RESTRICTEDWORLD TRADE
ORGANIZATIONG/VAL/M/14
22 June 2000
(00-2499)
Committee on Customs Valuation
MINUTES OF THE MEETING OF 12, 28 APRIL AND 10, 31 MAY 2000
Chairman: Mr. Edward Brown (United Kingdom)
The agenda proposed for the meeting, circulated in WTO/AIR/1280 was adopted as follows:
1. Report on the Work of the Technical Committee on Customs Valuation.......................1
2. Information on Implementation and Administration of the Agreement .........................3
(a) Notification of na tional legi slation ........................................................................................ .3
(i) Brazil ...................................................................................................................... ................3
(ii) Bul garia ................................................................................................................... ...............4
(iii) Kyrgyz Republic........................................................................................................... ...........4
(iv) Poland..................................................................................................................... ................4
(v) Romania..................................................................................................................... .............4
(b) Notification that national legislation under the Tokyo Round Customs Valuation
 Agreement remained valid under the WTO Customs Valuation Agreement ........................5
(c) Notifications made by de veloping country Members.............................................................5
3. Information on the application of Decisions of the Committee
on Customs Valuation ..........................................................................................................8
4. Technical Assistance ......................................................................................................... ....8
5. India - Information on Certain Aspects of the European Communities'
Valuation Policy ............................................................................................................... ...13
6. Fourth and Fifth Annual Reviews of the Implementation and Operation
of the Customs Valuation Agreement ...............................................................................14
7. Preshipment Inspecti on......................................................................................................1 4
8. Other Business............................................................................................................... ......15
_______________
1. Report on the Work of the Technical Committee on Customs Valuation
1.1 The observer of the World Customs Organization noted that the WCO Technical Committee
had not met since his previous report to the Committee in December.  Therefore, his report would
cover some intersessional developments which the WCO Secretariat was pursuing.  The first
concerned technical assistance, an area in which the effort required over the next few years was going
to be immense.  This realization had prompted a re-examination of the focus which initially wasencompassing a comprehensive review of all technical assistance policies and procedures.  As a
result, new and improved selection, evaluation, review and assessment procedures had been
developed in the area of valuation.  In addition, all existing training material for valuation was being
reviewed with the aim of developing more focused training packages for the basic, intermediate and
advanced levels, some possibly employing electronic distant-learning techniques which were
currently in their design stage.  The WCO had also agreed to host a seminar for senior managers
responsible for valuation, implementation and maintenance in October at the WCO headquarters.G/VAL/M/14
Page 2
1.2 He added that in support of all these initiatives  there was a need to ensure the availability of
resources, in particular of qualified valuation traini ng facilitators.  In this regard, the WCO was ready
to admit that it did not have an abundance of or additional resources available in the Brussels
headquarters.  It would be necessary to look else where and the WCO was in the process of contacting
a number of its Members who were known to have expertise in this area with the aim of using thisexpertise in this ambitious review process.  This also required greater cooperation and liaison with the
WTO and he was pleased to report that discussions on coordination, planning and delivery of
technical assistance were on-going.
1.3 He noted that two impediments often cited by developing countries to full implementation of
the Agreement were potential loss of revenue yield and problems relating to verification of values.
The WCO was undertaking some research into both of these areas and he hoped to be in a position toreport the results of these studies to the Committee in due course.  In respect of the verification of
values, the WCO's Enforcement Committee was undertaking a comprehensive review of all existing
conventions, recommendations and declarations with a view to ensuring that Member administrations
used these to the fullest degree, in particular in terms of transfer of information and mutual assistance
for the verification of values.  Finally, he info rmed the Committee that the next session of the
Technical Committee would be held in Brussels from 22 to 26 May.  The first two days of the session
would be devoted to valuation compliance issues which would likely be of particular interest to new
Members or those which were about to implement the Agreement.
1.4 The representative of Mexico stated that his delegation would appreciate receiving the report
of the next meeting of the Technical Committee well in advance of the next meeting of the Committee
on Customs Valuation so that comments could be better prepared.
1.5 The observer of the World Customs Organization noted that the recent scheduling of meetings
did not allow dovetailing of the two Committees' meetings.  However, the Committees would have to
work more closely to ensure synergy in the organization of meetings and he ensured that a full report
of the May meeting would be given at the November meeting of the WCO Committee.
1.6 The representative of Senegal was pleased to hear that efforts were being made to provide
assistance on implementation.  He asked for further explanation as to why there was a lack of
resources and follow-up commitments made during consultations with developed countries on
providing such technical assistance.  Had these co mmitments been brought to the attention of the
WCO?  He noted that the European Communities had stated that they were prepared to carry out a
technical assistance programme and he asked whether steps had been taken in this regard.  Further, he
asked if coordination of technical assistance was underway?
1.7 The Chairman noted that coordination between the WTO and the WCO was on-going.  At a
meeting last year of international organizations active in this area, representatives explained what
each was doing and discussion dealt with which activities should be pursued by each organization in
order to increase efficiency and greater results of assistance.  The statement by the WCO at this
meeting showed what its competitive advantage was and what the WCO was preparing to do in this
area.  Means were being explored to avoid duplication and make the best use of existing resourcesthrough coordination.
1.8 The representative of the European Communities noted with concern the resource constraints
cited by the WCO representative and welcomed the initiative to seek resources outside of the
organization if necessary.  He asked to come back to the questions from Senegal under the agendaitem technical assistance.  Generally, the EU continued to try to deliver technical assistance on a
needs and request basis.  Nevertheless, he did see greater potential for integration on a wider level.G/VAL/M/14
Page 3
1.9 The observer of the World Customs Organization briefly summarized that there was
recognition among the WCO and the WTO and among other organizations involved in technical
assistance in this area that coordination was an essential element.  The WCO was doing its best to
ensure that this aspect was taken seriously and was acted upon.  Limited resources had to be
optimised, particularly in terms of the quality of facilitators which were being sought.
1.10 The representative of the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela thanked the WCO for its report
and asked to be informed of the agenda for the May meeting of the Technical Committee in advance.
2. Information on Implementation and Administration of the Agreement
(a) Notification of national legislation
2.1 The Chairman recalled that Article 22 of the Agreement required each Member to inform the
Committee of any changes in its laws and regulations relevant to the Agreement and any changes in
the administration of such laws and regulations.  In addition, the Decision on Notification and
Circulation of National Legislation, adopted by the Tokyo Round Committee, required each Member
to notify its legislation to the Committee.
