MOREPRESS RELEASE
PRESS/TPRB/175
22 October 2001
(01-5184)
TRADE POLICY REVIEW BODY
REVIEW OF THE CZECH REPUBLIC
TPRB'S EVALUATION
The Trade Policy Review Body of the World Trade Organization (WTO) concluded its
second review of the Czech Republic on 17 and 19 October 2001. The text of the Chairperson's
concluding remarks is attached as a summary of the salient points which emerged during thediscussion.
The review enables the TPRB to conduct a collec tive examination of the full range of trade
policies and practices of each WTO member countries at regular periodic intervals to monitor
significant trends and developments which may have an impact on the global trading system.
The review is based on two reports which are prepared respectively by the WTO Secretariat
and the government under review and which cover all aspects of the country's trade policies, including
its domestic laws and regulations, the institutional framework, bilateral, regional and other
preferential agreements, the wider economic needs and the external environment. A record of the
discussion and the Chairperson's summing-up together with these two reports will be published in due
course at the complete trade policy review of the Czech Republic and will be available from the WTOSecretariat, Centre William Rappard, 154 rue de Lausanne, 1211 Geneva 21.PRESS/TPRB/175
Page 2
MORESince December 1989, the following reports have been completed: Argentina (1992 and 1999),
Australia (1989, 1994 and 1998), Austria (1992), Ba hrain (2000) Bangladesh (1992 and 2000), Benin
(1997), Bolivia (1993 and 1999), Botswana (1998), Brazil (1992, 1996 and 2000), Brunei Darussalam
(2001), Burkina Faso (1998), Cameroon (1995 and 2001), Canada (1990, 1992, 1994, 1996, 1998 and
2000), Chile (1991 and 1997), Colombia (1990 and 1996), Costa Rica (1995 and 2001), Côte d’Ivoire
(1995), Cyprus (1997), the Czech Republic (1996 and 2001), the Dominican Republic (1996), Egypt
(1992 and 1999), El Salvador (1996), the Eu ropean Communities (1991, 1993, 1995, 1997 and 2000),
Fiji (1997), Finland (1992), Gabon (2001), Ghana (1992 and 2001), Guinea (1999), Hong Kong
(1990, 1994 and 1998), Hungary (1991 and 1998), Iceland (1994 and 2000), India (1993 and 1998),
Indonesia (1991, 1994 and 1998), Israel (1994 and 1999), Jamaica (1998), Japan (1990, 1992,
1995,1998 and 2000), Kenya (1993 and 2000), Korea, Rep. of (1992, 1996 and 2000), Lesotho
(1998), Macao (1994 and 2001), Madagascar (2001), Malaysia (1993 and 1997), Mali (1998),
Mauritius (1995), Mexico (1993 and 1997), Morocco (1989 and 1996), Mozambique (2001), NewZealand (1990 and 1996), Namibia (1998), Nicaragua (1999), Nigeria (1991 and 1998), Norway
(1991, 1996 and 2000), OECS (2001), Pakistan (1995), Papua New Guinea (1999), Paraguay (1997),
Peru (1994 and 2000), the Philippines (1993 and 1999), Poland (1993 and 2000), Romania (1992 and
1999), Senegal (1994), Singapore (1992, 1996 and 2000), Slovak Republic (1995), the Solomon
Islands (1998), South Africa (1993 and 1998), Sri Lanka (1995), Swaziland (1998), Sweden (1990
and 1994), Switzerland (1991, 1996 and 2000 (jointly with Liechtenstein)), Tanzania (2000), Thailand
(1991, 1995 and 1999), Togo (1999), Trinidad and T obago (1998), Tunisia (1994), Turkey (1994 and
1998), the United States (1989, 1992, 1994, 1996, 1999 and 2001), Uganda (1995), Uruguay (1992
and 1998), Venezuela (1996), Zambia (1996) and Zimbabwe (1994).PRESS/TPRB/175
Page 3
MORETRADE POLICY REVIEW BODY
REVIEW OF THE CZECH REPUBLIC
CONCLUDING REMARKS OF THE CHAIRPERSON
This Review, the second of the Czech Republic's trade policies and practices, has been a real
success.  Through an open and informative discussion with the Czech delegation, we have all been
able to get a better understanding of the trade and trade-related policies and practices in place, and a
fuller appreciation of their impact on the multilateral trading system.  We have had a very productive
dialogue on recent economic reform in the Czech Republic, and the role that trade liberalization
played in them.  The Czech economy was viewed by most Members as now being a functioning
market economy.  Members were able to obtain useful information about recent and planned changesin trade measures, in particular with regard to the ongoing negotiations for accession to the European
Union.
