RESTRICTED  
  
G/TFA/M /18 
7 December 2021  
(21-9186) Page: 1/10 
Committee on Trade Facilitation  Original: English  
 
MINUTES OF THE MEETING OF THE COMMITTEE ON TRADE FACILITATION  
19-20 JULY 2021  
CHAIRPERSON: MR CHRISTOPHER O'TOOLE (CANADA)  
Contents  
 
1   MATTERS RELATING TO THE IMPLEMENTATION AND ADMINISTRATION OF THE 
TRADE FACILITATION AGREEMENT (TFA)  ................................ ................................ ....... 1 
1.1   Notifications by Members ................................ ................................ .............................  2 
A. Notifications Under Articles 15 And 16 of the Trade Facilitation Agreement  .......................  2 
B. Notifications Under Articles 17 And 19 of the Trade Facilitation Agreement  .......................  3 
C. Notifications Under Articles 1:4, 10:4:3, 10:6:2 and 12:2:2 Of the Trade Facilitation 
Agreement  ................................ ................................ ................................ ........................  5 
D. Notifications Under Article 22 of the Trade Facilitation Agreement  ................................ ... 5 
1.2   Status of Ratification and Notification Process  ................................ ................................  6 
2   EXPERIENCE SHARING/THEMATIC DISCUSSIONS  ................................ ......................  7 
2.1   The Role of Second Test Procedures in Trade Facilitation - Communication from  
The United States (G/TFA/W/48)  ................................ ................................ .........................  7 
2.2   Madagascar's Experience with Implementation of Article 3 Of the Trade Facilitation 
Agreement and Implementation of the E -Phyto Solution  ................................ .........................  7 
2.3   Compendium Sharing Experiences Related to the COVID -19 Crisis (G/TFA/W/40/Rev.1)  ..... 7 
3   REVIEW OF THE OPERATION AND IMPLEMENTATION OF THE AGREEMENT IN 
ACCORDANCE WITH ARTICLE 23.1.6 OF THE TRADE FACILITATION AGREEMENT  ...........  7 
A. Informal Discussion on The Review – Report by the Chairperson and any Additional 
Comments  ................................ ................................ ................................ ........................  7 
4   TRADE FACILITATION AGREEMENT FACILITY CONSULTATIONS – REPORT BY THE 
CHAIRPERSON  ................................ ................................ ................................ ................  9 
5   OTHER BUSINESS  ................................ ................................ ................................ ..... 10 
 
 
1  MATTERS RELATING TO THE IMPLEMENTATION AND ADMINISTRATION OF THE TRADE 
FACILITATION AGREEMENT (TFA)  
1.1.  The Chair welcomed delegations and recalled that the agenda for the meeting had been 
circulated in documents WTO/AIR/TFA/18  and WTO/AIR/TFA/18/Rev.1.  
1.2.  He informed the Committee that the Chairman of the Council for Trade in Goods  (CTF) 
continued to hold consultations with Members on the list of names to chair the subsidiary bodies of 
the CTG, and that there had been no developments regarding the appointment of officers to The G/TFA/M /18 
 
