RESTRICTEDWORLD TRADE
ORGANIZATIONG/AG/W/45
18 June 1999
(99-2471)
Committee on Agriculture
NOTIFICATION ISSUES
Background Note by the Secretariat
1. This background note has been prepared in response to the request made at the March 1999
meeting of the Committee on Agriculture that, for the purposes of the Committee's further informal
discussion of notification issues, the Secretariat provide some comments on the suggestions made in
the following background papers relative to the Committee's notification requirements (G/AG/R/18,
paragraph 19, refers):
Implementation Issues Regarding Domestic Support (by New Zealand):  G/AG/W/34Equivalent Measurement of Support (by the United States):  G/AG/W/35
Issues Regarding Export Subsidy Notifications (by Australia): G/AG/W/37
Notification of "Green Box" Measures (by the United States):  G/AG/W/39
Issues Regarding Market Access Notifications (by Canada):  G/AG/W/43
Treatment of Negative Components in AM S and Total AMS (by Canada):  G/AG/W/44
2. The comments provided in this paper are limite d mainly to the specific suggestions made in
the above papers concerning the Committee's Notification Requirements in G/AG/2.  While in some
instances views are necessarily expressed on the scope of the Notification Requirements, the
comments made herein are not intended to involve any issues of interpretation of the Agreement on
Agriculture itself.  Thus there are a range of issues raised in the above papers involving specific
implementation/notification issues on which the present paper does not comment.  The various
suggestions made are taken up in the same order (market access, domestic support and then exportsubsidies) as they appear in the Notification Requirements.
A. MARKET ACCESS NOTIFICATIONS
3. All Members with tariff quota commitments in Sections IB or IA of their Schedules are
required to submit MA:1 (tariff quota administration) and MA:2 (tariff quota import) notifications
(G/AG/2, page 2).
4. In the case of tariff quota administration the initial requirement was to submit a
comprehensive "one-off" notification in 1995 on the way in which each scheduled tariff quota was to
be administered, with subsequent changes being notified as and when such changes were introduced.
As indicated in Column 3 of Table MA:1 itself, what is required to be notified are "the arrangements
to be applied in order to provide the market access opportunities specified in the Member’s Schedule".
5. Under Table MA:2 Members with tariff quota commitments in Section I of their Schedules
are required annually to notify in-quota imports following the end of the relevant year (calendar,G/AG/W/45
Page 2
financial or marketing) on the basis of which the tariff quota is being implemented in accordance with
its Schedule.
6. As indicated in Columns 1 and 2 of both MA:1 and MA:2, the information required to be
notified for each tariff quota has to correspond to the product descriptions and related tariff item
numbers as specified in Schedules.
7. It may also be noted that under paragraph 15 of the Committee’s Working Procedures
(G/AG/1), information may be obtained during th e course of an implementation year on the
functioning of a specific tariff quota, including the quantity of imports effected or authorized under
that quota.
(i) Suggestions Regarding MA:1 a nd MA:2 Notifications (G/AG/W/43)
8. Suggestion 1:  that detailed tariff-line information be notified under MA:1 on the applied
terms of access where the in-quota, or a lower rate, is applied without limitation on the quantity of
imports that may enter at that rate; and that corresponding imports data be notified under MA:2
(W/43, paragraph 3 and 4).
9. Comment:  appropriate information in the context of an MA:1 notification should be provided
since the requirement to submit such a notification depends solely on the fact that there is a tariff
quota commitment in Section I of the Schedule of the Member concerned.  Moreover, where only the
bound in-quota tariff is being applied, whether to a somewhat larger volume of imports than the
scheduled quantity or to all imports, it is probably misleading to say, for the purposes of MA:1 and
MA:2, that the scheduled commitment is not being at least partly applied (see next paragraph).  Item
(d) in Column 3 would be the appropriate entry point ("any other information relevant to the
implementation of market access opportunities under such arrangements").  The products concerned
should be specified along with the related tariff item numbers as described in the Schedule.  It would
be a matter for consideration by Members whether, as a general practice, a statement should also be
included to the effect that a rate not in excess of the bound in-quota rate is, until further notice, also
applicable to imports in excess of the scheduled tariff quota quantity.
