote, and hilly areas; the language divide , as more than 90% of the content in digital space 
remained in English, while a large percentage of the population conversed in their native language; 
sustainability of funds in e -governance projects; and cyber security risks. As to the opportunities in 
the digital space, India was a data -rich country and a huge gr owing market along with millions of 
youth available as Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics ( STEM ) skilled workforce 
every year. India was also the largest democracy presenting an open society and a business -friendly 
government.  
5.30.   With respect to  the second question posed in the communication on initiatives taken by 
Members to address the challenges, India had been undertaking initiatives like ' BharatNet' and Fibre 
to the home (FTTH), which aimed to address the digital divide by making broadband a vailable and 
accessible to every Indian citizen. The ' National Digital Communications Policy' (NDCP) , notified  by 
the Government of India in 2018, had  been a significant step towards providing communications 
infrastructure support to the entire Indian popu lation with its varying demographic profiles. The 
policy was aimed at facilitating India's effective participation in the global digital economy by 
ensuring provision of universal broadband connectivity to all uncovered areas and expanding t he 
Internet of Things (IoT) ecosystem. Through the 'Future Skill Programme ', India was facilitating the 
skill development of professionals on emerging technologies. To bridge the language divide, the 
National Language Translation Mission was being implemented with an aim to provide language 
translation facilities in 22 Indian regional languages.  
5.31.   As the C OVID -19 pandemic had br oken out, India had developed a specialised Bluetooth -
enabled contact tracing mobile App , Aarogya Setu , for helping augment the efforts of limiti ng the 
spread of pandemic by mapping the likely hotspots and dissemination of relevant information about 
COVID -19. The application  had more than 164 million users as of November 2020, which was more 
than any other Contact Tracing application in the world. Several other applications , such as PM 
Dashboard for COVID -19 Status/Updates, COVID -19 Volunteers Database of MSMEs, Special 
Surveillance System (S3) for tracking COVID -19 patients , had been developed and implemented to 
facilitate the efforts in tackling the COVID -19 situation. Another useful mobile application , KisanRath , 
had been d eveloped to facilitate smooth transportation of agricultural produce during lockdown.  
5.32.   India had implemented 'Government e -Marketplace portal' to facilitate e -commerce in the 
Government for public procurement of goods and services. In th at regard, MSMEs ha d handled 57% 
of total orders by value handled at th at portal. India's Unified Payments Interface (UPI) power ed 
multiple bank accounts into a single mobile application, merging s everal banking features, seamless 
fund routing and merchant payments into one umbrella. UPI ha d recently surpassed 2 billion 
transactions in a month, which had been a major step towards enabling the delivery of digital 
services and financial inclusion of a ll entities. Bharat Quick Response (QR) allowed customers to 
make payments using their smartphones by scanning QR codes at merchants' location. MSMEs, S/C/M/144  
 
- 14 - 
 
  especially the brick and mortar shops, had been able to accept digital payments using th ose low -
cost acce ptance infrastructures. The payment history of th ose transactions was  also helpful for 
businesses in accessing credit  or loans.  
5.33.   Her delegation considered it useful for Members to share their national experiences and, 
therefore, the Work Programme should remain an important feature of the work of the Council. India 
urged the Membership to examine the issues mandated under the Work P rogramme instead of 
prematurely jumping to rulemaking. India believed that negotiations on rules and disciplines on e-
commerce would be very premature at th at stage , especially given t he highly asymmetrical nature 
of the existing global e-commerce space.  
5.34.   Regarding the e -commerce Moratorium, India reiterate d its long-standing view that the 
Moratorium adversely impacted developing countries not just from the revenue point of view, but 
also in terms of negatively impacting developing countries' efforts towards their digital 
industrialisation. India looked forward to a meaningful and comprehensive discussion on the twelve 
issues mentioned under the Work Programme.  
5.35.   The representative of Australia thanked all delegations who had shared information on their 
policies and programmes at that juncture. Regarding the proposal made by the Chairman on a 
compilation, Australia considered that such a compilation could be a useful product and, therefore,  
it was open to consider the proposal, particularly if the compilation would cover information already 
provided under th at agenda item. To evaluate  the proposal further, Australia sought further 
information about the process, for instance, on how the produ ct would be compiled and whether it 
would be presented to Members and , if so, how such a process would be conducted. Her delegation 
would appreciate further clarification on those issues before the proposal  could be taken forward.  
5.36.   The representative of China thanked again  the co -sponsors of the communication and stated 
that it was supportive of the discussions under th at agenda  item. At the meeting of the Council in 
October, China had shared experiences in promoting the development of the e -payment sector. At 
the same time, China had noted the concerns of Nigeria, Malaysia and other Members about the 
issue of  the digital divide. For China, pragmatic and inclusive cooperation among Members was 
important and necessary , as it could  help MSMEs  cope with obstacle s in the development of e -
commerce. In recent years, China ha d actively carried out South -South cooperation in e lectronic 
commerce and ha d provided assistance , within its capacity , to other developing Members and LDCs, 
including in the construction of netw ork infrastructure, establishing the e -commerce platforms in 
rural areas, and capacity -building. China encouraged  Members to continue the in formation -exchange 
stimulated by the communication , and hoped that, through more in -depth discussions, Members 
could deepen their understanding on e -commerce -related services and find out what the WTO could 
do to overcome challenges and seize opportunities.  
5.37.   The representative of Canada  thanked all Members that had taken the floor for sharing their 
domestic experiences and encouraged  other  delegations to do so . As to the proposal for a 
compilation put forward by the Chairman, while exploring it, Canada would appreciate further 
clarification on some aspects. Like Australia, Canada would be interested in knowin g how the 
information would be compiled, presented in the document, and how it would be disseminated. 
Canada also sought further clarification on whether Members would have an opportunity to review 
their own inputs before a draft was circulated to Members.  Likewise, Canada wished to know whether 
the document would be part of any initiative or process . More information would be useful to allow 
Canada to consider the proposal.   
5.38.   Finally, Canada did not agree with the statement made concerning the development of new 
rules on e -commerce. The JSI negotiations on e -commerce were open, inclusive and transparent, 
and any interested Members could join th e initiative. Canada also wished to point out the increased 
number of developing Members participating in th e e-commerce JSI. 
5.39.   The representative of the United States  stated that his delegation  was a strong supporter of 
the Work Programme  and the sharing of experiences , indicat ing also  that Members had exchanged 
useful information at that juncture. On the proposal by the Chairman to compile information, at that 
juncture, the United States was not supportive of such an exercise, as it considered that such 
information was not hard to find given that it was contained  in the reports of the meetings. The 
United States  did not see value in repackaging such information, which could be taken out of context  S/C/M/144  
 
