RESTRICTED  WORLD TRADE  
ORGANIZATION  WT/ACC/SPEC/RUS/20/Rev.1 
19 November 2001 
 (01-5870) 
Working Party on the 
Accession of the Russian Federation Original:   English 
 
 
 
ACCESSION OF THE RUSSIAN FEDERATION 
Overview of the Current Trade Polic y Regime of the Russian Federation  
Revision  
BACKGROUND  
1. The Government of the Russian Federation a pplied for accession to the General Agreement on 
Tariffs and Trade (GATT 1947) in June 1993.  At  its meeting on 8 July 1993, the GATT Council of 
Representatives established a Working Party to exam ine the application of the Government of the 
Russian Federation to accede to the General Agre ement under Article XXXIII.  In pursuance of the 
Ministerial Decision of 14 April 1994 on Acceptan ce and Accession to the Marrakesh Agreement 
Establishing the World Trade Organization (WTO) and to the decision of 31 May 1994 of the 
Preparatory Committee for the WTO, the Working Part y examined the application of the Government 
of the Russian Federation for membership in the WTO.  Following the entry into force of the WTO 
Agreement on 1 January 1995, and in pursuance of the decision adopted by the WTO General Council 
on 31 January 1995, the GATT 1947 Working Party w as transformed into a WTO Accession Working 
Party under Article XII of the Marrakesh Agreem ent Establishing the WTO. The Working Party met 
on 17-19 July 1995, 4-6 December 1995, 30-31 May 1996, 15 October 1996, 15 April 1997, 
22-23 July 1997, 9-11 December 1997, 29 July 1998, 16-17 December 1998, and 25 May 2000 under 
the Chairmanship of H.E. Mr. W. Rossier (Switzerland) and on 18 December 2000 and 26-27 June 2001 under the Chairmanship of H.E. Mr. K. Bryn (Norway). 
Documentation  
2. The Russian Federation presented to the Workin g Party Members a Memorandum on the Foreign 
Trade Regime of the Russian Federation (L/7410) , responded to the questions submitted by Members 
on the foreign trade regime of the Russian Federa tion, together with the replies thereto (see in 
particular WT/ACC/RUS/2 and Corr.1, WT/ACC/RUS/4, WT/ACC/RUS/9 and Corr.1, WT/ACC/RUS/13, WT/ACC/RUS/17 and Corr.1 WT/ACC/RUS/23, WT/ACC/RUS/25, 
WT/ACC/RUS/30, WT/ACC/RUS/38) and provide d other information listed in document WT/ACC/SPEC/RUS/20/Rev.1 
Page 2  
 
 WT/ACC/RUS/11/Rev.11 (on the legislative texts and other documentation see Reference paper 1
1). 
Russian Federation had been an observer to the GATT 1947 since January 1992 when Russia 
continued the former USSR observer status and,  in this capacity, had witnessed the successful 
conclusion of the Uruguay Round and fo llowed its implementation.  Since its request for accession to 
the WTO and pursuant to the reform of its trad e regime, the Russian Federation had progressively 
adopted laws and regulations cons istent with the WTO multilateral ru les and disciplines. As a result 
of the Government’s concerted efforts to encourag e free market and entrepreneurial activity and to 
facilitate foreign investment, the economy of th e Russian Federation had been heading towards 
greater economic stabilization and growth.  The Govern ment also made substantial efforts to combat 
inflation and control the budgetary situation of the country.  Membership in the World Trade Organization was therefore one important missing aspect in the Russian Federation’s trade policy. 
WTO membership was one of the priorities of th e Governmental program of economic reforms. 
ECONOMIC POLICIES  
Monetary and Fiscal Policy  
3. Current economic policies were aimed at achieving fiscal and monetary stability in the country.  
The budget deficit had been reduced and finally eliminated through expenditures restraint and 
increased revenues.  On the revenue side, a renewe d tax base system accompanied by more efficient 
tax collection instruments, including the introductio n of a new Tax Code Part One of 31 July 1998 
No. 146-FZ (as amended on 30 March, 9 July 1999,  2 January, 5 August 2000, 24 March 2001) and 
Part Two of 5 August 2000 No. 117-FZ (as amende d on 29 December 2000, 30 May, 6, 7, 8 August 
2001) which puts Russia’s taxation system in co mpliance with relevant WTO requirements. 
4. The current Russian Federation’s monetary polic y was aimed at reaching monetary and price 
stability through measures to reduce consecutively th e inflation and thus to create conditions for 
sustainable economic growth. This objective was basically being achieved by controlling money 
supply, maintaining floating exchange rate of national currency, consolidating gold and foreign 
exchange reserve assets. All these actions were accompanied by consecutive measures on 
liberalization of foreign exchange regulation. The major instruments of monetary policy, which the 
Central Bank of Russia (CBR) was in charge of, were the following – refinancing of commercial 
banks, operations on open market, depo sitory operations, mandatory reserve requirements and interest 
rates policy. On a methodology side, this  policy was based on a combination of two  internationally 
spread principles: inflationary targeting and mone y supply targeting (i.e. money mass aggregate M2). 
                                                     
 
1 Reference Papers 1 to 14 are available in document WT/ACC/SPEC/RUS/21/Rev.1.  WT/ACC/SPEC/RUS/20/Rev.1 
 Page 3 
 
 
 Foreign exchange and payments system 
5. The Russian Federation, as a member of the In ternational Monetary Fund since 1992, followed 
internationally accepted monetary rules.  The nati onal currency - the Rouble (equal to 100 Kopeks) - 
was convertible to foreign currencies on the basi s of current market rates based on supply and 
demand. According to the commitments undertaken by the Russian Federation under Article VIII of 
the Articles of Agreement of the International Mo netary Fund current payments were carried out 
freely, including in particular outward transf ers of returns and other proceeds from foreign 
investments. 
6. There were no subsidies on purchases and sales of  foreign exchange. The tax for purchase of 
foreign currency in cash amounted to 1 per cent . As to mandatory resale by Russian exporters of a 
part of their export earnings on the internal exch ange market the relative ceiling has been reduced 
from 75 per cent to 50 per cent. There were no restrictions for residents to buy foreign currencies on 
the internal exchange market to meet their pa yment commitments on current transactions. Foreign 
currencies to pay capital transactions could also be  freely obtained on this market upon the condition 
to meet the requirement of the CBR. This requireme nt, in case of prepayment to be transferred under 
contracts for imports, provided for the necessity for resident to put on a deposit in an authorized bank 
an amount in Roubles equal to 100 per cent of the sum used for buying foreign currency for the purpose of prepayment. This requirement represente d some kind of pledge established as a means to 
avoid illicit capital flight. The Russian Federation made  substantial payments to service its external 
debt and needed adequate currency control measures  to control unauthorised outflow of capital. The 
requirement was not valid for purchases by residents of foreign currencies to pay for imports already delivered to the territory of the country. Russian physical persons had the right to open freely banking 
accounts in foreign currencies in the OECD and FATF countries for non-commercial use. 
7. Within the framework of its policies to combat illegal transfer of capital and to maintain the 
integrity of financial system of the country th e Russian Federation implemented non-discriminatory 
measures of currency regulation and currency control which did not constitute restriction for trade in 
goods and services. Procedures connected with implementation of these measures were not designed as means of avoiding the Russian Federation’s future commitments under the WTO Agreements. 
These measures were in conformity with Russia's commitments under Articles of Agreement of the 
IMF. 
8. Capital transactions were subject to the CBR’ s regulative procedures. These transactions could 
require permissions of the CBR, or notifications to  the CBR or could be cond ucted freely. Permissions 
and notifications did not constitute unnecess ary barriers to trade. The procedures were  transparent WT/ACC/SPEC/RUS/20/Rev.1 
Page 4  
 
 being established by publicly available normativ e acts of the CBR. The number of capital operations 
requiring the CBR’s permissions was constantly dec lining in favour of notification procedures and 
free execution. For example, direct and portfolio foreign investments through acquisition of equity 
participation in charter capitals of Russian juri dical persons-residents (non credit institutions) on a 
primary market and foreign investments for joint activity with these residents were not restricted. 
9. Russian juridical persons - residents had the ri ght to acquire and reimburse freely credits and 
loans in foreign currencies attracted from non-residents for the period of time exceeding 180 days 
subject to simple notification to the CBR. Further liberalization of transfers in foreign currencies by 
residents abroad would include payments for immovable property and purchases and sales of commercial securities nominated in foreign curre ncies through authorized banks (decision was 
awaiting). 
10. Export proceeds were subject to repatriation re quirements. The Federal Law N 72 of 31 May 2001 
”On changes and amendments to the Law of the  “On currency regulation and currency control” 
simplified requirements in question, particularly, by prolonging delays for a number of capital 
transactions to be carried out freely without permi ssions of the CBR. In accordance with this Law 
Russian residents could defer up to three years period settlements for some exported machinery and 
equipment and up to five years for payments relate d to construction and sub- contracting works carried 
out abroad as well as for payments connected with  insurance and reinsurance of these projects. 
11. The monetary policy, foreign exchange and payments system were issues of great attention in 
Russia-IMF relationship. Progress made by Russia in  elaboration and implementation of clear and 
sound policies in these fields for the last decade was to a great extent reached due to the consultative 
mechanism, joint programs and direct support by th e IMF. Measures in these fields were coordinated 
with the IMF, including in particular those cove red by the provisions of Article XV of GATT 1994 
and of Articles VI and XI of GATS. 
Investment Regime   
12. Although the investment policy, per se , was not covered by WTO actual provisions, Russia 
provided the information in the following paragra phs, given the importance of this policy in the 
shaping of the country’s overall economic policy. 
13. The basic texts relating to the activities of foreig n investors were set forth in the Constitution of 
the Russian Federation adopted on 12 December 1993, the Civil Code Part One 30 November 1994 
No. 51-FZ  (as amended on 20 February, 12 August 1996, 8 July 1999, 16 April, 15 May 2001)   and  WT/ACC/SPEC/RUS/20/Rev.1 
 Page 5 
 
 
 Part Two of 26 January 1996 No. 14-FZ (as amended on,  12 August 1996, 24 October 1997, 
17 December 1999), and a number of other legisla tive acts such as the Federal Law “On Foreign 
Investment in the Russian Federation” No. 160-FZ of 9 July 1999, the Federal Law “On Investment 
Activity in the Russian Federation in the form of  capital investment” No. 39-FZ of 25 February 1999 
(as amended on 2 January 2000), the Law of th e Russian Federation “On currency control and 
currency regulation” of  9 October 1992 № 3615-1 (as amended on 29 December 1998, 5 July 1999 
and 8 August 2001)   and the Federal Law “On Production Sharing Agreement” of  30 December 1997 
No. 225-FZ (as amended on 7 January 1999, 18 June 2001). The adoption of the Land Code of the 
Russian Federation, a number of legislative acts on "debureaucratization" (Federal Law “On 
Licensing of Specific Types of Activity” No.128-FZ of 8 August 2001, Federal Law “On the Protection of Legal Entities’ and Individual Entrepre neurs’ Rights in the Case of Exercise of State 
Control (Supervision)” No.134-FZ of 8 Augus t 2001), Tax Code of the Russian Federation 
significantly contributed to the formation of favourab le investment climate, facilitation of activity of 
Russian and foreign companies on the Russian market.  
14. The Government of the Russian Federation had en trusted the Ministry of  Economic Development 
and Trade with a wide range of responsibilities in the field of foreign investments, such as co-
ordination of the corresponding activities of federa l and regional bodies, or ganisation of tenders, 
concession agreements, production sharing agreemen ts and bilateral investment agreements. 
15. The current policy of the Government provided for encouragement of the investments in the 
Russian Federation. The investment policy of Russia was directed at creation of conditions promoting 
expansion of domestic and fo reign investments, and also formation of transparent and stable rules of 
economic activity.   The Russian legislative acts mentioned above provided proper guaranties for 
protection of foreign investors’ rights and interest s and advantageous conditions for foreign investors 
and enterprises with foreign investments within na tional investment legislation and in conjunction 
with international treaties signed by the Russian Federation. According to the Federal Law  “On 
Foreign Investment in the Russian Federation” the foreign investors in the Russian Federation were 
treated no less favourably than Russian ones with the exceptions provided by the federal legislation.  
State ownership and privatization  
16. Although privatization policy per se  was not covered by WTO actua l provisions, Russia believed 
that for the purpose of transparency it could be inte resting to the members of the Working Party to get 
a more close look on this important part of Ru ssia’s internal economic policy (on the information 
about privatization processes in the Russian Fede ration see Reference paper 2 of the document 
WT/ACC/SPEC/RUS/21/REV/1). WT/ACC/SPEC/RUS/20/Rev.1 
Page 6  
 
 Pricing Policies 
17. The main goal of the economic policy pursued by th e authorities was to introduce the principle of 
free market price formation based on supply and demand. Therefore, prices in the vast majority of 
sectors in the Russian economy were determined fr eely by market forces thus balancing between 
supply and demand.  
18. Pricing in sectors where natural monopolies existed (namely in the sector of natural gas; electric 
and thermal energy; pumping, transhipment and stor age of oil, railway transportation, services of 
transport terminals, sea and river ports, airports, services of generally accessible electric and postal communication services); and products purchased exclus ively or mainly by the State such as defence 
products were based on production costs and estab lished in a way which excluded abuse by the 
producer/supplier of its monopoly position. The procedure for and principles of fixing prices for 
goods and services regulated by the State differed depending on the type of goods or services: for 
some a minimum price level was fixed (e.g. for alcoholic beverages above  28 proof) and a maximum 
price level for others (e.g. in railway transportation). In addition to that, in respect of air, road and 
river transport services sectors involving competing groups of carriers, the carriers themselves had the 
right to set their prices within established profit margins. 
19. Price and tariff fixing for products and services of  natural monopolies was by reference to: cost-
effectiveness of their production including the ex penses of production (marketing) of products and 
services; taxes and other payments; the cost of fi xed production assets; the requirement of investment 
for reproduction purposes, depreciation charges; estim ated profits; remoteness of different consumer 
groups to the production site of products and services; adequacy of the quality of the products and 
services produced and marketed to the consumer demand.  
20. Regional governments regulated prices for produc ts and services classified as local natural 
monopolies. These included gas and solid fuel sold to  the population, transportation of passengers and 
luggage by all means of public transport in m unicipal transport networks, communal services to 
households, water supply and sewerage services. At  the regional government level, prices for 
electrical energy provided by regional electrical power-plants were regulated, as well as prices for all means of commuter passenger transportation (excep t railways), communal services for the population 
(including rent), and public utilities. Fixed prices were established for such products and services. 
Price and tariff decisions taken by federal executive bodies authorized to regulate the activity of natural monopolies were obligatory for the regiona l executive bodies and local executive authorities. 
State regulation of prices for goods and services pr ovided by “local natural monopolies” was carried  WT/ACC/SPEC/RUS/20/Rev.1 
 Page 7 
 
 
 out by regional executive bodies independently, to the extent provided by the current legislation 
powers taking into account recommended prices approved by the federal executive bodies. 
21. Contract prices for goods and services subject to st ate price regulation delivered on the territory of 
the Russian Federation were fixed by enterprises inde pendently, subject to the state of the market and 
the current regulatory legislation regardless of whet her they were sold to  domestic or  foreign 
purchaser. Contract prices for exports of goods and services subject to state price regulation from the 
territory of the Russian Federation were fixed by enterprises independently, depending on market 
conditions. 
22. Order No. 12/1 of the Federal Energy Commis sion of 24 March 1999 “On granting a 50 percent 
reduction of prices of gas to enterprises which produ ce chemical fertilizers, chemical protections for 
plants, and raw materials for production thereof, in 1999” was cancelled in 1999 and from then on 
there were no other legal provisions that provided for similar price reductions for industries. Since 1 
August 2001 export and import cargoes to / from Russian  ports were transported through the territory 
of Russian Federation according to domestic tariffs  and since 1 March 2002 it was planned to apply 
this approach to transportation of foreign cargoes through all frontier points. 
23. Decree of the President of the Russian Federation “On measures to streamline the state regulation 
of prices (tariffs)” of 28 February 1995 No. 221 ( as amended on 8 July 1995) and Resolution of the 
Government of the Russian Federation “On measur es to streamline the state regulation of prices 
(tariffs)” of 7 March 1995 No. 239 (as amended on 8 February, 15 April, 31 July 1996, 30 June 1997, 
30 July, 28 December 1998, 6 February, 7 May,  16 June, 20 August 2001), established the main 
principles of the state regulation of prices (tariffs) on the domestic market of the Russian Federation, carried out by the Government of the Russian Federa tion, federal authorities and sub-federal bodies of 
executive power for the concrete types of goods a nd services (see also Reference paper 3). Regulatory 
legal acts issued by federal executive bodies con cerning state regulation of prices for goods and 
services were subject to mandatory official publication. All decisions by the Government of the 
Russian Federation concerning state regulation of prices and tariffs, including those for services of natural monopolies, were subject to pu blication in “Rossiiskaya Gazeta”. 
Competition Policy  
24. The Government attached great importance to competition policy. Noting that it was not fully 
covered by current WTO provisions, the Russian Fe deration followed closely the work of the WTO 
Working Group on the interaction between trad e and competition policy.  The basic goal of 
competition policy in the Russia Federation was to  promote and maintain fair competition of WT/ACC/SPEC/RUS/20/Rev.1 
Page 8  
 
 economic operators in markets, wherever this wa s viable.  Anti-competitive market structure and 
unfair business practices that impeded competition c ould be addressed through the application of the 
Anti-monopoly legislation.  
25. Antimonopoly legislation had been adopted, in cluding the Federal Law “On Competition and 
Restriction of Monopoly Activity on Commodity Markets” No. 948-1 of 22 March 1991 (as amended 
on 24 June 1992, 25 May 1995 and 2 January 2000) , the Federal Law  “On Making Amendments and 
Supplements to the Federal Law “On Consumers Ri ghts Protection” and the Code of the RSFSR On 
Administrative Offences” No 2-FZ of 9 January  1996 (as amended on 17 December 1999) and the 
Federal Law “On Protection of Competition in the Financial Services Market” No 117-FZ of 
23 June  1999. 
26. The Russian legislation in force contained, theref ore, all the basic elements of state supervision 
and control over agreements (Con certed Actions) of economic opera tors restricting competition, 
abuse of dominant position on the market by econom ic operators, economic concentration.  Another 
important element of the Russian anti-monopoly le gislation was preventing, limiting and suppressing 
of unfair competition. 
27. According to Article 3.1. of the Law of the Russian Federation “ On Competition and Limitation 
of Monopolies in Commodity Markets” the role of the Ministry of Antimonopoly Policy of the Russian Federation (MAP) was to assist the devel opment of commodity markets and competition, and 
prevent, restrain and prosecute forma tion of monopolies and unfair competition. 
28. The main functions of that Ministry included: introducing legislative initiatives in the field of 
anti-monopoly activity, developing and executing measures on demonopolization of production and 
distribution, monitoring compliance with an ti-monopoly requirements in the establishment, 
reorganization and liquidation of economic enterpris es. The Ministry conducted a preliminary review 
and control of the establishment and mergers, af filiation of commercial or ganizations or their 
association, transaction of acquisition of rights, shares in the capital of commercial organization, 
receiving by a person (group of persons) into ow nership of fixed assets and intangible assets of 
another person. The function menti oned above is realized through pr ior approval or notification of 
antimonopoly organs. 
29. MAP regulated the securities market and banking an d insurance services markets subject to the 
Federal Law “On Protection of Competition in the Financial Services Market” in conjunction with 
other federal authorities of executive power.   WT/ACC/SPEC/RUS/20/Rev.1 
 Page 9 
 