10. The MA:2 tariff quota fill notification is more of a transparency requirement to enable
Members to maintain an ex post check on the extent to which the market access opportunities
represented by a tariff quota commitment are being realized.  The key element of such scheduled
market access opportunities is the relatively low in-quota tariff which a Member is bound to respect
irrespective of whether or not the other element of a tariff quota commitment, the quantity limitation,
is enforced.  In these circumstances other Members have an equally legitimate interest in the volume
of imports being notified as they do for any other scheduled tariff quota commitment.
11. Suggestion 2:  in paragraph 5 and 6 of W/43 a number of examples are cited where
discrepancies have arisen between the product coverage of scheduled and implemented tariff quota
commitments, with the suggestion being made that where tariff quotas are implemented for a different
set of products than those covered by a specific tariff quota commitment as scheduled, an explanation
should be provided in the relevant MA:1 or MA:2 notifications.
12. Comment:  MA:1 tariff quota administration noti fications are an important tool because they
provide basic information for the Committee's review process, as well as commercially, about the
arrangements to be applied in order to provide the market access opportunities specified in Schedules.
This information should be provided for each individual tariff quota commitment and be accompanied
(in Columns 1 and 2) by the detailed product and tariff descriptions as they appear in Schedules.  Thetariff quota import data in MA:2 should also correspond to these scheduled product and tariff-line
descriptions.G/AG/W/45
Page 3
13. Accordingly, where a number of individual tariff quotas are to be aggregated and
administered jointly, this fact should be indicated in MA:1 in a manner which makes it clear that all
the constituent products are covered by the aggregate or jointly administered tariff quota.  It would
also seem to be incumbent on the Member concerned, where individual tariff quotas are aggregated
for administrative purposes, and there are differences between the bound in-quota rates applicable tothe various individual tariff quotas, to indicate how it is intended to ensure that the tariff treatment
specified in the Member’s Schedule is respected for all the products concerned.
14. The related suggestion that footnotes be used to  identify tariff-lines affected by changes
arising from HS:96 nomenclature or the relevant WTO HS documentation, could be useful but could
also be pursued in the broader HS transposition process, since such HS96 transpositions affect more
than just the agricultural tariff lines involving tariff quotas.
15. Suggestion 3:  that MA:2 notifications shoul d indicate whether imports are being counted
against tariff quotas on a basis other than actual imports (e.g, licenses issued) and whether additional
"autonomous imports" are included in the reported in-quota import data (W/43. paragraph 7).
16. Comment:  the general practice is to notify the actual quantity of imports in line with  Table
MA:2.  The reference to  "additional autonomous imports" is somewhat ambiguous.  If the suggestion
is to have a clear indication of the proportion or quantity of non-MFN or preferential imports, thenthat could indeed contribute to transparency.
17. Suggestion 4:  regarding consistency of reporting periods with scheduled commitments
(W/43, paragraph 8), namely that the annual basis for the implementation of tariff quotas should
correspond to the calendar, financial or marketing years as specified in Schedules and/or
G/AG/W/2/REV.4.
18. Comment:  the reporting periods to be specified in MA:1 and MA:2 relate to the annual basis
(calendar, financial or marketing year) as indicated in Schedules and/or in document
G/AG/W/2/REV.4, which consolidates inform ation on implementation years for scheduled
commitments generally.
19. Suggestion 5:  that MA:2 notifications should be submitted as and when they become due in
relation to the end of the particular implementation (calendar, financial or marketing) year concerned
(W/43, paragraph 9).
20. Comment:  this suggestion is consistent with G/AG/2 (page 2, point (ii)) but the practice
which developed from the outset has been to submit all inclusive annual MA:2 notifications, rather
than submitting separate annual notifications for the individual marketing years concerned.
21. Suggestion 6:  that the same measurement units as are specified in Schedules (units of weight
or volume) should also be used in MA:2 (W/43, paragraph 10).
