RESTRICTED
WORLD TRADE G/IT/M/3
9February 1998
ORGANIZATION(98-0456)
Committee ofParticipants ontheExpansion ofTrade
inInformation Technology Products
MINUTES OFTHE MEETING OF3DECEMBER 1997
Chairman: Mr.A.Hoda
Agenda oftheMeeting Page
1. Review ofthestatus ofimplementation oftheMinisterial Declaration
onTrade inInformation Technology Products (G/IT/1/Rev.1) ........... 1
2. Future work programme oftheCommittee ....................... 2
2.1 Divergences inclassifying information technology products
(G/IT/2, G/IT/2/Corr.2 andG/IT/2/Add.1) .................. 2
2.2 Review ofproduct coverage ........................... 2
2.3 Consultations onnon-tariff barriers ....................... 3
2.4 Other ........................................ 4
3. Newparticipants ....................................... 4
3.1 Schedule ofLatvia ................................. 4
3.2 Schedule ofPanama ................................ 4
4. Annual report (1997) oftheCommittee totheCouncil forTrade inGoods ... 5
(G/IT/W/2)
5. Other business .......................................... 5
Introduction
TheChairmanwelcomedparticipantstothethirdformalmeetingoftheCommitteeofParticipants
ontheExpansion ofTrade inInformation Technology Products. Hesaidthattheproposed agenda
wascirculated inairgram WTO/Air/742 of21November 1997andasked iftherewereanyothermatters
toberaised under "Other Business". Hearing norequests, hestated thathewould takeupthedate
ofthenextmeeting under thisagenda item. With thisaddition, theagenda wasadopted.
1. Review ofthestatus ofimplementation oftheMinisterial Declaration onTrade inInformation
Technology Products (G/IT/1/Rev.1)
1.1 TheChairman drewparticipants 'attention todocument G/IT/1/Rev.2 which updates thestatus
ofimplementation.G/IT/M/3
Page2
1.2 Thedelegate ofthePhilippines requested asmall correction tobemade tothedocument in
paragraph 1,indent 2,whereby thePhilippines should beincluded asoneofthose countries whose
implementation would begin afterthecompletion ofdomestic procedural requirements.
1.3 Thedelegate ofSwitzerland noted thatthesamecorrection should alsobemade forSwitzerland.
1.4 TheChairman stated thatinthenextrevision, thePhilippines andSwitzerland would beadded
tothelistofcountries attheendofparagraph 1which haveindicated thatimplementation would begin
afterthecompletion ofdomestic procedural requirements.
1.5 Thedelegate ofSwitzerland further requested thatintherevision itshould beindicated that
Switzerland hadnotified onbehalf ofthecustoms union ofSwitzerland andLiechtenstein.
1.6 Thedelegate ofNewZealand informed participants thatNewZealand 'sITAschedule hadbeen
finalized andwould besubmitted totheSecretariat soon. Thissubmission incorporated anumber of
technical changes thatdidnotaffect thesubstance ofNewZealand 'scommitments, which hadalready
beenimplemented onadomestic basis.
1.7 TheChairman noted thatparagraph 4ofdocument G/IT/Rev.2 contained alistoftheschedules
thathadbeencertified andalsoalistofadditional schedules thathadbeenputontheinternet web
site,although theywere notyetcertified.
2. Future work programme oftheCommittee
2.1 Divergences inclassifying information technology products (G/IT/2, G/IT/2/Corr.2 and
G/IT/2/Add.1)
2.1.1 TheChairman stated thatdiscussions onthismatter hadtaken place attheprevious meeting
butnoagreement wasreached onthefuture direction tobetaken. Hefurther noted thatthere were
twosetsofdocuments prepared bytheSecretariat which outlined thedivergences inclassifying
information technology products. There wasalsoaproposal made byJapan atanearlier meeting with
respect toconvening ameeting ofexperts, andastatement bytheUnited States indicating thatapaper
would beforthcoming ontheissue.
2.1.2 Thedelegate oftheUnited States noted thatconsultations withother participants were still
ongoing andheconfirmed thathisdelegation intended tosubmit apaper onhowtoproceed.
2.2 Review ofproduct coverage
2.2.1 TheChairman,referringtoparagraph3oftheAnnextotheMinisterialDeclarationandparagraph
7ofthedocument ontheImplementation oftheMinisterial Declaration, recalled that,beginning
1October 1997 andnotlaterthan31December 1997, participants weretosubmit totheCommittee
listsofadditional information technology products forpossible additional tariffconcessions. Henoted
thatthediscussions atthelastmeeting indicated thatwork wasongoing incapitals andthatproposals
would beforthcoming.