 
 30. In 2000, MAP identified 7,570 violations of the provisions of the Federal Law of the Russian 
Federation “ On Competition and Limitation of Mo nopolies in Commodity Markets”. 6,510 lawsuits 
were filed in prosecution of the violations identifie d. Over 2,700 orders to remove the violation were 
given. 
31. The bigger part of the violations identified dea lt with abuse of dominant position in the market 
place by business corporations (11 per cent of all la wsuits filed). Abuse of dominant position in the 
marketplace by business corporations were identif ied mainly in companies in natural monopolies : 
heat and power engineering (35 per cent of total violations), in communications (15 per cent), in 
transport (10-mostly in railway tran sport), and in housing and utilities.  
32. Activities of MAP and its territorial divisions  were reported in the journal “Antimonopoly 
Ministry Newsletter”, on the web site (www.maprus .ru), and once a month through  press conferences 
or round-table discussion. In 2000, 243 press re leases were produced and sent to mass media. 
33. Pursuant to Article 71.g of the Constitution of the Russia Federation, competition policy did not 
fall within the jurisdiction of regional authorities. 
FRAMEWORK FOR MAKING AND ENFORCING POLICIES Branches of State Power, Federal Structure and Delimitation of Jurisdiction between Federal 
and Sub-Federal Authorities 
34. In accordance with the Constitution, State power in the Russian Federation was exercised by the 
President of the Russian Federation, the Federal Assembly (the Council of the Federation and the 
State Duma), the Government of the Russian Federa tion, and the courts of the Russian Federation. 
35. The President of the Russian Federation was the Head of State.  He determined the guidelines of 
domestic and foreign policies of the State. Pending a r esolution of the matter by the appropriate court,  
the President had the right to suspend the opera tion of acts of the executive power bodies of the 
“subjects”
2 of the Russian Federation if they were not  in compliance with the Constitution of the 
Russian Federation, federal laws and interna tional commitments of the Russian Federation. 
36. The Federal Assembly (the Parliament of th e Russian Federation) was the representative and 
legislative authority of the Russian Federation.  It consists of two cham bers - the Council of the 
                                                      
2 Proceeding from Article 5 (1) of the Constitution of the Russian Federation, the term “subjects” of the 
Russian Federation includes republic s, regions, oblast, cities of federa l importance, autonomous regions and 
autonomous areas. Article 65 of the Constitution contained the exhaustive list of  “subjects” of the Russian 
Federation. WT/ACC/SPEC/RUS/20/Rev.1 
Page 10  
 
 Federation and the State Duma.  The Council of the Federation included two representatives from 
each subject of the Russian Federation: one from th e legislative and one from executive body of state 
power. Order of formation of the Council of the Fe deration is also determined by the Federal Law 
“On the Order of Formation of the Council of the Federation of the Federal Assembly of the Russian 
Federation” of 5 August 2000 No. 113-FZ.  The Stat e Duma consisted of 450 deputies elected for a 
term of four years.  Formation of the State Duma  was determined by the Federal Law “On Election of 
Deputies to the State Duma of the Russian fede ration” of 24 June 1999 No. 121-FZ (as amended on 
12 April, 10 July 2001). 
37. Both chambers were involved, inter alia, in th e adoption of the federal laws on federal budget, 
federal taxes and dues, financial, currency, credit, customs regulation and monetary issues, ratification 
and denunciation of internati onal treaties and agreements of the Russian Federation. 
38. Executive power in Russia was ex ercised by the Government of the Russian Federation. The 
Government, inter alia, ensured the implementation in the Russian Federation of a single trade, 
financial, credit and monetary policy, the implem entation of foreign policy, the implementation of 
measures required to ensure the rule of  law as well as establishing customs tariffs. 
39. The right of legislative initiative was vested with  the President of the Russian Federation, the 
Council of the Federation, the Members of the Coun cil of the Federation, the Deputies of the State 
Duma, the Government of the Russian Federation, and the legislative bodies of the subjects of the 
Russian Federation. The right of legislative initiativ e was also vested with the Constitutional Court of 
the Russian Federation, the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation, the Supreme Court of 
Arbitration of the Russian Federation in matters under their jurisdiction. 
40. The judicial system of the Russian Federation was instituted by the Constitution of the Russian 
Federation and Federal Constitutiona l Laws “On Judicial System of the Russian Federation” of 
31 December 1996 No. 1-FKZ, “On Constitutiona l Court of the Russian Federation” of 
21 February 1994 No. 1-FKZ (as am ended on 8 February 2001), “On Arbitration Courts in the 
Russian Federation” of 28 April 1995 No. 1-FKZ.   Judicial power was exercised by means of 
constitutional, civil, administrative and criminal court proceedings. Besides the rules of civil  
procedure in federal courts of  general jurisdiction established by the Civil Procedure Code of the 
RSFSR of 18 December 1965, the procedure for the se ttlement of disputes by  arbitration courts was 
stipulated by the Arbitration Procedure C ode of the Russian Federation of 5 May 1995 № 70-FZ. The 
rates of state fees for claims or other stat ements or complaints submitted to the courts  of general 
jurisdiction  or to arbitration courts were established in the Law  of the Russian Federation No 2005-1  WT/ACC/SPEC/RUS/20/Rev.1 
 Page 11 
 
 
 of 9 December 1991 “On State Fees”.   Justice in the Russian Federation was exercised by courts only. 
The judicial power was separated and acted indepe ndently of the legislative and executive powers. 
41. The Republics within the Russian Federation had their own constitutions and legislation.  The 
territories, regions, cities of federal importance, autonomous regions  and autonomous areas have their 
charters and legislation.  According to the Constitu tion of the Russian Federation, the legislation of 
the subjects of the Russian Federation should not cont radict the federal legislation adopted within the 
jurisdiction of the Russian Federation and the join t jurisdiction of the Russian Federation and its 
subjects . In case of contradiction between a federal la w and any other act issued in the Russian 
Federation within federal and join t jurisdiction of the Russian Fede ration and its subjects the federal 
law should be applied.   
42. The Federal law No 184-FZ of 6 October 1999 “On th e general principles of the organisation of 
the legislative (representative) and executive organs  of state power of the subjects of the Russian 
Federation” (as amended of 29 July  2000, 8 February 2001) established the mechanism of ensuring 
the conformity of the constitutions, laws and other legal acts of the subjects of the Russian Federation 
to the Constitution of the Russian Federation and fede ral laws. The President had the right to address  
legislative bodies of state power of the subject of the Russian  Federation with recommendation to put 
in conformity with the Constitution of the Russian Federation, federal constitu tional laws and federal 
laws of the constitution (charter) the law of the s ubject of the Russian Federation or other normative 
legal act of  legislative body of state power of the subject of the Russian Federation. Besides the 
President had the right to suspend the operation of acts of the executive power bodies of the subjects 
of the Russian Federation if they were not in compliance with the Constitution of the Russian 
Federation, federal laws and inte rnational commitments of the Russian Federation as it was mentioned 
earlier in this section. 
43. The Constitution provided for the clear jurisdic tion of the Russian Federation and the joint 
jurisdiction of the Russian Federation and its subjects. 
44. The jurisdiction of the Russian Federation included in ter alia the establishment of the principles of 
federal policy and federal programme s in the sphere of state, economic, ecological, social, cultural 
and national development of the Ru ssian Federation; of legal groups for a single market as well as 
financial, currency, credit, and customs regulation, monetary issues, the principles of pricing policy; 
federal economic services, includi ng federal banks, federal budget, fe deral taxes and dues, federal 
funds of regional development, fo reign policy and international rela tions of the Russian Federation, 
international treaties and agreemen ts of the Russian Federation, issues of war and peace, foreign WT/ACC/SPEC/RUS/20/Rev.1 
Page 12  
 
 economic relations of the Russian Federation, fe deral power systems, nuclear power-engineering, 
fission materials, federal transport, railways, in formation and communication, outer space activities.  
45. The joint jurisdiction of the Russian Federati on and the subjects of the Federation included , inter 
alia, issues relating to the ownership, use, and disp osal of land, mineral resources, water and other 
natural resources; delimitation of state property; establishment of general principles of taxation and 
levying of taxes the fulfilment of the Ru ssian Federation’s international treaties. 
46. Generally recognised principles and norms of intern ational law and international treaties to which 
the Russian Federation was party were constituent part of its legal system.  According to Article 15 of 
the Constitution of the Russian Federation if an in ternational treaty to which the Russian Federation 
was party provided for other rules than those set forth by Russian Federation domestic law, the rules 
of the international treaty apply.  
47. According to Article 3 of the Federal Law of  13 October 1995 No. 157-FZ “On State Regulation 
of Foreign Trade Activity” (as amended on 8 July 1997, 10 February 1999) foreign trade activity in the Russian Federation was regulated by the Constitu tion of the Russian Federation, federal laws and 
other legal acts of the Russian Federation and by the international treaties to which the Russian 
Federation is a party.  Article 6 of said Law provided for inter alia , the jurisdiction of the Russian 
Federation to form the concept and strategy of th e development of foreign trade relations and the 
basic principles of the foreign trade policy; to ensure the economic security and protection of the 
economic sovereignty and economic interests of the Russian Federation, as well as the economic 
interests of the subjects of the Russian Federation and of the Russian persons  and to conclude the 
international treaties of the Russian Federati on in the field of foreign economic sphere. 
48. Federal Law of 2 January 1999 No. 4-FZ “On Co -ordination of Intern ational and Foreign 
Economic Ties of the Subjects of the Russian Federation” provided, inter alia , the regions with the 
right to negotiate and conclude ag reements with their partners on international and foreign economic 
ties.  Such agreements could not contradict federa l legislation and the international commitments of 
the Russian Federation.  The Law made it compulsory  for the subjects to notify the appropriate federal 
authorities before entering into negotiation and set forth a procedure of prior approval of the draft 
agreed text of the agreement by the appropriate fe deral authorities.  The agreements concluded by the 
subjects of the Russian Federation were not  considered international treaties.  
49. As noted above, the right to conclude internati onal treaties falls within the jurisdiction of the 
Russian Federation.  But if an international treat y of the Russian Federati on affected issues falling 
within the jurisdiction of the subjects of the Russi an Federation, such treaty should be concluded in  WT/ACC/SPEC/RUS/20/Rev.1 
 Page 13 
 
 
 co-ordination with state power bodies of interested subjects of the Russian Federation. This rule was 
provided for by Federal Law No. 101 FZ of 15 July 1995 “On international treaties of the Russian 
Federation”. As regards international treaties of th e Russian Federation affecting issues falling within 
the joint jurisdiction of the Russian Federation a nd the subjects of the Russian Federation, the Law 
established that federal bodies of executive power s hould send the main provisions or the draft of a 
prospective treaty to the state power bodies of the interested subject of the Federation. Proposals 
received from the subjects are considered in the course of preparation of the draft of the international 
treaty.  
50. Under the Russian legislation the international tr eaty meant an international agreement concluded 
by the Russian Federation with a foreign State (or States) or with an international organization in 
written form and governed by interna tional law, regardless of whether such an agreement consisted of 
one document or several interrelated documents, and also regardless of its specific name. The 
Protocol of accession to the WTO would have the status of an international treaty and as such become an integral part of the legal system of the Russian Federation. 
51. The Protocol of accession, in th e event of accession of the Russian Federation to the WTO, should 
be subject to ratification. The ratification of the in ternational treaties of the Russian Federation was to 
be effected in the form of the federal law. 
52. In accordance with the Constitutio n of the Russian Federation th e Constitution itself and federal 
laws had supremacy over the whole te rritory of the Russian Federation. 
53. The bodies of state authority, the bodies of local self-government, official s, private citizens and 
their associations were to observe the Cons titution of the Russian Federation and laws. 
54. Besides according to the Law “On internationa l treaties of the Russian Federation”  the  
international treaties of the Russian Federation were  subject to  conscientious execution in accordance 
with the conditions of the international treaties themselves, the norms of international law, the 
Constitution of the Russian Federation, this Law and any other legislative acts of the Russian 
Federation. This law also contained rules on ensuring  the execution of the international treaties of the 
Russian Federation by the President and the Governme nt of the Russian Federation, federal bodies of 
the executive authority, bodies of state authority of the relevant subjects of the Russian Federation.   
55. Any administrative decision on issues covered by the WTO Agreement could be appealed. 
Depending on the issue concerned appeals could be a ddressed either to the Government or its agency 
which controlled the activity of the body responsible  for such decision, or the court of respective WT/ACC/SPEC/RUS/20/Rev.1 
Page 14  
 
 jurisdiction. In particular procedures of the administ rative appeal were stipulated in the Tax code of 
the Russian Federation and the Customs code of the Russian Federation. The judicial system of the 
Russian Federation was  described in paragraph 40. 
POLICIES AFFECTING TRADE IN GOODS 
Registration Requirements 
56. The elimination of the State monopoly in foreig n trade was proclaimed by the Decree of the 
President No. 213 of 15 November 1991 “On Libera lisation of Foreign Economic Activity on the 
Territory of the Russian Soviet Federal Soci alist Republic” (as amende d on 27 October 1992) under 
which all enterprises were given the right to carry out foreign economic activities, whatever their form 
of ownership. This principle was further provide d by the Civil Code and the Constitution of the 
Russian Federation. The State did not restrict the right of persons or entities to import or to export. 
57. The trading rights in foreign trade on the territory  of Russia had been further promulgated by the 
enactment on 13 October 1995 of the Federal Law “On the State Regulation of the Foreign Trade 
Activity” No. 157-FZ. Article 2 of this law stipulated that foreign economic activity  could be carried 
out both by Russian as well as foreign par ticipants of foreign economic activities.  
58. Foreign participants of foreign economic ac tivities were legal entities or natural persons 
recognised as such by the law of foreign states. If  foreign companies or natural persons were carrying 
out foreign economic activity (i.e. exportation or importation) as foreign participants of foreign 
economic activity, they did not need to be registered or have any investments in Russia. 
59. The Russian participants of foreign economic ac tivities were Russian juridical entities or natural 
persons, who have obtained the state registration as  juridical entities or individual entrepreneurs in 
accordance with the Russian law. 
60. The state registration of legal entities and natu ral persons as individual entrepreneurs was 
performed in accordance with Article 51 of the Ci vil Code and Presidential Decree “On Streamlining 
of State Registration of Enterprises and Entrepreneur s in the Territory of the Russian Federation” of 
8 July 1994 No. 1482. The registration of a legal en tity required submission of an application, the 
charter of the legal entity in question approved by  its founders, documentary confirmation of payment 
of no less than 50 per cent of the charter capital of the firm, and certificate of payment of state duty in 
the amount of 252 Rubles. Registration of a natura l person as an individual entrepreneur required 
application from such person and a document confirmi ng the payment of the registration charge in the 
amount of 100 Rubles. Denial of registration may be appealed through a judicial procedure. The  WT/ACC/SPEC/RUS/20/Rev.1 
 Page 15 
 
 
 registration act permits the enterprise/individual  entrepreneur to engage in economic activity, 
including foreign economic activity. 
61. The same principles were laid down by the Fe deral Law No. 129-FZ “On State Registration of 
Juridical Entities”, which regulated the registration of legal entities in case of their establishment, 
reorganisation or liquidation, of  introducing am endments to their instituting documents and the 
conduct of the State Registry of legal persons. This Law would replace the above Decree of the 
President.  
62. It established the transparent order for state regi stration of legal entities and did not contain any 
restrictions or discrimination for foreign founders of legal persons. The registration was effected 
solely by federal bodies.  
63. The lists of documents, necessary for state registration of a new le gal entity as well as of an entity 
under reorganisation were stipulated in Article 5 of  the Law (application for registration, description 
of the organisational form, address, copies of institu ting documents, and the charter capital) and were 
exhaustive. 
64. Under subpara 4 of article 9 the registering b ody could not demand any other documents than 
those mentioned in the Federal Law. 
65. The Federal Law “On Registration of the Juridi cal Persons” would be valid from 1 July 2002. 
66. Sub-federal entities had no rights to impose the re quirements on legal or natural persons that 
might affect their rights to engage in importation or exportation of goods. 
67. Article 10 of the Law «On the State Regulation of Foreign Trade Activity» established that all 
Russian participants of foreign economic activitie s were permitted to unde rtake foreign economic 
activity, regardless of the form of their property and without any additional special permission or 
activity licence. This rule had three exceptions.  
68. The first was the importation and exportation of alc oholic beverages. Pursua nt to the Federal Law 
“On State Regulation of Production and Turnov er of Ethyl Alcohol, Alcoholic and Alcohol-
Containing Products” of 22 November 1995 No. 173-FZ (as amended on 7 January 1999) natural 
persons and legal entities wishing to do business in  these areas were to obtain activity licence in the 
agencies of the Ministry of Tax and Charges Collect ion after their state registration. Conditions and 
requirements to be fulfilled by the enterprises and entr epreneurs dealing in this sphere were stipulated 
by Articles 18 – 21 of the said Law. Licensing fees provided by the Federal Law No. 5-FZ “On WT/ACC/SPEC/RUS/20/Rev.1 
Page 16  
 
 Charges for Issuance of Licenses for Production and Turnover of Ethyl Alcohol, Alcohol Containing - 
Products” of 8 January 1998 were as follows.  
Licensing fees structure for manufacturing, storage, 
 
wholesale, exportation and importation of alcoholic beverages  
Types of Activity Licence fees (in minimum wages) Equivalent in Roubles 
Manufacturing and wholesale of 
alcoholic beverages 500 50,000 
Exportation of alcoholic 
beverages 100 or 500* 10,000 or 50,000* 
Importation, storage and 
wholesale of alcoholic beverages 1,000 or 15,000* 10,000 or 1,500,000* 
* Lesser  fees correspond to payment for single operation li cense, while larger ones  - for  general  licence.   
Single operation licenses for exports or imports  were issued for delivery of alcoholic products for the customs value of up to 10,000 minimum wages (approximately US$32,000)  or of the volume in terms of 
absolute alcohol of  up to 2,000 decilitres and for du ration of  not more than 2 months. The general licence 
was issued for exports or imports of alcoholic products for the period of one year starting from the date of 
issuance of this licence. 
69. The second exception was the exports from the Russian Federation of precious metals and 
precious stones in accordance with the Decree of the President “ On  the exportation from the Russian 
Federation of Precious Metals and Preci ous Stones” No. 742 of 21 July 2001.  
70. The third exception were  imports and exports of  pharmaceutical products (medicines). According 
to the Federal Law "On medicines" FZ-86 of 22 June 1998 the right to exports and imports of 
pharmaceuticals is enjoyed by Russian participants  of foreign economic activities, who have the 
licence for production or wholesale trade of  these goods.  
71. Once a company obtained such an activity licence in  all three cases mentioned above it would be 
eligible for the receipt of import and export licenses each time it wished to import or export goods 
subject to licensing. 
72. The registration requirement for export contract s was introduced by Resolution of the Russian 
Government of 1 July 1994 No. 758, and was entirely repealed by Resolution of the Russian 
Government of 21 March 1996 No. 300. Registration of  import contract has never been practised in 
Russia. Thus Russia did not maintain any special registry of import or export contracts. There  were no plans to restore such registration in any form.  WT/ACC/SPEC/RUS/20/Rev.1 
 Page 17 
 