(i) Brazil
2.2 The Chairman drew Members' attention to document G/VAL/N/1/BRA/2 which contained the
Brazilian notification of regulations regarding customs valuation.  Specifically, it contained Decree
No. 2.498, of 13 February 1998;  Ministerial Order No. 28/98 (regulating the application of Decree
No. 2.498);  and Normative Instructions Nos. 16, 17, and 18 of 16 February 1998.  In addition,document G/VAL/N/1/BRA/3 contained a recent not ification of Normative Instruction No. SRF
139/1998 and Normative Instruction SRF No. 125/99.  At the last meeting it was agreed to revert to
this item pending consultations between Brazil, the EC and the US.
2.3 The representative of the European Commun ities informed the Committee that his delegation
had had consultations with Brazil on a number of issues, some of which might be reflected in
document G/VAL/N/1/BRA/2.  His delegation contin ued to communicate with Brazil and hoped that
consultations would be concluded soon. He note d that a new document , G/VAL/N/1/BRA/3 was
recently issued which amended certain provisions such as Article 39 of Ministerial Order No. 28/98
and which contained new provisions dealing with matters such as guarantees, release of goods and the
levying of additional duties on goods post-importation.  In light of this and the on-going consultations,
he suggested that the Committee revert to this item at its next meeting.
2.4 The representative of the United States stated that his delegation had participated in some of
the consultations with the EC and Brazil and had also engaged in some informal discussions with
Brazil.  His delegation continued to have an interest in this matter and associated itself with the
suggestion to keep this item on the agenda for the Committee's next meeting.
2.5 The representative of Brazil informed the Committee that the basic instruments that deal with
customs valuation were those which had been notified in document G/VAL/N/1/BRA/2 in
November 1998.  The additional instruments notified in G/VAL/N/1/BRA/3 were two Normative
Instructions issued by the Secretariat of Federal Revenue.  The first one established procedures to befollowed in the valuation of products when, in  the importation of goods subject to the same
commercial transaction and classified under separate tariff codes, the invoice showed a single overall
price.  The second one altered some provisions of Normative Instruction No. 16.  For instance, it
extended the possibilities under which a discount could be accepted for valuation of a good, it altered
the provisions that dealt with factors that prevented the customs valuation at the moment of customsclearance due to the need for further information to determine the final price, and it dealt withG/VAL/M/14
Page 4
summary procedures, etc.  These changes were effected in order to deal with specific situations that
were not covered in previous instruments and, in some cases, they were taken to extend time periods
granted to importers or to reduce requirements.
2.6 The Committee agreed to revert to this item at its next meeting.
(ii) Bulgaria
2.7 The Chairman drew Members' attention to document G/VAL/N/1/BGR/2 which contained
changes to the Bulgarian Customs Act and the Implementing Regulations of the Customs Act as of
1 January 1999.  He also noted that the responses to the Checklist of Issues were contained in
G/VAL/N/2/BGR/1.
2.8 The Committee agreed to conclude the examination of the Bulgarian legislation.
(iii) Kyrgyz Republic
2.9 The Chairman drew Members' attention to document G/VAL/N/2/KGZ/1 which contained the
Kyrgyz responses to the Checklist of Issues.  He noted that the legislation was being translated and
would be notified shortly.
2.10 The Committee agreed to revert to this item at its next meeting, pending notification of the
translated legislation.
(iv) Poland
2.11 The Chairman drew Members' attention to document G/VAL/N/2/POL/1 which contained the
Polish responses to the Checklist of Issues.
2.12 The Committee agreed to conclude examination of this item of the agenda.
(v) Romania
2.13 The Chairman reminded Members that at the last meeting, the Committee examined
legislation contained in document G/VAL/N/1/ROM/2.  It had been agreed to revert to this legislation
following questions by the United States.
2.14 The representative of the United States informed the Committee that his delegation was
consulting with Romania and was hopeful of a successful resolution.  However, he requested that the
item remain on the agenda of the next meeting.
2.15 The representative of Romania confirmed that his delegation was engaged in consultations
with the United States and was prepared to continue  these exchanges in order to find a solution to the
problems.
2.16 The Committee agreed to revert to this item at its next meeting.
2.17 The Chairman urged all Members, particularly those Members who had recently begun to
implement the Agreement, to notify their legislation under Article 22 of the Agreement.  Furthermore,
all Members applying the Agreement should notify their responses to the Checklist of Issues which
was found in document G/VAL/5.  Both notificati ons were obligations under the Agreement and
should be respected as soon as possible.G/VAL/M/14
Page 5
(b) Notification that national legislation under the Tokyo Round Customs Valuation Agreement
remained valid under the WTO Customs Valuation Agreement
2.18 The Chairman reminded Members that at its meeting in May 1995, the Committee agreed on
procedures for the notification and circulation of national legislation for Members who were Tokyo
Round signatories and whose legislation had already been examined (paragraph 32(a) and 35 ofG/VAL/M/1).  Since the last meeting there had been no such notifications.  There were two Members
which had notified legislation under the Tokyo Round Agreement and which had not indicated the
status of that notification in this Committee. Th ose Members were Botswana and Lesotho.  He had
written to this Members and did not see much else he could do.  Therefore, he suggested suspending
consideration of this sub-item of the agenda until there was information to report.
2.19 The Committee agreed.
(c) Notifications made by developing country Members
2.20 The Chairman drew Members' attention to document G/VAL/2/Rev.10/Corr.1 which
contained the updated lists of all Members who had invoked special and differential treatment
provisions under the Agreement.  It was a revision of the previous version of the document to showthose Members not applying the Agreement, whether through invocation of Article 20.1 or
paragraph 1 of Annex III.  In addition, for those applying the Agreement, the document showed those
still maintaining a reservation under Article 20.2 on the computed value, those who had invoked the
reservation to maintain a system of minimum values, and those who still maintained the reservations
under paragraphs 3 and 4 of the Agreement.  The document also maintained the list of thosedeveloping country Members which may still retain some of the special and differential treatment
provisions according to the Decision on "Continued Application under the WTO Customs Valuation
Agreement on Invocations of Provisions for Developing Countries for Delayed Application and
Reservations under the Customs Valuation Agreement 1979" (WT/L/38).
2.21 The representative of India stated that her delegation understood the format of this document
to be the same as the first revision which came out on 13 October 1995.  However, in paragraph I of
G/VAL/2/Rev.10 there was a change which read, 't hose Members that are applying the Agreement
before the period of delayed application under Article 20.1 has expired, as well as those Members for
which the period of delayed application has expired have been removed from the first list, except
those which have been granted a reservation to maintain a system of minimum values under
paragraph 2 of Annex III'.  She added that Members were already aware of her delegation's positionon this issue regarding its reservation to maintain a system of minimum values.  She wished to place
on the record her delegation's understanding that in accordance with the information set out in
paragraph III of the document where India was reflected, that India's status in this regard would be
deemed to be in paragraph III.
2.22 The representative of the United States asked for clarification on the document either from
India or from the Secretariat.  He did not understand the statement from the Indian representative.