22. Comment:  Table MA:2 does not contain specific instructions on this obvious point.
(ii) Suggestions Regarding Special Safeguard Notifications:  MA:3 to 5 (G/AG/W/43)
23. For the use of the volume-based special safeguard the requirement is to submit an MA:3
notification in respect of the first use of the special safeguard in any year for each affected product.The information required to be submitted is reasonably comprehensive, including the historical import
and consumption data used as a basis for the calculation of the "trigger level", as well as the volume
of current imports.G/AG/W/45
Page 4
24. The information required to be notified in relation to the price-based special safeguard is
more limited, in the sense that once the trigger price used to invoke the mechanism has been notified
under Table MA:4 (through either an "Up-front" notific ation or an ad hoc "First use" notification),
there is no requirement to notify on a shipment-by-shipment basis, whether and on what products the
price-based special safeguard is actually being applied in any given year thereafter.  Instead, and incommon with the volume-based special safeguard, there is an ex post  requirement in terms of
Table MA:5 to provide an annual summary of any special safeguard action taken, which includes a
description of the products affected and the related tariff item numbers.
25. Suggestion 1:  that, for volume-based SSG not ifications under Table MA:3, information be
provided (1) on the level of imports prior to the application of the special safeguard and the
distribution of these imports between in-quota and out-of-quota imports, (2) on the applied duty
before and after the application of the special safeguard; and (3) that, for the annual notificationsunder Table MA:5, information be provided on the volume of trade affected by the application of the
special safeguard (W/43, paragraph 11).
26. Comment:  under present arrangements data on the "volume of imports entering the territory
in current period" is already required under Item (4) of Table MA:3, but there is no requirement to
provide a breakdown of these imports as between tariff quota and other imports.  The other additionalinformation is not required under MA:3 or MA:5 nor in practice has it been provided by the limited
range of Members using the volume-based special safeguard. What is rarely if ever clear is how the
"domestic consumption" data employed in MA:3 not ifications is arrived at.  Consideration might be
given to requiring the use of consumption data from published, verifiable sources, or where this is not
practicable, some indication of how the consumption data is derived.  Such a requirement wouldinvolve a minimal elaboration of the existing requirement (G/AG/2, page 7) to provide details of the
"method of allocation of change in consumption to the tariff line concerned".
27. Suggestion 2:  that, for price-based special safeguard notifications under Tables MA:4 and
MA:5, information be provided on (1) the volume of  imports affected by the safeguard action, (2) the
extent to which the actual import price was below the trigger price, and (3) the applicable duty beforeand after the imposition of the price trigger (W/43, paragraph 12).
28. Comment :  none of the proposed additional information on the invocation/use of the
price-based special safeguard is required under Tables MA:4 and MA:5.  However, in practice, one
notifying Member regularly provides information on the volume of imports affected by such action.
29. With regard to the suggestions for additional in formation relating to special safeguard action
generally, it may be noted that paragraph 7 of Article 5 of the Agreement on Agriculture provides that
the operation of the special safeguard is to be carried out in a transparent manner.  Furthermore, apartfrom the possibility of raising questions on these issues under the Review Process, Article 5.7 of the
Agreement also makes specific provision for consultations on aspects of the operation of the special
safeguard.
B. DOMESTIC SUPPORT NOTIFICATIONS
30. The Committee’s notification requirements distinguish between two categories of Members:
those which have Total AMS reduction commitments in their Schedules and those which do not
(G/AG/2, page 11).
31. In the case of a Member with scheduled Total AMS commitments the requirement is to
submit a notification in the DS series which demonstrates that support for the year in question in
excess of (1) the applicable exempt Green, S&D and Blue Box categories and (1) the relevant deG/AG/W/45
Page 5
minimis  levels, i.e., current Total AMS or Amber support, is within the limits of the Current Total
AMS commitment level as specified for that year in Part IV, Section I, of the Member’s Schedule.