 
 Customs Regulations and Customs Tariff 
73. Russia had been an active member of the World Customs Organization even before gaining full 
membership on 8 July 1993. Russia had joined the International Convention on the Harmonized 
Commodity Description and Coding System on 1 January 1997. The Customs Tariff Law and the Customs Code constituted the legal framework for the customs regime of Russia. The right of appeal 
against decisions of Customs was ensured inter alia  in Articles 17 and 404-419 of the Customs Code. 
The Customs Code had been applied with minor changes since 1993. The new draft of the Customs 
Code and draft Chapter 27 of the Tax Code cont ained provisions on customs procedures and customs 
administration system in full conformity with the relevant WTO Agreement. 
Ordinary Customs Duties 
74. The structure of customs tariffs was regulated  by the Law “On Customs Tariff”, which had 
entered into force on 1 January 1994 (as amende d 7 August, 25 November and 27 December 1995, 
5 February 1997, 10 February and 4 May 1999, 27 May 2000). Tariff rates could be changed by 
government decisions based on proposals of the Governmental Commission on Customs and Tariff 
Policy and Trade Remedies Measures, taking also into account Russia’s international commitments. 
75. It was planned that starting from 1 January 2003 the Law «On Customs Tariff» would be replaced 
by Chapter 27 of the Tax Code «The Customs Duty  and Customs Charges» to be completely in 
conformity with GATT 1994 and the WTO Agreemen ts. This Chapter would describe the customs 
valuation procedure in full conformity with the WTO Agreement on Implementation of Article VII of 
GATT 94. 
76. The Resolution of the Government № 1560 of 27 December 1996 had introduced a commodity 
description and classification system based on HS 96, replacing as from 1 January 1997 the HS 92 previously used. A new commodity description and classification system would enter into force from 
1 January 2002 based on HS 2002. The customs tariff consisted of 11,032 tariff lines. The significant 
majority of tariff items were subject to ad valorem  tariffs, but 1,515 tariff items were subject to 
compound (mixed) rates ( ad valorem  and specific duties) and 76 tariff items were subject to specific 
rates (apples, chocolate, beer and strong alcoholic beverages). The ad valorem  rates and ad valorem  
equivalents of combined and specific rates multiple  of 5 and range from 0 to 30 per cent except for 
ethyl alcohol and beer. WT/ACC/SPEC/RUS/20/Rev.1 
Page 18  
 
 Tariff structure
 
Tariff rate (per cent) Number of tariff items 
0 46 
5 3,989 
10 1,890 
15 3,120 
20 1,824 
25 108 
30 5 
above 30 50 
 
Tabulation of the trade weighted average customs tariff rates  
Year Percentage 
1995 16.0 
1996 17.7 
1997 13.3 
1998 12.8 
1999 11.7 
2000 11.4 
2001(estimated) 10.7 
 
77. The tariff rates were established following the basi c criteria that (i) tariffs were the major trade 
policy measure applied to protect domestic industria l and agriculture production; (ii) tariffs were 
considered measures of both trade and fiscal polic y; (iii) tariffs were a function of economic 
development, in particular, the technological restru cturing of the economy. The most recent version of 
the Customs Tariff of the Russian Federation was introduced by the Resolution of the Government № 
148 of 22 February 2000 (as amended on 27 Novemb er 2000) which contained MFN rates of import 
customs duties for all 11,032 tariff lines. The rates of customs duties applicable to the products 
originating from the countries with which Russia di d not apply MFN treatment were twice higher then 
MFN rates. The import customs duties applicable to  products originating from the countries enjoying 
the Russia’s GSP scheme and being the subject of thei r traditional exports were levied at the level of 
75 per cent of the MFN rates (except for raw suga r where a tariff rate quota mechanism was used). 
78. Resolution of the Government No. 886 of 27 November 2000 substantially revised downwards 
and levelled out the customs duties (in approximately 3,500 tariff positions out of 11,032). As a result 
of this unification, customs tariffs for near ly all goods categories were grouped under broader 
headings (raw materials, semi-finished products, fini shed products, foodstuffs) w ith duty levels of 5, 
10, 15 and 20 per cent, respectively. These changes,  which took effect on 1 January 2001, were aimed 
at liberalisation of imports to Russia of modern technologies and machinery, fighting illegal practices 
at customs and improving the effectiveness of customs payment collection.  WT/ACC/SPEC/RUS/20/Rev.1 
 Page 19 
 
 
 Tariff Quotas, Tariff Exemptions 
79. The Law «On Customs Tariff» provided the legal fr amework for the establishment of tariff rate 
quotas as a part of free trade agreements and GSP scheme. These tariff quotas could be applied for 
agricultural and industrial goods. In general, tari ff rate quotas allowed import at zero (or reduced) 
tariffs. The only tariff rate quota now in place ( on raw sugar originating from the countries enjoying 
the Russia’s GSP scheme) had been opened under Government Resolutions № 572 (27 July 2000) and 
№ 622 (23 August 2001). TRQ on raw sugar had been  allocated under the auction mechanism among 
the importers. The auction was open for all Russian participants of foreign economic activities. The 
TRQ auction mechanism was widely used by WTO member countries. According to the WTO 
Secretariat, in 2000, 20 per cent of all TRQs were distributed through auctions. All Russian 
participants of foreign economic ac tivities could take part in the auctions. The auction distribution of 
TRQs was a transparent mechanism based on market principles and did not contradict Articles II, XI 
and XIII of GATT 1994, as well as Article 4 of the WTO Agreement on Agriculture, as the payments 
made by the winner of the auction were not a tax, or duty or charge, but the fee  for the service of 
conducting the auction.  
80. Exemptions from payment of customs duty co uld be granted only in accordance with the 
provisions of the Law ”On Customs Tariff”. Articl e 35 of the said Law established the list of goods 
not subject to customs duties such as goods in transit;  printed or recorded materials related to culture, 
science, education, items imported by foreign diplom atic and consular offices in Russia in accordance 
with their needs and requirements for official purposes; articles for personal use when travelling 
abroad; goods destined for disaster relief and human itarian purposes; industrial and other equipment, 
related to foreign investment, etc. Exemptions c ould be also granted under Articles 34, 36 and 37 of 
the Law (commitments under international agreem ents) on the basis of tariff rate quotas, tariff 
preferences, free trade agreement and GSP scheme. Ta riff exemptions other than those provided for in 
the context of a free trade agreement or  GSP scheme were applied on a MFN basis  (see also 
Reference paper 4). 
Other Duties and Charges 
81. Russia does not apply at present duties and charges on imports other than ordinary customs duties 
and charges for services rendered.  WT/ACC/SPEC/RUS/20/Rev.1 
Page 20  
 
 Fees and Charges for Services Rendered 
82. Fees for the customs services sti pulated in accordance with the Ar ticle 110 of the Customs Code, 
which contained the list of such fees. These fees and charges were related to the approximate cost of 
the services rendered. Revenues generated by those fees were remitted to the general revenues of the 
State budget. 
Fees and charges for customs services rendered related to
 
importation or exportation  
Description of Service Rendered/Purpose of Fees Rate Applied 
Customs charge for customs clearance 0.1 per cent of the customs value of the goods in 
rubles * 
Additional customs charge for customs clearance 0.05 per cent of the customs value of goods in 
foreign currency  
Customs charges for storage of  goods in temporary storage 
warehouses, where the goods to be placed before the 
customs clearance**, *** - the same in specially designed warehouses 
- in customs warehouses for goods placed under 
the customs warehouse regime  
 
0.02 Euro/kg of gross weight for every 24 hrs 0.03 Euro/kg of gross weight for every 24 hrs 
0.04 Euro/kg of gross weight and 3 Euro/vehicle 
per every 24 hrs 
Customs charges for cust oms escort of goods 
a) for each motor and rail way vehicle utilized either for 
the transportation of goods or which moves under its own 
power to be used as a commodity  - for the distance up to 50 km 
- for the distance from 50 to 100 km 
- for the distance from100 to 200 km - for the distance over 200 km  
 
 
 20 minimum wages (2,000 Rubles) 
30 minimum wages (3,000 Rubles) 
40 minimum wages (4,000 Rubles) 60 minimum wages (6,000 Rubles) 
Payment for the information and consultation 0.2-50 US$ depending upon the amount the 
information provided and short notice 
Payment for taking preliminar y decision on classification 
of goods according to HS codes 5 minimum wages (500 Rubles) 
* The State Customs Committee may reduce custom s charge for customs clearance to zero  
**  For the warehouses established by customs authorities only  
*** The customs authorities may reduce the charges for storage by half of the maximum  
83. According to the draft Customs Code fees and ch arges levied for customs services related to 
importation or exportation would be reduced to two types: customs charge for customs clearance and 
customs charge for customs escort of goods. The fees  charged  would be calculated not on ad valorem 
basis but  as fixed sums, corresponding to the value of rendered service. 
84. The stamp tax applicable for the processing of imports or exports by customs and for other 
purposes related to trade were establishe d in accordance with the Federal law № 226-FZ of 
31 December 1995 “On introducing the amendments a nd additions to the law of Russian Federation 
on the state duty” (with amendments and additions  of 20 August 1996; 19 July 1997; 21 July 1998;  WT/ACC/SPEC/RUS/20/Rev.1 
 Page 21 
 
 
 13 April 1999).  The stamp tax was to be collected for the performance of legally valid actions or for 
the issue of documents by the bodies or by the official persons, authorised for this.  
Stamp Tax related to imports and exports  
Service rendered/type of Fees and Charges Rates applied* 
For committing notary actions by the notaries of the 
state notary's offices or by  official persons of the 
executive power bodies, th e bodies of local self-
government and of the consular institutions authorised for this and also for their compiling the drafts of the 
documents and issuing the copies and duplicates of 
the documents, the state duty shall be levied in the following amounts:  
1. for the attestation of agreements the subject of 
which is subject to evaluation - 0.5 per cent of the sum for 
- which the obligation is assumed but at least 30 
per cent of the minimal wage 
2. for the attestation of agency agreements - 1. 5 per cent of the sum of the agreement but at 
least 50 per cent of the minimal wage  
3. for the certification of other warrants - 20%  of the minimum wage  
4. for effecting a captain's protest - a 15-fold minimum wage  
5. for testifying to the correctness of a document's 
translation from one language into another - 10% of the minimum wage per 1 page of  the 
document's translation 
6. for accepting in deposit of mone ys and  securities  - 0.5 per cen t of accepted monetary sum and the 
value of securities 
7. for testifying to the correctness of the copies of 
other documents and of the extracts from 
documents - 1%  of the minimum wage per 1 page 
8. for testifying to the authenticity of the signature:
-  on applications and on other documents  (with the exception of the bank cards) 
-  on bank cards (from every person and on every 
document)  
- 5% of the minimum wage   
- 1 minimum wage  
9. for the issue of duplicates of the documents, kept 
in the cases of the state notary's offices, executive 
power bodies and consular institutions - 50%  of the minimum wage  
10. for the performance of the technical work  of 
preparation of the above documents (print, 
editing, check of texts)  - two per cent of the minimal wage per page 
*    The minimum wage is roughly US$3.2. 
Consular Fees 
85. No special consular fees connected with expor t or import of goods or services have been 
instituted. Regular consular fees were collected in accordance with the legislation of the Russian 
Federation, Consular Articles provisions a nd the present Tariff approved on 29 June 1993 and 
28 March 1994, as well as international treaties of  the Russian Federation (see Reference paper 5). 
86. Payment collected by consular offices of the Ru ssian Federation for executing abroad the consular 
acts or issuance of the documents of legal signifi cance to citizens of foreign states, foreign legal 
entities, persons without citizenship, enterprises with  foreign investments, as well as Russian natural WT/ACC/SPEC/RUS/20/Rev.1 
Page 22  
 
 persons or legal entities c onstantly or temporarily residing or located in foreign countries were 
remitted to the general revenues  of the State budge t. Heads of consular offices had the power to 
decrease the consular fees or not to collect them  at all from individual persons in view of their 
applications, if the reasons specified by  them were considered to be valid.  
Other fees  
87. The port fees used in commercial seaports of th e Russian Federation were approved by Ministry 
of Transport of the Russian Federation on 21 July 1995. The regulated port-charges include: tonnage, 
beaconnage, canal dues, wharfage, anchor dues, ecol ogical dues, pilotage dues, navigation dues. Port-
charges (fees) were collected in commercial seaports  of the Russian Federation, irrespective of their 
form of organisation, legal status and pattern of ownership, from Russian and foreign vessels and 
floating facilities on the basis of non-discrimination principle (see Reference paper 6). 
Import surcharge 
88. Article 15 of the Federal Law “On measures to Protect the Economic Interests of the Russian 
Federation with Respect to Foreign Trade in Goods” of 14 April 1998 № 63-FZ provided for legal 
framework to safeguard country’s balance of paymen t. This article was in full compliance with the 
provisions of Article XII of GATT 1994. In accordan ce with this legislature due to the particular 
balance of payment difficulties the Resolution of the Government of 17 July 1998 № 791 had 
introduced a special import surcharge at a rate of 3 per cent ad valorem  applied to all tariff items. The 
Resolution of the Government of 27 February  1999 had eliminated the import surcharge from 
1 March 1999. 
Application of Internal Taxes to Imports 
Excise Taxes 
89. Excise taxes on certain products had differentia ted between imported and domestically-produced 
goods until January 1997. The Federal La w “On Excise Tax” of 10 January 1997 № 12-FZ unified 
excise tax rates for imported and domestic products . In pursuance of Chapter 22 of the Tax Code 
(Federal Law No 117-FZ of 5 August 2000) excise tax rates for imports and those for domestic 
products were identical and brought into confor mity with Article III of GATT 1994. The products 
subject to excise taxes and respective tax rat es per 2002 were enumerated in table below.  WT/ACC/SPEC/RUS/20/Rev.1 
 Page 23 
 
 
 Excise taxes  
 
Types of excisable goods Tax rate   
(in per cent or Rubles and kopeks per one unit of 
measurement) 
Ethyl alcohol made of all types of raw materials  14 Rubles 11 kopeks per 1 litre of absolute ethyl
Alcohol products of volume fraction of ethyl alcohol over 25 per cent (except for wines) and alcohol containing products 98 Rubles 78 kopeks per 1 litre of absolute ethyl 
alcohol contained in excisable goods
Alcohol products of volume 
fraction of ethyl alcohol from 9 to 25 per cent inclusive 
(except for wines) 72 Rubles 91 kopeks per 1 litre of absolute ethyl 
alcohol contained in excisable goods
Alcohol products of volume 
fraction of ethyl alcohol up to 9 per cent inclusive(except for wines) 50 Rubles 60 kopeks per 1 litre of absolute ethyl 
alcohol contained in excisable goods
Wines (except for natural wines) 41 Rubles 20 kopeks per 1 litre of absolute ethyl 
alcohol contained in excisable goods
Champagne and sparkling wines 10 Rubles 58 kopeks per 1 litre
Natural wines  (except for champagne and sparkling wines) 3 Rubles 52 kopeks per 1 litre
Beer with normative (standard)  volume of fraction of ethyl 
alcohol up 0,5 per cent inclusive 0 Ruble per 1 litre
Beer with normative (standardi zed) volume of fraction of 
ethyl alcohol  over 0,5 per cent up to 8.6 per cent inclusive 1 Ruble 12 kopeks per 1 litre
Beer with normative (standardi zed) volume of fraction of 
ethyl alcohol over  8.6 per cent 3 Rubles 70 kopeks per 1 litre
Pipe tobacco 453 Rubles 60 kopeks per 1 kg
Smoking tobacco, except for tobacco utilized as raw 
material to produce tobacco articles 183 Rubles 92 kopeks per 1 kg
Cigars 11 Rubles per 20 kopeks per 1 piece
Cigarillos, cigarettes with filter longer than 85 mm 84 Rubles per 1,000 pieces
Cigarettes with filter, except for cigarettes longer than 85 
mm and cigarettes of the 1, 2, 3, and 4 classes as per 
GOST 61 Rubles 60 kope ks per 1,000 pieces
Cigarettes with filter of 1, 2, 3  and 4 classes as per GOST 39 Rubles 20 kopeks pe r 1,000 pieces
Non-filter cigarettes, mouthpiece cigarette s 11 Rubles 20 k opeks per 1,000 pieces
Jewellery 5 per cent
Petroleum and stable gas condensate 73 Rubles 92 kopeks per 1 ton
Cars with engine power up to 67.5 Kw  (90 hp) inclusive 0 Rubles per 0.75 kWh ( 1 hp)
Cars with engine power up over 67.5 Kw  (90 hp) and up 
to 112.5 Kw  (150 hp) inclusive 11 Rubles 20 kopeks per 0.75 Kwt ( 1 hp)
Cars with engine power over 112.5 Kw  (150 hp), 
motorcycles with engine power over 112.5 Kw 
(150 hp) 112 Rubles per 0.75 Kwt ( 1 hp)
Motor gasoline with octane value up to "80" inclusive 1512 Rubles per 1 ton
Motor gasoline with other octane values 2072 Rubles per 1 ton
Diesel fuel 616 Rubles per 1 ton
Oil for diesel and (or) carburettor (injector) engines 1680 Rubles per 1 ton
Natural gas sold on the territory of the Russian Federation 15 per cent
Natural gas sold to member states of the  Commonwealth 
of Independent States 15 per cent
Natural gas sold from the territory of the Russian 
Federation (except for the CIS member states) 30 per cent
 WT/ACC/SPEC/RUS/20/Rev.1 
Page 24  
 
 90. Only two categories of products (natur al gas and jewellery) were subject to ad valorem  rates.  The 
tax base for calculating excise tax for those produc ts was selling price exclusive VAT for domestic 
products and the sum of their customs value an d the payable customs duty exclusive VAT for 
imported goods. 
91. If excisable goods were placed under customs treatme nt of transit, bonded warehouse, re-export, 
processing under the customs control, free customs ar ea, free warehouse, destruction and refusal in 
favour of the State the excise tax was not paid. 
92. Excise taxes were  applied differently to Russian  trade with CIS countries than to trade with non-
CIS countries.  But as from 1 July 2001, when the Chapter 22 «Excise Tax» of the Tax Code entered into force the excise tax was levi ed in the uniform manner based on the principle of country of 
destination. 
Value Added Tax 
93. In accordance with chapter 21 of the Tax Code  (Federal Law No 117-FZ of 5 August 2000 and 
Federal Law “On Introduction of Part Two of the Tax Code” of 5 August 2000 No 118-FZ VAT was 
applied in an uniform manner to all domestic a nd imported products on the basis of country of 
destination principle, and that also was the case  with CIS countries as from 1 July 2001. The only 
exception was the bilateral trade with Belarus, wher e VAT was levied on the principle of country of 
origin. As for the exportation of crude oil  and na tural gas the country of destination principle for 
VAT levied in the  course of bilateral trade with CIS country would be realised from year 2004-2005.  
94. The Value Added Tax was levied at a single rate  of 20 per cent with some exemptions (see 
Reference paper 7). All these exemptions were applied in non-discriminatory  manner both to domestic output and imports of si milar products. Also exempt from VAT were the goods placed under 
the customs treatment of transit customs ware house, re-export, duty free shop, processing under 
customs control, free customs zone, free warehouse, d estruction and refusal in favour of the State. The 
tax base for the imposition of VAT included excise ta xes, if any. For imported goods customs duties 
were included in the tax base, too.  
Quantitative Import Restrictions, including Prohibitions, Quotas and Licensing System 
95. The  Russian Federation did not  maintain any quantitative import restric tions, prohibitions or 
quotas (with the temporary  ban on importation of ethyl alcohol as the only exception).   WT/ACC/SPEC/RUS/20/Rev.1 
 Page 25 
 