- 15 - 
 
  and would institutionalize something that was not part of the W ork Programme. The United Sates 
agreed with points made  on the JSI on e -commerce, which was on -going, and strongly opposed the 
notion that the Moratorium had a negative impact on development. In the view of the United States, 
it was the opposite.  
5.40.   The representative of South Africa  indicated that,  to facilitate  and improve  digital capability  
in Africa, it was important to prior itise the data divide in order to enhance the continent's capability 
to leverage the commercial value of such data. That, in turn, would help to diversify growth and 
integrate the digital economy in Africa.  
5.41.   Members needed to cooperate better under int ernational agreements  to further  national  policy 
frameworks and  achieve  the interoperability of payment systems,  which were key to facilitate  
transactions in the digital economy. In addition, it would be important to work on facilitating digital 
investment, increase the level of technology transfer , develop essential digital infrastructure and 
reduce the cost of data.  
5.42.   South Africa ha d observed that, since 1998, there had been no meaningful progress on 
addressing  the relationship between e lectronic commerce and development in a focused and 
comprehensive manner with a view to  effecting positive  changes to the intractable development 
problems  across the developing world. South Africa  requested the co -sponsors to elaborate on 
measures and actions they had undertaken concerning  their obligations under Article VIII:1  and 
VIII:2 of the GATS.  
5.43.    With some Members opting to advance rules on electronic transmissions under the JSI on e -
commerce , it was time to accept that the Moratorium on customs duties on electronic transmissions 
had been unravelled by this, with the issue of an extension becoming defunct in the view of South 
Africa.  
5.44.   To conclude, her delegation considered that future discussi ons could benefit from the following 
technical inputs: sector specific e -commerce Notes prepared by the Secretariat capturing  the 
evolving nature of e -commerce activitie s across all services sectors and modes ; and a compilation 
of on-going or emerging busi ness practices by e -commerce services suppliers  that, as stipulated  in 
Article IX of the GATS, might restrain competition and, thereby, restrict trade in services  for 
develo ping countries.  
5.45.   The representative of Hong Kong, China  said that his delegation we lcomed Korea as one of 
the co -sponsors and also welcomed the information shared by Members across the different 
spectrum of developing and developed Members. Hong Kong, China found that information sharing 
was very informative and useful and they encourage d more developing countries to join and share 
their experiences , as well as the challenges facing them in handling the digital capabilities of MSMEs.  
5.46.   Regarding the proposal by the Chairman on a compilation of information based on Members' 
inputs, his delegation was considering it with an open mind. As other Members, his delegation would 
appreciate more clarity on the actual process and scope of the information to be compiled. For 
instance, he asked whether t he compilation would focus on information shared in the Council or 
would also include information available elsewhere , such as the WTO webpage providing information 
on COVID -19 and world trade. Members had also shared information on different measures in t he 
context of the pandemic, with some Members also providing information in the context of the trade 
monitoring process, in which his delegation had participated actively. Hong Kong, China sought 
further clarification on whether those sources of informatio n would also be considered , to avoid 
duplication of efforts and streamlining processes. Hong Kong, China was open minded to consider 
the proposal and looked  forward to enga ging in the pr ocess.  
5.47.   The representative of the European Union  indicated that her del egation appreciated the on -
going exchange of information on Members' policies, instruments and programmes aimed at 
strengthening digital capabilities and addressing the digital divide. The European Union had 
contributed to th at exchange of information with  some project and programme examples back in 
July, and suggested to share additional information, for example bilaterally, if Members were 
interested in having further details  on the examples provided by the European Union. Her delegations 
would be happy t o continue th at exchange.  S/C/M/144  
 
- 16 - 
 
  5.48.   With respect to the suggestion made by the Chairman to compile the information provided by 
Members in the previous  few months, the European Union would be happy to consider such an idea 
further. Like other Members, the European Un ion would appreciate having further information on 
the envisaged timeline, objective and other details of such an exercise.  
5.49.   On the WTO Moratorium on customs duties on electronic transmissions, the European Union 
wished to reiterate its strong support for a permanent Moratorium. Her delegation considered that 
there was clear evidence about the far -reaching benefits  the Moratorium had  for business and 
consumers across the economy and different Members. The European Union also considered that 
global rules on digital trade were long overdue and appreciated the progress made under the JSI, 
which was transparent and open to all Members .  
5.50.   The representative of Botswana , speaking on behalf of the African Group , wished to recall the 
intervention made by the Group at  the CTS meeting held in July. The Group continued to support 
the idea of having focused exploratory discussions under the Work Programme and thanked those 
Members that had shared their experiences. It remained critical to extend the scope of the 
discussions in order to comprehensively address the  development  interests of developing countries 
in order to ensure digital inclusion and not leave anyone behind.  
5.51.   As to the challenges faced  by developing countries , while COVID -19 had multiplied the use o f 
e-commerce  both in developed and developing countries, it was necessary  to examine the 
development impact of e -commerce , particularly on developing countries' exports and associated 
growth and  development.  
5.52.   The COVID -19 crisis had also expos ed the digita l divide : about h alf of the  world's  population 
did not have access  to the internet , about  25% of the population in developing countries had access 
to the internet compared to 87% in developed countries , while o nly 1 o ut of 5 persons in LDCs were 
connected to the internet . As a result, countries that were well connected had been  able to continue 
many of their economic operations online during the pandemic, while those that were not 
hyper connected were not able to provide basic information on combating COVID -19 where this was 
most needed. Regarding the global digital divide, it was more pronounced in terms of existing digital 
infrastructure, data processing skills, and digital technologies.  The capacity to store and process 
data was an important aspect in a digital -driven economy.  
5.53.   The 1998 Work Programme emphasized the need to examine the challenges of developing 
countries and to enhance the ir participation in e -commerce, particularly as exporters of electronically  
delivered products, including by improving access to infrastructure and transfer of technology. Lack 
of digital infrastructure and skills put at risk the export competitive  of MSMEs in developing and LDC 
Members. Those Members could benefit from a study on the effects o f e-commerce on trade and 
economic prospects of developing countries, including of MSMEs, and the need to maximize the 
benefits accruing to them.  
5.54.   Limited digital  technologies and capacity to assess the incomes earned by  digital platforms 
within the bounda ries of developing countries, particularly where there was no permanent 
establishment, had led to huge fiscal losses for developing countries, and there was a study by 
UNCTAD in that regard.  
5.55.   After looking at the challenges, it bec ame evident that the gain s of e -commerce would not be 
automatic for devel oping countries and  strategic  intervention at the national and international level 
would be needed. Policy and fiscal space w ould be required by the developing world  to revive their  
economy , declining trade c ompetitiveness and  falling exports . In th at regard, digital technology  
transfer s could play a critical role in bridging the digital divide and rebuilding the export 
competitiveness of developing countries.  
5.56.   The African Group thanked  the Chairman for his pro posal and joined other delegations in 
thinking  that it might be a useful initiative. The Group also considered that Members would benefit 
from further information on the proposal in order to allow them to properly consider the suggestion  
and how it would h elp Members to continue reinvigorating the 1998 Work Programme.  
5.57.   The representative of Switzerland  expressed thanks  for the suggestion  to compile information 
shared on enhancing digital capabilities , which would be studied with interest. Regarding the S/C/M/144  
 
