RESTRICTED  
  
G/IT/M/72  
 
20 November 2020  
(20-8430) Page: 1/11 
Committee of Participants on the Expansion of Trade in 
Information Technology Products    
 
 
MINUTES OF THE MEETING OF 30 OCTOBER  2020  
CHAIRPERSON: M S UMA MUNIANDY  
The Committee of Participants on the Expansion of Trade in Information Technology Product s held 
its 72nd formal meeting on 30  October  2020. The airgram of the meeting  was circulated in 
document  WTO/AIR/IT/11 , and an annotated agenda for the meeting was circulated in 
document  JOB/IT/2 6. 
 
1   REVIEW OF THE STATUS OF IMPLEMENTATION OF THE MINISTERIAL  DECLARATION 
ON TRADE IN INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY PRODUCTS (G/IT/1/REV.58)  .......................  2 
1.1   Implementation Issue Concerning India (G/IT/W/42 and G/IT/W/45)  ................................ . 2 
1.2   Implementation Issue Concerning China  ................................ ................................ .........  3 
1.3   Implementation Issue Concerning Indonesia  ................................ ................................ ... 4 
2   REVIEW OF PRODUCT COVERAGE  ................................ ................................ ................  5 
3   NON-TARIFF MEASURES WORK PROGRAMME  ................................ ..............................  5 
4   EMC/EMI PILOT PROJECT  ................................ ................................ ............................  6 
4.1   Draft List of the Types of Conformity Assessment Procedures for EMC/EMI used by 
ITA Participan ts (G/IT/W/17/Rev.27)  ................................ ................................ .....................  6 
5   DIVERGENCES IN CLASSIFYING INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY PRODUCTS 
(G/IT/14/REV.1/ADD.1; G/IT/W/6/REV.3; G/IT/W/ 33; G/IT/W/34; G/IT/27; 
JOB/IT/12; G/IT/29, AND G/IT/W/40/ADD.1 -21, G/IT/W/40/SUPPL.4, AND 
JOB/IT/25)  ................................ ................................ ................................ ......................  7 
5.1   Implementation of the Decision for the Classification of  
18 Attachment  B products (G/IT/27)  ................................ ................................ .....................  7 
5.2   Implementation of the 2016  Decision for the Classification of an  
Additional 15  items (G/IT/29)  ................................ ................................ ...............................  7 
5.3   Note by the Secretariat (G/IT/W/40 and its supplements  and addenda)  .............................  7 
5.4   The request to update the "ITA  Model List" – JOB/07/96, dated 25  June 2007 .....................  8 
6   NEW PARTICIPANTS  ................................ ................................ ................................ ... 9 
7   DRAFT ANNUAL REPORT (2020) OF THE COMMITTEE TO  
THE COUNCIL FOR TRADE IN GOODS (G/IT/W/50)  ................................ .........................  9 
8   OTHER BUSINESS  ................................ ................................ ................................ ........  9 
8.1   Date and programme of the proposed ITA  worksho p ................................ ........................  9 
8.2   Date of next meeting  ................................ ................................ ................................ ..11 
8.3   Secretariat staff changes concerning the Committee  ................................ ....................... 11 
 G/IT/M/72  
 