- 2 - 
 
  Trade Facilitation Committee (TFC, the Committee) . Ther efore, he would continue to chair the 
Committee until the election of the new Chair.  
1.3.  The Committee agreed  to continue the practice of holding Item 2 of the agenda "Experience 
sharing/thematic discussions" in informal mode, to allow for frank and interactiv e exchanges.  
1.4.  The Committee also agreed  that observers to the meeting could remain throughout the informal 
session.  
1.5.  The Chair  indicated that Kazakhstan  would not be making their experience sharing presentation 
during the meeting and instead it would take p lace at the Committee October 2021 meeting.   
1.6.  The European Union requested that the Compendium on Sharing of Experiences Related to 
COVID -19 (G/TFA/W/40/Rev.1 ) be moved to agenda item 3, following the item on the formal review 
of the four -year implementati on of the agreement . 
1.7.  The Chair added two items: (1) the dates for the Committee's meetings in 2021;  and 
(2) inviting Annex D partners and the Global Alliance for Trade Facilitation to the next meeting of 
the Committee.  
1.8.  The agenda was adopted  with the proposed changes.  
1.1  Notifications by Members  
1.9.  The Chair informed the Committee that a total of seven  new notifications had been received 
since the Committee's meeting on 22-23 June  2021. All notifications had been issued as documents 
in the G/TFA/N series.  
A. Notifications Under Articles 15 And 16 of the Trade Facilitation Agreement  
1.10.   The Chair drew the Committee's attention to the first group of notifications, namely those 
under articles 15 and 16 of the Agreement. Since the last meeting of the C ommittee, three 
notifications had been received from two Members. The notifications were introduced in alphabetical 
order of Members, as listed on the airgram.  
1.11.   The first notification came f rom Malawi (G/T FA/N/MWI/4 ) which provided information on the 
measur es taken and progress and arrangements on technical assistance.   
1.12.   The delegate of the United States  indicated the following :  
1.13.   We thank Malawi for your notifications.  We are encouraged to see assistance providers already 
working with Malawi to support implementation. We hope that this document helps Malawi identify 
partners for those remaining provisions where it seeks additional assistance. We have donors here 
in the room today and we hope they are open to further discussions to address Malawi’s outsta nding 
technical assistance needs.  
1.14.   The delegate of the United Kingdom  indicated the following:  
1.15.   We thank Malawi for notifying the Committee under Article  16 of the progress they have made 
in category C designated provisions and for their transparency. The UK  has provided technical 
assistance and capacity building ( TACB ) to Malawi under the World Customs Organization ( WCO) 
and United Nations Conference on Trade and Development ( UNCTAD ) programme. We encourage 
Malawi  to engage with the WCO for their technical a ssistance  needs where applicable. The UK 
support s the request for an extension under Article 16 . However, it would be helpful for the 
Committee to have more details on why Malawi needs six years to implement Article s 7.6, 7.7 
and 8.2. This would allow the Committee to explore ways to support Malawi that could potentially 
help accelerate implementation of those provisions. The UK remains interested in supporting 
Malawi's progress implementation progress  and we welcome further engagement with Malawi.  
1.16.   The dele gate of the European Union  indicated the following:  G/TFA/M /18 
 