- 17 - 
 
  Moratorium, Switzerland echoed the interventions made, particularly by the European Union and the 
United States. His delegation believe d that the Moratorium did not negatively affect WTO Members 
and that, on the contrary, it provided an important framework  condition , which had enabled the 
growth of e -commerce.  
5.58.   The representative of Saudi Arabia  thanked the co -sponsors of the communication an d for the 
initiative to share experiences and information on the challenges and opportunities of digital trade, 
as wel l as on enhancing digital capability in trade in general, especially given the recent experience 
under the pandemic. For Saudi Arabia, it was important to share information on experiences and 
measures, as well as challenges. It was also important to consid er the digital divide faced by 
developing countries, business, women and youth, and to help them integrate into the global digital 
economy.  
5.59.   Her delegation would cooperate and share its experiences with other Members in the future, 
particularly regarding t he measures shared by G -20 members in the 2020 Summit on digital 
solutions and challenges, which evidenced that there was a lot to do  in that area. In the context of 
the meetings of the G -20 Working Group on Trade and Investment, a compil ation of short -term and 
long-term measures, which include d digital solutions and challenges, had been prepared . As to the 
Chairman's suggestion, Saudi Arabia would study it in Capital and report back at a later stage.  
5.60.   The representative of Peru thanked all delegations that had shared their experiences in 
facilitating and promoting e -commerce. Peru preliminarily agree d with some  delegations in 
considering that the proposal put forward by the Chairman , to compile the information provided by 
Members , was interesting , as it could allow to continue learning about good practices and facilitate 
easy access to such information. He also noted that there seemed to be some  reluctance on the part 
of some delegati ons. Therefore, Peru kindly requested the Chairman to continue exploring 
appropriate and acceptable parameters for all Members , which could be shared for consideration. 
Peru stood ready to assist the Chairman towards th at goal. 
5.61.   The representative of Australia  said that, r egarding the question put forward by one 
delegation on how the co -sponsors of the communication complied with their obligations under 
Article  VIII:1 and VIII:2 of the GATS, the co -sponsors  considered that they we re in compliance with 
those obligations. The co -sponsors sought further clarification from the delegation concerned in 
order to understand the relevance of those obligations in any case , and particularly , in the context 
of the current discussion. The repre sentative of UNCTAD  informed delegations that it had released 
a few new studies related to e -commerce and COVID -19 in the previous  few months. In October, 
UNCTAD had presented the results of a survey of consumers in nine countries to see how their online 
shopping behaviour had changed due to the pandemic. The survey  covered Brazil, China, Germany, 
Italy, the Republic of Korea, the Russian Federation, South Africa, Switzerland and Turkey. The 
survey had found that about half of all respondents had done more e-commerce during the crisis, 
with particular increases related to food, hygiene products and pharmaceuticals. Emerging 
economies had seen greater increases than more mature economies in which e -commerce levels 
were already quite high.  
5.62.   In November, UNCTAD had released the results of a second survey, this time of e -commerce 
businesses in 23 developing countries, mainly LDCs. While 58% of businesses selling their own 
products or services online had recorded a drop in monthly revenue, about 64 % of third -party 
marketplaces had seen a spike in sales. The study had also reported a notable increase in digital 
financial services as consumers tried to limit exposure to the virus while paying for food, medicine, 
health and hygiene products and other g oods. The study had highlighted the range of challenges e -
commerce businesses ha d faced during the pandemic, which in cluded , notably , disrupted supply 
chains, logistical problems arising from restrictions on the movement of people, and high broadband 
costs. UNCTAD was preparing a report , together with the UN Regional Commissions , on a broader 
assessment of the impact of COVID -19 on e -commerce in the context of the "eTrade for all " initiative, 
which was expected to be released in January 2021.  
5.63.   The representa tive of UNCTAD also wished to inform Members about some relevant meetings , 
such as the fourth session of the 'Intergovernmental Group of Experts on E -commerce and the Digital 
Economy '. The meeting, which had been  held in hybrid format in October, had focused on the topic 
of 'Digital platforms and value creation in developing countries: Implications for national and 
international policies'. At that occasion, UNCTAD had shared the revised version of the Manual for 
the Production of Statistics on the Digital Economy, which would be a valuable resource for countries S/C/M/144  
 
- 18 - 
 
  wishing to measure, for example, e -commerce and trade in ICT services and trade in d igitally 
delivered services. UNCTAD hoped to be able to organize the second session of the Working Group 
on Measuri ng E-commerce and the Digital Economy in the second quarter of 2021.  
5.64.   Regarding statistics, he wished to draw Members' attention to the fact that UNCTAD had 
published  data on trade in digitally deliverable services for the period 2005 -2019. He noted that , 
globally, the share of digital ly deliverable services in global exports of services had risen  from 45 % 
to 52% during that period . In developed countries, the share was 58%, while in LDCs it was 17%.  
5.65.   Finally, on capacity -building related to e -commerce, he no ted that UNCTAD continued 
receiving a growing number of requests for assistance. Until then , UNCTAD had completed 27 eTrade 
Readiness Assessments, mainly for LDCs, but also for some non -LDCs. The day before  the meeting, 
UNCTAD had officially launched the a ssessment of Iraq. More attention was being placed on the 
implementation of recommendations contained in the assessments. He wished to take the 
opportunity to thank both beneficiary countries for their trust and development partners, especially 
Germany and  the Netherlands,  whose  funding was essential to be able to respond to the growing 
demand for assistance.  
5.66.   The COVID -19 pandemic had  further acce ntuated the need for the development community 
to help bridge the digital divide to ensure that digitalization could bring inclusive development rather 
than widening inequalities. Against that background, he was pleased to report that a growing number 
of donors were recogni sing the importance of the digital dimension in their development assistance 
programmes. The "eTrade for all " initiative, of which both WTO and the Enhanced Integrated 
Framework (EIF) were founding members, represented in that context a valuable resource that could 
be further leveraged moving forward. The "eTrade for all" platform also conta ined a dedicated part 
related to resources of relevance to CO VID-19 and e -commerce.  
5.67.   The Chairman  thanked the representative of UNCTAD for the update. Thereafter, he thanked 
all delegations who  had provided their views and suggestions on his proposal for a compilation of 
information related to digital capabilities sh ared by Members under the e -commerce Work 
Programme . The underlying objective of his proposal was simple and straightforward, namely, to 
bring together the wealth of information on concrete and practical initiatives that had already been 
shared by Members,  presenting it in an organized and structured manner  in order to facilitate access 
by Members . He noted that going through  the individual reports of the meetings  to retrieve such 
information would be time -consuming for most delegations . Therefore, the purp ose of his suggestion 
was to enable easy access  to that information  by the Membership, thereby  enhanc ing its utility. The 
idea was not to propose something that was redundant .  
5.68.   As some Members had sought clarifications , particularly on how the compilation would be 
assembled and presented, he would circulate a concept note providing further information about his 
proposal. He invited Members to share their ideas on the process, including on the structure of the 
compilation. In the end, i t would be up to WTO Members to decide whether they wished to move 
forward with his proposal . The Chairman also thanked those delegations who had intervened at that 
meeting  to share information and experiences on their e -comme rce activities.  
5.69.   He then  recalled that, pursuant to the General Council Decision on the Work Programme 
adopted in December 2019  (document WT/L/1079 ), Members had agreed to reinvigorate the work 
under the  Work Programme, based on the existing mandate.  Since the beginning of 2020, the 
Chairman of the General Council had provided Members with an overview of developments under 
the Work Programme, including in the various bodies entrusted with such work, as pa rt of his regular 
reports on the implementation of the Ministerial outcomes. However, the Council for Trade in 
Services had not reported directly to the General Council on its work under the Work Programme 
since December 2019. He also noted that the Counci l for Trade in Goods had recently agreed that 
its Chairman would produce a report on this issue for the meeting of the General Council  to be held 
on 16 -17 December.   
5.70.   He stated that it would be also his intention to report once again to the General Council  at its 
upcoming meeting.  In line with past practice, he would be producing, under his own responsibility, 
a Chairman's Report of the discussions th e Council had  had under the Work Programme since the 
last report was issued in December 2019. The report would be purely factual, reflecting the essence S/C/M/144  
 