2.23 The representative of India explained that in the 1995 document, there was a particular listing
of countries specified in paragraphs I and III.  In the new document there was a similar listing of
countries presumably updating the status of revocations of minimum values or any other special
provision or application of the Agreement.  However, in the description of paragraph I, there was a
sentence that was inserted by the Secretariat which she found confusing because it contained many
exceptions;  it divided the Members into various categories.  Since she did not fully understand the
meaning of this sentence, she had stated that between October 1995 and 12 April 2000, India'sposition as regards its reservation for minimum prices remained unchanged and that the two
documents, G/VAL/2/Rev.10 and G/VAL/2/ Rev.10/Corr.1 did not affect that.G/VAL/M/14
Page 6
2.24 The Secretariat explained that G/VAL/2/Rev.10 which was issued in English only was
replaced by G/VAL/2/Rev.10/Corr.1.  The corrigendum reflected corrections to the text to reflect the
reservations under Article 20.2, and paragraphs 3 and 4 of Annex III of the Agreement taken by
Members for whom the five-year delay period had expired on 1 January 2000.  Because paragraph Iof the document reflected all the reservations invoked by Members, it was necessary to categorise
Members into those applying and not applying the Agreement, the former group of which was divided
further into those retaining the above reservations as well as those which had invoked paragraph 2 of
Annex III.  Finally, in paragraph II of the document, Members which maintained any or all
reservations from the Tokyo Round Agreement were grouped together.
2.25 The representative of the United States asked India if what it meant was that this document
was without prejudice to what India considered to be its rights and obligations, or was it that the
paragraph that was of concern was now removed in the corrigendum?
2.26 The representative of India explained that  her delegation understood that G/VAL/2/Rev.10
replaced an earlier issue of the document including G/VAL/2/Rev.1 which had been issued in
October 1995.  When the latter document was prepared, there was a particular understanding of what
India's position was regarding minimum prices and its reservation under the Tokyo Round
Agreement.  The new document, Rev.10 had in pa ragraph 1 a categorization of Members which was
not there when Rev.1 was prepared.  Between 1995 and April 2000, India had not revoked its
reservation and therefore that factual change could not be deemed to be a part of the changesrepresented in Rev.10.  In brief, in document G/VAL/2/Rev.10, the status of India as regards its
reservation on minimum values was exactly the same as the status of India in Rev.1.
2.27 The representative of the United States insisted that the statement made by the Indian
representative be reflected as her own statement.  His delegation was aware that the situation with
regard to India's position was not a matter of consensus in the Committee and would not accept the
statement by India represented as a fact agreed by the Committee.  He did not wish to revisit an earlier
debate, but wished to ensure that it be reflected in the minutes of the meeting that this was not a
settled matter.
2.28 The Chairman explained that G/VAL/2/Rev .10 was replaced by G/VAL/2/Rev.10/Corr1 and
therefore the language in the former was not relevant.  He wished to continue any discussion on the
basis of the latter document.  He emphasized that the statement by the Indian delegation would be
reflected as such and not as a position of the Committee.
2.29 The representative of Japan stated that his delegation did not share the Indian position on this
matter.2.30 The representative of Singapore noted that her delegation was in full compliance with the
Agreement and no longer needed the reservations under Article 20.2, and paragraphs 3 and 4 of the
Agreement.  She wished this to be reflected in the document.
2.31 The representative of Malta informed the Committee of his delegation's intent to apply the
Agreement and that his delegation had notified its legislation in conformity with Article 22 of the
Agreement.  He informed the Committee that there had been no change in the products listed in
G/VAL/W/47 subject to the Decision on Minimum Values in G/VAL/16.
2.32 The representative of Bolivia asked that document G/VAL/2/Rev.10/Corr.1 be corrected to
accurately reflect her Government's status because in the document Bolivia was listed as both
applying and not applying the Agreement.G/VAL/M/14
Page 7
2.33 The representative of Morocco informed the Committee that his Government's reservation on
minimum values would expire in four weeks and his delegation would be requesting another four-year
waiver for the same list of products.  He said that an official communication would be submitted to
the Secretariat shortly.
2.34 The representative of Chile asked that a certain time-period be given for Members to study
the document G/VAL/2/Rev.10/Corr.1, in order to reflect any necessary changes.
2.35 The representative of Egypt asked that the fact that Egypt had requested an extension be
reflected in the document G/VAL/2/Rev.10/Corr.1 as it was not presently.2.36 The representative of Guatemala associated his delegation with the comments by Egypt.
2.37 The representative of India stated that she was confused by the Chairman's remarks that her
statement would be reflected in the minutes as only her view and not that of the Committee.  When
she approached the document G/VAL/2/Rev.10 and Corr.1, she had regarded the revision as only a
change in the factual positions of Members' status between 1995 and 2000.  To the best of herknowledge, either a revocation by India of its minimum prices or the need to revisit the issue of
India's reservation at the request of any Member never arose.  The Committee had been dealing with
this matter in the context of two other documents prepared by the Secretariat and by trying to show
that between 1995 and 2000, factually no change in position had occurred, she was trying to find an
agreement to G/VAL/2/Rev.10 including Corr.1.  With the statements made by the Chairman and theUnited States, her delegation asked that this document and Corr.1 be included in the Chairman's
consultations and be given the same status as the two documents at issue, G/VAL/W/29 and
G/VAL/W/43 so that the entire matter could be dealt with together.
2.38 The Chairman stated that any errors in documentation did not effect the rights and obligations
of Members.  The consultations that he would be  holding would be on the Annual Reviews and not on
document G/VAL/2/Rev.10 and Corr.1.
2.39 The Committee took note of the comments made and agreed that the Secretariat should issue
a corrected version of the document G/VAL/2/Rev.10/Corr.1.2.40 The Chairman also drew Members' attention to  an editing correction that needed to be made
in the Honduran Decision regarding the reserve on minimum values in document G/VAL/15.
Specifically, in the list of goods, item (ii) should read "used domestic appliances", instead of
"domestic appliances".  He proposed that the Committee take note of this correction and that the
Secretariat issue a corrigendum reflecting this correction.  The Chairman also proposed that the
Secretariat prepare a reference note listing the various notification and reporting requirements of theMembers which had been granted extensions and reservations for minimum values, as contained in
their Decision.
2.41 The Committee so agreed.
- Extension of delay period
2.42 The Chairman noted that, under this sub-heading, Cuba was added to the list of Members
requesting extensions.  Their request had recently been circulated in document G/VAL/W/65.  He was
not in a position to report on any agreements having been reached on the outstanding requests.G/VAL/M/14
Page 8
- Reservation on minimum values
2.43 Under this sub-heading, the Chairman report ed that there were two Members' requests to
consider, Nicaragua and Colombia.  He noted his understanding that consultations were still on-going
on these requests and therefore he was not in a position to report any final outcome.  As he wouldpropose to suspend this meeting under the agenda item  "other business", he considered that these two
sub-items could be taken up again when the meeting would be resumed.