- 2 - 
 
  1  REVIEW OF THE STATUS OF IMPLEMENTATION OF THE MINISTERIAL DECLARATION ON 
TRADE IN INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY P RODUCTS  (G/IT/1/REV.58)  
1.1.  The Chairperson  informed the Committee that an overview of the Status of Implementation of 
the Ministerial Declaration on Trade in Information Technology Products could be found in 
document  G/IT/1/Rev.58.  
1.2.  As stated at previous meetings of the Committee, she flagged the outstanding issue concerning 
the missing submission of Morocco under the 1980  Procedures for Modification and Rectification of 
Schedules of Tariff Concessions.  It was recalled that Morocco ha d become a participant to the ITA 
on 14  November  2003. Nevertheless, Morocco had still not yet submitted its final ITA  schedule of 
commitments. Despite outreach to Morocco undertaken on several occasions by previous 
ITA Chairpersons, including a letter sen t to the Minister of Economy and Finance of Morocco in the 
autumn of 2017, a formal response from Morocco had still not been received. In this context, she 
urged Morocco to submit its ITA  schedule of commitments for formal modification and rectification, 
as required by the 1980  Decision, as soon as possible , and suggested that the issue be discussed 
again at the Committee's next meeting.  
1.3.  The Committee took note  of the statement made.  
1.1  Implementation Issue Concerning India (G/IT/W/42 and G/IT/W/45)  
1.4.  The Chairp erson  referred to document  G/IT/W/42, which had been circulated at the request of 
the delegations of the European  Union, Japan, and the United States, and document  G/IT/W/45, 
which had been circulated at the request of the delegation of India.  
1.5.  The represen tative of China  reiterate d China's concern with regard to India' s customs duties 
on telecommunication and relevant products, especially mobile phones and their components. China 
believe d that  these products f ell within the scope of the 1996 ITA Agreement , and that India's 
applied rates ha d exceeded its bound rates in the WTO, which was inconsistent with its obligations 
under the ITA and Article  II of the GATT. China once again urge d India to eliminate its customs 
duties on the products concerned  immediatel y, or at least to restore them to their  WTO bound rates.  
1.6.  The representative of Norway  underlined the importance that Norway placed on this issue.  
1.7.  The representative of the United States  regretted the fact that they, and numerous other 
Members, had to raise  again the issue of the inconsistencies between India's WTO  commitments to 
provide duty -free access on a range of information and communication technology products , and 
the non -zero import duties, of up to 20% in some cases, that India continued to charge on imported 
ITA products, including a number of commercially significant products from the United States. Her 
delegation had given India ample opportunity, both bilaterally and in the relevant committees, to 
address these measures and to abide by its commi tments. Nevertheless, tariff increases had 
persisted and may continue. The United States also noted with interest the request for consultations 
filed recently by the European Union, Japan, and Chinese Taipei, and looked forward to participating 
as a third  party in these disputes as they progress ed. She once again called upon India to provide 
duty-free access for the ICT and telecommunications equipment products for which India had a 
WTO commitment to do so.  
1.8.  The representative of Singapore  thanked China, Nor way, and the US, for placing this item on 
the agenda.  Singapore share d the concerns expressed by previous speakers and wished to reiterate 
its systemic and commercial interest in the issue.  
1.9.  The representative of Canada  noted  that Canada's  concerns on this topic remained, as 
previously  expressed in the Committee , as well as the Market Access Committee  (CMA) , and the 
Council for Trade in Goods  (CTG) . As mentioned by the United States, Canada also expressed its 
interest in joining, as a third  party, in the panel proceedings  that had been initiated  by the European 
Union, Japan, and Chinese Taipei . 
1.10.   The representative of the Republic of Korea  reiterated its concerns over th e issue of India's 
tariff increases on certain ICT  products , which had  been raised several times at previous relevant 
meetings, including at the ITA  Committee and the CTG. Therefore, Korea called upon India to provide G/IT/M/72  
 