Members congratulated the Czech Government for its continued support of, and active rôle in,
the WTO.  The Czech Republic has undertaken important commitments in the multilateral system,and has expanded on them since the previous Review of its trade policies in 1996.  Members
appreciated the Czech Republic's overall commitment to liberal trade and investment policies.  Many
Members also welcomed the Czech support for launching an expanded negotiating agenda at the 4
th
Ministerial Conference.
All delegations welcomed the Czech economic recovery, assisted by structural change
encompassing domestic reform and trade and investment liberalization.  Some Members noted that
the fiscal situation was fragile and that a further deterioration could pose a threat to macroeconomic
stability.  Members appreciated the efforts made by  the Czech Republic in adapting its institutional
and economic environment to the requirements of a modern market-oriented economy.  Membersacknowledged the impressive results of the Czech transition process, including the ongoing
privatization of state-owned enterprises, which has played a significant rôle in attracting foreign
investment.  Members noted the importance that the authorities placed on investment promotion, and
on related plans to move forward on restructuring and privatization.
Many Members noted that preparations for EU accession provided a strong anchor to the
reform process.  In this sense, they commented fa vourably on the Czech's priority target of accession
to the EU which would create the opportunity for further reform as the Czech Republic increasingly
harmonized its policies with EU requirements.  Some Members raised concern as to the real impact on
trade opportunities for non-EU countries, in particular for agricultural goods, resulting from
accession.  The relatively large number of preferential trade agreements to which the Czech Republic
is party was noted as was the fact that this resulted in a small share of its trade being conducted on anMFN basis.  Members appreciated the close Czech economic and trade relations with the Slovak
Republic, while recognizing that this did not imply common external positions in all areas.  Members
also took note of the Czech determination that its regional trade objectives be consistent with its
participation in, and ambitions for, the multilateral trading system.
Members appreciated that the Czech tariff regime was transparent and predictable, and that
average rates were relatively low.  Nevertheless, some Members noted that Czech preferential rates
were well below MFN levels.  Members invited the Czech Republic to reduce the gap between
preferential and MFN tariffs.  They also commented on the wide tariff disparities, including tariff
peaks, tariff escalation, and the use of concessions and exemptions.  The advantages of simplifyingPRESS/TPRB/175
Page 4
the tariff structure by reducing the high number of different MFN and preferential rates was
highlighted.  Members welcomed the fact that only relatively few non-tariff barriers existed.
On sectoral policies, Members focused mainly on agriculture and services.  Some noted that
the average tariff on agriculture was relatively high compared with that on non-agricultural goods.
Clarification was sought on the existing system of assistance to the agriculture sector.  A number of
Members asked about the envisaged evolution of agricultural policies, in particular given the
prospects for accession to the EU.  Members welcomed the fact that competition in the banking sector
had increased in recent years, and referred to measures to improve the efficiency of the banking
sector.  They sought information on plans for furt her privatization in the telecommunication sector.
Members also sought additional details in a number of specific areas, including:
• customs procedures;
• non-automatic import licensing;
• technical regulations and standards, and conformity testing procedures;
• contingency measures;
• government procurement;
• export policy and assistance;
• free trade zones;
• protection of intellectual property rights, and enforcement;
• investment regime and incentives;
• the overall system of state aid, including specific aid to economically-depressed regions;
• public enterprise restructuring and further privatization plans;
• bankruptcy legislation and practice;
• commercial courts system, and transparency of the legal framework;  and
• technical assistance experience in the context of transition economies.
The Czech delegation gave written and oral replies to questions posed, and undertook to send
more detailed replies to some of them.  The replies helped clarify and bring a better understanding ofthe Czech trade and trade policy measures currently in force.
In conclusion, I think we can all congratulate the Czech Republic for its continuing efforts to
liberalize its economy and its further integration into the multilateral system, something which is
already well underway.  Members were very appreciative of the Czech Republic's successfuleconomic transformation, and for the success in overcoming the 1997-99 recession.  Current policies
have resulted in a transparent, predictable, and open trade regime, which has proven to be an
important factor behind the increase in trade and investment, and has sustained GDP growth.
Members encouraged the Czech Republic to continue down this path.  Members also encouraged the
Czech Republic to preserve its active interest in the multilateral trading system and to consolidate inthe multilateral framework its regional liberalization measures.  This would benefit not only the Czech
long-term economic interest but also the overall multilateral trading system.  The Czech Republic,
being a relatively small country dependent on export markets, has much to gain from a full
participation in the multilateral trading system.
END