 
 96. The prohibitions on the importation of ethyl alcohol had been enforced by the Federal Law № 61-
FZ “On Temporary Ban on Ethyl Alcohol Imports” of 31 March 1999 and woul d be valid until 31 
December 2001. This measure was necessary for the enforcement of governmental measures to 
restrict the quantities of like domestic product for ma rketing (Article XI: 2 (c) (i) of GATT 1994).  
97. The Article 13 of the Federal law “On State Re gulation of Production and Turnover of Ethyl 
Alcohol, Alcoholic and Alcohol-Containing Products”  of  22 November 1995 ( № 173-FZ as further 
amended) restricted imports of di stilled spirits to no more than 10 per cent of alcohol sales in Russia. 
Within this quota, not less than 60 per cent of impor ts must contain 15 per cent of alcohol or less. The 
provisions of that Article had never been implemented. 
98. The legal framework for the import licensing system  was established by Article 19 of the Federal 
Law "On the State Regulation of Foreign Trade Activities" (No. 157-FZ, dated 13 October 1995).  
Articles 12 and 15 of the Law stipulated that procedures for the importation of precious stones, 
precious metals, and nuclear materials were establi shed by Decrees of the President of the Russian 
Federation, while procedures for the importation of goods affecting Ru ssia's national security interests 
and for the fulfilment of its international agreem ents were laid down by the Government of the 
Russian Federation.  
99. On 31 October 1996, the Russian Government, through its Resolution No. 1299 "On rules of 
conduct of auctions and tenders on sale of quotas in cases of introduction of quantitative restrictions 
and licensing of exported and im ported goods, works and services" ( as amended on 27 January 1997, 
2 February, 14 March and 29 December 1998), intro duced a uniform procedure for the licensing of 
imports, making the Russian practices in this field consistent with the relevant provisions of the 
GATT 1994 and the Agreement on Import Licensing Procedures. 
List of goods subject to non-automatic import licensing  
 
Product group HS Code Reason for licensing GATT Reference 
Weapons, ammunition, 
military equipment, kits 
to produce such equipment 9301-9307, 8710 National security Art. XXI (b) (ii) 
Explosive substances 2904 20100, 3601-3604 National security Art. XXI (b) (ii) 
Nuclear materials, 
equipment and 
installations to produce 
such materials 2844, 8401 etc. in accordance with the 
internationally agreed list of Tsanger 
committee and London club of 
nuclear suppliers National security Art. XXI (b) (ii) 
Pharmaceutical 
products 2904-2909, 2912-2942, 3001-3004, 
3006 30, 3006 60 Protection of human, 
animal or plant life or 
health Art. XX (b)  WT/ACC/SPEC/RUS/20/Rev.1 
Page 26  
 
 Product group HS Code Reason for licensing GATT Reference 
Drugs, substances with 
psychotropic effects; poisons; materials to 
produce such substances Internationally agreed list of UN 
Convention of 1961 (as amended by Vienna Protocol of 1963) Protection of human, 
animal or plant life or health Art. XX (b)  
Products for plant 
protection 3808 (only for plant protection) Protection of human, 
animal or plant life or 
health Art. XX (b)  
Hazardous wastes Internationally agreed list of Basel 
Convention Protection of human, 
animal or plant life or 
health Art. XX (b) 
Ozone destroying 
substances and  products Internationally agreed list of Montreal 
Protocol Protection of human, 
animal or plant life or health Art. XX (b) 
Encryption devices 847 (only cipher equipment)  
847330 (only for cipher equipment), 
854380900 (only for cipher 
equipment),  
854390900 (only for cipher 
equipment) National security Art. XXI (b) (ii) 
Goods of dual purposes 
which could be used for production of chemical, 
biological, nuclear or 
rocket mass destruction  weapons  Internationally agreed lists National security Art. XXI (b) (ii) 
Sturgeon species of fish 
and products made there 
of including caviar Internationally agreed lists: 
ex.030199190, ex.030269190, 
ex.030270, ex.030379190, ex.030380, ex.030410190, ex.030410910, 
ex.030420190, ex.030490100,  
ex.030520, ex.030530900, ex.030549800, ex.030559900, 
ex.030569900, ex.051191900, 
ex.160419910,ex.160419980, ex.160420900 (all-only sturgeon 
species of fish), 160430100 Protection of animal 
life or health Art. XX (b)  
Equipment for 
unauthorised receipt of information ex.851750, ex.851780900, 
ex.852440100, ex.852510900, ex.852520900, ex.8527, ex.900651, 
ex.900652, ex.852530, ex.852540, 
ex.900653100 (all-special devices only) Protection of public 
moral  
Ethyl alcohol 220710000 
220720000 
220890910 220890990 Protection of human 
health or life Art.XX (c) 
Vodka and some other 
strong alcoholic 
beverages  220860, 220890110, 220890190, 
ex.220890330, ex.220890380, 
220890410, 220890450, ex.220890480, 220890520, 
ex.220890570, ex.220890690, 
ex.220890710, ex.220890740, ex.220890780 Protection of human 
life and health. Art.XX ( c )  WT/ACC/SPEC/RUS/20/Rev.1 
 Page 27 
 
 
 Product group HS Code Reason for licensing GATT Reference 
Raw sugar 170111 Administration of 
TRQ Agreement on 
Import Licensing Procedures, 
Articles 1 and 3 
 
List of Goods subject to automatic import licensing  
Product group HS Code Reason for licensing 
Glucose syrup 1702 30 990 Monitoring of trade flows 
Tobacco and tobacco items 2401-2 403 Monitoring of trade flows 
 
100. The grounds for import licensing were justified by provisions of articles XX and XXI of 
GATT 1994 and the Agreement on Import Licensing Pr ocedures. In accordance with the said Federal 
Law licenses are prescribed for the purpose of fu lfilling international agreements, ensuring state 
security, the protection of human, animal and pl ant health, protection of the environment and 
maintenance of public morals. The licences were is sued by the Ministry for Economic Development 
and Trade and for weapons and ammunitions – by the Ministry of Defence. The licensing regime 
applied equally to imports from all c ountries, including imports from CIS. 
101. The purpose for licensing regime was to monitor and to control imports of goods which for 
various reasons were classified as sensitive for Russia and international community. Russia had no 
intention to limit the quantity and value of im ports, except as provided for in international 
conventions such as the Montreal Protocol or B asel Convention. The import licenses for tobacco and 
glucose syrup had been of temporary surveillance character, issued to gather trade data. Those 
licenses were granted automatically. As for impo rt licensing on strong alcoholic beverages and 
pharmaceutical products the applicant should have an activity licence. 
102. The last Resolution of the Government which enforced import or export licensing had been 
dated as of December 1998 and after that the decisi ons on goods subject to import or export licence 
regime were amended on several oc casions over the past three years with a view to minimizing their 
list. The most recent decision adopted on 20 of July 2001 removed import licenses for white sugar. 
103. Licence applications were submitted to no more  than two administrative bodies. The amount 
and type of information to be submitted was s tipulated in the Resolution of the Government № 1299 
of 31 October 1996: the application it self, copy of import or export cont ract, copy of the charter of the 
applicant, copy of the certificate for the state regi stration approval of the federal agency responsible 
for the specific sensitive goods (for non-automatic  licence only) and activity licence (for strong 
alcoholic beverages only). The validity of licence wa s as a rule no more than 12 months but could be WT/ACC/SPEC/RUS/20/Rev.1 
Page 28  
 
 extended upon request of the licence holder. An administrative fee of 3,000 Rubles was charged for 
each import or export licence. For issuance of  prel iminary permits for imports of pharmaceutical 
products the Ministry of Health charged fees of  0.05 per cent of the contract value of the goods. 
Applications could only be rejected if any of the above-mentioned documents would not be available, 
or the information submitted by the applicant was false or the importer or exporter did not fulfil the conditions stipulated in interna tional conventions for specific goods. A licence was required to be 
issued within 25 days after the complete set of documents had been submitted (see also 
WT/ACC/RUS/10 for further details).  
Customs Valuation  
104. The basic provisions relating to customs valua tion practices in Russia were contained in the 
Law of the Russian Federation No. 5003-1 of 21 May 1993 “On Customs Tariff” and the Resolution 
of the Government of the Russian Federation No. 856 of 5 November 1992 “On the procedure of 
customs valuation of products imported into the te rritory of the Russian Federation”. The rules for 
determining customs value were based on the prov isions of the Agreement on Implementation of 
Article VII of the GATT 1994. All six methods of cu stoms valuation applied in Russia were based on 
the provisions of Articles 1, 2, 3, 5, 6, 7 and Article 8 of the Agreement on Implementation of 
Article VII of GATT 1994.  
105. Taking into account the provisions of Article  17 of the Agreement on Implementation of 
Article VII of the GATT 1994, the State Customs Committee (SCC) had been implementing a special 
technique of customs control to prevent gross unde r-invoicing of customs value such as the use of 
false documents stating a clearly understated co ntractual price in the performance of customs 
formalities.  
106. This technique was based on defining the decision making authority of the customs bodies to 
check the truth and accuracy of the stated value of  products.  The relevant customs bodies were vested 
with certain functions to control customs value and those situations in which such functions should be 
performed were specified, thus defining the operati onal procedure of the customs bodies at the various 
levels (custom-house, regional customs authority, SC C staff). This technique was not meant to replace 
the applicable Russian legislation  on customs valuation in respect of use of the transaction value as a 
main method of customs valuation.  The technique  also might enable the customs authorities more 
effectively corresponded to provisions of Article 13 of the Agreement on Implementation of Article 
VII of the GATT 1994 as it simplified the procedures a nd criteria used to decide whether the stated 
transaction value could have been understated.    WT/ACC/SPEC/RUS/20/Rev.1 
 Page 29 
 
 
 107. Actions of SCC could be appealed in accordan ce with the procedure established by the 
Customs Code of the Russian Federation.  Article 407 required the initial appeal to be filed with the 
higher customs administration of the Russian Federation, while Article 416 stipulated that should this 
appeal be turned down, the importer may further appeal to court. 
108. Draft Chapter 27  “Customs Duty and Customs Charges” of the Tax Code of the Russian 
Federation contained requirements  ensuring consistency of custom s valuation procedures with the 
provisions of the Agreement on Implemen tation of Article VII of GATT 1994.  
Rules of Origin 
109. Russia was following closely the work of  the WCO and the WTO regarding the 
harmonisation for non-preferential rules of origin.  In accordance with the provisions of the Federal 
Law “On Customs Tariff”, the principles for determin ing the country of origin of goods were based 
on international practices.  The procedures for dete rmining the country of origin of goods were 
established pursuant to the said Law.  The goods or iginated from a country if they were wholly 
produced in that country or sufficiently processed in accordance with criteria set forth in the said Law.  
The country of origin of goods might also be understood to mean a group of countries, customs 
unions, a region or a part of a country, if this was necessary to identify them with a view to 
determining the origin of goods.  The provisions of the Law “On Customs Tariff” concerning the 
determination of the country of origin of goods , and reflecting the international practices and 
implementing the recommendations of the Kyoto Conve ntion were incorporated in the draft of the 
new version of the Customs Code of the Russian Federation.   
110. In order to verify the origin of goods fro m a country, the Russian customs agency might 
request the presentation of a certificate of origin.  This applied, in particular: 
- with respect to goods originating from c ountries which benefit from the National GSP 
Scheme; 
- with respect to goods the import of whic h from a given country was regulated by 
quantitative restrictions (quotas) or by ot her methods for the regulation of foreign 
economic activities; 
- if this was envisaged by international agre ements, to which Russia was a party, as 
well as by Russian legislation on environmental protection, public health, protection 
for the rights of Russian consumers, public  order, state security and other vital 
interests of Russia; and WT/ACC/SPEC/RUS/20/Rev.1 
Page 30  
 
 - in cases where data about the origin of the goods were absent in the documents 
submitted for customs clearance or the Russian  customs agency had reason to believe 
that the declared data about the origin of the goods were not trustworthy. 
111. The certificate of origin of goods should unequivocally certify that such goods originated 
from the specified country, and should contain: 
- written statement by the consignor that goods  met the appropriate criteria of origin; 
- written confirmation by the duly authorised agency of the exporting country, which 
had issued such certificate, that the data indicated therein were true. 
112. The certificate of origin of goods should be s ubmitted alongside the customs declaration and 
other documents presented for customs clearance.  Whether doubts existed about the validity of a 
certificate or the accuracy of the data indicated ther ein, including the data about the country of origin 
of goods, the Russian customs agency might approach the organisations that ha d issued the certificate 
or other authorities of the country indicated as the country of origin of goods with a request for supplementary or clarifying data.  Goods would not  be regarded as originating from a given country 
until a duly executed certificate of origin  or requested data were submitted. 
113. The Russian customs authorities might refuse to clear goods across the Russian customs 
border only if it had sufficient grounds to believe that such goods originate from a country from which 
goods could not be cleared under inte rnational agreements to which Russia was a party and/or Russian 
legislation.  Failure to submit a duly executed certificate or data about the origin of goods would not 
constitute the grounds for refusal to clear such goods  across the customs border.  Goods, the origin of 
which had not been surely established, shall be cl eared after the payment of customs duties at the non-
MFN rates of the Russian Customs Tariff.   
114. Determination of origin of goods origina ting from developing countries eligible for the 
preferences system maintained by  the Russian Federation was governed by the “Rules of origin of 
goods originating from developing countries for the purposes of tariff preferences under the General 
Preferences System” incorporated in the Agreemen t of the CIS states of 12 April 1996 “On Rules of 
Origin of Goods Originating from Developing Count ries for the Purposes of Tariff Preferences under 
the General Preferences System”.  
115. As for the rules of origin within free trade agreements the additional criteria of direct 
purchase were used.  WT/ACC/SPEC/RUS/20/Rev.1 
 Page 31 
 
 
 116. In respect of goods originating from CIS countries,  Russia adhered to the Rules of origin of 
goods, approved by the Council of Heads of CI S Governments of 30 N ovember 2000. The above 
rules were developed pursuant to the intern ational practice of determination of origin. 
Other Customs Formalities 
117. Other customs formalities in u se in the Russian Federation we re applied in accordance with 
the internationally accepted rules and we re based on the Kyoto Convention.   
Preshipment Inspection   
118. The Government did not contract or mandate preshipment inspection. 
Anti-Dumping, Countervailing Duties and Safeguard Regimes   
119. Federal Law “On Measures to protect the Econom ic interests of the Russian Federation in 
Foreign Trade in Goods” № 63-FZ had been adopted on 14 April 1998.  The Law established the 
rules of procedures for the application, conduct of  investigation and the imposition of safeguards, 
anti-dumping and countervailing measures as well as other regulations of exports and imports 
provided for in the relevant rules of GATT 1994, including BOPs measures.  Antidumping, safeguards and countervailing measures could be in troduced only following an investigation showing 
evidence of substantially increased, dumped or subsid ised imports, serious or material injury to 
domestic industry or threat of such injury and causality between these developments.  The measures 
could be in place for a limited period of time necessa ry to eliminate the injury.  The Regulations of 
the Government of Nos. 183, 184 of 16 Februa ry 1999 and 274 of 11 March 1999 established 
procedures of investigations as well as the procedures for determination of injury.   
120. A new draft Federal Law “On Safeguard, An ti-Dumping and Countervailing Measures” had 
been prepared by the Government in full conform ity with the relevant WTO provisions and would be 
submitted to the State Duma shortly.  
EXPORT REGULATIONS Customs tariffs  
121. Export duties ranging from 5 to 50 per cent ha d been imposed for fiscal purposes mainly and 
in very rare cases (raw hides and skins, scrap a nd waste of non-ferrous metals) to ensure essential 
materials to the domestic industry and to prevent s hortages in domestic supply (see Reference paper 8 
for further details). Export duties were applied on MFN basis except for the goods exported to the WT/ACC/SPEC/RUS/20/Rev.1 
Page 32  
 
 country-members of the Customs Union. All cha nges in export duties were published officially. 
Exported goods were exempt from VAT (except fo r crude oil and natural gas exported to CIS 
countries). Russia maintained the same customs fees on exportation as on importation. 
Export Restrictions  
122. All previous export bans or export quotas had been abolished from 1996. Article 15 of the 
Federal Law “On State Regulation of Foreign Trade Activity” allowed the imposition of export quotas 
in exceptional cases to ensure essential national interests of Russia and implementation of 
international commitments of the Russian Federation. There were no special registration of export 
contracts or registration or nomination of exporting companies (special exporte rs). According to the 
Article 19 of the said Federal Law a ban on exports c ould be introduced by special Federal Law only. 
Export licensing 
123. The procedure for export licensing was the sa me as for import licensing. Some sensitive 
goods were subject to non-automatic licensing. Limite d number of products were subject to automatic 
licensing for monitoring of trade flows.  
Goods subject of non-automatic export licensing
 
 
Product group HS Code Reason for 
licensing GATT Reference 
Weapons, ammunition, 
military equipment, kits 
to produce such equipment 9301-9307, 8710 National security Art. XXI (b) (ii) 
Explosive substances 2904 20100, 3601-3604 National security Art. XXI (b) (ii) 
Nuclear materials, 
equipment and 
installations to produce 
such materials 2844, 8401 etc. In accordance with 
the internationally agreed list of 
Tsanger committee and London 
club of nuclear suppliers National security Art. XXI (b) (ii) 
Pharmaceutical 
products 2904-2909, 2912-2942, 3001-
3004, 3006 30, 3006 60 Protection of 
human, animal or 
plant life or health Art. XX (b)  
Drugs, substances with 
psychotropic effects; poisons; materials to 
produce such substances Internationally agreed list of U.N. 
Convention of 1961 (as amended by Vienna protocol of 1963) Protection of 
human, animal or plant life or health Art. XX (b)  
Products for plant 
protection 3808 (only for plant protection) Protection of 
human, animal or 
plant life or health Art. XX (b)   WT/ACC/SPEC/RUS/20/Rev.1 
 Page 33 
 
 
 Product group HS Code Reason for 
licensing GATT Reference 
Certain precious metals 
and stones, objects 
made there of, alloys 
semifabricates, ores, concentrates wastes  2616, 2530 90 950,7101 
7103, 7106, 7108, 7110, 7118 Special role of 
precious metals and 
stones Art. XX (c) 
Hazardous wastes Internationally agreed list of Basel 
Convention Protection of 
human, animal or 
plant life or health Art. XX (b) 
Ozone destroying 
substances and  products Internationally agreed list of 
Montreal Protocol Protection of 
human, animal or plant life or health Art. XX (b) 
Encryption devices 847 (only cipher equipment) 
847330 (only for cipher 
equipment), 854380900 (only for cipher equipment), 854390900 
(only for cipher equipment) National security Art. XXI (b) (ii) 
Goods of dual purposes 
which could be used for production of chemical, 
biological, nuclear or 
rocket mass destruction  weapons  Internationally agreed lists National security Art. XXI (b) (ii) 
Sturgeon species of fish 
and products made there 
of including caviar Internationally agreed lists: 
ex.030199190, ex.030269190, 
ex.030270, ex.030379190, 
ex.030380, ex.030410190, 
ex.030410910, ex.030420190, 
ex.030490100,  ex.030520, ex.030530900, ex.030549800, 
ex.030559900, ex.030569900, 
ex.051191900, ex.160419910,ex.160419980, 
ex.160420900 (all-only sturgeon 
species of fish), 160430100 Protection of 
animal life or health Art. XX (b)  
Equipment for 
unauthorised receipt of 
information ex.851750, ex.851780900, 
ex.852440100, ex.852510900, 
ex.852520900, ex.8527, 
ex.900651, ex.900652, ex.852530, ex.852540, ex.900653100 (all-
special devices only) Protection of public 
moral Art. XX (a) 
Ethyl alcohol 220710000 
220720000 
220890910 220890990  Art. XX (b) 
Vodka and some other 
strong alcoholic 
beverages  220860, 220890110, 220890190, 
ex.220890330, ex.220890380, 
220890410, 220890450, ex.220890480, 220890520, 
ex.220890570, ex.220890690, 
ex.220890710, ex.220890740, ex.220890780  Art. XX (b) WT/ACC/SPEC/RUS/20/Rev.1 
Page 34  
 