- 3 - 
 
  1.17.   We commend Malawi for their detailed notification on gaps in the assistance they need to help 
them implement their category C commitments. We recommend that Malawi  get in touch with the 
EU delegation to a ddress their needs for assistance and to see how some support to TFA 
implementation could be provided under the EU new programming of aid that is still under 
discussion.  
1.18.   The Committee took note  of the notification and the statements made.  
1.19.   The next notification came from R wanda (G/TFA/N/RWA/1/A dd.3) and contained shifts in 
categories and indicative dates for the implementation of measures under category C.   
1.20.   The delegate of the United States  indicated the following :  
1.21.   We thank Rwanda for your notificat ions. We note that Rwanda has shifted Article 7.6 from 
category B to C and requested an implementation date of 31 August 2024 . Can Rwanda please 
provide further detail on the reason to shift this category from B to C, including what kind of technical 
assistance is required to implement this commitment?  As an LDC, Rwanda may still submit its 
definitive dates for its category C, thus we can accept this notification as a category C definitive date 
per Article 16, rather than a request for an extension under Ar ticle 17.  
1.22.   We are encouraged to see assistance providers already working with Rwanda to support 
implementation. We hope that this document helps Rwanda identify partners for those remaining 
provisions where it seeks additional assistance. We have donors her e in the room today and we hope 
they are open to further discussions to address Rwanda 's outstanding technical assistance needs.  
1.23.   The delegate of the European Union  indicated the following:   
1.24.   We support the United States statement on this notification. We al so note that there are 
several areas in category C commitments where Rwanda did not find assistance and in crucial 
provisions like testing capacities , risk management , or border agency cooperation , which are critical 
in these times of the pandemic. We enco urage Rwanda to get in touch with our delegation and we 
will try to see how future programme s of EU assistance could be of help. I would like to recall in this 
respect, that the Members have to put those provisions as a priority when discussing with the EU . 
The EU does not have unlimited funding so for category C provisions to be part of the programming 
agreed with the Member, the Members have to put those elements and commitments as a priority.  
1.25.   The Committee took note  of the notification and the statements  made.  
1.26.   A second notification from Rwanda (G/TFA/N/RWA/4 ) provided information on progress and 
arrangements on technical assistance and capacity building for provisions allocated in category C.  
1.27.   The Committee took note  of the notification.  
B. Notifications Under Articles  17 And 19 o f the Trade Facilitation Agreement  
1.28.   Article 17 cover s the Early Warning Mechanism and t he extension of implementation dates 
for provisions in categories B and C. Two notifications from two Members had been received since 
the last meeting.  
1.29.   The first notification was from Belize (G/TFA/N/BLZ/1/A dd.2) in regard to a shift between 
categories, as  well as a request for an extension to the definitive implementation dates for a number 
of provisions.  
1.30.   The delegate of the United States  indicated the following :  
1.31.   We thank Belize for your notification and commend your efforts to shift the category of 
Article  10.1 from C to B.  We also note your category shifting for Article s 6.2 and 10.7, and use of 
Article 17, the Early Warning Mechanism to extend the definitive implementation date for those 
articles.  G/TFA/M /18 
 
- 4 - 
 
  1.32.   In order to utilize the Early Warning Mechanism , Article 17 provides that developing country 
Members must submit their notification to the Secretariat 120 days prior to the original definitive 
implementation date. It appears that Belize submitted its notification 60 days prior to the original 
implementatio n date, which means Belize's request for an extension under Article 17 is untimely. As 
such, the United States is not in a position to accept this notification.  
1.33.   Is Belize currently working with a donor to implement Articles 6.2 and 10.7, which has now 
shifted from category B to category C?  Belize did not submit information regarding the reason why 
it has requested an extension to implement Article 10.4. Could Belize please present the rationale 
on that to the Committee?  
1.34.   The delegate of the European Union  indicated the following :  
1.35.   The EU welcomes the Belize notification of a shift of category from C to B for Article 10.1 . The 
notes that Belize shifted two provisions from category B to C and detailed its needs for assistance, 
while requesting a  14 month extens ion of its implementation deadline. This is covered by Article 
19.2 that states that a Member when requesting both a shift of category and an extension for 
implementation can resort to Article 17.2. However, he required deadline for the request under 
Article 17.2 has not been respected. This case shows the pertinence and benefit of Japan 's proposal 
in the framework of the four-year review that the Committee closely monitors the commitments of 
category B and C whose final date for implementation passed.  
1.36.   The delegate of the Japan  indicated the following :  
1.37.   Japan thanks Belize for its notification  and appreciate s Belize's efforts to implement the 
provisions.  Regarding its notification shifting Article  6.2 and Article  10.7 from category  B to category 
C, we note that the request is not made within the due date specified in Article  17, and therefore, 
Belize cannot use Article 19.2 (a) to request additional time for implementation.  We think it needs 
to be clarified as to which provision Belize is requesting additional time for implementation.  Japan 
would welcome the notification as a request based on Article 19.2 (b).  
1.38.   The Chair noted that there was no consensus in the Committee to accept the request for an 
extended definitive implementation date.  
1.39.   The Committee took note  of the notification and the statements made.  
1.40.   The next notification was from the Dominican Republic (G/TFA/N/DOM/1/A dd.2) regard ing 
the extension of the definitive implementation dates for a number of provisions.  
1.41.   The delegate  of the European Union  indicated the following :  
1.42.   The EU notes the timely notification by the Dominican Republic of its request for extensions  
of deadlines by less than 18 months  compared to the initial date of implementation that was notified 
to the WTO.  We look forward to  the Dominican Republic's explanation  for the request. We note that 
many of these provisions whose implementation has been extended would be of great help during 
the COVID -19 crisis  and we are  concerned by this situation  and are listening with great interest to 
their presentation.  
1.43.   The delegate of the United States  indicated the following :  
1.44.   We thank the Dominican Republic for its notification. The United States supports the 
Dominican Republic 's timely extension request to delay implementation of Articles 5.1, 7.4, 7.9, 8 
and 10.2 from December 2021 to June 2023.  
1.45.   The delegate of the Dominican Republic  indicated the following :  
1.46.   I would like to thank the delegates for their comments. The Dominican Republic presented 
the request of a n extension by 17 months in the notification  circulated to Members , under the 
provisions available in  Article 17 of the TFA. This decision was taken in capital after reviewing it in 
the National Trade Facilitation Committee ( NTFC) that given the impact of the COVID -19 pandemic,  
many of the actions that had been planned  in order  to implement  these measures before G/TFA/M /18 
 