2.2.2 Thedelegate ofChinese Taipei stated thathisdelegation intended tosubmit awritten proposal
which would include items, among others, under HS8540, suchasdatagraphic displays andcomputer
displays.G/IT/M/3
Page3
2.2.3 Thedelegates ofAustralia; Canada; EU;Japan; NewZealand; Norway; Switzerland; andthe
United States stated thatconsultions wereongoing withindustry onthismatter andthattheyintended
tosubmit alistofadditional products.
2.2.4 TheChairman stressed theimportance ofmeeting thedeadline of31December 1997 for
submissions ofadditional product lists.
2.3 Consultations onnon-tariff barriers
2.3.1 TheChairman made reference tothediscussion attheprevious twomeetings onthissubject.
Hepointed outthatagreement hadbeenreached onaproposal bytheUnited States onsurveying
participants ontheiruseoftwospecific standards. There wasalsoanother proposal bytheEuropean
Communities toenlarge thesurvey butsome delegations needed more timetoreflect onthisissue.
2.3.2 Thedelegate oftheEuropean Communities referred toaroom document circulated atthelast
meeting byhisdelegation onthismatter showing thesituation withregard toconformity assessment.
Inthatpaper account wastaken ofquestions raised bytheUnited States withrespect totechnical
regulations andwhether these regulations werealigned oninternational standards. TheECproposal
outlined themandatory conformity assessment procedures inoperation, which weregenerally conducted
byeither theregulatory authority, orbyabody which itdesignated todoso.Athirdpossibility was
self-declaration, whereby thegovernment, inthecaseofmandatory certification, delegated theright
tomake theconformity assessment tothemanufacturer. Thus, these three elements should formpart
ofthesurvey. Itshould alsocover conformity assessment relating toproducts andtoprocesses. By
processes itwasmeant theprocess thatwent intomanufacturing theparticular product, e.g.inthe
caseofsemi-conductors. Itwould beuseful tohaveaclearunderstanding ofthesituation inthisarea,
inregard tobothstandards andconformity assessment. Thedrafting ofthequestions could beleft
totheSecretariat.
2.3.3 TheChairman stated thatdelegations hadhadtheopportunity toexamine theEuropean
Communities room document since thelastmeeting andheasked whether participants could agree
toextend thecoverage ofthesurvey.
2.3.4 Thedelegation ofthePhilippines, speaking onbehalf ofASEAN, thanked theEuropean
Communities fortheirclarification oftheproposal. Inprincipal, ASEAN could goalong withthe
ideaofasurvey, butwould liketohavefurther discussion andexamination ofthewording ofthe
questionnaire. AstheEuropean Communities hadoffered tohavediscussions withinterested delegations
inthisrespect, ASEANs could liftitsreservation tothesurvey. Shefurther asked whether onconformity
assessment thesurvey would belimited tothetwoquestions proposed bytheUnited States.
2.3.5 Inresponse, thedelegate oftheEuropean Communities saidthatinhisviewthesurvey would
havethree parts. Onepartwould relate tothestandards mentioned bytheUnited States, i.e.what
technical regulations existed inthisfield; thesecond partwould indicate towhat extent theywere
aligned ontheinternational standards referred tobytheUnited States; thethird element would be
whatconformity assessment procedures existed inregard toproducts covered bytheITA.
2.3.6 Thedelegation ofChinese Taipei, stating support inprincipal forthesurvey, asked whatthe
scope ofthesurvey would be.
2.3.7 TheChairman stated thatthefurther details being sought bythePhilippines andChinese Taipei
could beworked outonthemargins ofthismeeting bytheEuropean Communities withinterested
delegations. Itwasagreed, inprincipal, toenlarge thesurvey.G/IT/M/3
Page4
2.4 Other
2.4.1 Thedelegate ofCanada stated thathisdelegation hadcirculated anon-paper onimport licensing
procedures which reflected industry concerns withrespect toadministrative procedures andtimedelays
associated withimport licensing requirements relating toITAproducts. Forexample, concerns had
beenraised about theshort period ofvalidity ofsuchlicences,small contract values requiring import
licences, lackofclear focal points forapproval oflicences, andundue delays inobtaining licences.