 Product group HS Code Reason for 
licensing GATT Reference 
Wild animals and wild 
plants 010119900,  010290900, 
010391900, 010392900, 
010410900, 010420900, 
010600910, 010600990 040700900, 0507, 050800000, 
0604, 070951, 070952000, 
071080600, 071230000, 080221000, 080222000, 0810-
0812, 121220000, 1301, 1302 
(except  130219300), 1401-1404, 9601(all-wild animals and wild 
plants only)  Protection of 
human, animal or 
plant life or health Art. XX (b) 
Pharmaceutical raw 
materials 020610100, 020622100, 
020629100, 020630100, 020641100, 020649100, 
020680100, 020690100, 0507, 
051000000, 1211, 121220000, 1302 130219300, 3001, 3002 (all-
pharmaceutical raw materials 
only) Protection of 
human, animal or plant life or health Art. XX (b) 
Rare kinds of fish 0301, 0306, 0307, 051191900 (all- 
rare kinds of fish alive only) Protection of 
human, animal or 
plant life or health Art. XX (b) 
 
Goods subject to automatic export licensing  
Product group HS Code Reason for licensing 
Soya beans, rape or colza seeds, 
sunflower seeds  1201, 1205, 1206 Monitoring of trade flows 
Raw hides and skins 4101, 4102, 4103 Monitoring of trade flows 
 
INTERNAL POLICIES AFFECTING FOREIGN TRADE IN GOODS Industrial subsidy policies   
124. By virtue of the current Russian legislation the following types of state support (financial 
contribution) were available: 
- direct transfers of budget funds, including those under federal targeted and 
investment programs; 
- grants and subventions (earmarked grants) to regions; 
- budgetary loans, credits and guarantees; 
- deferred payments and exemptions in respect of taxes payable.  WT/ACC/SPEC/RUS/20/Rev.1 
 Page 35 
 
 
 125. Besides, tariff preferences with respect to  the goods and services  produced by natural 
monopolies could be granted by the decisions of fede ral and regional tariff regulating authorities. At 
the present time no budget subsidies existed in the Ru ssian Federation which could be considered as 
export subsidies. 
126. Total state support averaged US$12 billion a year, including US$10 billion from the federal 
budget (hereinafter referred to the average data of 1997-1999). Support was accorded on federal and 
regional levels. 
127. Direct transfers constituted the significant elem ent of the state support to industrial production 
sector from the federal budget (around 40 per cent). Such state support was concentrated in the coal mining industry and targeted mainly social and rest ructuring needs. The remaining amount of direct 
transfers was provided under federal targeted pr ograms, 38 per cent of which going to programs 
(projects) associated with the de velopment of industrial production. 
128. Financial contribution to the regions of the Ru ssian Federation did not directly concern the 
development of industrial production, but aimed at re ducing regional financial disparities. The bulk of 
transfers were provided on the basis of objective indicators characterising social situation in the 
regions (82.5 per cent of the total amount). The rest paid for deliveries of supplies of food and fuel to 
Far North areas (11.5 per cent) and  special (“closed”) territorial areas. 
129. Same forms of the state support to industrial production sector were used by the subjects of 
the Russian Federation. Such support mostly aime d at the financial rehabilitation of enterprises, 
resolution of social problems and reimbursement of losses. Less than 6 per cent of the total amount of 
support was dedicated to the production development. 
130. For details on industrial subsidies at all leve ls, please see WTO documents, submitted by the 
Russian Federation, WT/ACC/RUS/22 (Corr.1, Add 1, 2 and Add 1 and Rev.1), WT/ACC/RUS/26 (Corr.1), WT/ACC/SPEC/RUS/11 (Add.1) a nd non-paper of 25 October 2001 (7912). 
Technical Barriers to Trade  
131. The federal authority for standardization, metrology and certification issues was the State 
Committee of the Russian Federation for Standardi zation and Metrology (Gosstandart of Russia). 
Gosstandart of Russia acted directly or through its  subordinate centres for standardization, metrology 
and certification and state inspectors performing surveillance over state standards and providing 
uniformity of units of measure. The tasks of devel opment of state standards of the Russian Federation, WT/ACC/SPEC/RUS/20/Rev.1 
Page 36  
 
 participation in the development of internati onal and regional standards, works and services was 
fulfilled by technical standardization committees. 
132. The legal framework for regulation of issues of  standardization, metrology and certification 
was laid down by: 
- Laws of the Russian Federation of 10 J une 1993, No. 5154-1 “On Standardization” 
(as amended and supplemente d on 27 December 1995), of 27 April 1993, No. 4871-1 
“On Provision of Uniformity of Units of Measure”, of 10 June 1993, No. 5151-1 
“On Certification of Prod ucts and Services” (as am ended and supplemented on 
27 December 1995, 2 March, 31 July 1998) , of 7 February 1992, No. 2300-1 
“On Protection of Consumer Rights”  (as amended and supplemented of 
17 December 1999); 
- Resolutions of the Government of the Russian Federation of 12 February 1994, 
No. 100 “On Organization of Works in Standa rdization, Provision of Uniformity of 
Units of Measure, Certification of Produc ts and Services”; of 2 February 1998, 
No. 113 “On Certain Measures to Improve Systems of Ensuring Quality of Products 
and Services”; of 1 November 1999, No. 1212, “On Development of a Uniform 
System of Classification and Encoding of Technical and Economic and Social Information”; of 11 January 2000, No. 26, “On Federal System of Cataloguing 
Products Procured for Federal Stat e Needs”; of 6 July 2001, No. 514 
“On Accreditation of Organizations Perfo rming Assessment of Conformity of 
Products, Production Processes and Services to the Existing Quality and Safety 
Requirements”; 
133. Products imported into the territory of the Russian Federation shoul d meet technical, 
pharmacological, sanitary, veterinary, phytosanita ry and ecological standards and requirements 
determined by the Russian Federation. Imports of pr oducts into the territory of the Russian Federation 
are restricted if: 
- they do not meet the legislative requirements; 
- they do not have a certificate, marking or  a corresponding sign in cases envisaged by 
federal laws and other legal act s of the Russian Federation  
- they are banned for use as harmful consumer goods.  WT/ACC/SPEC/RUS/20/Rev.1 
 Page 37 
 
 
 134. The Russian authorities determined the nomenclature of products and services subject to 
mandatory certification in the Russian Federation.  The lists of products subject to mandatory 
certification were approved by the Government R esolution No. 1013 of 13 August 1997 (as amended 
on 24 May 2000) “On the Approval of the List of Goods Subject to Mandatory Certification and the 
List of Works and Services Subject to Mandatory Certification”. Gosstandart was in charge of organization and implementation of mandatory certification. In cases envisaged by legislative acts of 
the Russian Federation with respect to certain typ es of products, they could be entrusted to other 
governmental bodies of the Russian Federation. Th e forms of mandatory certification of products 
were determined by Gosstandart of Russia or other authorized governmental bodies of the Russian Federation with due regard to established interna tional and foreign practice. The entities involved in 
mandatory certification were the State Committe e for Standards, other governmental bodies of 
administration of the Russian Federation authoris ed to carry out jobs dealing with mandatory 
certifications, certification bodies, test laborator ies (centres), producers (suppliers, executors). 
135. The list of goods for which safety might be c onfirmed by declaration of conformity was 
provided in Resolution of the Russian Federation Government of 7 July 1999, No. 766 “On Approval 
of the List of Products Whose Conformity Ma y Be Confirmed by Conformity Declaration”. 
136. Conformity of products subject to mandato ry certification could be confirmed by a 
conformity certificate issued by certification authoriti es, or a declaration of conformity registered with 
the certification authority. Such certificate should be submitted to customs authorities together with 
the cargo customs declaration and was necessary to obt ain permission for imports of products to the 
Russian Federation. The issues of recognizing certificates issued by the supplying country were by reference to interstate agreements  and international certification systems to which Russia had acceded.  
137. The fees for works in certification of products and services, including certification tests, were 
payable as provided under the certification rules “P ayment for Works Involved in Certification of 
Products and Services” agreed with the Russian Minist ry of Finance and registered with the Ministry 
of Justice of the Russian Federation.  
138. The Appeal Commission of Gosstandart of Russia regulated by its charter approved by 
Gosstandart of Russia, had been set up for the purpo se of considering complaints from participants of 
certification processes concerning performance of certification authorities, testing laboratories 
(centres), certification experts and applicants, monitoring, use of conformity mark, issuance, suspension and cancellation of certificates, licenses, and other issues. WT/ACC/SPEC/RUS/20/Rev.1 
Page 38  
 
 139. All works related to accession to WTO TBT and SPS Agreements were governed by the 
provisions of the Inter-Agency Program of Measures to Ensure Compliance with the Requirements of 
WTO TBT Agreement and WTO SPS Agreement. A draf t interdepartmental program of measures for 
2001 – 2002 is currently in the stage of obtaining interdepartmental approvals. 
140. Gosstandart of Russia jointly with the Ministry of Economic Development and Trade of the 
Russian Federation have drafted measures of further harmonization of the existing legislation with the 
requirements of WTO TBT and SPS Agreements. The draft law implementing these measures 
provided the following main approaches based on the provisions of the WTO Agreement for technical 
barriers to trade: 
- introduce regulation of issues of safety and quality of products by  regulatory legal 
acts, i.e. technical regulations providing binding specifications in respect of goods 
and their production processes; 
- institute national standards developed, as a rule, pursuant to an international 
counterpart as voluntary standards; 
- conformity confirmation procedures reconcile d with international rules and being a 
constituent part of a technical regulation, would provide the producer with a choice of 
different confirmation schemes depending on the degree of potential danger of the 
products; 
- legislative support for a single enquiry point for use by customers, including 
international customers, containing availa ble documents and documents in progress. 
- the draft law provided for the general approach  to estimation of the cost of work on 
conformity confirmation. The cost of mandatory conformity confirmation would be based on uniform rules of price fixation for identical or similar products and on the basis of uniform principles reflecting the actual value of incurred expenses. 
- It was intended after adoption of this law to analyse the adjoining legislation and if 
necessary define the ensuing amendments. 
141. Additionally, effective 2002, it was proposed to  issue federal laws “On Accreditation” and 
“On Cataloguing”. Simultaneously, draft state sta ndards would be developed based on direct 
application of the corresponding international standard s. Voluntary application of such state standards 
should ensure compliance with the requirements of technical regulations. As technical regulations for  WT/ACC/SPEC/RUS/20/Rev.1 
 Page 39 
 
 
 various types of products were de veloping and taking effect, all state standards (both existing and 
newly developed) would be tran sformed to non-binding instruments by revision, cancellation or 
adoption of new standards. 
142. For the purposes of implementing the provisions of the WTO TBT Agreement requiring 
harmonization of national standards with their inte rnational counterparts, since 1997 and subject to 
state standardization plans state standards have b een developed and implemented, of which over 50 
per cent were harmonized with their international counterparts. The overall le vel of harmonization of 
domestic standards with international standards was currently equal to 35 per cent. It was intended by 
the end of 2001 to enact the “Code of Providing Practices of Development, Adoption and Application 
of Standards” in full. 
143. Gosstandart of Russia was working on exclusion of certain types of products from the range 
of goods subject to mandatory certification; reclassification of certain types of products as allowing 
conformity confirmation by declaration of conf ormity granted availability of supplementary 
documents provided by third parties (quality system certificate, tests protocol of the accredited laboratory).  
144. The Single Enquiry Point contemplated under WTO TBT and SPS Agreements had been 
created to provide the Russian and foreign customers with access to Russian legal provisions, standards, rules and conformity confirmation procedures. 
145. The point was located within Gosstandart  of Russia at the following address: 
Russian Federation 
4, Granatniy Pereulok,  
103001, Moscow e-mail : ENPOINT@VNIIKI.RU
 
website – http://www.ricwto.ru  
Tel/Fax: (007 095) 230 25 98 
146. In order to implement the requirements of th e WTO TBT and SPS Agreements in respect of 
notification of draft regulatory documents, GOST R 1.13-2001 “State Standardization System of the 
Russian Federation. The Procedure for Preparation of Notifications of Draft Regulatory Documents” 
had been passed and would be published in November of 2001. Th is standard provided framework 
requirements and procedures for filling in the notif ication forms in respect of draft regulatory 
documents produced pursuant to WTO TBT and SPS Agreements. Enactment of this standard would 
allow full-scale implementation of notification pr ocedures in respect of draft domestic regulatory 
documents. Since 2000, Gosstandart of Russia published a regular (quarterly) Newsletter (Vestnik) of WT/ACC/SPEC/RUS/20/Rev.1 
Page 40  
 
 the Russian enquiry point, which contained such regulatory documents and reference materials as 
required by the WTO TBT and SPS Agreements. Draft documents were also published in the 
Newsletter. In the future it was proposed to also publish notifications of draft domestic documents. 
147. In order to provide for transparency of any measures taken, a web-page was created on the 
Internet by the Ministry of Economic Deve lopment and Trade and Gosstandart www.gost.ru
, 
containing plans for standards development, draft la ws, other draft regulatory acts, and other required 
documents pursuant to WTO TBT Agreement. Eff ective 2002, it was proposed to supplement this 
page with documents and information in the Englis h language. For more detailed information on such 
issues see the site of the Enquiry Point. 
Sanitary and phytosanitary measures 
148. The federal executive authority in charge of ensuring sanitary and epidemiological well-being 
of the population, was the Ministry of Health of the Russian Federati on (State Sanitary and 
Epidemiological Surveillance Department – “Gossa nepidnadzor”). Protection of human health was 
regulated by the “Fundamentals of Health Legislatio n of the Russian Federation” of 23 June 1993, 
No. 5487-1, Federal Law “On Sani tary and Epidemiological Well-Being of the Population” of 
30 March 1999, No. 52-FZ (hereinafter the Fede ral Law SEBN No. 52-FZ), the Regulations of the 
State Sanitary and Epidemiological Service of the Russian Federation and Regulations on State 
Sanitary and Epidemiological Standardization a pproved by Resolution of the Russian Federation 
Government of 24 July 2000, No. 554, and terms an d provisions of other federal laws and resolutions 
of the Russian Federation Government concerning  provision of safety of goods and products for 
human health and environment (e.g. Federal Laws  “On Environmental Prot ection”, “On Consumer 
Rights Protection”, “On Quality and Safety of Food Products”). 
149. Pursuant to Russian law, all products produced  in and imported into the territory of the 
Russian Federation for distribution to the population and/or use in industrial production, agriculture, 
civil construction development, in transport requiri ng direct human involvement, or for private and 
household use, had to conform to the requirements of sanitary and epidemiological rules, norms and 
hygienic standards (Articles 13, 15, 16 of Federa l Law SEBN No. 52-FZ). Such conformity should be 
confirmed by a sanitary-epidemiological approval or a registration certificate. A sanitary and 
epidemiological report was not a confirmation of  conformity of products and goods to the 
requirements of sanitary legislation (this was a re sponsibility of the producer or supplier), but only a 
statement that the certain type of product was in c onformity with the sanitary legislation, under strict 
implementation of established requi rements and rules during production, transportation, storage and 
sale of products.   WT/ACC/SPEC/RUS/20/Rev.1 
 Page 41 
 
 
 150. Hygienic assessment of imported products had to be performed, as a rule, prior to delivery of 
products to the territory of the Russian Federation.  Imports of products that had not passed prior 
hygienic assessment procedure had to be subjected to hygienic examination resulting in a hygienic 
report valid for such particular consignment only. 
151. Pursuant to Article 14 of the Federal Law SEB N No. 52-FZ, chemical, biological substances 
and certain types of products presenting potentia l human hazards were allowed for production, 
transportation, procurement, storage, sale and use af ter their state registration based on the results of 
research, tests, examination. The below-stated sh all be subject to state registration (Article 43): 
- not heretofore industrially produced or u sed chemical, biological substances and 
preparations thereof (hereinafter “substances”), presenting potential human threat; 
- certain types of products presenting potential human threat; 
- certain types of products, including food pr oducts, for the first time imported to the 
Russian Federation. 
152. State registration of the above substances and types of products was based on: 
- assessment of the threat presented by substances and certain types of products for 
human life and health and environment acco rding to the regulatory documents and 
assessment guidelines approved by the Ministry  of Health of the Russian Federation; 
- establishment of hygienic and other limitations on the presence and content of certain 
elements of such products in the environment; 
- development of protective measures, including requirements in respect of disposal 
and destruction of substances and certain types of products, to prevent damage to 
human life and health and environment. 
153. A registration certificate was issued once for an y type of products for the whole period of 
industrial production in the case of Russian products, or the period of supplies in the case of imported 
products. 
154. State registration of potentially hazardous subs tances and types of products was performed by 
the Ministry of Health of the Russian Federation,  and in the case of new food products of animal 
origin by the same in conjunction with the Mini stry of Agriculture of the Russian Federation 
(Resolution of the Russian Federation Government “On State Registration of Certain Types of 
Products Presenting Potential Threat for Human Life and Health and Certain Types of Products First 
Imported to the Territory of the Russian Federati on” of 4 April 2001, No. 262, “On State Surveillance WT/ACC/SPEC/RUS/20/Rev.1 
Page 42  
 
 and Control in Ensuring Quality and Safety of Food Products” of 21 December 2000, No. 987, “On 
State Registration of New Food Products, Materials and Items” of 21 December 2000, No. 988). Lists 
of products subject to state registration are a ttached to the above Resolutions of the Russian 
Federation Government. Pursuant to Russian legisl ation, an applicant had the right to appeal a 
decision of Gossanepidnadzor following administrative or judicial procedures. 
155. The requirements and criteria in respect of safety of products for human health and the 
environment pursuant to articles 1, 2, 12, 13, 15 , 16, 37, 38, 39, 41, 42 of the Federal Law SEBN 
No. 52-FZ were implemented in state sanitary and epidemiological rules and norms which were regulatory legal acts binding on all citizens, individual entrepreneurs and legal entities. 
156. All regulations within the territory of the Ru ssian Federation was perfo rmed through federal 
rules approved and enacted by the federal body of ex ecutive power authorized to perform sanitary and 
epidemiological surveillance (Ministry of  Health of the Russian Federation). 
157. The State Sanitary and Epidemiological Serv ice of the Russian Federation was a single 
federal centralized system of agencies and instituti ons, consisting of a federal executive authority (the 
Ministry of Health of Russia – Gossanepidnadzor) ch aired by the Chief State Sanitary Expert of the 
Russian Federation – First Deputy Minister of Health of the Russian Federation, centres for state 
sanitary and epidemiological surveillance in Russ ian Federation regions, areas, transport (water 
transport and aircraft) and state research and other institutions. 
158. The procedure for sanitary and epidemiological  examination of products, types of products 
and the procedure for issuance of sanitary and epidemiological report regarding conformity 
(nonconformity) of products to state sanitary an d epidemiological rules and norms were as provided 
by the Regulations on the Procedures of Sanitary  and Epidemiological Examination of Products, 
approved by Order No. 217 of the Ministry of H ealth of Russia of 20 July 1998. A sanitary and 
epidemiological report ascertaining conformity of pr oducts to the available sanitary rules and hygienic 
norms and based on the results of a sanitary and epid emiological examination of  products by one of 
the Gossanepidnadzor centres, was valid everywhere  in the territory of the Russian Federation. 
159. After state registration with the Ministry of Justice of the Russian Federation, all regulatory 
legal acts of the Ministry of Health of the Russi an Federation had to be pub lished in official press 
organs: the Bulletin of regulatory acts of federal executive authorities of the Administration of the 
President of the Russian Federation (Presidentia l Decree No. 763 of 23 May 1996, “On the Procedure 
for Publication and Taking Effect of Acts of the President of the Russian Fe deration, the Government 
of the Russian Federation, and Regulatory Legal Ac ts of Federal Executive Authorities”), the Bulletin  WT/ACC/SPEC/RUS/20/Rev.1 
 Page 43 
 