- 19 - 
 
  of Members' deliberations in July, October, and at that meeting . He took it that that was acceptable 
to all Members.  
5.71.   It was so agreed . 
5.72.   The Chairman  suggested that the Council take note of the statements made and said that the 
Council would revert to th at item at its next meeting.  
5.73.   It was  so agreed . 
6  ITEM F: UPDATE OF THE SECRETARIAT BACKGROUND NOTE ON MODE 4 – REQUESTED 
BY INDIA  
6.1.  The Chairman  indicated that that item had been added to the agenda of the Council at the 
request of the delegation of India.  
6.2.  The representative of India said that, as had been emphasi zed by her delegation on several 
previous occasions, India reiterated its request for the update  of the Secretariat Background Notes 
on all four modes of supply and also supported further Secretariat work on inter -modal linkages, as 
requested by one delegation.  
6.3.  As India had clarified before, while her delegation welcomed the US proposal on the issue of 
inter-modal linkages, that should not substitute the request to update the separate modal 
Background Notes by the Secretariat.  
6.4.  In earlier CTS meetings, India had also identified the potential areas of the mode 4 Secretariat 
Note of 2009 that could be updated. Those were merely some suggestions. India looked forward to 
engaging with other interested Members on their views and suggestions on its proposal to update 
all the modal Secretariat Background Not es. India once again requested Members to positively 
consider its proposal, which was inclusive and comprehensive. Her delegation believed that it would 
be a very useful exercise for trade in services . 
6.5.  The representative of the United States  said that his delegation's position on that issue had not 
changed. The United States did not support updating the Secretariat Background Note on mode  4, 
as that exercise would not add much value. His delegation had suggested a possible look at the 
interlinkages between the modes of supply. The United States would remain open to something 
along those lines but not to separate modal updates.  
6.6.  The representative of Bangladesh  said that his delegation supported the proposal by India and 
strongly encourage d that the Secretaria t should update the Background Notes on all service s modes 
to better understand the current situation and commitments by Members. His delegation also 
endorse d the suggestion on the preparation of a separate Note by the Secretariat on the 
interlinkages amon g the modes of supply.  
6.7.  The representative of Uganda , speaking on behalf of the LDC Group , said that the  Group 
reiterate d its strong support for the request by India to update the modal Background Notes. The 
Group  agree d with the delegation of India that that would be a very useful exercise. In updating 
that Note, the LDC Group would urge the Secretariat to include specific information on priorities of 
LDC suppliers, including mode 4 measures identified by the LDC Group in its quest to operationalize 
the LDC  Waiver and notifications with mode 4 entries, as well as limitations.  
6.8.  The representative of South Africa  said that her delegation would like to strongly support India's 
proposal for the 2009 Note on mode 4 and other mod al Notes to be updated, especially considering 
that the information contained therein was outdated. That could form part of a broader technical 
support initiative with respect to trade in services. Her delegation also urged the United States , who 
had objecte d to that proposal in terms of not providing any value  added , to reconsider its position 
because it ma de no sense to have a Note on the interlinkages without an updated Note on the 
different modes.  
6.9.  The representative of the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuel a said that his delegation reiterate d 
its support for the proposal made by India.  S/C/M/144  
 
- 20 - 
 
  6.10.   The Chairman  suggested that the Council take note of the statements made.  
6.11.   It was s o agreed . 
7  ITEM G: CYBERSECURITY MEASURES OF CHINA AND VIET NAM – REQUESTED BY JAPAN 
AND THE UNITED STATES  
7.1.   The Chairman  indicated that the item ha d been added to the agenda of the Council at the 
request of the delegations of Japan and the United States.  
7.2.   The representative  of Japan  said that, regarding the "Draft of Personal Information Protection 
Law of the People's Republic of China" that the Chinese Government had sought public comments 
on, the Japanese Government had submitted its comments to the Chinese Government in N ovember.  
7.3.  For example, the regulations that the draft Law stipulated included the safety assessment and 
certification standards (Article 38), domestic storage obligations for data (Article 40), applicable 
standards for regulatory measures (Articles 42, 43),  the obligation to designate a Personal 
Information Protection Officer (Article 51), and the obligation to designate a professional 
organization and a representative in China for personal information processors outside of China 
(Article 52).  
7.4.  Those regulati ons, depending on their interpretation and implementation, could result in 
excessive data distribution restrictions being placed on foreign operators. Japan also noted the 
possibility that they violated the obligation of National Treatment under Article XV II of the GATS and 
requested that the examination criteria be fair and clear to prevent foreign businesses from receiving 
disadvantageous treatment while ensuring the transparency of implementation.  
7.5.  Japan appreciated China's efforts to seek public comments  from various stakeholders in view 
of transparency. Japan expected that the requests and concerns expressed in its Government's 
comments would be properly considered and taken into account in the enactment process going 
forward. Japan also called on China to continue to listen widely, through public comments, to voices 
from home and abroad on the detailed regulations to be made concerning China's cybersecurity 
measures.  
7.6.  In addition, Japan continued to have the concerns it had repeatedly raised at the CTS on  the 
other related Chinese laws and regulations on cybersecurity. His delegation would not repeat its 
concerns in detail at that meeting, but Japan continued to pay close attention to those laws and 
regulations and expected China to ensure consistency with  the GATS.  
7.7.  With regard to Viet Nam's measures, Japan recognized that the Government of Viet Nam was 
still deliberating the draft Decree relating to the Law on Cybersecurity. Japan asked Viet Nam to 
take Japan's comments fully into consideration. Japan requ ested that Viet Nam continue to ensure 
transparency and take into account the inputs of all stakeholders before finalizing the Decree and 
related laws and regulations.  
7.8.  The representative of the United States  noted Japan's intervention regarding China's dra ft 
Personal Information Protection Law. His delegation shared a number of the concerns that Japan 
had raised in regard to the draft Law.  
7.9.   For over two years, the United States had raised concerns in the Council that various Chinese 
draft and final measures , including in connection with China's Cybersecurity Law and its National 
Security Law, might restrict cross border data flows and required localization of data.  
7.10.   On 21 October 2020, China's National People's Congress had published a draft Personal 
Informat ion Protection Law for public comments, with comments due by 19  November 2020. The 
United States recognized that it was important that China developed a legal framework to improve 
and strengthen the protection of personal information. Robust privacy protec tions were an important 
complement to a thriving digital economy.  
7.11.   However, the United States noted its general concern that some aspects of the draft Law 
might overlap with more general provisions found in China's Cybersecurity Law or other legal S/C/M/144  
 
- 21 - 
 
  measures  or guidance provided by certain Chinese regulators. That might pose challenges for 
companies seeking to comply with the draft Law.  
7.12.   In addition, the United States had significant concerns regarding certain aspects of the 
substance of the draft Law that cou ld significantly impact the ability of companies to transfer 
personal information across borders. In particular, Article 40, in connection with Article 39 of the 
draft Law, would impose a data localization requirement on operators of critical information 
infrastructure and personal information processors that processed personal information whose 
volume had reached a certain threshold. Those entities would be subject to a "security assessment" 
before being able to transfer any personal information out of Chi na. The United States had repeatedly 
raised its concerns about Chinese measures and policies that proposed those types of security 
assessments on data transfers.  
7.13.   The United States noted that cross -border transfers of personal information should not and 
need not undermine the privacy and security standards that China decided to adopt. However, 
imposing unduly restrictive requirements on data transfers, simply because they were cross -border, 
unfairly disadvantaged foreign suppliers, and did not enhance protec tions for personal information.  
7.14.   Depending on how China was to identify the companies and applicable thresholds of personal 
information captured under Article 40, a very large number of companies could conceivably be 
subject to a case -by-case approval in o rder to transfer  abroad any personal information at all. The 
quantity of information that an information processor would seek to transfer was unrelated to the 
information processor's ability to ensure the security of that information.  
7.15.   The United States also did not believe that Article 40 of the draft Law should apply to 
processing activities outside China for purposes of supplying services to persons in China from a 
foreign territory. China had made GATS commitments for the supply of services int o China from the 
territories of other WTO Members in many sectors (i.e. mode 1 commitments). Cross -border services 
suppliers seeking to supply services consistent with China's GATS commitments should not be 
required to establish a commercial presence in Ch ina as a condition to supply those services as was 
implicit in Article 40. The United States urged China to remove Article 40 from the draft Law.  
7.16.   There were ways in which cross -border transfer of information could be done in a less trade -
restrictive manner  including the possible use of certification by professional organizations. The Law 
could be clear on that point. Another way China could ensure a less trade -restrictive effect of that 
measure was to grant formal status in its Law, as Japan did, to APEC Cr oss-Border Privacy Rules as 
a legitimate transfer mechanism.  
7.17.   The United States also noted that Article 52 of the draft Law would require that data 
processors outside of China established an office or appointed a representative in China. The draft 
Law, in i ts current form, did not provide further definition of what would constitute an "office" or a 
"representative". As indicated before, the United States noted that cross -border services suppliers 
seeking to supply services consistent with China's GATS commit ments should not be required to 
establish a commercial presence in China as a condition to supply those services. Therefore, the 
United States urged China to consider those comments as it reviewed the draft Law and its 
measures.  
7.18.   With respect to Viet Nam, t he United States remained concerned about Viet Nam's proposed 
data localization and local presence requirements in its draft Cybersecurity Decree. As his delegation 
had noted in the previous  Council meeting , those requirements would affect an expansive arr ay of 
services which were foundational to the digital economy and were frequently provided on a cross -
border basis. The draft Decree would also impose even stricter data localization requirements on 
Vietnamese firms, threatening their ability to use cloud -based services supplied from abroad.  
7.19.   US and other foreign companies should be able to supply such services to Vietnamese firms 
on a cross -border basis, without being subjected to the additional burden of installing redundant 
computing facilities in the ter ritory of Viet Nam, consistent with Viet Nam's GATS commitments.  
7.20.   The United States would welcome any update Viet Nam could provide regarding the status of 
that draft Decree.  S/C/M/144  
 