32. As indicated in Article 1 (h) (ii) of the Agreement the Current Total AMS is to be calculated
in accordance with the provisions of the Agreemen t, including Article 6 (which refers to the exempt
support categories and de minimis  levels), and in accordance with the constituent data and
methodology used in the AGST tables of supporting material incorporated by reference in Part IV of
the Member’s Schedule.  This AMS material includes,  inter alia , the external reference prices which
are to be used by such Members in order to quan tify (product-specific) administered-price-related
measures in current AMS terms.
33. In a typical case a Member with a scheduled total AMS commitment will, as appropriate,
complete the following DS supporting Tables and repo rt the overall result (its Current Total AMS) in
Table DS:1, alongside the scheduled Total AMS commitment level for the year in question:
Supporting Table
(i) For Support Exempt from Reduction:
DS:1 - Green Box Measures
DS:2 - Special and Differential Treatment Measures
DS:3 - Blue Box (Article 6.5) Measures
(ii) For Product-Specific Aggregate Measurements of Support:
DS:5 - Market Price Support
DS:6 - Non-Exempt Direct Payments
DS:7 - Other Product Specific Support
DS:7 - The sum of the foregoing three components (minus any associated fees or
levies), i.e., the Product-Specific AMS, is then calculated for each basic
product concerned in Column 10 of Supporting Table DS:7.
(iii) For Product-Specific Equivalent Measurements of Support (EMS):
DS:8 - For the calculation of Equivalent Measurements of Support for
product-specific measures in respect of which the AMS methodology is not
practicable.  The total monetary value of such equivalent measurements(minus any associated fees or levies) is then calculated for each basic product
concerned in Column 11 of Supporting Table DS:8.
(iv) For the Non-Product-Specific AMS:
DS:9 - For the calculation of total Non-Product-Specific Support that is not
otherwise exempt, net of any associated fees or levies.
- In practice most reporting Members use Supporting Table DS:9 to calculate
the non-product-specific de minimis .
(v) For the Calculation of the Current Total AMS:
DS:4 - In Supporting Table DS:4 the Product-Specific AMS and EMS (from
Column 10 of DS:7 and Column 11 of DS:8, respectively) are added togetherto produce, after netting-out product-specific de minimis  support, the CurrentG/AG/W/45
Page 6
Total AMS for each basic product concerned.  The Current Total AMS for
the basic products concerned are then aggregated with the Total Non-
Product-Specific AMS, if any, (from Column 11 of Supporting Table DS:9)
to produce the Current Total AMS (whose final destination is Column 3 of
Table DS:1).
(vi) Support within de minimis  Levels:
There are no specific instructions or guidelines included in the DS Supporting Tables
regarding the calculation of de minimis  support levels.
The (percentage) product-specific de minimis  is calculated by dividing any current product-
specific support for a basic product by the current total domestic value of that basic product
for the year in questions.  The allowable limits are 5 per cent for developed country Members
and 10 per cent for developing country Members.
The product-specific de minimis  is taken into account either in Supporting Table DS:7 where
the total product-specific AMS is calculated (sometimes in supporting Table DS:5 if only
Market Price Support measures are applicable) or in the "round-up" Current Total AMS
Supporting Table DS:4 (particularly where there is product-specific EMS support to be taken
into account from Supporting Table DS:8.)  Most Members show the necessary data for the
relevant total production values for their de minimis  calculations in line with Article 6.4 of the
Agreement.
The (percentage) non-product-specific de minimis  current non-product-specific support (such
as non-product-specific subsidies to inputs, operating costs and preferential user changes,
except those which are exempt under the S&D Box) is calculated by dividing any suchsupport by the current total domestic value of the Member's total agricultural production for
the year in question.  These calculations are normally carried out in Supporting Table DS:9itself.  The result in practically all cases is that the allowable non-product-specific de minimis
limits (5 per cent for developed country Members and 10 per cent for developing country
Members) more than covers any positive non-product-specific support.