 
 of regulatory documents an d guidelines of Gossanepidnadzor of the Ministry of Health of Russia, and 
various specialized scientific journals and manuals  (Nutrition Care, Health Care at Work Place, 
Radiation Hygienics, Toxicology Newsletter, et c.). Draft sanitary rules were published in the 
“Newsletter of the Russian Enquiry Point” and speci alized journals. Regulatory documents took effect 
not earlier than 3 months after their approval, unless a direct threat to human health and life was involved. 
160. A Russian TBT and SPS Enquiry Point had been set up and was functioning, supplying all 
relevant information on SPS issues (see ТВТ  section).  
161. The Federal executive authority in charge of veterinary control over imports of animal 
products was the Ministry of Agriculture (Veterinary Department). 
162. The procedures of the State Veterinary Serv ice were regulated by Law of the Russian 
Federation “On Veterinary Service” of 14 May 1 993, No. 4979-1, and other federal laws and 
regulatory legal acts made pursuant thereto (“Regula tions on the State Veterinary Service of the 
Russian Federation for Protection of the Russian Te rritory Against Importation of Infectious Animal 
Diseases from Abroad”, approved by Resolution of the Russian Federation Government of 
29 October 1992, No. 830; “Regulati ons on State Veterinary Surveillance in the Russian Federation”, 
approved by Resolution of the Russian Fede ration Government of 19 June 1994, No. 706; 
“Regulations on the Procedure for Examination of Low Quality or Hazardous Food Input and 
Products, Their Use and Destruction”, approved by Resolution of the Russian Federation Government 
of 29 September 1997, No. 1263; “Regulations on Division of Functions of State Veterinary 
Surveillance in Processing and Storage Enterprises of Animal Products”, approved by Chief State 
Veterinary Inspector of the Russian Federation of 14 October 1994, No. 13-7-2/173; Instruction “On 
the Procedure for Issuance of Veterinary Accomp anying Documents for Cargoes Controlled by the 
State Veterinary Surveillance Agency”, approved by the Ministry of Agriculture of Russian on 
12 April 1997, No. 13-7-2/871, Resolution of  the Russian Federation Government of 
21 December 2000, No. 987 “On State Surveillance a nd Control in Ensuring Quality and Safety of 
Food Products”).  
163. Developments in the legislation on certifica tion, quality and safety of products made it 
necessary to update the Federal Law “On Veterinary  Service”. Amendment and supplementation were 
currently underway. Changes would af fect the structure of the State Veterinary Service of Russia and 
organization of the veterinary and sanitary surveillance. WT/ACC/SPEC/RUS/20/Rev.1 
Page 44  
 
 164. Veterinary requirements in respect of domestic  and imported cargoes controlled by the state 
veterinary services were the same. They were pr ovided by the Law of the Russian Federation “On 
Veterinary Practice” (Articles14,15,18). The list of controlled cargoes was endorsed by letter of the 
Veterinary Department of the Ministry of Agri culture of the Russian Federation of 16 May 2000, 
No. 13-8-01/3009. 
165. Imports of cargoes controlled by the State Ve terinary Service to the Russian Federation 
required authorization of the Chief State Veterinary Inspector of Russia. 
166. A cargo entering the Russian Federation had to be  accompanied with the original veterinary 
certificates of the exporting country, issued by the state veterinary service of the country of 
production, guaranteeing compliance with all provisions  of the certificate. Russi a had agreed forms of 
veterinary certificates for all types of animal products (goods) with the state veterinary services of 
most of the exporting countries. Pursuant to the re quirements of bilateral agreements for cooperation 
in veterinary matters, pursuant also to the Code of the International Epizootics Office (IEO) and by 
virtue of the Law “On Veterinary Issues” pre-sh ipment inspection was implemented on raw meat 
products that have not undergone thermal treat ment. Such inspection was implemented under 
supervision of representatives of the Veterinary Department. 
167. For those countries that had not agreed veterinary certificates with Russia, imports of cargoes 
were governed by “Veterinary and sanitary requireme nts for imports into the Russian Federation of 
cargoes controlled by the state veterinary service”, approved by the Chief State Veterinary Inspector 
of Russia and letter of the Ministry of Agriculture of 23 December 1999, No. 13-8-01. 
168. Imports into Russia of imported controlled cargo es were restricted to designated cross-border 
checkpoints of the Russian Federation at railway a nd car stations, at seaports, airports and other 
specially equipped places open for international co mmunications and having cr oss-border veterinary 
checkpoints installed. 
169. To be able to bring (as import or transit) controlled cargoes regulated by the Convention on 
International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild  Fauna and Flora (CITES), the owner of the cargo 
needed to have, in addition to the above documen ts a permit from the CITES agency in the exporting 
country (in Russia the CITES agency is the Ministry  of Natural Resources of the Russian Federation). 
170. Imports (exports) of pedigree an imals required the owner of the animals to have obtained, 
apart from the permit of the Chief State Veterinary In spector of Russia and a veterinary certificate, an 
“extract from the state registry of selection achieveme nts allowed for use, in respect of the imported  WT/ACC/SPEC/RUS/20/Rev.1 
 Page 45 
 
 
 plant seeds or pedigree animals” (at import) or “confirmation of compliance with the requirements in 
respect of protection of patent holder rights in resp ect of the exported plant seeds or pedigree animals” 
(at export), signed by the Deputy Minister of Agriculture of the Russian Federation. 
171. Imports of veterinary preparations were regul ated by "Regulations on Imports into and 
Exports from the Russian Federation of Medicines and Pharmaceuticals", approved by Resolution of 
the Russian Federation Government of 25 December 1998, No. 1539. 
172. Transit of cargoes required written authorization by the Chief State Veterinary Inspector of 
the Russian Federation or his/her deputies. Where pe rmits for transit through third countries had to be 
obtained such formalities were th e responsibility of the owner of the cargo. International transit 
required permits from central state veterinary agenci es of importing countries, both destinations of the 
cargo and transit territories. The itinerary of the cargo  also had to be agreed with such agencies. 
173. Once passed, all new instruments of veterinary  legislation were published in the journal 
“Veterinary Science and Practice”, “Veterinary Newspaper” and the newspaper “Veterinary Consultant” and other special publications. 
174. State policies in quarantine of plants were as de termined by the Ministry of Agriculture. The 
actual quarantine was implemented by the State Serv ice of Quarantine of Plants of the Russian 
Federation of the Ministry of Agriculture of the Russian Federation  
175. Regionally, the phytosanitary control was implem ented by state inspections for quarantine of 
plants in the Russian Federation regions. Cross- border phytosanitary control at Russian checkpoints 
was performed by cross-border plant quarantine point s, and local quarantine of plants was performed 
by district and inter-district plant quarantine points of the regional inspections. 
176. Imports of products to the territory of the Ru ssian Federation were subject to phytosanitary 
control based on import quarantine permits, issued by the State Inspection for Quarantine of Plants of 
the Russian Federation and its divisions in the Ru ssian Federation regions. Import quarantine permits 
were issued by reference to Resolution of the Ru ssian Federation Government “On State Service for 
Quarantine of Plants in the Russian Federati on” of 23 April 1992, No. 268, as amended and 
supplemented by Resolution of the Russian Federa tion Government No. 1143 of 1 October 1998. The 
list of products subject to phytosanitary cont rol, indicating codes according to the Goods 
Nomenclature of the Foreign Economic Activity of the CIS was given in the "Nomenclature of Main 
Types of Products, Cargoes and Materials (Goods) S ubject to Quarantine, for which imports into and 
exports from the Russian Federation require authori zation by the agencies of the State Service for WT/ACC/SPEC/RUS/20/Rev.1 
Page 46  
 
 Quarantine of Plants of the Russian Federation" . The latter Nomenclature was approved by the 
Ministry of Agriculture of the Russian Federati on on 19 March 1999, upon agreement with the State 
Customs Committee of the Russian Federation, and presented a binding document both for the 
agencies of the State Service for Quarantine of Pl ants and for the agencies of the State Customs 
Committee of the Russian Federation. 
177. In respect of imports of seeds and planting stoc k, and large volumes of  other products subject 
to quarantine and intended for several regions , import quarantine permits were issued by 
Rosgoskarantine, and for imports of fresh vegeta bles, fruits for use in one region import quarantine 
permits were issued by the regional insp ection of such Russian Federation region. 
178. To obtain an import quarantine permit, the cons ignor needed to apply to the corresponding 
inspection or Rosgoskarantin. The application had to state the name of product, the country of origin, 
the country of export, volumes, timeframe for colle ction, destinations, cross-border checkpoints for 
imports of such products subject to quaran tine (under Resolution of the Russian Federation 
Government No. 268 of 23 April 1992 “On State Se rvice for Quarantine of Plants in the Russian 
Federation”). 
179. An import quarantine permit indicated ad hoc  phytosanitary requirements in respect of each 
consignment of products subject to quarantine and the requirement that each consignment be 
accompanied with a phytosanitary certificate, confirming conformity of the phytosanitary qualities of the product to the said requirements. 
180. A phytosanitary certificate needed to be issued by  agencies of the state service in charge of 
the quarantine of plants in the exporting country. 
181. Phytosanitary measures maintained by the Ru ssian Federation met the recommendations of 
the European and Mediterranean Plant Protecti on Organization, of which Russia (USSR) was a 
member since 1957, and an executive member – since 1997. 
182. Information on phytosanitary issues could be obtained through the single Russian TBT/SPS 
enquiry point. 
Trade-Related Investment Measures (TRIMs)  
183. The Federal law N160FZ “On Foreign Investment in the Russian Federation” a dopted on 
9 July 1999 did not provide for measures inconsistent  with provisions of Art. III or XI of the GATT 
1994 and measures which correspond to the illustrative list of TRIMs according to para 2 of Art.2 of  WT/ACC/SPEC/RUS/20/Rev.1 
 Page 47 
 
 
 the TRIMs. The Law provided information on all measures affecting foreign investors should be 
published. The Law provided the Government and local powers the authority to grant foreign 
investors more favourable regime taking into consid eration general economic interest of Russia. As 
the Law established criteria for such more favour able regime the sub-federal authorities could 
establish such criteria by themselves. Thus sub- federal powers were empowered to apply any 
measures provided that those measures were w ithin the competence of sub-federal powers and 
concerned the sub federal budget.  The Law “On production sharing” as of 2001 provided for some 
obligations of foreign investors which took part in production sharing schemes in Russia to place some proportion of their orders for locally produced goods.  
184. The Decree of the President of 5 February 1998 No. 135 “On Additional Measures to Attract 
Investments for Development of Domestic Car Making” and Resolution of the Government of 
23 April 1998 No. 413 “On Additional Measures to A ttract Investments for Development of Domestic 
Car Making” provided for customs and other  pref erences for those investments  in the automotive 
industry that were higher than established ceiling.  Four investment agreemen ts had been signed on 
the basis of these acts. There was a strong intenti on not to sign any more new such agreements. The 
normative acts for cancellation of those decrees and r esolutions would be prepared in due course.   
185. The Resolution of the Government of 2 August 2001 No. 574 “On Certain Issues of 
Regulation of Temporary Imports of Foreign Made  Aircraft” superseded completely Government 
Resolution of 7 July 1998, No. 716 “On Additional Measures of State Support for Civil Aviation in 
Russia” .  
State-trading enterprises 
186. Information had been already provided to  the Working Party notifying pursuant to  
Article XVII of the GATT 1994 (WT/ACC/RUS/18), fi ve State-trading enterprises existing in the 
Russian Federation. In the view of the Russian G overnment there were no other enterprises in Russia, 
either state-owned or privately-owned, which had b een granted such exclusive or special rights, or 
privileges including statutory or constitutional powers in the exercise of which their purchases or sales 
might influence the level or direction of  imports or exports. The list of these was  limited to the energy 
(three STE), and raw natural diamond a nd platinum (two STE) spheres. 
187. The enterprises, which had been granted excl usive or special rights or privileges in the 
exercise of which they influenced, through their pur chase or sales, the level or direction of imports or 
exports, made their purchases and sales on the basis of commercial considerations. WT/ACC/SPEC/RUS/20/Rev.1 
Page 48  
 
 188. Regarding trade in agricultural products,  by virtue of Government Resolution No. 1224 of 
26 September 1997 the Federal Agency for Food Market Regulation replaced the Federal F ood 
Corporation with a modified institutional and le gal framework.  The agency’s mission included, inter 
alia, the monitoring of agricultural product markets, promotion of competition, assisting in 
commodity purchases in the agricultural market  and acting as a state customer (procuring 
organisation) to maintain the current food reserves of the Russian Government.  Purchases of products 
and commodity interventions were to be performed  not by the Agency but exclusively by business 
entities selected through public tenders.  Thus the Ag ency did not impact on export or import trade. 
189. Some enterprises (Roshleboproduct and Roscontr act) had been granted exclusive and special 
rights in 1993-1994 in the course of bilateral bart er trade with some CIS countries  performed under 
the framework of special intergovernmental agreem ents for those calendar years. Such exclusive 
rights of those enterprises  expired completely on  31 December 1995 at the moment of expiration of 
the agreement mentioned above  and were never resumed. 
190. At the present time Russia did not conduct barter trade with any of the CIS countries.  
Free zones, special economic zones 
191. Although Russian legislation provided for the estab lishment of free-trade zones, such zones 
did not become significant for the Russian Federa tion’s trade regime.  Actually only one Special 
Economic Zone (SEZ) was under operation in Russi a which had been created taking into account 
specific geographical location of the Kaliningrad re gion. Administration of the Kaliningrad region 
was governing authority of this SEZ. Under the Federal Law No. 13-FZ of 22 January “On The 
Special Economic Zone in the Kaliningrad Regi on” (as amended on 27 December 2000) all goods 
(excluding goods covered by  quantitative restrictions), importe d into the Kaliningrad Region were 
exempted from customs duties and payments (excluding charges).   
192. The legislation in force (Federal Law No. 150-FZ of December 27 “On the Federal Budget 
for 2001”, 2000, as amended on 24 Ma rch, 8 August 2001) abrogated the excise and VAT exemptions 
for imports of excisable goods under free customs zone  regime of the territory of the Kaliningrad SEZ 
in 2001. 
193. However, if such goods were later exported to  other regions of the Russian Federation, 
customs import duties were payable in full, with the exception of goods processed or deemed to have 
been processed in the Kaliningrad Region.   WT/ACC/SPEC/RUS/20/Rev.1 
 Page 49 
 
 
 194. Pursuant to Federal Law “On Special Economic Zone in Kaliningrad Region”, a product was 
deemed manufactured in the Special Economic  Zone provided the value added by processing 
amounted to no less than 30 per cent, or no less than  15 per cent in electronics and sophisticated home 
appliances, and its processing resulted in a change of the HS code of such product according to the 
customs classification. The procedure for determining a product as originating from a special economic zone was approved by joint resolution of the Administration of Kaliningrad Region and the 
State Customs Committee of Russia of 31 December 1998, No. 296-r/01-14/1365, “On Approval of 
the Procedure for Determination of Goods as Or iginating from the Special Economic Zone of 
Kaliningrad Region”, registered by the Ministry of Justice as of 9 July 1999, under No. 1892. 
195. There was legislation which provided for the establishment of SEZ in the Magadan region 
and in Nakhodka, but those zones were not yet active. 
196. Free Economic Area “Nakhodka” was formed in October 1990, as Russia’s first free 
economic area. Its free economic re gime was regulated by Resoluti on of the RSFSR Supreme Council 
of 24 October 1990 “On Creation of a Free Econo mic Zone Centred on the Town of Nakhodka in 
Primorsky Krai”, and by Resolution of the G overnment of the Russian Federation No. 1033 of 
8 September 1994, “On Certain Measures of Develo pment of the Free Economic Zone of Nakhodka”. 
Exports and imports of goods of Free Economic Area "Nakhodka" were regulated by the ordinary 
customs regime.  
197. Magadan Special Economic Zone was created under Federal Law of 31 May 1999, No. 104-
FZ “On the Special Economic Zone in Magada n Region”, and Law of  Magadan Region of 
5 July 1999, No. 80-OZ, “On Changing the Admini strative and Territorial Structure of Magadan 
Region”. The procedure for determining goods as originating from the Special Economic Zone in 
Magadan Region was provided by Order No. 829 of the State Customs Committee of the Russian 
Federation of 30 November 1999, and Guidelines fo r Determining Goods as Originating from the 
Special Economic Zone in Magada n Region contained in joint Letter of the State Customs Committee 
and the Administration of Magadan Regi on of 25 April 2000, No. 01-11/10593. 
198. The territory of Magadan Region was a free cu stoms zone, which meant that foreign goods 
were imported to the territory of the Special Econo mic Zone free of customs duties and taxes. Foreign 
goods exported from the territory of Magadan Region within or outside of the customs territory of the 
Russian Federation were liable to customs duties in full amount. 
199. Foreign goods undergoing a certain amount of  processing qualifying for the definition of 
sufficient processing, were deemed to be Russian goods and were not liable to import customs duties WT/ACC/SPEC/RUS/20/Rev.1 
Page 50  
 
 and other taxes upon such goods entering the rest of the customs territory of the Russian  Federation. 
The criteria of sufficient processing of goods in th e Special Economic Zone were as follows: change 
of commodity position (HS code), implementation of certain producti on and technological operations 
sufficient, or insufficient, for the goods to be de emed to originate from the Special Economic Zone; 
change of cost of goods, provided the value added by processing amounted to no less than 30 per cent 
of the goods (no less than 15 per cent for elect ronics or sophisticated home appliances). Tax and 
customs benefits were to be maintained until 31 D ecember 2014 – the last effective date of the Law 
“On the Special Economic Zone of Magadan Region”.    
Transit 
200. At present, transit of commodities through the territory of the Russian Federation was free 
from the levy of fees, customs duties, VAT and ex cise tax. The Russian Federation granted freedom 
of transit through its territory as prescribed by Article V of the GATT 1994 as well as on the basis of 
international treaties it was party to. The only charges levied were those for transportation 
commensurate with administrative expenses or with the cost of services rendered. 
Agricultural policies 
201. The key long-term tasks of the Russian agricu ltural sector were an effective and competitive 
agro-industrial production and food security of the country. These tasks required a comprehensive program of measures, both short-term and long-term. 
202. Pursuant to the “Priority Trends of Agri-Food Policy of the Government of the Russian 
Federation for 2001 – 2010”, approved by the mee ting of the Government on 27 July 2000, the 
Russian agricultural sector first and foremost need ed to address the problems that have accumulated 
over the years preceding the reform and during the re form, notably the sectoral imbalance of prices 
and revenues, which was a major adverse factor in  agrarian production, low profitability, and the 
development of material base. 
Description of state measures pert aining to “amber box” measures  
Restructuring of debts of agricultural companies 
203. Restructuring was regulated by Resolution of the Government of the Russian Federation of 
3 September 1999, No. 1002 “On the Procedure a nd Timeframe for Restructuring of Accounts 
Payable of Legal Entities in Respect of Taxes and Levies, and Arrears on Penalties and Fines 
Outstanding to the Federal Budget”. In addition, the Federal Budget fo r 2001 provided, in Article 130,  WT/ACC/SPEC/RUS/20/Rev.1 
 Page 51 
 