- 22 - 
 
  7.21.   The representative of the European Union  recalled, as noted in previous CTS meet ings, that 
her delegation was concerned about the implementation of the Cybersecurity Law of China. In her 
delegation's view, the scope of the requirements remained unclear and the European Union 
continued to be concerned that key terms had not been specif ied in sufficient detail. For example, 
the "Cyberspace Administration of China's Cross -Border Data Transfer Measures" continued to raise 
concerns about the broad scope of those regulations regarding what was considered as critical 
information infrastructur e and which kinds of cross -border data transfers were affected. A definition 
of critical information appeared to cover many commercial activities and whole sectors that had no 
bearing on national security.  
7.22.    Moreover, her delegation noted that the implement ing measures of the Cybersecurity Law 
were still not in place. That created significant uncertainty for economic operators. The European 
Union would therefore welcome an update from China on when those implementing measures would 
be adopted.  
7.23.   Furthermore, a s regarded the draft Data Security Law, the European Union noted with concern 
that the draft Law seemed to have an excessively broad scope of application, covering "data 
activities" within China but also beyond the territorial mainland of China, that might  harm China's 
national security or public interest. Because of the data localization and assessment requirements, 
foreign companies operating in China could find themselves in a less competitive situation compared 
to domestic operators.  
7.24.   The draft Law seeme d to give the power to local authorities to identify their own important 
data. That could lead to a lack of harmonization of the term, making it impossible for companies to 
comply when conducting cross -border data transfers. As per her delegation's comment s during the 
consultations conducted, the European Union would welcome a common definition set at the central 
level with clear boundaries identifying which data were considered "important". Or, at the very least, 
that the list defining "important data" be only released at the central level by the relevant industry 
department, and not by local authorities.  
7.25.   Finally, as regards the draft Personal Information Protection Law, her delegation did have 
concerns and had conveyed them to the Chinese Government in res ponse to the consultations 
organised earlier that month.  
7.26.   When it came to the Vietnamese Cybersecurity Law, the European Union shared other 
Members' concerns and reiterated its remarks about the potential economic impact and the 
compatibility of that Law wi th Viet Nam's commitments under the WTO. The European Union would 
encourage Viet Nam to develop and implement the Cybersecurity Law and implementing measures 
in full respect of WTO principles, such as non -discrimination and proportionality, and to take int o 
consideration available international standards and practices.  
7.27.   The representative of Australia  said that, like Japan and others, her delegation appreciated 
China's efforts to consult with interested parties on its draft measures relating to cybersecurity, 
including, most recently, on China's draft Personal Information Protection Law, on which Austr alia 
provided a written submission of views in November 2020.  
7.28.   Her delegation was concerned that some provisions of the Personal Information Protection 
Law had the potential to create inconsistencies with WTO rules. Australia noted that any measure or 
count ermeasure taken under the Law should only be applied consistently with China's WTO 
obligations.  
7.29.   Australia continued to urge China to take into account the concerns of business and Members 
in the implementation of those measures and development of future me asures. Her delegation 
looked forward to continuing to work closely with China on draft measures related to cybersecurity.  
7.30.   Her delegation appreciated Viet Nam's engagement on its cybersecurity measures. As 
Australia had raised in previous CTS meetings, lik e other Members, Australia remained concerned 
with several concepts in Viet Nam's Cybersecurity Law and urged Viet Nam to ensure that its 
legislative measures aligned with WTO obligations. Australia looked forward to continuing to work 
with Viet Nam on tha t Law and related measures.  S/C/M/144  
 
- 23 - 
 
  7.31.   The representative of Canada  said that her delegation joined previous interventions 
highlighting specific concerns following the release of drafts or measures relating to cybersecurity. 
As several Members, Canada had participat ed in the recent comment period on the draft Privacy 
Legislation. Canada hoped that the comments submitted would be taken into consideration. Canada 
would continue to monitor the development and implementation of that measure and was confident 
that the Chi nese Government would ensure compliance with its WTO obligations.  
7.32.   Regarding the agenda item on Viet Nam's cybersecurity measures, Canada echoed previous 
interventions and reiterated its concerns.  
7.33.   Canada remained interested in obtaining any updates on China 's and Viet Nam's cybersecurity 
measures in the Council for Trade in Services.  
7.34.   The representative of China  thanked Members who had intervened for sharing their views on 
cybersecurity -related issues. China took note of those remarks and other observations. As reiterated 
in previous meetings, Members were facing the common challenges of safeguarding cybersecurity 
and data security around the world.  
7.35.   There was a global consensus that one needed to safeguard personal information, 
cybersecurity, and data securit y when regulating cyberspace. On the basis of such consensus, in 
recent years, China's series of legislative initiatives, such as the Cybersecurity Law, the Data Security 
Law as well as the Personal Information Protection Law, as mentioned in Members' inte rventions, 
were all taken with the purpose to address various problems of cybersecurity and data security, as 
well as to respond to the needs of the development of the digital economy.  
7.36.   In the legislative drafting process, China had comprehensively referred  to the existing 
international rules and legislative experiences of other Members, strictly followed the transparency 
requirements, and comprehensively solicited public opinions. China always attached great 
importance to Members' concerns and continuously welcomed constructive opinions from all 
interested stakeholders.  
7.37.   Regarding the Cybersecurity Law, China had provided comprehensive and detailed responses 
and clarifications on specific issues in previous CTS meetings. China would not repeat t hem at that 
meeting.  
7.38.   Regarding the Data Security Law, currently, the Law was still in the process of legislation. As 
one of the important legislations on data management, it regulated data activities and emphasized 
the promotion of lawful, reasonable, and effective use of data on the basis of ensuring data security. 
In practice, Members carried out data categorization and classification with the purpose of refining 
data security and governance. The provisions of the draft Data Security Law had taken references 
to some Me mbers' data protection practices and standards.  
7.39.   Meanwhile, in response to the national security risks in the data field, China had made 
regulations to conduct national security reviews of significant issues and activities that affected or 
might affect nati onal security, which was an internationally recognized practice and fully WTO 
consistent. For the next step, China would continue to formulate and improve supporting measures 
to clarify the scope of the data security review as well as the procedures of the  review.  
7.40.   On personal information protection, China recognized the importance of the economic and 
social benefits from protecting personal information as well as the contribution that it made to 
enhancing consumer confidence in electronic commerce. Regardin g the concerns from Japan, the 
United States, and other Members about the Personal Information Protection Law, that was the first 
time it had heard those statements in the CTS. The representative said that she had taken note of 
the statements and would lik e to provide them to her competent authority in the Capital for further 
consideration.  
7.41.   The representative of Viet Nam  thank ed Japan, the United States,  the European Union, 
Australia , and Canada for sharing their concerns and expressing their continued inte rest in 
Viet Nam's  legislative draftin g process  for the Decree  to implement certain articles  of the 
Cybersecurity Law. As already explained in the October CTS meeting and previous CTS meetings, S/C/M/144  
 