3. Information on the application of Decisions of the Committee on Customs Valuation
3.1 The Chairman stated that under this agenda item, the Committee noted any new notifications
of application of the Decisions of the Committee on Customs Valuation on the "Treatment of Interest
Charges in the Customs Value of Imported Goods" and on the "Valuation of Carrier Media-Bearing
Software for Data Processing Equipment", both adopted by the Committee and contained in document
G/VAL/5.  Since the last meeting, document G/VAL/W/5/Rev.7 had been circulated which included
the addition of notifications from Bulgaria and Latvia.  The Kyrgyz Republic had also notified their
application of these Decisions and this would be reflected in the next revision of this document.
3.2 The Committee took note of the information.
4. Technical Assistance
- Article 20.3 technical assistance activities
4.1 The Chairman stated that under this agenda item, the Secretariat usually provided a written
document of the recent WCO technical assistance activities.  Since the Technical Committee had not
yet met this year and the representative of the WCO had presented the plans for reviewing and
revising their technical assistance activities, discussion of this item could be concluded at this stage.
4.2 The representative of India informed the Committee about various technical assistance
activities her Government had carried out.  She had previously mentioned training that had been
organized for customs officials from several Members in 1997.  Her Government had also assisted the
WCO in organizing a workshop in India, on the Agreement and fraud, for customs officials of several
Asian countries in September 1998.  In 1999, her Government had organized a special course for
customs officials of some Members currently acceding to the WTO.  Although as a developing
country itself, India was not required to provide technical assistance to other developing countries, ithad readily offered to share its experience in the implementation of this Agreement with other
developing countries.  In this regard, she adde d that a Commonwealth Secretariat/India/WCO customs
valuation course was going to be carried out in Mumbai, India during the month of May 2000.  It had
been jointly planned by the Commonwealth Secretar iat and the Indian customs administration.  She
highlighted some features of the course which were different from technical assistance activitiesmentioned previously.  The course was designed to share the implementation experience of Indian
customs with other Commonwealth countries which had not yet implemented the Agreement or had
only recently implemented.  It aimed to train officials in preparing legislation, instituting the
implementation structure, understanding and application of valuation provisions, as well as providing
practical guidance for detection and prevention of valuation fraud.  The course was to be conductedover four weeks with one week assigned to on-th e-job training at the Indian customs houses.  The
Indian customs administration was responsible for providing the core faculty, but WTO, UNCTAD
and WCO Secretariats had been invited to give presentations during the course and international
consultants would be providing specific inputs to the programme.  She would report to Committee
after the course was completed with further information.G/VAL/M/14
Page 9
- Report from the Secretariat on its activities
4.3 The Chairman noted that under this sub-heading, the WTO Secretariat would report on its
activities as well as the Inter-American Development Bank which was present at the meeting to report
on its activities in this area.  The statement from the IADB had been circulated in advance indocument G/VAL/W/64.
4.4 The Secretariat briefly updated Members on the activities of the Customs Valuation Technical
Assistance Programme.  Since the programme began in mid-1998, 34 missions had been completed in
which an expert consultant had been sent for one week to each of the Members which had requested
assistance.  Of these 34 missions, one was a follow- up mission to carry out further training of trainers.
Two more follow-up missions were planned for this year.  Since the programme had grownconsiderably since it was first initiated, it had recent ly been agreed within the Secretariat to share the
management and administration of the programme with the Technical Cooperation Division.  This
was to ensure better cohesion with the larger technical assistance activities of the WTO as well as
coordination with other international organizations, and allocation of funding.
4.5 The Committee took note of the report by the Secretariat.
4.6 The observer of the Inter-American Development Bank stated that the IADB had been active
in support of customs reform since the early 1990's when the priority of customs strengthening gained
a higher profile in the policy dialog - the loan and technical assistance prioritisation process - whichthe IDB carried out every year or so with each of its borrowing Member countries.  The Bank had
approved around US$ 100 million in financing for customs projects.  These projects may be either
stand alone or combined with other components, fo r example, strengthening tax administration, or for
strengthening other aspects of public financial management and control such as:  the budgeting
process;  the cash management or treasury function;  public credit, i.e. debt management;  accountingand reporting;  or internal and external auditing.  He added that all of these fiscal areas, including
customs strengthening, were of growing importance as part of ensuring transparency in public
finances.
4.7 He added that the IADB was about to approve and put into place an anti-corruption policy,
and tax, customs and public financial management and control were an integral part of this policy.
Projects for customs strengthening may be financed with IADB loans or grants.  As money dried up,more and more customs strengthening projects were financed with loans which, in the customs area,
were small, usually US$ 1-5 million.  They were primarily institutional strengthening projects in
which advisory services (consultancies and equipment (information systems)) were the main
components financed by the Bank.  But as with other institutional strengthening projects, although
small, they could have a big impact, as they covered a wide range of areas:  the legal framework,organisational issues, procedures, information systems, human resources management, and training.
In customs projects, valuation was a key part of the strengthening process.
4.8 The IADB added not only financing in this proc ess, but also technical expertise in assisting
countries to formulate proposals for strengthening, and monitoring of results during and after projectexecution.  The IADB also brought knowledge of real-life experiences from other countries into the
analysis of new requests.  He informed the Committee that last year, the IADB had approved
financing for customs strengthening in Nicaragua and Peru and this year was working on custom
projects in Bolivia, El Salvador and Paraguay.  In the case of Bolivia, the Government would be the
borrower, the customs agency would be the benefi ciary and executing agency, and the project would
have a total cost of US$6.25 million of which th e IADB loan would cover US$5 million over a
four-year period.  The project would have six com ponents, one of which would be for valuation.  The
others would be for agency wide information systems, strengthening the audit function, establishing
an office of ethics and so forth.  The valuation component represented about 10 per cent of the totalG/VAL/M/14
Page 10
project cost and included consultancies and computer hardware and software for the following main
components:  setting up procedures for valuation of merchandise under the WTO Agreement on
Customs Valuation;  training of customs agency staff (both centrally and in the regional offices) in the
new methodology and procedures;  defining the characteristics of a database to support the valuation
function, selecting it, adapting and implementing it su ch as determining what data should be fed into
the database and maintaining it; and training for customs brokers regarding WTO rules and other
relevant regulations.