 
 for restructuring of overdue debts (principal, inter est, penalties and fines) on federal taxes and levies, 
and insurance premiums payable to state non -budgetary funds. The restructuring schedule 
presupposed full write-off of penalties and fines. Th e procedure and terms of restructuring in 2001 
were as provided by Resolution of the Russian Federation Government of 8 June 2001, No. 458. 
204. Soft lending was currently provided through co mpensation from the Federal Budget of the 
difference in interest rates on loans obtaine d from lending institutions , and through budgetary 
allocations towards formation of the leasing fund. Appropriations were made in the 2001 Budget to 
finance these purposes. The system of soft seasonal short-term lending was not tied to production of 
any particular goods. The same concerns leasing opera tions. The latter were in the form of mid-term 
lending. 
205. As most agricultural producers had overdue  accounts payable, a common scheme was to 
credit agricultural companies through the media tion of food and processing industries. Otherwise 
commercial banks would be unable to provide loans to finance seasonal works. Subsidies were 
provided to a borrower monthly in the amount of 2/3 of  the refinancing rate of  the Central Bank of the 
Russian Federation maintained at the date of the loan, on condition of payment by such borrower of 
interest accrued under loan agreements (see Resolu tion of Government of the Russian Federation of 
7 March 2001, No. 192 “On Approval of the Proc edure of Compensation in 2001 from the Federal 
Budget of the Difference in Interest Rates on Loan s Obtained from Russian Lending Institutions by 
Agricultural Producers, Enterprises, Orga nizations of Agro-Industrial Sector”). 
206. The state leasing fund was formed with budge tary allocations. Leasing agreements for 
machinery and equipment, and breeding horned cattle we re made for a period of 2 to 5 years, and for 
certain types of breeding animals for a period of 2 years. The volume and description of products 
delivered under leasing agreements were determ ined based on the submissions of executive 
authorities of the Russian Federation regions. En terprises and farms paid to leasing companies a 
compensation for use of the leased property in the amount of 3 per cent per annum of the outstanding 
value of the leased property – for machinery, and 0.5 per cent per annum for breeding animals. The 
amount of original payment was 10 to 30 per cent of  the value of product subject to its nature and 
price (the distributions of leasing fund in the current year have not yet been determined). 
Food and agricultural products market regulation   
207. The goal of establishing a system of food market regulation was to prevent wide and sharp 
fluctuations of prices. Such fluctuations were typi cal of Russia due to sharp fluctuations in weather WT/ACC/SPEC/RUS/20/Rev.1 
Page 52  
 
 conditions. Besides, a regulation system  allowed building reserves and avoiding a food deficit on the 
market. 
208. The major instruments of regulation of f ood markets were commodity and procurement 
interventions. They were provided by Federal Law No. 100-FZ of 14 July 1997, and Resolution 
No. 580 of the Government of the Russian Federa tion of 3 August 2001 “On Approval of Rules of 
State Procurement and Commodity Interventions for Regulation of the Market of Agricultural 
Products, Input and Food”. Procurement interventions  were performed when market prices dropped 
below the minimum level or where producers were una ble to sell their products due to falling demand. 
Commodity interventions were made in a situation of  deficit in the products market or when market 
prices soared beyond the fluctuation cap. 
209. Input subsidies took the form of compensations to purchase mineral fertilisers and electric 
power benefits for agricultural operating compan ies supplying water for irrigation and other 
aquicultural purposes and for other needs of agri cultural production companies (Resolution by the 
Government of the Russian Federati on of 15 February 2001, No. 115) 
210. Input subsidies were used as a mid-term measu re which secured a hurdle level of production 
efficiency and food security in a situation of c ontinued transformation of the market and price 
distortions. As agriculture adjusted to new ec onomic conditions and agricultural production became 
more profitable the requirement of  input subsidies would subside. 
211. Investment Subsidies were implemented th rough specific programs (development of hop 
plant industry, flax industry, baby food industry) or through allocations of budgetary funds for capital 
investments in reproduction of fixed assets. 
212. The allocations were made by partial compensa tion of costs of investment projects, or by 
direct capital investments, including under specific-purpose programs. 
213. Grants to animal and plant production were cal culated per unit of product. In 2001, pursuant 
to Government Resolution No. 272 of 6 April 2001,  “On Approval of the Procedure for Provision of 
Subsidies for State Support of Certain Sectors of Agricultural Production in 2001”, subsidies were provided to finance the following costs: support fo r reindeer rearing, animal breeding, domestic 
sheep-breeding, elite seed-growing, flax and he mp production. Subsidies were calculated and 
advanced based on the actual subsidisable costs incurred in the accounting period of the current 
financial year.  WT/ACC/SPEC/RUS/20/Rev.1 
 Page 53 
 
 
 Measures attributable to “green box”3 
214. General services (funding of budget-financed ins titutions; funding of research and educational 
programs; capital investments in melioration and aquiculture except maintenance costs; operating 
costs, financial support for creation of a market da tabase) are financed from the Federal Budget, under 
the following sections: “Agriculture and Fishery” , “Public Education”, “Management”, “Industry, 
Power Generation, and Construction”, “Financial Assi stance to Budgets of Other Levels”, etc. and 
with funds allocated to federal special-purpose programs to the extent of research expenses. 
215. Formation of state reserves to provide food secu rity (the costs of creation of a federal and 
regional food reserves) presupposed food supplies to the Far North Areas and territories of equivalent 
status and adequate provisions according to requireme nts of the military and equivalent categories of 
consumers. Food reserves were procured at market prices. 
216. Support of the level of income of producers,  other than production support presupposed 
support for development of rural territories, mainte nance of social and engineering infrastructure 
(development of rural health care centres, public  education, power supply, gas supply, road 
construction in rural areas, etc. under federal a nd regional special-purpose programs), and budgetary 
grants to regions to finance the housing an d utilities costs. Draft federal program “Social 
Development of Rural Areas Through 2010” was produ ced to further the development of social rural 
infrastructure, and was due to be enacted soon.  
Financial participation of the Government of  the Russian Federation in crop insurance 
programs 
217. The terms of the government’s financial partic ipation in agricultural crop insurance programs 
were  provided under Law No. 100-FZ “On State Regulation of Agro-Indus trial Production” and 
Resolution of the Russian Federation Govern ment of 27 November 1998, No. 1399 “On State 
Regulation of Insurance in Agro-Industrial Productio n”. State support involved partial subsidising of 
insurance premiums (the legislation in force pr ovided for 50 per cent subsidising) based on the 
insurance cost determined annually by reference to the size of areas under crops, the yield pattern in 
the preceding 5 years, and the estimated market price of the agricultural crops to be produced in the 
applicable year. Losses of agricultural crops in such  year against the average yield in the previous 5 
years were subject to compensation in the amount of 70 per cent of the said losses (in money terms). 
                                                      
3 A more detailed account of “green box” measures  will soon be submitted to the WTO Secretariat. WT/ACC/SPEC/RUS/20/Rev.1 
Page 54  
 
 218. Assistance in the event of natural calam ities involved financial assistance (partial 
compensation) to farms affected by natural calamitie s and was provided out of the reserve fund of the 
Government of the Russian Federation pursuant to  requests from executive authorities substantiating 
the amount of financial assistance so requested ( under Article 24 of the Federal Law No. 68-FZ of 
21 December 1994 “On Protection of Population and Te rritory From Emergenci es of Natural and/or 
Human Inflicted Origin”, and Resolution No. 81 0 of the Russian Federation Government of 
26 October 2000) and partial compensation of the cost s of transportation of fodder to farms affected 
by natural calamities based on the records of th e registry of waybills confirming transportation 
expenses actually incurred (in 2001 the program was not maintained). 
219. Financing of environmental protection progr ams presupposed grants to veterinary and 
sanitary salvage plants for collection and processing of biological wastes at a fixed rate per ton of 
utility wastes (in accordance with Resolution No. 272 of  the Government of the Russian Federation of 
6 April 2001 “On Approval of the Procedure for Provision in 2001 of Subsidies from the Federal 
Budget for State Support of Certain Sectors of Agri cultural Production”); and measures to rehabilitate 
radiation-contaminated agricultural lands, provisi on of ecologically clean products, reproduction and 
prevention of deterioration of natural environm ent, ecologically-friendly functioning of agro-
industrial sector in Russia under various federal a nd regional programs (“Prot ection of the Population 
of the Russian Federation from Consequential Im pact of Chernobyl Catastrophe”, “Chernobyl 
Children”, “Improvement of Fertility of Russian Soils”, “Wastes”, “Ecological Rehabilitation of 
Orenburg Oblast and Improved Health Care to Its Population”, “Comprehensi ve Federal Program to 
Protect the Lake Baikal and Provide for Rational Use of Its Basin”, etc.)   
220. Funding of the restructuring program presupposed support for individual farms in the form of 
provision of financial allowances fo r relocation of individuals to rura l areas for organisation of farms, 
soft lending, tax benefits, publica tion of manuals, etc. This type of support was provided under federal 
law “On Federal Budget for 2001” pursuant to artic le “Current Costs of Maintenance of Political 
Subdivisions” in the form of subsidies provided by Resolution of Government of the Russian 
Federation of 6 April 2001, No. 272. 
221. Funding of regional assistance programs  presupposed capital investments in Far North Areas 
and equivalent territories for development of prev alent regional sectors and trades, construction of 
new and expansion and re construction of existing enterprises and facilities.  WT/ACC/SPEC/RUS/20/Rev.1 
 Page 55 
 
 
 Export Subsidies 
222. Taking into account such factors as the geography of agricultural production in Russia, its 
vast territory, actual state of development of tr ansportation system and infrastructures supporting 
exports of agricultural products, use of export subsid ies by some of Russia’s major partners and also 
the prevailing conditions for competition on world ag ricultural markets, the Government came to a 
conclusion that export subsidies consistent with the Agreement on Agriculture could be used. 
Therefore, Russia intended to reserve its right to u se export subsidies subject to: (a) agreed reductions 
with WTO members over a fixed period of time; and (b) possible results of the on-going new WTO negotiations on agriculture on export subsidies. 
TRADE-RELATED INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY REGIME  
General 223. The national system of protection of intell ectual property rights corresponded to the basic 
international standards in this field including, inter alia, the provisions of the TRIPS Agreement.  The 
general thrust of the Russian Fe deration’s policy on intellectual property was determined by the 
Constitution of the Russian Federatio n (Article 44-1) which provided erga omnes  the guaranteed 
freedom of literary, artistic, scientific, technical and other types of creative activity, and teaching; and 
stipulated that the intellectual property shall be pr otected by law.  The whole system of the Russian 
legislation in force contributed to the realisation of  this constitutional right.  A vital element of the 
said system laid in a number of international agreem ents to which the Russian Federation was a party. 
224. The Russian Federation extended national treatme nt to the legal entities and individuals of 
those countries which were parties to agreements mandating such treatment (most notably: the Paris 
Convention for the Protection of Industrial Property, the Universal Copyright Convention, and the Bern Convention for the Protection of Literary a nd Artistic Works) both directly pursuant to such 
covenants (Clause 4 of Article 15 of the Constitution of the Russian Federation provided for the direct 
application and prevalence of international agreemen ts) and in accordance with relevant provisions of 
legislative acts of the Russian Fe deration (in particular, Articles 36 and 37 of the Patent Law of the 
Russian Federation No. 3517-1 FZ of 23 Septem ber 1992, Articles 47 and 48 of the Russian 
Federation Law “On Trademarks, Service Marks, and Appellations of Origin” No. 3520-FZ of 
23 September 1992, Article 3, Article 5:1 and Ar ticle 35:4 of the Russian Federation Law “On 
Copyrights and Related Rights” No.5351-1 FZ of 9.Ju ly 1993, Article 7 of the Russian Federation 
Law “On the Legal Protection of Computer Programs and Databases” No.3523-1 of WT/ACC/SPEC/RUS/20/Rev.1 
Page 56  
 
 23 September 1992, Articles 13 and 14 of the Russi an Federation Law ”On the Legal Protection of 
Layout Designs of Integrated Circuits” No.3526-1 23 September 1992). 
225. The application of most-favoured-nation treat ment (with exceptions regarding advantages 
granted by Russia in accordance with  certain agreements including agreements with CIS countries) on 
intellectual property was stipulated in the agre ements that the Russian Federation had with 
Switzerland and the European Union. For more  information on TRIPS regime in Russia see 
WT/ACC/RUS/41, WT/ACC/RUS/29, WT/ACC/RUS/29 Rev.1 and WT/ACC/RUS/45. 
Copyright and related rights 
226. In general, the provisions of the Russian legislation on copyright (including the ones on the 
protection of computer programs and databases) were in conformity with the provisions of the Bern 
Convention for the Protection of Literary  and Artistic Works (including Article 6 bis) and the relevant 
provisions of the TRIPS Agreement.  At the same time, according to the declaration made by the 
Government of the Russian Federation when joining the Bern Convention, the provisions of the latter 
were not applied to literary and artistic works which were of public domain when the Convention 
came into force for the Russian Federation.  In accordance with Article 28 of the Russian Federation 
Law “On Copyright and Related Rights” No. 3531-1 FZ of 9 July 1993 works for which the term of 
copyright expired, as well as works to which copyright protection had never been extended within the 
Russian Federation were of public domain. New ame ndments to this Law would bring the provisions 
relating to retroactive protection into conformity  with the respective requirements of the Bern 
Convention and TRIPS Agreement.  
Trademarks, including service marks 
227. In general, the provisions of the Russian le gislation on the protection of trademarks and 
service marks were in conformity with the provisions of the Paris Convention for the Protection of Industrial Property and the relevant provisions of  the TRIPS Agreement with the exception of the 
TRIPS provisions on additional protection of we ll-known marks in respect of non-homogeneous 
goods.  These provisions would be taken into account  when amendments to the Russian Federation 
Law “On Trademarks, Service Marks and Appe llations of Origin” would be approved. 
Geographical indications, including appellations of origin 
228. Prior to 1992 geographical indications in Russi a were protected mostly by considering any 
false geographical indications as a form of unfair co mpetition or a violation of consumer rights (this 
was done by antitrust agencies or courts respectively).  WT/ACC/SPEC/RUS/20/Rev.1 
 Page 57 
 
 
 229. In addition to this since 1992 one highly impor tant category of geographical indications - 
appellations of origin - was accorded special pr otection through their state registration in accordance 
with the procedure set forth in the Russian Fe deration Law “On Trademar ks, Service Marks and 
Appellations of Origin”. 
230. In general, the provisions in accordance to which geographical indications were accorded 
protection were in conformity with the provisions  of the Paris Convention for the Protection of 
Industrial Property and the relevant  provisions of the TRIPS Agreement.  New amendments to the 
Law on Trademarks would be taken into account  the provisions of the TRIPS Agreement on 
additional protection of geographical indications for wines and spirits were extended only for the 
appellations of origin which were registered  in accordance with the established procedure. 
Inventions and Industrial designs 
231. In general, the provisions of the Patent Law of the Russian Federation on the protection of 
inventions and industrial designs were in confor mity with the Paris Convention and the relevant 
provisions of the TRIPS Agreement.  The draft law on amendments to the Patent Law of the Russian 
Federation took into account the prov isions of the TRIPS Agreement on the use of inventions without 
patent holder’s authorisation (“compulsory licensing”).   
Plant variety and animal breed protection (selection attainments) 
232. Plant varieties and animal breeds were protect ed in accordance with the Russian Federation 
Law “On Selection Attainments” No. 5605-1 FZ of 6 August 1993.  The provisions of this Law were 
in conformity with the TRIPS Agreement and the UPOV Convention.  The Russian Federation 
became a member of the UPOV Convention in 1998. 
Layout designs of integrated circuits 
233. Layout designs of integrated circuits were  protected in accordance with the Russian 
Federation Law “On Legal Protection of Layout Designs of Integrated Circuits”.  In general, the 
provisions of this Law were in c onformity with the provisions of the Treaty on Intellectual Property in 
Respect of Integrated Circuits (Washington Treaty) , notwithstanding the fact that Russia was not a 
party to this Treaty.  Additionally (in respect of the Washington Treaty) the relevant requirements of the TRIPS Agreement had been taken into account in  a draft law on amendments to the Law on layout 
designs which was to be submitted to the legislative authorities. WT/ACC/SPEC/RUS/20/Rev.1 
Page 58  
 
 Requirements on undisclosed information, including trade secrets and test data 
234. Protection of undisclosed information, as in S ection 7 of the TRIPS Agreement, was ensured 
in the Russian legislation by virtue of Article 139 of the Civil Code.  In particular, Article 139 
stipulated the liability of officials who illegally ob tained information which constituted official or 
commercial secrets.  The obtaining, use, or discl osure of scientific, technical, production, or 
commercial information, including commercial se crets, without the owner’s consent were not 
permitted by virtue of Article 10 of the Fede ral Law No. 948-1 of 23 March 1991 “On Competition 
and Restriction of Monopoly Activity on Commodity Markets”. 
Enforcement 
Criminal measures 
235. The  representative of Russia informed  that w ithin the Main Economic Crime Division of the 
Ministry of Interior  (in 89 regions there are regional departments of ec onomic crimes) since 1999 
there has been a special department dealing with intellectual property crimes. 
236. As for the criminal sanctions, the Criminal C ode included three articles specifically dealing 
with intellectual property: Article 146 (Copyright an d Related Rights Violations), Article 147 (Patents 
Violations) and Article 180 (Trademark Violations).  While copyright violations were punishable by 
fines and imprisonment. For the other intellectual property violations no imprisonment was provided.  
In the meantime, the State Duma approved, in the first reading, the draft amendment to Article 180 
(Trademark Violations) introducing a new paragraph dealing with organised crime, initial conspiracy 
and providing an imprisonment. 
237. Since Intellectual property crimes were not cons idered to be “grave” crimes,  enforcement 
bodies used other articles of the Criminal Code wh en appropriate such as smuggling, consumer fraud, 
etc.  In 1997, there were 720 intellectual property violation cases, in 1998 – 950, in 1999 – 1300, in 
2000 – 2000 including 1117 cases on copyright and related rights violations. In 1999, 125 illegal 
manufacturing facilities were closed down, 30 milli on illegal units were confiscated, in 2000 – 334 
manufacturing facilities were closed down and 50 million units were confiscated. 
238. As for confiscating illegal goods, materials a nd equipment used for their manufacturing, 
Articles 146, 147 and 180 of the Criminal Code did not  directly stipulate it. It was a normal practice 
when these goods and machinery were confiscated as ma terial evidence. As for the illegal copies, the 
right holder could request to take them; as for the machinery it had to be decided by the court. In 
practice, however, the infringer could be the owne r of illegal copies. In such cases, the owner was  WT/ACC/SPEC/RUS/20/Rev.1 
 Page 59 
 
 
 responsible for properly reflecting these goods in his balance in accordance with accounting rules. 
When the illegal goods wee not reflected in the ba lance they could be confiscated by the court as 
property, which had no owner. Such a case had to  be initiated by the financial control bodies . 
239. Concerning the High Arbitration Court’s practice, the Court issued a decision on confiscation 
and destruction in cases where the right holder did no t request the goods to be transferred to him. If 
the Court did not decide on confiscation of illegal goods in civil proceedings this decision could be 
appealed against by the right holder. 
Criminal procedure 
240. In accordance with the legislation in force the enforcement bodies had the responsibility for 
discovering and identifying criminal violations. Sinc e intellectual property violations were within the 
category of private accusation criminal procedure c ould not be initiated without the complaint by the 
right holder.   
241. As for the time limits for investigation in accord ance with the Criminal Procedure Code it was 
initially 10 days and 30 days for the final decision in complex cases. 
242. Normally, the statement that the goods were counterfeit was made by the right holder. 
Official state expertise may be done by the Centre fo r Expertise of the Ministry of Interior. Rospatent 
dealt with examination in the trademark cases. The decision on expertise was made by the investigator, prosecutor or the court. The experti se initiated by the law enforcement bodies was free of 
charge.  
Administrative measures 
243. Administrative sanctions under the Code of Administrative Offences in force were applied 
only to the copyright violations (Article 150:4). Ad ministrative sanctions were the fines defined by 
the court between the minimum and maximum estab lished in the Law. Although the fines were not 
high administrative liability was generally a more simple and efficient form for smaller scale 
copyright violations. Most importantly, Article 150-4 directly provided for the confiscation of illegal 
copies, material and equipment. Confiscated article s could be transferred to the right holder on his 
request or destroyed. 
244. The criterion, which defined administrative lia bility as opposed to criminal liability at the 
moment was “significant damage”. In addition, cr iminal measures were aimed against the most 
serious crimes, which represented danger to the public.  WT/ACC/SPEC/RUS/20/Rev.1 
Page 60  
 