- 5 - 
 
  31 December 2021 had to be delayed, suspended or reprogrammed . The Dominican Republic has 
started discussions with some donors so as to be able to plan the implementation of  these measures 
that we are requesting to extend today , and to strengthen some of those measures that have already 
been noted in category A.  
1.47.   The Committee took note  of the notifications and the statements made.  
C. Notifications Unde r Articles 1:4, 10:4:3, 10:6:2 and 12:2:2 Of the Trade Facilitation 
Agreement  
1.48.   Transparency notifications are mandated by Article s 1:4, 10:4:3, 10:6:2 and 12:2:2 of the 
TFA. They all ha ve the objective of providing transparency, either in a broader context – providing 
information on publication sources – or providing information on the specific items, such as a single 
window operation, the use of customs brokers, and customs cooperation.  
1.49.   Since the last meeting, one transparency notification had been received , which came from 
Samoa in document G/TFA/N/WSM/2 .  
1.50.   The delegate of the United States  thanked Samoa for their notification.  
1.51.   The delegate of the European Union  indicated the following:  
1.52.   We thank Samoa for its notification which is most welcome. We would like to invite Samoa to 
consider notifying their contact point for aid and to inform the Committee of the state of play 
regarding assistance received for ten category C provisions.  
1.53.   Finall y, and in line with all our statements on transparency notifications, we would like to  call 
on the Members that have not yet notified commitments there were either category A or category B 
with the deadline passed, to quickly notify their transparency meas ures which  are extremely 
important in these times of COVID -19 and crucial for traders.  
1.54.   The Chair informed the Committee that a  notification received from Lesotho would be included 
in the agenda for the next meeting.  
1.55.   The Committee took note  of the notifica tions and the statements made.  
D. Notifications Under Article 22 of the Trade Facilitation Agreement  
1.56.   The Chair drew the Committee's attention to the notifications under Article  22 of the TFA. 
There were three separate notification  obligations  identified under Article  22 - Article  22:1, 
notifications by donor members on their recent capacity building activities;  and Article s 22:2 
and 22:3, notifications from information on contac t points. Since the meeting of 22-23 June 2021 , 
one Member had provided a notification under Article  22. 
Article 22.3  
1.57.   The Chair  directed Members' attention to a notification  from Lesotho  G/TFA/N/LSO/3 .  
1.58.   The delegate of the United States  thanked Lesotho for  their notification.  
1.59.   The delegate of the United Kingdom  indicated the following:  
1.60.   The United Kingdom would like to thank Lesotho for the notification to this Committee. We 
look forward to continuing to support  those  that meet their obligations to the TFA t hrough the 
capacity building programmes through WCO and UNCTAD. Lesotho's NTFC has recently completed 
the e-learning course that  was delivered by UNCTAD and are in the process of being set up with the 
reform tracker tool. The UK remains interested in monit oring the rate of implementation  of the TFA 
and we encourage them to contact colleagues at WCO and UNCTAD for any future technical 
assistance  needs.  G/TFA/M /18 
 