34. In terms of paragraph (ii) of G/AG/2, Members which do not have scheduled Total AMS
commitments are required to submit annual notificati ons in the Supporting Table DS series, along the
lines outlined above as appropriate, although at the request of a developing country Member this
requirement may be modified by the Committee to  only include Supporting Tables DS:1 to DS:3
relating to the Green, S&D and Blue Box exemptions (no such requests have thus far been made).
Least-developed country Members are only required to submit Supporting Tables DS:1 to DS:3 everytwo years.
35. The notifications of Member countries which do not have scheduled Total AMS reduction
commitments generally fall into two groups, namely, (1) those in which domestic support measures as
reported are fully covered by one or other of the exempt categories (with only Supporting Tables
DS:1 to 3, as appropriate, needing to be notified), and (2) those in which this is not the situation.Where there is support in excess of these exemptions, more than Supporting Tables DS:1 to 3 are
necessary in order to demonstrate, in line with Article 7.2 (b), that support in excess of the applicable
exempt categories is within the product-specific and non-product-specific de minimis  levels.  In such a
case the Member concerned would be expected to also provide Supporting Tables DS:5 to DS:7 as
appropriate, as well as Supporting Table DS:9 for non-product-specific support.  In a number of casessuch Members report their support under the exempt categories and accompany this information with
a statement that support in excess of these exempt categories is within the relevant de minimis  levels.G/AG/W/45
Page 7
36. Members which do not have scheduled DS commitments, the general practice recommended
by the Secretariat is that the covering page of the DS notifications include a statement along the lines
that the only domestic support measures are those listed in the attached DS Supporting Tables.
37. In terms of the Notification Requirements, where a Member does not apply any domestic
support measures a statement to this effect should be notified to the Committee (G/AG/2, page 11).
Suggestions Regarding Domestic Support Notifications:  G/AG/W/34 and G/AG/W/39
38. Suggestion 1:  that in all cases where de minimis  claims are made, total value of production
figures should also be provided (W/34, paragraph 4).
39. Comment:  as indicated above most Members invoking the Article 6.4 de minimis  provisions,
either in the calculation of their Total Current AMS (Members with AMS reduction commitments) or
in order to show that any support not covered by the Green, S&D and Blue Box exemptions is within
the relevant de minimis  levels (Members not having AMS reduction commitments), have been
providing the relevant value of production figures in their domestic support notifications.  Some other
concerned Members have provided these figures on request in the context of the Committee's review
process.
40. Suggestion 2:  that, with regard to measures notified as being exempt under the Green, S&D
or Blue Boxes, more information needs to be prov ided in Supporting Tables DS:1 to DS:3 concerning
the "measure type" (e.g. under which specific measure category of Annex 2 a measure is claimed to
be exempt) the "name of the measure" and concerning the "description of the measure with reference
to" the relevant criteria (Green Box – Annex 2) or the relevant Articles (S&D Box – Article 6.2:  Blue
Box – Article 6.5).  G/AG/W/39 suggests that relevant  Supporting Tables could be revised in order to
clarify these notification requirements (W/34, paragraph 5).
41. Comment:  the review of domestic support notifications constitutes a major part of the work
of the Committee, both in terms of the volume of notifications and questions raised by other
Members.  The provision of this basic information on exempt measures, which is already required
under Supporting Tables DS:1 to DS:3, would contribute significantly to the efficiency of the Review
Process.  The provision of more adequate information on measures claimed as exempt would befacilitated by a revision of the Supporting Tables as suggested or by general guidelines to supplement
the existing rather cryptic descriptions of what has to be notified under Columns 1 ("Measure Type")
and 3 ("Criteria") of Supporting Tables DS:1 to 3.
42. In this general context it may be noted that the requirements of Table DS:2, concerning new
or modified exempt support measures, are more explicit as regards the need to provide a detailed
description of the measure with reference to the criteria invoked as a basis for exemption.
43. Other:  in AG/W/34 and in the informal di scussion of suggestions on domestic support
notifications reference has been made to adjustments for the impact of excessive rates of inflation on
domestic support commitments.  The advice consistently provided to delegations has been that, for the
purposes of the Review Process and Article 18.4 of the Agreement, the relevant DS Tables should be
submitted concurrently on both an unadjusted and an inflation-adjusted basis.
