RESTRICTEDWORLD TRADE
ORGANIZATIONG/SCM/W/500
7 March 2002
(02-1160)
Committee on Subsidies
and Countervailing MeasuresOriginal:  English
MEMBERS' DIFFICULTIES IN MAKING SUBSIDY NOTIFICATIONS,
AND THE PLANNED SUBSIDY NOTIFICATION SEMINAR
Reply to Questions in document G/SCM/W/473
of 18 December 2001
Paper Submitted by St. Lucia
The following communication, dated 5 February 2002, has been received from the Ministry of
External Affairs, International Trade and Civil Aviation in St. Lucia.
_______________
B. QUESTIONS CONCERNING DIFFICULTIES IN NOTIFYING
1. Does your government face resource constraints in trying to make subsidy notifications?
If so, what are the major bottlenecks in the notification system of your government?  Is the
problem primarily an insufficient number  of staff to handle the notifications, or is it more a
question of insufficiently trained  staff?
Reply
Yes.  We do not have the required manpower, or sufficiently trained personnel to complete
notifications in a timely manner.
2. Depending on your answer to question 1, above, if the notification questionnaire format
could be simplified, would this make a difference to your government’s ability to make the
required subsidy notifications?
Reply
It could help, but would not solve the problem.
3. Balancing your government’s needs for as simple a format as possible against its needs to be
able to understand other Members’ notifications when it reviews them, how much simplification
could be introduced withou t sacrificing transparency?
Reply
Answers could be provided in point form part icularly when supported with a copy of the
relative Act/Law.G/SCM/W/500
Page 2
4. Considering the notification format itself, and the concepts underlying it as found in SCM
Articles 1-3, in your government’ s experience, do individuals responsible for making
notifications have difficulties understanding the requirements due to the language used in the
Agreement to define “subsidy”, “specificity”, etc. ?  For example, do these individuals believe
that subsidies are in the nature of cash grants  only, and do not encompass revenue foregone via
tax and duty incentives?  Could some sort of explanation be introduced into the questionnaire
format to make more clear the scope of measures that are subject to notification?  How might
such an explanation be worded?
Reply
Individuals do not have difficulty with terminology but marginal references can help speed up
the process by allowing for delegation at Ministry level.
5. Does your government experience general problems due to the formatting requirements of
the notification questionnaire?  In particular, does your government maintain any pre-existing
information that addresses the substance of the notification questionnaire, but does not
correspond to the questionnaire’s format?  If so, what are the specific problems that your
government encounters when it tries to fo rmat the information as required by the
questionnaire?  If the information were to be notified in its pre-existing format, could itnevertheless be keyed to the data elements of the subsidy questionnaire?
Reply
There is information available but not at one central point.  Needs to be collated.
6. In reviewing other Members’ notifications, would your government find it problematic to
review information that was formatted in a way other than the way foreseen in the subsidy
questionnaire, but that comprehensively ad dressed the substantive elements of the
questionnaire?  How important would it be for this information to be keyed or coded to the
questionnaire format?
Reply
There is no difficulty.
7. Does your government maintain any informatio n about its subsidy or incentive programmes
on official web sites?  How much would your notification of subsidies be simplified if such
information could be submitted in its pre-existing format?  As a reviewer of notifications, what
sorts of limits should there be to the substitution of information from web sites for completed
notification questionnaires?  Would references to web sites be a useful supplement to
substantive information provided in a notification?
Reply
Any listing on the website would be for specific trade promotion and probably incomplete.
8. Concerning General Rule 6, which requires that  notification of subsidies provided “to
specific products or sectors” be organized on a product- or sector-specific basis, does this rule
pose problems for your government when notifying subsidies that are provided on a horizontal,
rather than a product- or sector-specific basis?   What are the specific steps and difficulties in
preparing sector- or product-specific informatio n for subsidies provided on a horizontal basis?G/SCM/W/500
Page 3
Reply
Presents no difficulties in current format required.  No specific problems come to mind in
obtaining information.
9. Does this rule present problems for notification  of subsidies that are provided on a product-
or sector-specific basis (e.g., some agricultural subsidies)?
Reply
No.
10. Would a redrafting of General Rule 6 to refer to  subsidies "provided on the basis of specific
products or sectors" help to resolve this problem?  (The idea would be to clarify that
programme-based information, rather than product- or sector-specific information would be
required for subsidies provided on a horizontal basis, which product- or sector-specific
subsidies would continue to need to be notified on that basis.)
Reply
Would assist in meeting notification deadlines.
11. Would such a redrafting pose problems for the review of subsidy notifications, and if so,
what would those problems be?
Reply
Not to our knowledge.
12. To what extent does the general requirement to provide statistical information on the trade
effects of notified subsidies (chapeau of item 9) impede or delay the presentation of subsidy
notifications?
Reply
Difficulties are experienced in obtaining current data as a result of our own internal capacity.
13.  To what extent does the need to compile the specific kinds of statistical information
referred to in items 9(a) and 9(b) impede or delay the presentation of subsidy notifications?
Reply
As in 12 above.
14. How important is this statistical informatio n about other Members’  subsidies to your
government when reviewing subsidy notificati ons?  Could these reporting requirements be
made less stringent in some manner?  If so, how?