4.9 In addition to country specific projects such as for Bolivia, the IADB was also considering a
regional programme for all of its borrowing member countries in Latin American and the Caribbean
to strengthen business facilitation in the customs area.  This would be financed by a special IADB
window called the Multilateral Investment Fund (or MIF) which was non-reimbursable andconcentrated on financing innovative projects to promote private sector development.  This initiative
arose when the Free Trade of the Americas Initiative meeting of Trade Vice-Ministers in Toronto in
November asked the IADB to finance this regional programme.  He concluded that the IADB would
welcome the opportunity to explore partnering with the WTO in ways that complemented on-going
assistance provided directly by the WTO and the IADB's own activities in the two organizations' jointmember countries.  In the case of the regional MIF project, the IADB was exploring a possible role
for the WCO in the execution of the project.  There was no reason why WTO involvement could not
be considered in this kind of project as well.
4.10 The Chairman asked if a four-year loan was typical or whether an improved customs
administration could mean that loans could be paid back earlier?4.11 The observer of the IADB distinguished between the execution period of the project and the
loan amortisation period.  Normally a typical project would have an execution period of four years but
the loan to the Government would have an amortisation period of anywhere from 15 to 25 yearsdepending on the circumstances.  Usually the four-year execution period was a grace period for
amortisation.  Certainly projects in the fiscal area served to strengthen capacity of governments and
this was an important factor in their being a high priority for borrowing externally on behalf of the
government.  These loans did, in fact, pay for themselves in a short period of time, financially.  Many
of the IADB-financed projects were justified on the basis of social benefits and economic benefits
which were not always financial.  One of the major benefits of projects in the fiscal area was that
there was a direct financial return.
4.12 The representative of Colombia expressed appreciation for the presentation.  In the
discussions on technical assistance in the Committee, it had been emphasized that technical assistance
should be provided at various levels, primarily where it was considered to be most feasible such as
training.  His Government had benefited from a ssistance from the IADB and, in his opinion, the
difficulties encountered by Members in implementing the Agreement was not so much in
understanding the Agreement but rather in the infrastructure and managerial shortcomings in customs
implementation.  It was a complex issue including issues of modernization and reform, and major
inputs through technical assistance were necessary.  His delegation welcomed initiatives by the IADB
to develop managerial and infrastructure capacity in this area.  Last year, concerns were shared withthe development banks and he wondered if there had been any reaction to these concerns.
4.13 The Chairman noted that this was an issue discussed last year.  One of the problems was
knowing the right people to address in the developmen t banks.  He considered that it would be useful
for the Committee to reflect on whether there would be merit in having an informal session with theother regional development banks so that they could explain what they were doing in the area, as the
IADB had done.  Unfortunately this idea had been put aside because of the intense work concerning
extension and minimum value requests since late last year.G/VAL/M/14
Page 11
4.14 The representative of the United States supported the Chairman's suggestion of inviting some
of the regional development banks and appreciated the presentation by the IADB.  His Government
interacted considerably with the IADB in Washington, D.C. in regional matters.  His Government was
particularly pleased with the idea of the IADB working with the WTO on technical assistance matters;
this could ensure better coherency particularly in an era of resource constraints that all organizationswere facing.  This could avoid gaps in providing assistance as well as ensuring that there was not
redundancy in activities.  He added that perhaps the biggest challenge was moving to the second stage
of developing the administrative infrastructure necessary for customs reform and proper
implementation of the Agreement.  One of the best  ways to address this challenge was to ensure
coherency among organizations.
4.15 The Chairman suggested that the Secretairat make enquiries with other regional development
banks as to whether they would be interested in participating in such an informal meeting.
4.16 The representative of the Technical Cooperation Division of the Secretariat stated that her
Division was initiating a plan of action in this area.  One of the activities planned was to establish
contact with the various regional development banks as well as other various regional secretariats andinternational organizations.  One of her aims was to establish the nature of different programmes and
projects which these organisations were carrying out.  She noted that one of the problems she had
identified in her efforts was the lack of experts to work as consultants for the WTO.  One possible
solution might be if Members could propose customs experts from their national administrations.  She
would be happy to hear suggestions from Members which she could follow-up.
4.17 The representative of Mexico expressed appreciation for the IADB presentation.  Regarding
customs reform which had successfully been carried out by the IADB in several Latin American
countries, he noted the second step mentioned by the IADB concerning differential treatment
according to the characteristics of the trade involved  and the trading operators.  He asked for further
explanation of this in terms of technical assistance for national programmes.  Also, in giving
preference to poverty alleviation programmes, he asked how these programmes would be linked to
customs?  He considered that all these programmes were linked to customs, so how were programmes
being carried out in this particular area?  He noted that the IADB stated that it continued to play an
important role in terms of imports and exports.  What was the particular approach of that kind of
activity and what was the focal point for technical assistance?  In this context, he had two points to
make.  Regarding the Customs Valuation Agreement, the bank made two important suggestions.  Hisdelegation considered that one area for future examination could be the use of data-bases in those
countries that had developed and used these tools.  Generally speaking the use of data-bases had been
noted as only used sketchily in the area of trade facilitation or preshipment inspection.   But the
Committee had not really gone into the details of their use in customs valuation.  This would be a
theme worthy of greater analysis in the Committee.  Another theme would be a centralisedorganisation of customs valuation services.  It would be useful to study customs administrations
which had adopted this type of structure and the benefits that had been achieved as well as the
obstacles encountered.
4.18 The IADB report could serve as a type of model.  Probably its activities were not much
different from the activities of other regional banks.  Furthermore, it would be useful to see the reports
from the Technical Committee on Customs Valuation for analysis before the Committee meetings as
we did with the IADB report.  Finally, he consider ed the suggestion to hold an unofficial meeting with
regional banks dealing with technical assistance in customs valuation or other customs-related
questions a good one.  At such an informal meeting, perhaps Latin-American banks, UNCTAD, theWorld Bank, and the WCO could explain the latest progress made.  It would be useful to know what
had been done at the regional bank level and then more broadly at the levels of the World Bank and
the WCO.  In other words, efforts should be made  to work together in a consistent manner.  A
memorandum of understanding on these matters had been signed by the IADB and the WCO.G/VAL/M/14
Page 12
Perhaps this would be another step forward after the informal meeting.  Also, perhaps a joint analysis
could be carried out by the WTO on how to bring all the activities together so that the Committee
could come to some kind of understanding to decide in which particular niche each organization was
working.  WTO Members would then better be able to understand certain aspects of technical
assistance in customs valuation and other customs-related questions.
4.19 The representative of Guatemala appreciated the information provided by the IADB and
considered that follow-up technical assistance activities were also important.  His delegation believed
that other institutions should follow in the footst eps of the IADB in cooperating with the customs
administrations in Latin and South America concerning technical assistance, financing and other
areas.  The statement made by the IADB, as part of the tripartite group on the Americas, on its work
shows the importance of the WTO rules and provides an important example for activities elsewhere.His Government was interested in the projects carried out in several Latin American countries and
would like to see more follow-up in this area.