- 6 - 
 
  1.61.   The delegate of the European Union  indicated the following:  
1.62.   We congratulate Lesotho for its notification wh ich is very useful . We note that there are still 
many developing country Members that have category C commitments that have not notified a 
contact point for aid and we make the link with the four-year review proposal of the EU and US  
(G/TFAW/45/Rev.1 ), regarding organizing donor meetings . The EU would be happy to participate 
and facilitate  any such meetings so as to access the situation of the Members that are still in need 
of technical assistance.  
1.63.   The Committee took note  of the notification and the stat ements made.  
1.64.   The Chair  asked if any delegation wishe d to add something on their own process, or comment 
on notifications in general.  
1.65.   The delegate of Ecuador  indicated the following :  
1.66.   Generally speaking, we would like to ask the Secretariat what the situat ion is for Members 
relating to notifications on Article 17. We understand there are delays and some of these requests 
for extensions have not been approved yet . We would like to know exactly what the state of play is 
for these Members regarding the ir original implementation dates that have been committed to , and 
some of these have already passed . Ecuador would like to know the situation. We would like to have 
an idea of how we can help these Members as the objective is that these activities are implemented.  
I am sure that these Members are full of good intentions even if they did not manage to do things 
in time. So, we would like to know exactly what the situation is for these Members.  
1.67.   The Chair recall ed the earlier discussions amongst the Committee, both in  informal and formal 
mode, and how as a result of those discussions it was clear that there was not a path forward in the 
sense of how those countries would change their implementation dates because of the lack of 
timeliness of their notifications . The Com mittee had decided to proceed on the basis of some 
suggestions made by the Chair , which include d the document G/TFA/INF/1 , which list ed the 
notification dates for Members for the coming two years. This would be  an evergreen document 
issued annually. The Ch air would recall the document at each meeting and ask that delegations  
maintain and refer to it as part of their notification efforts to ensure that they underst ood when 
dates were coming up and could  submit timely Article 17 notifications. As for the requests for 
extensions in the past  on which there had been  no consensus in the Committee around allowing 
them, the original implementation deadlines notified by those Members remain ed in place.  
1.68.   The Committee took note  of the notifications and statements made.  
1.2  Status of Ratification and Notification Process  
Update by the WTO Secretariat  
1.69.   The representative of the WTO Secretariat  presented an update since the last Committee 
meeting held in June 2021. The presentation and all the information used had been sourced from 
the TFA Database website and it is available at ( https://tfadatabase.org ).  
1.70.   The delegate of the Europe an Union  indicated the following:  
1.71.   We thank the Secretariat of the WTO for this very useful report. It is very precise and concise. 
The EU proposal (G/TFA/W/49 ) in which we suggest that Item 1.2 "Status of ratification and 
notification process  - Update by the Secretariat ", be taken up in the final report of the review. I have 
to say that we are always impressed by the quality of the report s, they are very precise and give us 
a very exact idea of where we stand with implementation of the TFA. The reports pro vide 
non-controversial and extremely useful information to better understand the implementation 
challenges . A total of 137 measures will expire  between now and the end of the year - 71 in 
category  B and 63 in category C .  
1.72.   Picking up on Japan's proposal on the four-year review of the implementation, I think that we 
cannot wait for 2022 to start seeing what has been done. If the proposals are accepted, I think that 
we should start doing this at each meeting of this Committee. It should be part and parcel of our G/TFA/M /18 
 