- 24 - 
 
  Viet Nam's process for the Decree ha d been transparent , with a n open mind  and a ll stakeholder 's 
comments had been reviewed for the continuing  internal consideration.  
7.42.   The Chairman  suggested that the Council take note of the statements made.  
7.43.   It was so agreed . 
8  ITEM H: 5G-RELATED MEASURES OF AUSTRALIA – REQUESTED BY CHINA  
8.1.  The Chairman  indicated that the item had been added to the agenda of the Council at the 
request of the delegation of China.  
8.2.  The representative of China  recalled that his delegation had expressed its concerns on 
Australia's 5G -related re strictions at previous CTG and CTS meetings. At the October CTS meeting, 
China had asked Australia to provide clarification on several specific concerns, as Australia had only 
provided some general remarks rather than detailed responses. Thus, his delegati on would like to 
continue raising questions to seek further clarification from Australia.  
8.3.  First, could Australia please explain what legislations provided the legal basis for the prohibition 
against Chinese equipment and service suppliers?  
8.4.  Second, could Au stralia please explain how its measures could be consistent with WTO rules 
and its GATS commitments, especially the commitments on telecommunication services? For 
example, how could its measures be in line with GATS Article II (MFN treatment), Article VI 
(Domestic Regulation), Article XVI (Market Access), and Article XVII (National Treatment), as well 
as paragraph 5 of the GATS Annex on Telecommunications and paragraphs 2 and 5 of the 
Telecommunications Reference Paper?  
8.5.  Third, China noticed that Australia's  Telecommunications and Other Legislation Amendment 
Act 2017 had not come into force when the prohibitions took place. Therefore, China would like to 
know, what were the legal basis and the criteria for the prohibitive measures back at that time? How 
could  those measures be in line with WTO obligations of transparency and domestic regulation?  
8.6.  Since the outbreak of COVID -19, Information and Communication Technology (ICT) had played 
a critical role in ensuring the operation of businesses and the society at la rge and had been essential 
in promoting global cooperation in countering the unprecedented challenge. China called on 
Members to work together to improve the construction, operation, and service of 5G and other 
information infrastructure so as to promote e conomic recovery and development.  
8.7.  China strongly opposed any Member using state power to suppress companies from other 
Members that legally operated in the host country. China had always required enterprises operating 
overseas to comply with domestic laws and regulations. China urged Australia to respect WTO rules 
and its GATS commitments, and to stop its discriminative measures, so as to create a better 
environment for enterprises doing business in Australia. China reserved its right to take further 
action s in the future.  
8.8.  The representative of Australia  noted China's latest statement at the October CTS meeting in 
relation to Australia's 5G Security Guidance. That was the third occasion that China had raised that 
issue in the CTS, having first raised it else where in the WTO in late 2018. Australia had engaged 
constructively and in good faith with China to explain in detail the rationale for its position, including 
in relation to the protection of Australia's national security.  
8.9.  Australia recognised that 5G networks would enable a new wave of innovation across the 
economy. Like other countries, Australia was committed to safeguarding its critical national 
infrastructure, including in the telecommunications sector.  
8.10.   In 2016, following extensive public consultat ions, the Australian Government had introduced 
to the Parliament of Australia a Bill called the Telecommunications and Other Legislation Amendment 
Bill 2016. The Bill introduced a regulatory framework to strengthen the security of Australia's 
telecommunica tions networks. The Bill was passed by the Parliament of Australia on S/C/M/144  
 
- 25 - 
 
  15 September  2017; it received Royal Assent on 18 September 2017; and entered into force on 
18 September  2018, following a 12 -month implementation period.  
8.11.   The key element of the telecom munications security framework was a security obligation for 
carriers and carriage service providers to do their best to protect telecommunications networks and 
facilities from unauthorised interference or unauthorised access.  
8.12.   To ensure predictability and stability, during the 12 -month implementation period for the new 
telecommunications security framework, the Australian Government had publicly issued 5G Security 
Guidance, on 23 August 2018. That 5G Security Guidance was provided on the basis of careful, 
objective, and extensive review, and allowed a clear understanding of how the legal obligations 
under the new telecommunications security framework applied to 5G networks. Australia wished to 
emphasise that the obligations under that telecommunications secu rity framework were imposed on 
carriers and carriage service providers, and not on equipment vendors.  
8.13.   As had now been underscored on multiple occasions, Australia's position on 5G networks was 
country -agnostic, transparent, risk -based, non -discriminatory,  and fully WTO consistent. Australia 
continued to welcome foreign business involvement in the market, which was essential for the 
efficient and effective operation of Australia's telecommunications sector.  
8.14.   Finally, Australia noted the keen interest from ma ny other WTO Members on the issue of 5G 
security as demonstrated by the participation of over 120 states at the recently held Second Prague 
5G Security Conference.  
8.15.   The Chairman  suggested that the Council take note of the statements made.  
8.16.   It was so agreed . 
9  ITEM I: RUSSIAN FEDERATION FOREIGN -LICENSED FIXED SATELLITE OPERATORS 
MARKET ACCESS (DECISION OF THE SCRF NO. 17 -42-07, DATED 4 JULY 2017) – 
REQUESTED BY THE UNITED STATES  
9.1.  The Chairman  indicated that the item had been added to the agenda of the Council at the 
request of the delegation of the United States.  
9.2.  The representative of the United States  recalled that his delegation had placed that item on 
the agenda , as in previous CTS meetings , given that there ha d been reports of the Russian 
Federation granting preferential access to Russian satellite systems in discrimination against foreign 
satellite firms.  
9.3.  His delegation  had heard the responses from the Russian Federation, and they had claimed 
that there was no discrimination, or they had not heard of any. Therefore , his delegation was looking 
for confirmation from the Russian Federation that foreign satellite firms were not disadvantaged by 
any rules that would grant a preference for use of Russian satellite sys tems over those foreign 
systems. If the United States were able to receive that confirmation, it would be able to remove  that 
item from future agendas. However, his delegation would reserve the right to keep coming back to 
that issue if it could not get co nfirmation that foreign satellite providers were not disadvantaged in 
the Russian market.  
9.4.  The representative of the European Union  reiterated her delegation's concerns regarding the 
licensing procedures of the Russian Federation for the provision of fixed satellite services. First, the 
European Union sought clarifications regarding a simplified licensing procedure for fixed satellite 
services companies that were part of a list published by the Government. Her delegation asked the 
Russian Federation to clari fy which criteria were used to include, or not, companies in that list.  
9.5.  Secondly, Law 17 -42-07 of 2017 required companies operating in Russia and wishing to rent 
capacity for connectivity from a foreign satellite operator to provide the Russian State Commi ssion 
for Radio Frequencies with a document stating that Russian satellite owners did not have enough 
capacity themselves.  S/C/M/144  
 