 245. As far as the activities of the Ministry of Antimonopoly Policy and Entrepreneurship Support 
were concerned, the sanctions were available under the antimonopoly legislation. Any business entity 
whose rights of intellectual property were violat ed by another business entity could apply to the 
Ministry to start the proceedings against the offe nder. The Ministry could issue a decision imposing 
fines or demanding certain actions or prohibiting infringing actions.  The procedure normally took 
between 1 and 2 months, in complicated cases - between 3 and 6 months.  
Border measures 
246. Article 10 of the Customs Code included intell ectual property protection within the scope of 
the Customs’ responsibility. Since 1998, the State Customs Committee accepted right holders’ 
applications for the Customs’ measures. The follo wing documents had to be presented: confirmation 
of the intellectual property rights, power of a ttorney (when necessary) and information on the 
violation (description of goods) as well as any additio nal information available from the right holder. 
247. At present, the Customs Code did not allow the Customs bodies to act fully in accordance 
with the TRIPS standards in terms of supplying the right holder as a third party with information and 
of providing the right holder with an opportunity to  inspect detained goods and take samples. The 
draft new Customs Code included a new section dea ling with intellectual property protection, which 
effectively addressed these problems as well. At the CIS level there was the draft Treaty on 
importation and exportation of goods ap proved by the CIS Economic Council.  
248. When goods were detained the Customs had 10 wo rking days to inspect all goods. Particular 
attention was paid to the goods indicated by the ri ght holder. The term coul d be extended for another 
20 working days or 31 calendar days. Within this pe riod if there were grounds to consider intellectual 
property violations the Customs transferred materi als on intellectual property violation to the Police 
and prosecutors. The right holder could br ing a civil law case to the court.   
249. As for the possibility to obtain from the Cu stoms bodies information about the infringing 
company, its history, activity, etc., after the new Customs Code would be enacted such information 
would be available in relation of  the impor ters and imported goods . Concerning backdated 
information it would be possible from the date of regi stration of the right holder’s application with the 
Customs or from any date based on the court order. 
Civil law remedies and procedure 
250. Referring to  remedies available under the Civil Code and intellectual property the list thereof  
was as follows: confirmation of rights, prohibitio n of actions violating rights, imposing fines,  WT/ACC/SPEC/RUS/20/Rev.1 
 Page 61 
 
 
 compensation of damages caused to the right holde r, compensation of income received by the 
infringer and statutory compensation. The last two  measures were available only for copyright.  
251. Regarding claims for damages and assessment of damages, in civil law cases the general 
principle of full recovery of damages existed. Th e amount of damage was calculated in accordance 
with the general norms of the Civil Code based  on the prices of corresponding legitimate goods taking 
into account actual damage and forgone profit of the right holder. As for the statutory compensation it 
was initially defined by the plaintiff who needs to prove the fact of damage caused but without 
calculating the amount. Then it was further assessed by  the court based on the nature of infringement, 
income received by the infringer, etc. The cour t finally decided on the amount of compensation.  
252. Regarding provisional measures under Article 75 of  the Code of Arbitration Procedure the 
court could issue an order for preliminary injunc tion based on the plaintiff’s petition. Such measures 
should be aimed at securing the claim. Provision al measures included: prohibition of infringing 
actions, arrest of property including back account s, seizure of documents and other evidence The 
judge handling the case should make a decision the ne xt day after the petition is filed without the 
representatives of the parties. Under the current legislation in force any petition for provisional 
measures can be filed after the civil procedure is initiated. However, the draft amendments to the 
Code of Arbitration Procedure proposed to allow pr ovisional measures to be obtained before filing the 
claim. 
POLICIES AFFECTING TRADE IN SERVICES 
253. Russian market for services based on supply a nd demand conditions bega n to develop only in 
the first part of the 1990s, following the domestic pr ocess of market reforms and privatisation, as well 
as liberalisation of the whole system of the Russian Federation’s economic relations.  The 
development of services market had led to a substa ntial increase of its share in national GNP, which 
reached about 55 per cent in  2000 (28 per cent in 1991).  Although Russia’s share in world trade in 
services was not yet quite important, the contribution of services to the country’s total trade was not 
negligible (in  2000 Russia’s share of trade in services in the world’s trade in services comprised over 
1 per cent). The balance of foreign trade in ser vices, however, was traditionally negative for the 
Russian Federation, with exports amounting to  US$9,632 million and imports amounting to 
US$17,412  million in  2000 (data based on Balance of Payments).  
254. The reform of the Russian economy during the l ast decade called into being the new services 
sectors as well as contributed to the development of ex isting ones.  At the same time, be they old or 
new, services providers in some sectors operated within insufficient regulatory and institutional WT/ACC/SPEC/RUS/20/Rev.1 
Page 62  
 
 framework and suffered from unstable market structur e.  As “infant industries”, those services sectors 
were liable to positive and negative economic and social  variations that could have serious impact on 
the economy as a whole.  Should negative variations prevail, the Russian Fede ration needed to keep 
the possibility to have recourse to certain temporary measures aimed at the maintenance of  normal competitive environment, balance and integrity of markets, social stability and employment.  The 
implication of these measures was limited in time until the factors triggering their use would be 
removed.  Should multilateral disciplines addressing the relevant issues be agreed, the Russian 
Federation was willing to put the mentioned measu res in compliance with those disciplines.  
255. The economic developments in services were suppor ted by the legislative process. Many laws 
and regulations, necessary to establish a legal framewo rk for provision of services in general (such as 
Civil Code or Law on foreign investments) or in specific sectors were adopted. However, the 
dynamism of services markets was still not adequately  reflected by the regulatory system. The reasons 
of the Russian banking crisis in August 1998 were, in particular, associat ed with inadequate 
approaches to and lack of effective prudential arrangements in the established banking activities, 
following the evolved extreme dependence of the inte rnal financial system from the situation in short-
term foreign capital markets. In a ddition, development of regulatory systems in some services sectors 
depended on the adoption in its final shape of  politic ally sensitive basic laws on the status of land for 
the purpose of ownership and commercial transactions. For the purposes of creating a favourable economic and investment climate, including in services sphere, the Russian Federation had embarked 
on a series of measures to reduce red tape rest raints on economy, involving streamlining of the 
procedures of company registrations, downsizing of th e list of types of activities subject to licensing 
and reduction of frequency of inspections of enterp rises.  It could be expected that regulatory 
framework of the Russian Federation governing th e services sector would, at the same time, be 
subject to frequent adaptations and improvement in light of experience and of progress made in 
building national capacity to supply services on a competitive basis. That did not contradict GATS 
provisions recognizing the right of Members to re gulate, and to introduce new regulations, on supply 
of services within their territories in or der to meet national policy objectives. 
256. According to legal framework some kinds of  services were subject to licensing. For the 
purpose of transparency the detailed information about  the particularities of licensing of certain types 
of activity is submitted in Reference Paper 12.  
257. Russian authorities were aware of ongoing negotiations within the WTO with a view to 
developing the necessary multilateral disciplines to a void trade distortive effects of subsidies and 
addressing the appropriateness of countervailing proce dures.  Taking into account the fact that the  WT/ACC/SPEC/RUS/20/Rev.1 
 Page 63 
 
 
 Russian Federation did not take part in the negotia tions as a full-fledged participant and thus was not 
able to secure adequately its particular interests in  this respect, the Russian Federation had to reserve 
the right, pending the results of these negotiations, to maintain subsidies measures according to the 
national legislation and practice, and upon comp letion of negotiations to adjust its specific 
commitments on services in a manner not contradicting the above-mentioned results. 
258. The Russian Federation exercised its sovereign rights over  subsoil and mineral resources, 
underground resources within the territory of the Ru ssian Federation, including subsoil domain and 
mineral resources contained therein, energy and othe r resources.  Subsoil areas could not be subject to 
purchase, sale, gift, inheritance, depos it, pledge or any other form of alienation.  In this context, the 
Russian Federation was developing a market envir onment in this field with a purpose of creating 
favourable conditions for enterprise operation, cap ital and technology inflow and encouraging access 
to the subsoil and natural resources on the basis of conclusion of production sharing and concession 
agreements.    
259. In respect of most favoured nation commitm ents, the Russian Federation had a limited 
number of bilateral agreements re lated to debt settlements and technical assistance, measures resulting 
from the agreements on legal assistance; meas ures which defined the responsibility for the 
preservation of suitability of aircraft for carrying out the flights (defined by bilateral agreements);  
agreements on  terms  of activity on the territory of Russia of some international banking institutions  
(North Investment Bank,  Black Sea Bank of Tr ade and Development, In terstate Bank), which 
contained some preferential provisions resulting from  specific international status of these institutions 
within the context of the  agreements.  There wa s an understanding of the Russian Federation  that 
WTO provisions should not be construed as preventi ng Russia to implement the mentioned bilateral 
agreements for the period of their validity. 
260. At the beginning of 2001 the modified draft of the Schedule of Specific Commitments of the 
Russian Federation in Services was submitted to the S ecretariat of the WTO. This draft was based on 
the understanding that the Russian Federation reser ved the right to determine it's commitments in 
respect of the state procurement supplied on non-discriminatory basis depending on the future definition of the "services purchased for government al purposes" and in accordance with multilateral 
rules, that will be established in the context of Article XIII of the GATS.  
261. For the purpose of protection of interests of investors, depositors, policy-holders, protection 
of national currency of the Russian Federation and also for the purpose of ensuring the stability and 
integrity of the financial system, the Russian Fede ration did not exclude the possibility of application 
of measures affecting currency regulation and currency control and any transaction involving WT/ACC/SPEC/RUS/20/Rev.1 
Page 64  
 
 instruments of the internal debt of the Russian Fede ration and raising credits or loans at international 
financial markets by issuance and placement of bonds and other issue-grade securities outside the 
territory of the Russian Federation. 
262. Russia followed the federal policy of and exer cised state control vis-à-vis the natural 
monopolies
4 in the spheres, determined by Federal Law № 147 of 17 August 1995 "On the Natural 
Monopolies", for the purpose of reaching a balance of  interests between the consumers and subjects of 
the natural monopolies5. The bodies regulating natural monopolies exercised control over the actions 
which were performed with participation of the s ubjects of the natural monopolies engaged in services 
supply or in respect of such subjects, or which could result in infringement of the interests of 
consumers of services, regulated in keeping with the mentioned Federal Law or subject to the restraint 
of the economically justified transition of the co rresponding services market from the state of natural 
monopoly to that of a competitive market. Methods of the State regulation included the followings: 
the price regulation with respect to the activity of the subjects of natural monopolies in services 
market through the setting (fixation) of the maximum level of prices (tariffs); the identification of 
consumers subject to obligatory service and/or the fixation of a minimum level of their supply; control 
over any transactions, as a result of which a subject of  natural monopoly acquires the right of 
ownership of fixed assets or the right of using fi xed assets, not intended for services supply, regulated 
in accordance with the said Federal Law; control over the investments of a subject of natural 
monopoly in services supply, which are not regulated in keeping with the said Federal Law; control 
over the sale, lease,  or any  other transaction, as a result of which the transactor unit acquires the right 
of ownership or possession and/or use of the part of the fixed assets of the subject of natural monopoly, intended for the services supply, regulated in conformity with the said Federal Law.  
263. In the Russian Federation services considered as public utilities could be subject to public 
monopolies or exclusive rights granted to private  op erators. Public utilities existed in sectors such as 
utility services, related scientific and technical c onsulting services, services on obligatory independent 
technical testing, appraisals, examinations and analysis, environmental ser vices, health services, 
transport services and services auxiliary to all modes of transport. Exclusive rights on such services 
could be granted to private operators, for inst ance operators with concessions from bodies of state 
                                                     
 
4 A natural monopoly is the state of a market in which the satisfaction of the demand on this market is 
more effective in the absence of competition, due to the specific technological aspects of production (in connection with the substantial decreas e in the production costs per unit of services to the extent of growing 
volume of output), whereas services produced by the su bjects of a natural monopoly cannot be replaced by 
consumption of other services in connection with which the demand on the given market for services produced by the subject of the natural monopolies depends to a lesser degree on changes of prices for these services than 
on the demand for other services.  WT/ACC/SPEC/RUS/20/Rev.1 
 Page 65 
 
 
 power and local self-governmental bodies, subject to  specific services obligations. These services are 
universal and are supplied on the basis of public  contract.  This measures are applied on non-
discriminatory basis with respect to foreign services suppliers. 
264. Realizing the state's policy of the Russian Federation in preserving, developing, and 
disseminating culture, it was stipulated that aut horization could be required with respect to the 
acquisition of control over a juridical person of Russi an Federation related to the cultural heritage of 
Russian Federation and/or being a cultural property of  the peoples of the Russian Federation. Also the 
number of services suppliers and scope of their operation could be limited on non-discriminatory 
basis on the specially protected territories.  
265. For the purpose of the protection and preservati on of indigenous pers ons and exiguous ethnic 
communities measures directed at protection an d preservation of the territories of traditional 
habitation of these group could be  applied and preferences to these group could be granted with 
respect to their traditional economic activity, on the territory of their traditional habitation. 
266. For the purpose of national security reasons  Russia could use measures on regulation of 
economic and entrepreneur activity with respect to trade in services, including possession, use and 
disposal of land, natural resources and  immovable pr operty, entry and/or perm anent stay of physical 
persons could be limited or prohib ited within the border zones  and cl osed administrative areas. Such 
measures were not aimed at discrimination of the foreign suppliers of services.  
267. The required for GATS inquiry point was now under establishment. 
FREE TRADE AND CUSTOMS UNION AGREEMENTS 
268. In accordance with Russia’s bila teral agreements on free trade with CIS countries and the 
Federal Republic of Yugoslavia, th e importation of nearly all goods (including agricultural products) 
originating from those countries into the customs territory of the Russian Federation was not subject 
to customs duties. Such preferences were granted on  the basis of a certificate of origin, provided that 
the exporter was a resident of the exporting country. There was no intention to establish a common 
external tariff within CIS. 
269. A number of agreements were signed between the Russian Federation and the Republic of 
Belarus, the Republic of Kazakhstan, the Republic  of Tajikistan and the Kyrgyz Republic.  These 
agreements were aimed at a step-by-step fo rmation of a customs union among the signatories. 
                                                                                                                                                                     
5 The subject of a natural monopoly is a transactor un it (legal entity) engaged in the services supply in WT/ACC/SPEC/RUS/20/Rev.1 
Page 66  
 
 270. The detailed description of the score, nature a nd status of all these preferential arrangements 
were provided by the Russia Federation in the document WT/ACC/RUS/43. 
271. The above-noted several agreements to create customs union were transformed into  single 
agreement on establishment of the Eurasian Economic Community, which took effect on 30 May 2001. 
272. Pursuant to Article 6 of the Agreement of  the Eurasian Economic Community on the 
Common Customs Tariff, which took effect in January 2001, a customs tariff common for Russia, 
Belarus, Kazakhstan and Tajikista n would be gradually formed within a five year period. The 
Agreement provided for possible extension of the timeframe for formation of the Common Customs 
Tariff beyond the original five-year period. This  process would fully take into account the future 
commitments of Russia as the WTO member, inter alia, under Article XXIV of the GATT 1994 .  
273. The formation of the customs union was in its in itial stage. The list of goods for which import 
customs duty rates were the same in countries of the Eurasian Economic Community represented only 35 per cent percent of the goods nomenclature. Trade with these countries was currently carried out under the terms and conditions of a free trade regime. 
274. The Government would, from the date of ac cession, observe the pr ovisions of the WTO, 
including Article XXIV of the GATT 1994 and Article V of the GATS in its participation in trade 
agreements, and would ensure that the provisi ons of these WTO Agreements for notification, 
consultation and other requirements concerning free trade areas and customs unions of which Russia 
was a member were met.  
275. The Russian Federation intended to maintain the limited scope of MFN exemptions, as 
provided for in the Annex on GATS Article II. Descri ption of respective measure, countries to which 
the measure was  applied, intended duration and c onditions creating the need for exemptions were 
provided in the List of Article II (MFN) exemptions of the Russian Federation. 
Sectorial agreements 
276. Trade agreements in specific sectors which were concluded with several WTO members, 
falling into the definition of “voluntary export rest raint agreements” covered different products such 
as steel and steel products, certain fertilizers, textile s and sport weapons. It was not the intention of 
the Russian Federation to continue these agreem ents which were askew of WTO commitments and 
                                                                                                                                                                    
 
the conditions of the natural monopoly .  WT/ACC/SPEC/RUS/20/Rev.1 
 Page 67 
 
 
 the Russian Federation intended to propose to its othe r parties either to bring them into conformity 
with the WTO or to terminate these agreements from the date of Russia’s accession to the WTO. 
Transparency 
277. Article 15 of the Constitution provided that: “Laws shall be officially published.  Unpublished 
laws shall not be used.  Any normative legal act s concerning human rights, freedoms and duties of 
man and citizen may not be used, if they are not officially publishe d for general knowledge.” 
278. The constitutional principle of obligatory publi cation of legislative acts was developed in 
Federal Constitutional Law of 17 December 1997 No. 2 -FKZ “On the Government of the Russian 
Federation” (as amended on 31 D ecember 1997), in the Federal Law of 14 July 1994 No 5-FZ “On 
the procedure of publication and entry into for ce of Federal Constitutiona l Laws, Federal Laws, 
statements of chambers of Federal Assembly” a nd in the Decree of the President of 23 May 1996 No 
763 “On the procedure of publication and entry in for ce of statements of the President of the Russian 
Federation, Government of the Russian Federatio n and legislative acts of the federal executive 
bodies”. In accordance with the aforesaid legislation,  only officially publis hed federal constitutional 
laws, federal laws, statements of ch ambers of Federal Assembly were enforced within the territory of 
the Russian Federation. The “Parlamentskaya Gaze ta” (Parliament Gazette), “Rossijskaya Gazeta’ 
(Russian Gazette) or “Sobranie Zakonodatelstva Ross ijskoj Federatsii” (Complete legislation of the 
Russian Federation) were the official publications of the acts mentioned above.  
279. The  sources of official publication of the acts of the President of the Russian Federation and 
the Governments of the Russian Federation were “Rossijskaya Gazeta” and "Sobranie 
Zakonodatelstva Rossijskoj Federatsii”  . The normative acts of federal bodies of the executive power 
were registered in the Ministry of Justice of th e Russian Federation and were subject to official 
publication in “Rossijskaya Gazeta» and in “Bu lletin of the normative acts of federal bodies”. 
 
__________