- 7 - 
 
  agenda, and always be on our agenda. I would like to link the 63 measures in category C that will 
expire before the end of this year  with the proposal made by the UK on the dedication session on 
technical assistance and capacity building support. If the Committee is seeking criteria to work 
affectively during the dedicated session, I think we should also give priority to these category C 
provisions that will expire this year. These are mere suggestions. I hope that more a nd more, the 
Committee can establish a link between the presentation by the Secretariat of the reality of things 
and the proposals that are made within the four-year review of the implementation of the TFA.  
1.73.   The delegate of the United States  indicated the f ollowing:  
1.74.   We just want to thank the Secretariat for its report. There is a lot of valuable information that 
comes out of this report that we all rely upon. We also recognise that it is a constant stream of 
information going into the Secretariat and they ar e distilling and organising it. We appreciate the 
work, we know how much it is, and we want to say thank you for the presentation.  
1.75.   The delegate of Brazil  also appreciated the presentation.  
1.76.   The delegate of Rwanda  indicated the following:  
1.77.   We would like to c larify more on the shifting from B to C of Article 7.6 . We found that we still 
need capacity building for our staff to ensure that they understand and implement what they are 
supposed to by implementing. We also found that we do  not have enough finance to implement this 
measure.  
1.78.   The Committee took note  of the information and the statements made.  
2  EXPERIENCE SHARING/THEMATIC DISCUSSIONS  
2.1.  This segment of the  meeting  was conducted in informal  mode , with the understanding  that 
information  Members were willing to share would be made available on a dedicated website 
(https://tfadatabase.org ) with related links also being included in the minutes of th e meeting. If a 
delegation requested it, their intervention would also be recorded in the minutes of the meeting.  
2.2.  Members  addressed the following  issues:  
2.1  The Role of Second Test Procedures in Trade Facilitation  - Communication from The 
United States  (G/TFA/W/48)  
2.3.  Information  on the presentation can be found under the following  link: https://tfadatabase.org . 
2.2  Madagascar's Experience with Implementa tion of Article 3 Of the Trade Facilitation 
Agreement and Implementation of the E -Phyto Solution  
2.4.  Information  on the presentation can be found under the following  link: https://tfadatabase.org . 
2.3  Compendium Sharing Experiences Related to the COVID -19 Crisis  
(G/TFA/W/40/Rev.1 ) 
2.5.  Information  on the presentation can be found under the following  link: https://tfadatabase.org . 
3  REVIEW OF THE OPERATION AND IMPLEMENTATION OF THE AGREEMENT IN 
ACCORDANCE WITH ARTICLE 23.1.6 OF THE TRADE FACILITATION AGREEMENT  
A. Informal Discussion on The Review – Report by the Chairperson  and any Additional 
Comments  
3.1.  The Chair recalled that Article 23.1.6 stated that "The Committee shall review the operation 
and implementation of this Agreement four years from its entry into force, and periodically 
thereafter". The Trade Facilita tion Agreement entered into force on 22 February 2017, therefore, the 
first review of the Agreement was required to be carried out this year.  G/TFA/M /18 
 