C. EXPORT SUBSIDY NOTIFICATIONS
44. The basic annual requirement for Members with scheduled export subsidy reduction
commitments is to provide a "full picture" notification under which information is provided via
Table ES:1 on subsidized exports (outlays and quantities), the quantity of food aid and the
corresponding annual commitment levels (outlays and quantities) and, via Table ES:2, on the totalG/AG/W/45
Page 8
quantity of exports of the products subject to reduction commitments on a comparable basis to that
provided in Table ES:1.  (Table ES:3 also requires  information to be submitted on the total volume of
food aid in any year but this requirement concerns all food aid donor Members, including those
without scheduled reduction commitments for the products concerned, and all donated products.)
45. In terms of G/AG/2 the requirement to submit such comprehensive notifications depends
solely on whether the Member concerned has export subsidy commitment levels shown in Part IV of
its Schedule, i.e., not on whether the export of individual products subject to reduction commitments
were or were not subsidized in the year in questi on (G/AG/2, page 24, paragraph (ii)).  In other words
the information required to be notified should be provided in respect of each product or group of
products described or specified in Part IV of the Member's Schedule, as indicated in the relevant
columns of Table ES:1, as well as for any "incorporated products" reduction commitment.
46. Members which do not have scheduled reduction commitments are required annually to
confirm that no export subsidies exist.  Developing country Members using exempt export subsidies
under Article 9.4 of the Agreement (certain marketing-cost-reduction and transportation subsidies),
during the implementation period, are required to notify in terms of Supporting Table ES:1.
Suggestions Regarding Export Subsidy Notifications:  G/AG/W/37
47. Suggestion 1:  that it be made clear that Members with reduction commitments are required to
complete TableES:1 (and Table ES:2) for all scheduled products, including products for which no
export subsidies were granted during the reporting period (W/37, paragraph 3).
48. Comment:  in practice most Members with reduction commitments provide notifications
which are comprehensive as regards the products listed in their Schedules.  Since it is important that
Tables ES:1 and ES:2 notifications should be comprehensive, from the point of view of both
transparency and anti-circumvention, the suggested clarification would be appropriate.
49. Suggestion 2:  that, where an individual reduction commitment relates to a group of products,
it may be useful if the tariff lines that actually benefitted from export subsidies and, if possible, the
volume and value of export subsidies involved were identified in notifications (W/37, paragraph 4).
50. Comment:  any requirement along these lines would significantly increase the volume of
information to be notified to the Committee and could very well overload the review process.
51. Suggestion 3:  that, where total exports as reported in Table ES:2 exceed the relevant annual
commitment level, a simple statement be included in Table ES:2 to the effect that exports in excess of
the commitment level have not benefitted from Article 9.1 or other export subsidies (W/37,
paragraph 5).
52. Comment:  the possibility for raising such matters, where necessary, under Article 18.6 of the
Agreement would seem to be a relevant consideration in this regard.
53. Suggestion 4:  that Members whose export subsidy outlay commitments are expressed in
currencies other than their national currencies, shou ld notify the source and basis for the calculation of
the exchange rates (W/37, paragraph 6).
54. Comment:  while the question of exchange rates/currency conversion for the purpose of
reporting budgetary outlays has not so far presented itself as a significant issue in the Committee's
review process, the suggestion is one that might usefully be explored.  Of the 25 Members with export
subsidy reduction commitments, 10 have expressed their budgetary outlay commitments in another
currency.G/AG/W/45
Page 9
55. Suggestion 5:  that the same reporting period (calendar fiscal or marketing years) should be
used within and across all ES tables (W/37, paragraph 7).
56. Comment:  not only should reporting periods be consistent inter se  but also in relation to the
annual bases for implementation as specified in Schedules.  As noted above, paragraph (iii) at page 24
of G/AG/2 requires that the Table ES:2 data on "total exports" shall be on a basis comparable to thatprovided in Table ES:1.
