G/TBT/W/681  
 
25 November 2019  
(19-7997) Page: 1/2 
Committee on Technical Barriers to Trade  Original: English  
 
 EUROPEAN UNION — REGULATION (EC) NO 1107 /2009 - NON-RENEWAL OF APPROVAL 
OF THE ACTIVE SUBSTA NCE PICOXYSTROBIN  
STATEMENT BY BRAZIL TO THE COMMITTEE ON TECHNICAL BARRIERS T O TRADE  
13 – 15 NOVEMBER  2019 
The following communication, dated 13 November  2019, is being circulated at the request of the 
delegation of Brazil . 
 
_______________  
 
 
1.  As stated in the previous meetings of this Committee, Brazil seconds the understanding that 
Europe`s non -renewal of pico xystrobin registries goes against scientific consensus regarding the 
safety of the substance and its use to protect crops. In 2017, we encouraged the EU to notify the 
non-renewal of picoxystrobin to the SPS Committee, bearing in mind that the protection of  human 
and animal health constitutes its basic underlying concept. Since its first notification in the TBT 
Committee, the EU took one year and a half to finally bring this matter to the attention of the SPS 
Committee.  
2.  As it is known, in January 2017, the E U notified to the TBT Committee that the approval of 
picoxystrobin was not renewed ( G/TBT/N/EU/437) . But only in July 2018 (after one year and a half), 
the EU notified to the SPS Committee the adoption of Commission Regulation (EU) 2019/91 of 18 
January 2019, establishing very restrictive Maximum Residue Levels for seven sub stances, including 
picoxystrobin, as well buprofezin, which are important substances for Brazil's trade in agricultural 
commodities. Moreover, we consider that the transitional period of 13 August 2019 given for 
producers to adapt to the new MRLs is not re asonable, given that studies conducted by EFSA were 
inconclusive, not based in due risk -analysis and to the detriment of CODEX guidelines.  
3.  Council Directive 91/414/EEC of the European Commission declared that picoxystrobin was not 
toxic, the report of the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) claimed that it was not possible to 
deliver final conclusions on the genotoxic potential of picoxystrobin based on the available data, and 
the Joint Committee of the FAO and WHO of specialists had also concluded that t he substance was 
not genotoxic. This substance is used in more than 65 countries and has been approved by many 
bodies, such as the US Environmental Protection Agency, the Canadian Management Regulatory 
Agency, the Japanese Agency as well as in Brazil itsel f. Our delegation considers that the maximum 
residue levels (MRLs) for picoxystrobin was already very low - for example, for soya the default was 
0.01mg/kg – and therefore we reiterate that the EU's non -renewal of picoxystrobin was in 
contradiction to scie ntific data and should be changed.  
4.  This STC relates to a measure notified under the TBT Agreement but that could also fall under 
the SPS Agreement. As the TBT and SPS Agreements regulate similar areas, we know that identifying 
the scope under which a speci fic measure falls is not always a clear -cut issue. Since 2016, we believe 
that at least 20 different cases of substances that were not approved or had their registry of approval 
not renewed by the EU were notified only to the TBT Committee. Where there is a lack of clarity 
regarding whether a measure should be notified under either the SPS or the TBT Agreements, it is 
our position that members should notify it under both Committees. Previous interventions in this 
Committee have led us to believe that this u nderstanding is shared by other members as well.  
5.  We also express our concerns regarding statements made by European representatives in the 
SPS Committee, who said that countries have had enough time to adapt to restrictions imposed on G/TBT/W/681  
 
- 2 - 
 
  pesticides mentioned  in document G/SPS/N/EU/264 , because they already knew that there would  
be a reduction in MRLs since the non -renewal of approval of these substances was communicated 
to the TBT Committee. Here it's important to remind that many countries have totally different teams 
of experts dealing separately with each Committee.  
 
__________