4.20 The Chairman asked the IADB why their average loan was about US$5 million and the World
Bank had stated that their average loan was about US$ 10 million per country.4.21 The observer of the IADB stated, with regard to the Chairman's question, that every case and
situation was different.  He was not aware of the average project cost but what he had referred to was
the range of costs and bank loans for customs projects.  That range was US$ 1-5 million usually.  He
did not think that the total cost of the project necessarily reflected the extent of the need for
strengthening.  It all depended on what was to be financed within the purview of the project.  For
example, sometimes information systems might be more expensive than consultancies and the total
cost of a project may reflect, in one case, that more emphasis needed to be on information systems
than on consultancies.  This would not necessarily mean that the need for strengthening was greater in
one case than another.
4.22 With regard to a question posed by Mexico whether there was a link between customs
projects and poverty alleviation programmes, he stated that there was no direct link.  The IADB had
been charged by its Member countries to devote fifty per cent of its loan programmes to the social
sector as part of the IADB's poverty alleviation mandate.  These projects in the social sectors were for
education, public health projects, slum upgrading, and other projects to strengthen and invest in
human capital.  They were normally executed by the social sector ministries.  When the IADBengaged in its dialogue on a periodic basis with its borrowing member countries, both parties
discussed the best ways for the IADB and the country to make their priorities meet in the best areas
for investment.  This policy dialogue was where all the ideas of both the country and the IADB, based
on its analysis, would be discussed with the aim of finding agreement among the respective points of
view.   Through this coordination mechanism, projects in the social, fiscal, and physical infrastructuresectors arose.  However, in the actual design and execution of projects, there was no direct
coordination.
4.23 The customs expert of the IADB explained other aspects of the IADB's work in this area.  He
noted that there had been a reduction in contributions since the mandate was specifically aimed atpoverty alleviation.  This, the special treatment that had been given to commercial activities and to
importers was a new global trend.   He agreed with the WCO that resources should be focused on
those activities and projects which dealt with the highest risks for a given country.  The IADB used
risk analysis methods to make sure that those operators which did not have the risk profile would be
able to carry out their activities.  Differential treatment was not discriminatory in nature, but wasrelated to provision of information from the customs au thorities.  With regard to databases, he noted
that this was of interest to those countries which in many instances were poorly equipped and which
had substantial information which had been already computerised.  For this purpose, an integrated
data base of prices was necessary.  The selection and analysis of data which may be used in thisG/VAL/M/14
Page 13
database and those which may be used with regard to the implementation of the Agreement had been
the subject of substantial discussion in this Committee and the WCO Technical Committee.  The
IADB would be providing assistance to the coun tries concerned so that their facilities may be
compatible with the Agreement.  He would be ready to answer further questions in this regard.
4.24 The Committee took note of the statements made.
5. India - Information on Certain Aspects of the European Communities' Valuation Policy
5.1 The Chairman reported that at the last meeting of the Committee, the representative of India
had provided questions to the EC on certain aspects of the EC valuation policy.  Since then, the EC
had provided responses circulated recently in G/VAL/W/66.
5.2 The representative of India noted that the EC had referred to regulations 2913/92, 2454/93
and 3223/94.  She would appreciate if copies of these regulations could be provided to Members
along with any amendments or revised regulations for examination in conjunction with the replies.
She also noted that in the reply to her third questi on, the EC mentioned that rules of customs valuation
were contained in separate legal instruments such as the two Council regulations to which she hadearlier referred.  She was not clear as to whether these instruments contained special provisions for
determining customs value for fruits and vegetables on the basis of fixed or standard values.  A
related question was that, if this was so, since when had such provisions been in existence and were
they in existence during the Tokyo Round Agreement on Customs Valuation?  The replies from the
EC were not very specific to the questions that had been asked by her delegation.  Her delegationbelieved that the EC appeared to confuse the issue by emphasizing that they were using standard
import values for determining tariff positions and duty rates under the entry price system for giving
effect to tariff concessions under EC regulation 3223/94 which had been 'made in the context of the
Uruguay Round as regarded agriculture' (quote from  the EC submission G/VAL/W/66).  It appeared
to her delegation that the EC system for determinin g duty rates with reference to an entry price system
also needed closer examination from the point of view of tariff bindings.  If the duty rates were
dependent on the entry price of goods, the implications would become more complicated by the fact
that the importer must choose the standard price method for customs valuation as well as for
determining entry price.  The reply to question 2 implied this because it stated that duties were
charged on customs values for which the importer had the choice of using standard import values in
addition to the transaction value.  Her delegation wished to know which provisions of the Agreement
would justify such a choice to determine customs values on the basis of fixed standard values.  Otherquestions to the EC would be provided in writing at a later stage.
5.3 The representative of the European Communities stated that the responses had been carefully
prepared to try to respond as clearly as possible to the questions.  Where it might seem that the
responses did not match the question, this would indicate that the question contained built-inpresumptions which the response tried to show were not valid.  His delegation would be willing to
supply copies of the regulations mentioned which had, in any case, already been circulated to the
Committee.  He added that the EC had always allowed importers the possibility of using simplified
methods to determine value for customs value purposes in particular cases, such as perishable goods
imported on consignment and where importers wished to use values made available through thecustoms services.  He considered that his delegation's replies were quite specific and invited the
Indian delegation to examine them closely.  He noted that the Committee now had two exchanges
with India on this point and if there was an objective or purpose to continuing the dialogue, his
delegation would be happy to go along, but he request ed India to consult with the EC directly through
bilateral means as this would be more efficient.  His delegation would be happy to receive any otherquestions and provide the information requested.  He concluded that this system put in place a system
of tariff classification to determine the duty positions, and those duty positions reflected duty rates
agreed and accepted as outcomes of the Uruguay Round.  This Committee could not take up questionsG/VAL/M/14
Page 14
of tariff bindings which the EC regarded as a settled matter, but only valuation matters.  This matter
raised valuation issues on a purely tangential basis and these issues were entirely consistent with the
obligations under the Agreement.
5.4 The representative of Colombia noted his delegation's interest in this matter and would prefer
that it remain on the Committee's agenda for fuller transparency regarding the difficulties encountered
by various Members.
5.5 The representative of India thanked the EC for its replies.  Regarding her question on whether
the values were fixed or standard, she understood the EC to say that importers were happy to make
use of values made available to customs services.  It was, in fact, in this context that her delegation
had asked the question as to which provision of the Agreement would justify the use of such fixedstandards or minimum values.  On the tariff bindings, she noted that the EC had stated that the entry
price system they were using was to give effect to tariff concessions made in the context of the
Uruguay Round.  If administration of customs was being used in a manner that effected their tariff
concessions, she considered that it was for this Committee to examine the matter.  Of course, if the
matter turned out to be a purely tariff binding issue, her delegation would not like to create aprecedent of taking up matters in this Committee which were not relevant to its work.  She also added
that she was not trying to state that the EC, in its responses, had not given due regard to her
delegation's questions.  Perhaps the questions had been confusing because it appeared to her that the
EC had confused two issues which her delegation had tried to distinguish in its questions.  She was
prepared to provide new questions and looked forwar d to discussing the matter with the EC.  However
she did wish to retain the item on the agenda of the Committee.