- 26 - 
 
  9.6.  The European Union considered that to be a discriminatory requirement against foreign satellite 
providers, who were prevented from ga thering customers for their services on equal grounds as 
their Russian competitors. There were some instances brought to her delegation's attention when 
businesses operating in Russia had expressed their interest to use the capacity of foreign -owned 
satell ite operators but had had to turn to Russian operators instead, in line with the requirements of 
the Law. The measure had resulted, and continued to result, in significant financial losses for foreign 
licensed fixed satellite operators.  
9.7.  The European Union noted that the Russian Federation's GATS schedule contained specific 
liberalisation commitments on fixed satellite services and that it did not contain reservations 
reflecting the kind of practice that seemed to be imposed by Law 17 -42-07. The European Uni on 
therefore sought clarification from the Russian Federation on how it viewed the requirement of that 
Law against its GATS commitments.  
9.8.  In the CTS meeting of 2 October, the Russian Federation had referred to internal consultations 
with relevant authoriti es and business operators regarding potential practical difficulties that 
Members might face in relation to the implementation of Law 17 -42-07. The European Union would 
appreciate an update on the findings of that consultation.  
9.9.  Finally, the European Union  would welcome further bilateral discussions on that issue.  
9.10.   The representative of Canada  thanked the United States for maintaining that agenda item. 
Her delegation wished to take that opportunity to reiterate its concerns and to refer to the statement 
made  at the previous CTS meeting. Canada was looking forward to hearing from Russia on the 
questions her delegation had submitted bilaterally and would be interested in Russia's answer to the 
United States' question on whether or not foreign operators would be  discriminated by that new 
measure.  
9.11.   The representative of the  Russian Federation  said that her delegation disagree d that the 
measure at issue was inconsistent with Russia's obligation s under the WTO Agreement  and, in 
particular, with its specific commitmen ts under the GATS. At the same time, the Russian Federation 
noted that it did not possess  information about the denials of access to radio frequency spectrum 
for foreign satellites.  
9.12.   The Chairman  suggested that the Council take note of the statements made.  
9.13.   It was so agreed . 
10  ITEM J: RUSSIAN FEDERATION SOFTWARE PRE -INSTALLATION MANDATE (FEDERAL 
LAW DATED 2 DECEMBER 2019 NO. 425 -FZ "ON AMENDING ARTICLE 4 OF THE LAW OF 
THE RUSSIAN FEDERATION 'ON PROTECTION OF CONSUMER RIGHTS '") – REQUESTED BY 
THE UNITED STATES  
10.1.   The Chairman  indicated that the item had been added to the agenda of the Council at the 
request of the delegation of the United States.  
10.2.   The representative of the United States  recalled that, in both the July and October meetings, 
his delegation had raised concerns about Russia's software pre -installation mandate created by 
Federal Law No. 425 -FZ. Concerns about that mandate had been raised previously in other WTO 
bodies.  
10.3.   In fact, following the July meeting, the United States had provided written questions to the 
Russian Federation regarding that mandate, and had yet to receive answers. His delegation was still 
interested in Russia's explanation as to how the requirement that ce rtain Russian software be pre -
installed in certain "technical devices" complied with Russia's services commitments.  
10.4.   In fact, his delegation's concerns about Russia's methods for developing and applying that 
mandate had only increased. The United States appreciated that different parts of the Russian 
Government had had discussions with industry representatives, but confusion continued to reign on 
how the mandate was to be implemented.  S/C/M/144  
 
- 27 - 
 
  10.5.   In addition, the United States appreciated that according to Reg ulation No. 1867, dated 
18 November 2020, only three categories of software must be pre -installed, and the software might 
be pre -installed by the manufacturer, distributor, or reseller. However, the implementation deadline 
remained 1 January 2021 - less th an 30 days away - and the list of software to be pre -installed had 
not been finalized.  
10.6.   New, and greater, concerns had arisen around draft legislation being considered in the Duma 
that expanded further the Russian Government's effort to limit choice and dic tate market conditions. 
The latest amendment would require companies to install both a local search engine and a local 
browser as the default functionality.  
10.7.   The existing Law 425 -FZ was bad enough, but at least it left some choice to the consumer. 
Those new  amendments accelerated a dangerous trend of the Russian Government eliminating 
consumer choice and dictating what browser and search engine the consumer must use. Could the 
delegate from the Russian Federation describe what efforts, if any, the Russian Go vernment was 
taking to address those concerns in the Duma?  
10.8.   The United States looked forward to written answers to their questions from the Russian 
Federation, explaining, among other things, how it would implement that mandate consistent with 
its WTO serv ices commitments.  
10.9.   Furthermore, the United States urged the Russian Federation to assure Members that it would 
postpone or delay the implementation of any mandate until its obligations and parameters were 
clear to industry participants and with sufficient l ead times to assure compliance.  
10.10.   The representative of the European Union  shared the concerns expressed by the United 
States on the Russian Federation's software pre -installation mandate. As previously requested, the 
European Union would appreciate more in formation from the Russian Federation on the type of 
equipment that would be covered and on the list of Russian software that must be pre -installed.  
10.11.   Moreover, the European Union would welcome clarifications on how the obligation to pre -
install certain Russ ian software would comply with the National Treatment commitments that the 
Russian Federation had made in computer and related services and in telecommunications services.  
10.12.   The representative of Canada  said that, as indicated at the July and October CTS mee tings, 
her delegation was concerned about the Russian Federation's software pre -installation mandate. 
Canada would like to echo concerns expressed by the United States and the European Union.  
10.13.   Based on the information available, Canada was concerned that t hose requirements might 
not be consistent with Russia's GATS National Treatment commitments, such as on electronic mail, 
as the requirement might modify the conditions of competition in favour of Russian digital service 
providers. Canada was of the view th at that would be problematic for foreign firms seeking to enter 
the Russian market and could negatively impact trade.  
10.14.   As indicated previously, Canada would also appreciate receiving more information on the 
next steps, including the timeframe for relevant implementing regulations, as ensuring timely access 
to information would be essential to companies impacted by those measures.  
10.15.   The representative of Japan  recalled that, a s pointed out at the October  meeting of the 
Council, Japan had a general concern about Russia 's software pre -installation mandate. Depending 
on the specific details of the relevant regulations and the manner in which they were administered, 
the mandate might  hamper the entry of foreign companies into the Russian market and , therefore , 
be inconsistent with the principle of non -discrimination.  
10.16.   The representative of the  Russian Federation  disagree d that the measure at issue was 
inconsistent with Russia's obligations under the WTO Agreement  and, in particular, its specific 
commitments under the  GATS. As her delegation had  explained on numerous occasions, the draft 
measure and its adop tion, in the form of the resolution of the Government of the Russian Federation 
of 18 November 2020 no. 1867, did not set out any restrictions in respect of install ation and pre -
installation of software of foreign origin.  S/C/M/144  
 
- 28 - 
 
  10.17.   Moreover, said resolution did not contain any requirements on the removal of installed 
software of foreign origin, in case it ha d been pre -installed by the producer or seller of the relevant 
produc t. Said resolution of the Government provide d for three options for the technically complex 
goods to comply with the pre -installation requirement. Irrespectively of the option chosen, the 
software to be pre -installed was easily removed by the consumer.  
10.18.   Moreover, if the pre -instalment of particular software was technically not possible, for 
instance due to incompatibility of the software and the technically complex goods on which it should  
be pre -installed, the producer of that device was exempted from the obligation to pre -install the 
software.  
10.19.   The Russian Federation was still expecting answers from the relevant delegations to the 
questions  it had  posed earlier in order to clarify the concerns of those  delegations in respect of the 
measur e at issue.  
10.20.   The Chairman  suggested that the Council take note of the statements made.  
10.21.   It was s o agreed . 
11  ITEM K: MEASURES OF THE UNITED STATES RESTRICTING TRADE IN SERVICES – 
REQUESTED BY CHINA  
11.1.   The Chairman  indicated that the item had b een added to the agen da of the Council at the 
request of the delegation of China.  
11.2.   The representative of China  recalled  that his delegation  had expressed concerns about a series 
of trade -restrictive measures taken by the United States on TikTok and WeChat at the previous CTS 
meeting, while the US delegate had only made a general statement without providing detailed 
feedback to China's specific concerns. Therefore, China wanted to take that opportunity to ask the 
United States to provide further clarifications on the following q uestions.  
11.3.   First, could the United States please explain what specific evidence was available to 
substantiate the cited national security threats from TikTok and WeChat?  
11.4.   Second, could the United States explain how its authorities treated like services and s ervices 
providers of any other Member? Could the United States please explain how its measures were in 
line with relevant WTO rules and its GATS commitments, including GATS Article II (MFN treatment), 
Article VI (Domestic Regulation), Article XVI (Market A ccess), and Article XVII (National Treatment)?  
11.5.   Third, China noted that, in a preliminary injunction ruling, the US judge had considered that 
Executive Order 13942 and the Commerce Department's prohibitions likely exceeded the lawful 
bounds prescribed by t he IEEPA, and that, absent injunctive relief, ByteDance and TikTok Inc. would 
suffer "irreparable harm". His delegation would like to know what the United States' view was on 
that.  
11.6.   China had always asked Chinese enterprises operating overseas to comply wi th local laws and 
regulations. However, the US measures had seriously affected the business operations and 
investment activities of the above two enterprises in the United States, violated the legitimate rights 
and interests of the enterprises concerned, d isrupted the normal market order, and undermined the 
confidence of international investors in the business environment of the United States. China urged 
the United States to immediately stop its wrong practices and earnestly safeguard fair and 
transparent international rules and order. China reserved the right to take corresponding measures 
in the future.  
11.7.   The representative of the United States  thanked China for raising that issue. His delegation  
had responded back in October  and its  position remain ed exact ly the same, that the actions taken 
by the United States cited by China's intervention on those  particular matters served to protect the 
US national interest. After conducting a thorough  review , the United States had  determined that the 
mobile applications  of the Chinese companies  at issue  posed a specific, identified national security 
risk. The actions taken by the United States were designed to mitigate those  national security risks.  S/C/M/144  
 