57. Suggestion 6:  that export subsidy notifications should be submitted to the Committee as and
when they become due in relation to the end of the implementation year for the particular products
(W/37, paragraph 8).
58. Comment:  this suggestion is consistent with G/AG/2 but the practice which developed from
the outset has generally been to submit all inclusive annual ES:1 notifications, rather than submitting
separate annual notifications for individual marketing years.
59. Suggestion 7:  that there should be consistency in the measurement units used for each
product within and across all ES tables (W/37, paragraph 9).
60. Comment:  this is not specified in the notification requirements but should if necessary be
confirmed.
61. Suggestion 8:  regarding the reporting of actual subsidized exports as opposed to reporting on
the basis of approvals or awards and a final notification, within an appropriate period of time, using
data on actual subsidized exports (W/37, paragraph 10).
62. Comment:  the relevant columns in Table ES:1, Columns 3 and 4, refer to "subsidized
exports".  This issue has also been the subject of discussion in the Committee (see for example,
G/AG/R/2, paragraphs 16 to 18).
General 
63. Members may also wish to take account of th e following matters in their further informal
discussions on this general subject.
64. First of all there has to be a trade-off between, on the one hand, the amount of information
and data that Members should be required to provide to the Committee for the purposes of the Review
Process under Article 18 of the Agreement and, on the other hand, the efficiency of the Review
Process itself.  The efficiency of the Committee's Review Process will also be important when the
stage is reached, in the near future, when delegations and the Secretariat will have to cope with the
parallel demands of the further negotiations on agriculture to be conducted in an appropriate group
and the on-going process of overviewing/revi ewing the implementation of the Uruguay Round
commitments.  From this perspective it could be argued that there is a case for slimming down thereview process in order to focus on the essentials and ensure an optimum use of resources both in
Geneva and in capitals.
65. Secondly, in considering the various suggestions  currently under informal discussion in the
Committee, it is necessary to be mindful of the fact that there are other procedures available for
obtaining additional information where necessary, such as the procedures for written questions andreplies under the Committee's Working Procedures (G/AG/1), counter-notification under Article 18.7,
the provisions for consultation under Article 5.7, as well as the generally available consultation
procedures under Article 19 of the Agreement.G/AG/W/45
Page 10
66. Thirdly, since the Notification Requirements were adopted by the Committee in 1995 various
improvements or modifications have been introduced on an ad hoc basis and this sort of pragmatic
approach should continue to guide further development of the notification requirements and their
practical application.
67. Against this general background it could well be that, rather than attempting to revise aspects
of the Notification Requirements, the approach to be followed should be to develop some further
guidance to facilitate the notification and review process, with the emphasis more but not necessarily
only on improving the practical application of the existing requirements.  From this perspective some
of the suggestions in respect of which draft guid elines might initially be prepared for informal
consideration by the Committee could include such matters as, for example:
Market Access Notifications
(i) general consistency between tariff quota commitments as specified in Members'
Schedules and the information and data (including such things as, reporting periods,
product coverage and units of weight/volume, etc.) notified under Tables MA:1 and
MA:2;
(ii) the provision of MA:1 and MA:2 notifications in respect of scheduled tariff quota
commitments where the quantitative elemen t thereof is not currently being applied;
(iii) indicating, for transparency purposes, the proportion of the current volume of imports
accounted for by in-quota imports in MA:3 in connection with the application of
Article 5.2;
Domestic Support Notifications
(i) provision of relevant production values and calculations for de minimis purposes;
(ii) improved description of exempt measures in relation to relevant criteria;
(iii) concurrent notification of unadjusted and inflation-adjusted data in the context of
Article 18.4;
Export Subsidies Notifications
(i) need for general consistency between reduction commitments as specified in
Schedules and the information and data notified under Tables ES:1 and ES:2,
including reporting zero-use of export subsidies in respect of scheduled products;
(ii) provision of more timely ES:1 and ES:2 notifications for individual commitments in
relation to applicable implementation years.
__________