5.6 The Committee agreed to revert to this item at its next meeting.
6. Fourth and Fifth Annual Reviews of the Implementation and Operation of the Customs
Valuation Agreement
6.1 The Chairman informed the Committee that he was still holding consultations on this item
and proposed that the Committee revert to this item when it resumed its meeting.
6.2 The Committee so agreed.
7. Preshipment Inspection
7.1 The Chairman informed Members that followin g adoption of the final report of the Working
Party on Preshipment Inspection in G/L/300, the General Council agreed that future monitoring of the
Agreement on Preshipment Inspection should be undertaken initially by the Committee on Customs
Valuation where PSI would be a standing agenda item.  Therefore, this subject had been included on
the agenda as from the last meeting when it was agreed that the Secretariat would prepare a documentlisting the Members using PSI.  This document was contained in G/VAL/W/63.
7.2 The representative of the European Communities appreciated the document which showed the
extent of PSI activities as also mentioned in the communication by the IADB.  His delegation wished
to continue to be informed in this way.
7.3 The Committee took note of the information.G/VAL/M/14
Page 15
8. Other Business
- Date of the next meeting
8.1 The Chairman proposed that the Committee suspend its proceedings and resume at a later
point in time to take up item 9, Election of Officers, because the Chairman of the Council for Trade in
Goods was still consulting on a slate of names for appointments as Chairs to the subsidiary bodies, as
well as items 2(c) and 6.
8.3 The Committee so agreed.
Resumption of meeting on 28 April
1. Information on Implementation and Administration of the Agreement
(a) Notifications made by developing country Members
- Reservation on minimum valuesNicaragua
1.1 The Chairman informed the Committee that there were two draft decisions to be discussed.
The first concerned a request under paragraph 2, Annex III by Nicaragua which was contained in
G/VAL/W/59/Add.1.  He proposed that the Committee adopt this draft decision.
1.2 The Committee adopted the draft decision contained in G/VAL/W/59/Add.1.
Colombia
1.3 The Chairman informed the Committee that the second draft decision concerned a request by
Colombia under paragraph 2, Annex III.  He was aware that a few delegations were not yet in a
position to adopt this text so he proposed that the Committee suspend its deliberations on this draft
decision and meet again no later than 10 May 2000.  Any decisions taken by the Committee on 10
May would be reflected as of 28 April 2000.
1.4 The Committee so agreed.
1.5 The representative of India noted that her delegation did not share the interpretation put
forward by the Chairman in an informal meetin g of the Committee that, if no agreement could be
reached on Colombia's draft decision by 28 April, in time to meet the deadline imposed by theDecision on Reservations in G/VAL/5, Colombia would have no choice but to request a waiver for
minimum values under the General Council.  This was not her delegation's understanding of the
provisions of the Agreement, including those cont ained in G/VAL/5.  Her delegation considered that
Colombia would have other options available to it.  However, should Colombia decide to seek a
waiver under the General Council, her delegation would not stand in the way.
1.6 The representative of the European Communities asked the Secretariat, for transparency
purposes, to remind the Committee of the language contained in the relevant provisions of the
document G/VAL/5.
1.7 The Secretariat read out to the Committee paragraphs 3 and 4 of the Decision B.1 on
Reservations under the Agreement, contained in the document G/VAL/5, which was adopted by theG/VAL/M/14
Page 16
Committee on Customs Valuation at its first meeting on 12 May 1995.  It had been previously
adopted by the Tokyo Round Committee in January 1981.
1.8 The Chairman summarized his understanding of the situation regarding Colombia, whose
five-year transition period under Article 20.1 would end on Sunday, 30 April 2000.  Therefore, unless
the terms and conditions which would govern its request for retaining a system of minimum values
under paragraph 2, Annex III were agreed by this date, Colombia would not be granted this extension.
1.9 The representative of India indicated that her delegation had also seen this provision.
However, it was her delegation's understanding that this Decision applied to one particular situation
and not to all situations that were possible under Article 21 of the Agreement, read with paragraph 2,
Annex III.  There were situations that were possible were a Member was applying the Agreement andthen made a reservation which was not covered by this Decision.
1.10 The Committee agreed to suspend the meeting until further notice.
Resumption of the meeting on 10 May 2000
1. Information on Implementation and Administration of the Agreement
(a) Notifications made by developing country Members
- Reservation on minimum values
Colombia
1.1 The Chairman reminded Members that the Committee had suspended consideration of this
item when it last met on 28 April pending consultations between Colombia and the delegations which
had not been in a position to adopt the report at that time.  He understood that these consultations had
resolved the outstanding issues and therefore proposed that the Committee adopt the draft decision
contained in G/VAL/W/53/Add.3.  The date on which it was adopted would be 28 April 2000.
1.2 The Committee so agreed.
1.3 The representative of Colombia informed the Committee that the legislative aspect of
implementation of the Agreement had almost been completed.  His Government hoped that at the end
of the period granted for the reservation on minimum values, it would be in a position to apply the
Agreement fully to all products.  Risk analysis would continue to be carried out using the reference
prices for certain products, but this would not mean  that they would be used for valuation purposes.
1.4 The representative of the United States stated that his delegation welcomed Colombia's
implementation of the Agreement and, on that basis, had been able to join in the consensus regarding
Colombia's reservation.  In particular, his delegation was pleased that Colombia had structured the
reservation on the basis of a phased elimination of the minimum values over three years and hadagreed to provide the Committee with information on the methodologies used for calculating these
values.  Nevertheless, his delegation wished to emphasize that its agreement to this Decision had no
bearing on its view regarding the WTO consistency of the price-band system applied by Colombia
under the Andean Community.  In particular, his delegation remained concerned that this system
appeared to include the arbitrary use of "reference prices" for marker products and createdconsiderable confusion and uncertainty for traders in linking additional products to these markers.
While welcoming Colombia's implementation and bein g sensitive to its desire to maintain minimum
values for a short period of time on a limited number of products, his delegation continued toG/VAL/M/14
Page 17
scrutinize other aspects of the price-band system to ensure their consistency with the Agreement as
well as with other WTO Agreements.
1.5 The representative of Mexico noted that the consultations carried out with Colombia were
useful to clarify some doubts that his delegation had concerning the matter.  His delegation was now
prepared to join the consensus on the matter.
- Extension of the delay periodTunisia
1.6 The Chairman informed the Committee that a draft decision on Tunisia's request for an
extension under paragraph 1, Anne x III was contained in G/VAL/W/ 62/Add.2.  He proposed that the
Committee adopt this draft decision.