- 29 - 
 
  11.8.   The Chairman  suggested that the Council take note of the statements made.  
11.9.   It was so agreed . 
12  ITEM L: MEASURES OF INDIA  RESTRICTING TRADE IN SERVICES – REQUESTED BY 
CHINA  
12.1.   The Chairman  indicated that the item had b een added to the agenda of the Council at the 
request of the delegation of China.  
12.2.   The representative of China  recalled that,  at the last CTS meeting, his delegation had 
expressed its concerns on India's restrictive measures on trade in services, including  investment 
restrictions and the ban on apps. However, India had not provided detailed responses to China's 
questions.  
12.3.   Since the previous meeting, China had noted that the Indian Ministry of Electronics and 
Information Technology had issued another announ cement, on 24 November 2020, banning the use 
of 43 apps which were developed and operated by Chinese companies in India. The Indian measures 
were obviously inconsistent with WTO rules and India's GATS commitments. Therefore, China would 
like to raise its c oncern again and ask India to provide detailed clarifications on the following 
questions.  
12.4.   First, India's restrictive measures on investment and apps were highly discriminatory and had 
not been administered in a reasonable, objective, and impartial manner.  Those measures were 
running in the opposite direction of trade liberalization and facilitation and violated India's obligations 
under GATS Article II (MFN Treatment) and Article VI (Domestic Regulation).  
12.5.   Second, the Indian measures banning Chinese apps pr evented the supply of services through 
mode 1 and mode 3, of services on which that India had made specific commitments, including 
computer -related, telecommunication and audio -visual services, thus violating GATS Article XVI 
(Market Access) and Article XV II (National Treatment).  
12.6.   Third, considering that the Indian measures would significantly affect trade in services, India 
should notify them to the CTS pursuant to GATS Article III (Transparency). Therefore, China would 
like to ask India to share its plan o f future notification of those measures.  
12.7.   China strongly opposed the Indian Government's repeated abuse of national security 
measures and the adoption of highly restrictive measures that affected Chinese service suppliers 
and services. China urged India to stop the inconsistent practices immediately and reserved the 
right to take further actions in the future.  
12.8.   The representative of India said that her delegation was fully committed to upholding its WTO 
obligations. As stated during its intervention at the la st meeting of the CTS, India firmly believed 
that its two measures, on which China had raised concerns, were wholly consistent with India's 
commitments at the WTO.  
12.9.   With respect to the concern expressed by China regarding the review of India's FDI policy, 
her delegation clarified that India continued to permit and welcome FDI from all Members of WTO, 
including the Member raising the concern. India had one of the world's most open regimes for FDI. 
It was strange that the Member raising the concern itself impo sed substantial restrictions on foreign 
investments.  
12.10.   On the second specific measure, relating to the mobile applications, a transparent process 
with necessary checks and balances and safeguards, as specified in India's Information Technology 
Rules of 2009,  had been followed while blocking those applications. All those app suppliers had been 
informed about the blocking order issued by the Government of India, indicating the reasons and 
grounds for blocking. Those app suppliers had also been given the opportu nity to be heard by 
submitting their comments and clarification to a detailed questionnaire sent by the Indian Ministry 
of Electronics and Information Technology.  S/C/M/144  
 
- 30 - 
 
  12.11.   India valued and was committed to protecting the democratic rights of its citizens, including  
access to goods and services, while reserving the right to take measures to ensure the protection of 
privacy, data security, and national security. India's track record in transparency, upholding the 
principles of the multilateral trading system and leadi ng initiatives for inclusive trade in services was 
well-known. It was expected that the other Member who had raised the issue should first reflect on 
its track record on transparency and allowing open trade in services.  
12.12.   The representative concluded by reit erating that India's measures were fully compliant with 
its obligations under the GATS. In case any Member had any issues, India was always open for a 
constructive dialogue.  
12.13.   The Chairman  suggested that the Council take note of the statements made.  
12.14.   It was so agreed . 
13  ITEM M: VAT EXEMPTION AND CERTAIN TAX REDUCTIONS FOR RUSSIAN SOFTWARE 
AND IT COMPANIES UNDER FEDERAL LAW NO. 265 -FZ – REQUESTED BY THE UNITED 
STATES  
13.1.   The Chairman  indicated that the item had b een added to the agenda of the Council at the 
request of the delegation of the United States . 
13.2.   The representative of the United States  said that the new item that his delegation had placed 
on the agenda had a significant, potential impact on service suppliers. The United States understood 
that the Russian Fede ration had recently made amendments to its tax code (Federal Law No. 265 -FZ, 
dated 2August 2020) that would provide certain tax benefits to domestic suppliers of IT services and 
domestic software products as of January 2021.  
13.3.   Under those amendments, royalti es paid on foreign software products would be subject to 
VAT, but royalties on registered Russian software products would not. The United States understood 
that one of the criteria for registration of a software product as Russian was that its intellectual  
property was owned by a Russian national or a majority Russian -owned company.  
13.4.   Additionally, under those amendments, a wide array of accredited Russian IT and software 
services suppliers would be subject to reduced rates of corporate income tax and lower s ocial 
insurance contributions, as compared to non -accredited suppliers of those same services. Again, the 
United States understood that the criteria for being considered an "accredited Russian" firm included 
that the firm was established under Russian law,  the firm was majority Russian -owned, and the 
intellectual property was owned by a Russian national or a majority Russian -owned company.  
13.5.   The United States would welcome any further information that Russia could provide on those 
measures. In particular, his  delegation had heard that Russia was considering extending the VAT 
exemption to royalties paid on all software, regardless of nationality.  
13.6.   In light of Russia's National Treatment commitments in computer and related services, and 
Russia's National Treatmen t commitments in distribution services with respect to software products, 
could Russia please explain how those measures were consistent with its GATS National Treatment 
obligations?  
13.7.   The representative of the Russian Federation  noted that its measures were consistent and 
legitimate measures of state support of Russian software producers and could not  be considered not 
to be in compliance with Russia's obligations under the WTO Agreement. Those measures were not 
applied across the sector but on ly granted to certain developers of specific importance for that sector. 
The Russian Federation  also note d that the taxation measures did not affect the degree of IPR 
protection . The legislation of Russia provide d complete protection of copyright in the fi eld of civil and 
criminal law in compliance with the provisions of the TRIPS Agreement.  
13.8.   The Chairman  suggested that the Council take note of the statements made.  
13.9.   It was so agreed . S/C/M/144  
 
- 31 - 
 
  14  ITEM  N: OTHER BUSINESS  
14.1.   No issue was raised under this agenda item.  
14.2.   The meeting  was adjourned . 
__________