- 8 - 
 
  3.2.  In accordance with the roadmap for the conduct of the review, which had been circulated in 
document G/TFA/1, the C ommittee held its third informal meeting dedicated to a discussion of 
proposals submitted by Members under the review on 19 July 2021.  
3.3.  The Chair provided a report1 on the discussions at the previous day's meeting  as follows :  
3.4.  The convening notice for the dedicated session was circulated on 1 July. There were two items 
on the agenda for consideration: (i) a second discussion of the factual report which was circulated 
in document G/TFA/W/41; and (ii) consideration of any submissions by Members in relatio n to the 
review.  Both of these items were taken up together.  
3.5.  In accordance with the Committee's agreement to hear from the Annex D partners as part of 
the review discussions, a  representative of the W orld Customs Organization  made a presentation on 
trackin g progress on implementation of WCO standards, instruments and trade facilitation measures . 
3.6.  Turning to the general discussion in the meeting, all 12 communications received from 
Members to date were individually considered. These communications are listed in the outline of the 
review structure.  
3.7.  There was very good engagement from Members on the communications. In general, 
delegations expressed their support to consider all suggestions and undertook to continue 
discussions with proponents. A number of Member s were still reviewing some of the proposals. In 
addition, a number of proposals which were received at the end of last week were introduced by the 
proponents and they will be considered in detail at the Committee's meeting in September. 2 
3.8.  There appeared t o be general consensus expressed for the proposal contained in G/TFA/W/35, 
which is to remove consideration of notifications under Article 15 as a standing item from the agenda 
of Committee meetings. A second proposal, which is to maintain remote participa tion in Committee 
meetings by capital -based officials, contained in G/TFA/W/50, garnered strong interest.  
3.9.  I asked guidance from the Committee regarding two issues, and I would like to repeat that 
request this morning.  
3.10.   The first issue is whether the Committ ee could support the outline of the review structure. 
This draft review document will include  proposals on which there is consensus.  Remaining proposals 
that are under consideration will also be included in the document but in text boxes with an indicati on 
that they are still under consideration  by the Committee . 
3.11.   A second  issue for which I asked for guidance from the Committee was whether or not to 
consider extending the current deadline of mid -November for completion of the review. I raised this 
suggesti on in the context of the intensive work programme that Members have over the next five 
months. The sense I got from the discussion was that Members wished to maintain that deadline for 
now and would re -examine it in the Fall.  
3.12.   With regard to the current roa dmap, I outlined a slight change in timing. The Secretariat will 
circulate the first draft of the review by the end of July and a first discussion on it will take place in 
the September meeting. A revision of the review will be circulated after that meetin g and will be 
further discussed at the Committee's October meeting. With that schedule, hopefully, we would meet 
the current deadline of mid -November 2021.  
3.13.   Before concluding my report, I would firstly like to confirm that if any Member so wishes, we 
can in clude their statements made at yesterday's informal session in the record of today's meeting.  
3.14.   Secondly, I welcome the information from Members yesterday that they are working on 
proposals which they will submit in writing to the Committee before the end of  July 2021. 
 
1 Circulated in (JOB/TF/229).  
2 See document series JOB/227 and JOB/228 for a consolidated listing of textual amendments and 
proposals.  G/TFA/M /18 
 
- 9 - 
 
  3.15.   It has been very encouraging to see the increase in written submissions, as well as the very 
positive momentum that was shown in yesterday's meeting.  
3.16.   In that spirit, I encourage all Members to give consideration to possible submissions they 
would like to add to the discussion and to provide them in writing.  
3.17.   The delegate of the United States  indicated the following:  
3.18.   For those Members who were unable to join the informal yesterday, I would like to note that 
the US is working wi th Brazil on a revision of our proposal on the private sector G/TFA/W/42. We 
also have a new paper on NTFCs that we have worked on with Turkey as a co -sponsor  which is to 
be circulated .  
3.19.   The delegate of Brazil  indicated the following :  
3.20.   I would also like to  tell the Members that were not here in the informal session that Brazil 
introduced  a proposal , to be circulated, about customs cooperation based on Article 12 . The proposal  
encourages Members to establish bilateral agreements in order to exchange informat ion to increase 
risk management, international trade and also security of international trade.  
3.21.   The delegate of the Russian Federation  indicated the following :  
3.22.   The Russian Federation welcomes those Members who have already submitted their 
comments and prop osals on the first Draft Factual and encourages those who are still working to 
provide it promptly. We also express our appreciation for the work done by the Secretariat to prepare 
compendia  of Members' proposals, in documents JOB/TF/227 and JOB/TF/228.  
3.23.   We would like to underline the importance to submit all comments, changes and proposals to 
the Draft Factual Report in writing. The Russian Federation notes that in order to hold constructive 
discussions in the course of this work it is crucial that any comm ents of Members should be 
accompanied also by concrete textual suggestions to changes in the Report.  
3.24.   In our view, the lack of concrete textual proposals can lead to delay in finalizing the work on 
the first comprehensive draft version of this report. Thus,  we kindly ask the Chairperson to clarify 
how we envisage our work in respect of comments without concrete proposals on changes in the 
text. 
3.25.   The delegate of the United Kingdom  indicated the following:   
3.26.   The UK  proposal on the Agenda setting for dedicated se ssions is under G/TFA/W/54. Another 
proposal concerning T rade Policy Review  (TPR) reporting in the Committee on Trade Facilitation 
regarding Members' PR process has been circulated in document  G/TFA/W/55. Once again, we will 
look forward to engaging with M embers on these two proposals.  
3.27.   The Committee took note  of the information and the statements made.  
4  TRADE FACILITATION AGREEMENT FACILITY  CONSULTATIONS – REPORT BY THE 
CHAIRPERSON  
4.1.  The Chair reported on  the consultations held regarding the communication from the United 
States entitled "Role of the Trade Facilitation Committee in the Trade Facilitation Agreement Facility" , 
which had been  circulated in document G/TFA/W/36.   
4.2.  To continue the discussion with a view towards reaching consensus within the Committee on 
the issue, a third open -ended informal consultation  had taken place  on 7 July.  This consultation had 
been in follow -up to the discussion in the June Committee meeting , and the informal discussion on 
9 June, as wel l as a separate discussion and presentation on trust funds earlier in May.  
4.3.  During the discussions of 7 July , there had been  a number of exchanges regarding a possible 
way forward. There had not been much development since, but the Chair recalled an idea  presented 
to Members  in the context of affirming the relationship between the Committee and the Trade G/TFA/M /18 
 