1.7 The Committee so agreed.
1.8 The representative of Venezuela noted its satisfaction with the work of the Committee at this
meeting.  At the same time, his delegation wished to note that according to its rights under the legal
WTO texts, it had had to request more time to consider the Colombian reservation and study the draft
decision, particularly because of the need to coordinate with the Andean Community.  At no time
should his delegation's request for more time be considered as an opposition to the legitimate rights ofdeveloping countries.  His delegation further wished to stress its concern regarding the procedure
being followed in the Committee for the adoption of decisions concerning extension requests.  His
delegation understood that there should be consultation among Members directly interested in the
contents of these decisions.  Nevertheless, other Member countries should have a minimum time
sufficient to study the draft decisions before they were formally put before the Committee.  This was ahealthy practice which was normally followed in the WTO.  In this way, a repetition of the previous
situation would be avoided.  All Members needed to be involved in the consultation process to
accelerate the process and to avoid that the consultations on the requests come at the end of the
respective delay periods which could become an element of pressure for all involved.
1.9 The representative of Tunisia stated that it was his delegation's understanding that the
Decision adopted by the Committee was without prejudice to the rights and obligations of Tunisia
with respect to the Agreement.
1.10 The Committee agreed to further suspend the meeting to take up the items on the agenda
which it had not completed on 12 April.
Resumption of the meeting on 31 May 2000
1. Information on Implementation and Administration of the Agreement
(a) Notifications made by developing country Members
- Extension of delay period
1.1 The Vice-Chairman informed the Committee that  the Chairman was unable to be at the
meeting and requested him to chair the meeting.  He asked if the Committee agreed on this procedure.
1.2 The Committee so agreed.G/VAL/M/14
Page 18
1.3 The Vice-Chairman informed the Committee that two draft decisions had been circulated to
Members regarding requests for extensions from Myanmar and Mauritania.  Because the draft
decision for El Salvador had not yet been translated into English, the Chairman proposed postponing
its consideration to the next formal meeting of the Committee.
Mauritania
1.4 The draft decision for Mauritania was contained in G/VAL/W/58/Rev.5 and Corr.1.  He
proposed that the Committee adopt this draft decision.
1.5 The Committee so agreed.
1.6 The representative of Mauritania thanked Members for granting this extension.  He reminded
Members that his Government had drawn up a deta iled programme of work in which Ministers and
competent bodies had participated so as to make it possible to prepare and adopt appropriate
legislation and to undertake the necessary domestic procedures including training, dissemination of
information, etc.  He noted that his country already applied paragraph 2 of the Decision on Carrier-Media Bearing Software and that it did not apply minimum values to any products at the present time
and did not have the intention of doing so on the expiration of the transition period.  His country was
committed to use these two years to accelerate reform s so as to rigorously apply the work programme
submitted.  He further added that this Decision was without prejudice to the rights and obligations of
his country under the WTO Agreements, in particular the Agreement on Customs Valuation.
Myanmar
1.7 The Chairman drew the Committee's attention to the draft decision for Myanmar contained in
document G/VAL/W/41/Add.2.  He proposed that the Committee adopt this draft decision.1.8 The Committee so agreed.
1.9 The representative of Myanmar noted that his country had been an early contracting party to
the GATT and had joined the WTO as a founding Member in 1995.  As a responsible Member of the
WTO, Myanmar had fulfilled its obligations and participated in the activities of the WTO.  Since
1995, Myanmar had made utmost efforts to implement the provisions of the Agreement on CustomsValuation.  However, its efforts were impeded due  to the Asian financial crisis.  Myanmar was the
only least-developed country which had suffered from this crisis and was a country in transition from
a centrally-planned economy to a market econom y.  His Government appreciated Members'
understanding of its exceptional situation and circumstances which had necessitated the extension of
the transition period.  Now that Myanmar had been granted this extension, it would be in a betterposition to advance and complete its gradual and prog ressive integration into the international trading
system.  Myanmar had established and was implementing a comprehensive plan of action for
implementation of the Agreement and would welcome and appreciate substantial financial and
technical assistance from Members and international organizations in reforming and modernizing its
customs administration.  His country could accept the two year extension on the understanding thatthe Decision would not prejudice Myanmar's rights and obligations under the Agreement on Customs
Valuation.  He expressed gratitude for the patience and flexibility and spirit of cooperation displayed
by the interested parties.
1.10 The representative of Malaysia, on behalf of the ASEAN Member countries, recognized the
Committee's decision on Myanmar and considered that this would in no way prejudice Myanmar's
rights and obligations under all the WTO provisions.  His delegation would have preferred that
Myanmar receive the full five years that it had requested.  As a least-developed country, it faced
tremendous problems as a result of the Asian financial crisis which exacerbated its efforts inG/VAL/M/14
Page 19
implementing the Agreement.  During the two years, his delegation hoped that intensive technical
assistance would be provided to Myanmar both bi laterally and from international organizations, in
particular also the WTO.  If for any reason, despite efforts made by Myanmar, at the end of the two
year extension Myanmar could not apply the Agreement, his delegation considered that WTO
Members should be sensitive to the concerns and needs of all Members, particularly Myanmar, aleast-developed country.
2. Fourth and Fifth Annual Reviews of the Implementation and Operation of the Customs
Valuation Agreement
2.1 The Vice-Chairman reported to the Committee that the Chairman's consultations on this
matter had not resulted in its resolution.  Therefor e, this matter would remain with the Committee to
be addressed as appropriate.  He proposed that the Committee take note of this information.
2.2 The Committee took note of the information.
3. Election of Officers
3.1 The Chairman recalled that the Rules of Procedures for meetings of the Committee on
Customs Valuation provided that the Committee elect a Chairperson at the end of the first meeting of
the year.  The Chairman of the Council for Trade in Goods had carried out informal consultations on a
slate of names for appointment as chairpersons of standing bodies in accordance with the establishedguidelines for appointment of officers.  On the basis of the understanding reached, he proposed that
the Committee elect M. Remo Moretta (Australia) as Chairperson.
3.2 The Committee so agreed.
3.3 The Chairman added that the Rules of Procedure also allowed the possibility of electing a
Vice-Chairperson.  He asked for nominations from Members.3.4 The representative of the Canada nominated Mr. Alejandro Buvinic (Chile) as Vice-
Chairperson of the Committee.3.5 The Committee so agreed.
3.6 The new Chairman thanked the previous Chairman for his hard work and dedication.  He
congratulated the Vice-Chairman and looked forward to working with the Committee in a cooperative
and constructive manner on all matters before the Committee.  He would advice Members of the date
of a formal meeting in June to take up, among issues, the draft decision on El Salvador's request forextension of the delay period.
3.7 The meeting was adjourned.
__________