Reply
We can follow basic information without narrative.  Narrative should only be necessary in
answering questions arising from the notification.G/SCM/W/500
Page 4
15. Does your government find, in preparing subs idy notifications, th at there is conceptual
overlap or redundancy in some of the information elements as currently drafted?
Reply
Limited.
16. If your government believes there to be overlap, how might this be eliminated?  What
drafting improvements might be introduced to clarify such situations, while preserving the
substantive requirements of Article 25 from which the questionnaire is drawn?
Reply
If the format is designed closely to the five points in Article 25.3, this should suffice for small
developing countries whose contribution to world trade is under 1 per cent.
17. Do the requirements to provide information on the policy objective or purpose of the
subsidy, its background and authority, and to whom and how it is provided pose significantdifficulties to your government in preparing its subsidy notifications?  How might these
requirements be simplified?
Reply
All that should be required is purpose, duration period and legal authority.
18. Does the requirement to furnish an explanatio n where a particular element of information
cannot be provided pose particular difficul ties to your government in preparing its
notifications?  If so, is there a way to simplify this requirement while preserving its substantive
content?
Reply
It does.  However, this can be resolved with  a comment to the effect and an undertaking to
provide the information at a later date.  In most instances, missing information represents important
data that is still to be processed at due date of notification.
19. Is there sufficient flexibility in item 7 of th e subsidy questionnaire (information on the
amounts of subsidies provided) for your government to be able to notify such information
without undue difficulty?  If not, is there a way to simplify this requirement while preserving itssubstantive content?
Reply
It can be readily estimated, however actual data would take time to compile.
C. QUESTIONS PERTAINING TO THE SUBSIDY NOTIFICATION SEMINAR
1. Concerning the number and nature of pa rticipants in the seminar, how many
individuals in your government have day-to-day responsibility for gathering information about
subsidies and for preparing and submitting subsidy notifications based on that information?  Ifmore than one, please describe the differen ces in these individuals ’ responsibilities.G/SCM/W/500
Page 5
Reply
Two.  Trade Officers, junior and senior.
2. Would it be sufficient for your government to have two participants in the seminar?  If
not, why not, and how many participants would be optimal from your government’s point of
view?
Reply
Yes, but optimum four.
3. Would two days be a sufficient/appropriate length for the seminar?  If not, what would
be more appropriate?
Reply
Yes.
4. Would the following schedule be appropriate:  First session:  detailed presentation of the
basic definitions in Articles 1, 2 and 3 of the SCM Agreement, and presentation of the subsidy
notification obligations in the light of these definitions.  Second session:  Presentations by
Members concerning the specific problems they experience in preparing subsidy notifications.
Third session:  Information-sharing and brainstorming among Members as to possible practical
solutions for the identified problems (ways to coordinate and streamline gathering and
formatting of subsidy information).  Fourth session:  Follow-up steps to ensure that information
shared and lessons learned would be retained and implemented.  (It has been emphasized thatto be effective, such follow-up should be immediate and intensive.)  Ideas suggested to date have
included establishment of informal contacts am ong capital-based officials, planning of future
focused technical assistance activities, etc.
Reply
Yes.
5. Does your government normally send capital-based representatives to the Committee’s
regular meetings?  If not, why not?
Reply
No.  Budgetary constraints.
6. Does your government view this subsidy noti fication seminar as an important event in
improving its ability to understand the subsidy rules, and to make subsidy notifications in a
complete and timely manner?  (That is, does your government view the seminar as a priority
event for its participation?)  Does your government  plan to send capital-based participants to
the seminar?  If so, how many and what are their functions?  If not, why not?
Reply
If funding can be obtained it would be desirable to train two persons.  The Government
reaffirms its commitment to observing WTO rules and would welcome any assistance towards this
end.G/SCM/W/500
Page 6
7. In the view of your government, would financial sponsorship only of participants from
least-developed country Members be appropriate?  If not, why not?  What other objective
criteria for eligibility for financial sponsorship could be developed that might be more
appropriate?
Reply
Consideration should also be given to small developing nations who are unable to meet the
high cost of training, particularly those unable to afford an office in Geneva.
8. If your government would be prevented from sending participants to the seminar due to
financial constraints, what is the minimum level of financial sponsorship that would make it
possible to send participants (e.g., airfare only, airfare and subsistence for the days in Geneva,
etc.)?
Reply
Airfare and subsistence for period in Geneva.
9. Assuming that it is not possible to finance the seminar out of existing trust funds in the
WTO (a possibility currently being explored), and assuming a total budget of approximately
CHF 225,000, would your government consider making  a donation to finance it?  If so, how
much would your government be in a position to contribute?
Reply
Would definitely be outside contingency provisions.  We would be unable to attend.
10. If the seminar were financed by earmarked contributions from individual Members,
and there were a surplus in the budget for the seminar (due to fewer than expected participants
from Members eligible for financial sponsorship,  however they might be identified), how should
any such surplus be disposed of?  Two possible  options have been discussed (I) returning the
surplus to the sponsors on a pro-rata basis; or (ii) making the surplus available on a first-come,
first-served basis to other developing countr y Members.  Are there other, more appropriate,
options?
Reply
Option (ii) appears appropriate.
__________