- 10 - 
 
  Facilitation Agreement Facility (TFAF) . The suggestion to Members was to come up with a set of 
guidelines to provide direction to the work of the Facility. The purpose of this document would be to 
set out a relationship between the Committee and the Facility , in the sense that the Committee 
would set  out the priorities that it want ed to address in terms of implementation.  
4.4.  Based on some of the interventions f rom Members during the meeting, regarding monitoring 
and helping Members meet their deadlines for implementation , there was space for the Committee 
to work to identify where the TFAF could  support it , and also identify the kinds of activities that the 
Comm ittee would like the TFAF to undertake in that regard.  
4.5.  The second part of the document would respond to requests around transparency , where the 
Committee could  actually take a look at the requests that had been made to the Facility by Members; 
the purpose of that activity; its relationship to the implementation efforts of that Member and the 
priorities that the Committee ha d set; but also, as well to look at some of the expected outcomes 
and how that support ed the Committee efforts to implement the Agreemen t. 
4.6.  Essentially, a way was needed for the Committee to have a communication with TFAF and to 
also provide ongoing policy guidance in terms of the work that it was doing to help Members in their 
implementation.  
4.7.  The Chair  propose d, to less en the burden on the  full Committee , to hold small group discussions 
in an effort to develop this idea further , and to find out if consensus could be reached on proceeding 
in that manner . Interested Members who wish ed to participate in those consultations  should contact  
the Secretariat and a meeting would be organize d to delve further into this idea and  examine if the 
Committee could  come up with a document that satisfie d both Members need to get the TFAF 
working as soon as possible  but also reflected guidance provided by the Committee. The Chair would 
report back to the Committee on the outcome of those consultations at the next meeting.  
4.8.  It was so agreed .  
4.9.  The Committee took note  of the information and the statements m ade.  
5  OTHER BUSINESS  
5.1.  The Chair informed the Committee that there would be  an informal meeting dedicated to the 
review on 22 September, and a formal Committee meeting from 19 to 21 October. The Dedicated 
Session on Technical Assistance and Capacity Building  Support would  take place on 21 October.  
5.2.  The Committee agreed  to invite the Annex D organizations, as well as the Global Alliance on 
Trade Facilitation, to the next meeting.  
5.3.  The Committee took note  of the information and the statements made.  
5.4.  The meeting was adjourned .  
 
__________