Hefurther noted that,while under theAgreement onImport Licensing there existed notification
requirements, notallparticipants hadcomplied witheither thenotification requirements ortheresponses
totheannual questionnaire. More importantly, theinformation provided inthose notifications was
notspecific toITAproducts. Heproposed thatasurvey beundertaken bytheSecretariat onimport
licensing measures. Thiswould alsoclarify thesituation foracceding Members totheWTO. The
questions proposed forthesurvey werecontained intheCanadian non-paper. Insummary, theywere
asfollows:
- Onwhich ITAproducts wereimport licences required? (information tobeprovided byHS
tariff lineanddescription).
- What wasthepurpose ofthelicensing regimes thatwere maintained?
- What wasthenature oftheimport licensing provisions? (forexample, weretheyautomatic
ornot).
- Through whatmeans could importers bemade aware oftheseimport licensing provisions, and
anychanges thatmight takeplace?
2.4.2 Thedelegate ofNewZealand supported theproposal byCanada inprincipal.
2.4.3 Thedelegate ofMalaysia, speaking onbehalf ofASEAN, andthedelegate ofIndia, stated
thattheywould likesome timetostudy thisproposal andwould revert toitatafuture meeting.
2.4.4 TheChairman summarized thatatpresent, theCommittee could onlytakenoteoftheproposal
made byCanada, andthatitwould betaken upatthenextmeeting afterdelegations hadtheopportunity
tostudy itscontents.
3. NewParticipants
3.1 Schedule ofLatvia
3.1.1 TheChairman stated thatattheprevious meeting concerns hadbeenraised withrespect to
theschedule ofLatvia, inparticular astowhether Latvia would implement itsITAschedule without
waiting forthecompletion ofitsaccession totheWTO. There wasanindication thatthiswasa
condition, which needed further clarification. Itwasagreed topostpone thismatter untilthenext
meeting.
3.2 Schedule ofPanama
3.2.2 WithrespecttothescheduleofPanama,theChairmanrecalledthattheSecretariathadperformed
anelectronic verification andthatcertain discrepancies hadbeennoted andconveyed tothedelegation
ofPanama. Atthistime, arevised schedule hadnotbeenreceived. Itwasagreed toawait aresponse
from Panama.G/IT/M/3
Page5
4. Annual report (1997) oftheCommittee totheCouncil forTrade inGoods (G/IT/W/2)
4.1 TheChairman drew participants 'attention todocument G/IT/W/2, which contained adraft
annual report oftheCommittee totheCouncil forTrade inGoods. Thisreport provided afactual
summary ofthework undertaken todateintheCommittee. Itneeded tobeupdated based ontheresults
ofthediscussions heldtoday.
4.2 Thereport wasdiscussed paragraph byparagraph:
4.3 With respect toparagraph 5,thedelegate ofChinese Taipei proposed toadd,attheendof
theparagraph, "participants intheprocess ofacceding totheWTO hadimplemented theirschedules
onanautonomous basis." Hearing noobjection, theChairman stated thatthiswould beadded to
paragraph 5.
4.4 Onparagraph 8,thedelegate ofthePhilippines requested thatmore specificity begiven to
thescope andcoverage ofthesurvey. Also, inparagraph 8,thedelegate ofSwitzerland noted that
reference wasmade to"small andmedium exporting participants", whereas itwould bemoreappropriate
touse"small- andmedium-sized exporting participants". TheChairman saidthattheproposals by
Switzerland andbythePhilippines would betaken careofwhen thepaper wasbeing updated.
4.5 Thedelegate oftheUnited States suggested thatinorder tobeconsistent withtheproposal
bythePhilippines, inparagraph 8specific reference should bemade tothetwostandards, IEC950
andCISPR 22.
4.6 Thedelegate ofthePhilippines agreed withtheUnited States 'proposal, butasked whether
theconformity assessment aspect proposed bytheEuropean Communities would bespecific toIEC950
andCISPR 22.
4.7 Thedelegate oftheEuropean Communities responded thatitwasnotintended thatthesurvey
should beconfined tothese twostandards butshould alsocover technical regulations inthefield, to
what extent theyconformed tothese standards andtowhat extent theyhadconformity assessment
procedures attached tothem. Forexample, areformulation ofoneoftheUnited States 'questions could
read"Does yourgovernment havemandatory technical regulations toensure thetechnical safety of
information technology equipment, ifso,please identify", and,furthermore "Arethese requirements
harmonized withIEC950,ifnot,please explain thecurrent practice".
4.8 Itwasagreed toadopt thedraftreport withthechanges thathadbeenproposed.
5. Other Business
5.1 TheChairman proposed thatthenextmeeting oftheCommittee beheldinearly February,
andthattheexact datewould beconveyed toparticipants inthenearfuture. Itwassoagreed.
__________