- 3 - 
 
  duty-free access to the ICT  products at issue, as it had  committed  to do . Korea would continue to 
follow this is sue closely  with a view to finding a way forward . 
1.11.   The representative of Thailand  registered Thailand's ongoing commercial and systemic 
concerns over India's re -imposition of customs duties on ICT  products. Thailand joined other 
delegations in requesting In dia to abide by its WTO  commitments. Thailand also looked forward to 
participating as a third  party in the disputes filed by the European Union, Japan, and Chinese Taipei.  
1.12.   In response, t he representative of India thanked the delegations of China, Norway, the United 
States, Canada, Singapore, the Republic of Korea, and Thailand, for their continued interest in India's 
customs duty on certain telecommunication products  that were alleged to be ITA Agreement  
products by some M embers . He indicated that India ha d already made its position clear on this issue 
in various WTO  bodies, namely the CTG, the CMA, and this Committee , and he did not intend to 
repeat those statements.  However, India wished to reiterate that it ha d fully abi ded by its obligations 
and commitments under the Agreement , as contained in document  WT/Let/181.  Moreover, India did 
not intend to make commitments beyond the scope of its commitments  under the 
1996 ITA Agreement . 
1.13.   He argued that India ha d also stated in its earlier interventions that Members had a right to 
revisit any error or mistake made during tariff transposition s of their HS Schedules , and to place the 
necessary  rectification request before the WTO  body concerned . Accordingly, India had filed a 
rectification request for correcting certain errors in its HS2007  transpositions.  This rectification 
request was in accordance with the procedures for modification and rectification of schedules of tariff 
concessions contained in the Decision of  26 March  1980, under the category "Other Rectifications".  
India urge d Members to address this issue through this rectification request and, in any case, if any 
Member ha d any other views on the technical aspects of these products , as well as their 
classif ication, India would be happy to discuss these  with the Member concerned.  
1.14.   The Committee took note  of the statements made.  
1.2  Implementation Issue Concerning China  
1.15.   The representative of Japan  pointed out that China continued to impose tariffs on several 
items that had previously been free of duty. Japan remained concerned about these tariffs and would  
closely monitor the situation regard ing China's commitment to eliminating tariffs in July  2021 on all 
relevant items in line with the staging of the ITA  Expansion.  On China's classification of the IGBT -IPM 
(Intelligent Power Module ), Japan  appreciated the constructive dialogue with China  on this point and 
thanked China  for changing its classification of the IG BT-IPM to HS8542.39, which resolved Japan's 
concerns . 
1.16.   The representative of the European Union  noted that her delegation continued to be concerned 
about Chinese duties on Multi -Component Semiconductors (MCOs). The fact that several delegations 
continued to  raise the issue  also demonstrated that the information so far provided by China had 
not been sufficient to alleviate their concerns.  The WTO  Secretariat had elucidated certain useful 
elements in 2019  in its response to a letter by the Chairperson of the 1 9th Government Authorities' 
Meeting in Semiconductors (GAMS). The EU had taken from this that tariff lines should normally be 
broken down to a more detailed level so that the draft HS2017  file fully reflected the same level of 
concessions.  
1.17.   Therefore,  the EU considered that  China could have created additional national tariff lines in 
order to continue to apply a zero  duty on those products that had previously been duty -free, thereby 
maintaining the value of its concessions, in keeping with the spirit o f the ITA  Expansion.  This had 
not been the case. Nor had China consulted with other Members in advance, as it should have done.  
The EU regretted that the issue remained unresolved  and expect ed China to step up the 
implementation of its commitments . The EU urged China to rectify the situation where previously 
zero-duty items were now charged with a duty, even if that duty was being gradually lowered as the 
implementation of the staged cuts progressed . 
1.18.   The representative of Chinese Taipei  stated that they had  raised this issue in different 
WTO meetings, including in this Committee, the CMA, and the CTG , and wished to reiterate the fact 
that, since 2017, ten  tariff lines that were bound duty -free in China's WTO  schedule , and six of them G/IT/M/72  
 
- 4 - 
 
  that were covered by Chi na's ITA  commitments , were subject to duty rates under heading  8542 in 
its HS2017  schedule. This could not be justified by the HS2017  transposition amendment China 
claimed , insofar as o ne core principle was that the scope of Members' tariff concessions und er the 
WTO shall not be changed during their tariff transpositions.  She noted that , since January  2020, the 
applied tariff rate of the HS 8-digit product HS8542 .32.10 in China ha d been temporarily modified 
and reduced from 1.4% to zero, which was a positive step. Chinese Taipei  urged China to do the 
same on the other MCO  products at issue without delay.  
1.19.   The representative of the Republic of Korea  echoed the concerns expressed by Ja pan, the EU, 
and Chinese Taipei. He believed that all Members needed to fully respect the spirit of the ITA and to 
fulfil their commitments to the greatest extent possible. To this end, Korea encouraged China to 
reconsider its implementation policy.  
1.20.   The re presentative of the United States  stated that the US supported the statements and 
questions raised by the EU, Japan, Chinese Taipei, and Korea, and reiterated its concern over a 
change in China's applied duty rates for certain semiconductor products. Indee d, this was an issue 
that the US had previously raised in this Committee , as well as at the CMA and the CTG. The 
semiconductor products in question had been duty -free for over a decade but were now being 
charged import duties at the border. The US  continue d to assert, in line with the General Council 
Decision on Harmonized System (HS)  transpositions, that the scope of China's concessions had 
changed substantially and that the value of the concession had been impaired.  
1.21.   In response, t he representative of China thanked those  delegations that had expressed  their 
concerns over this issue. He said that his delegation had responded on many occasions , including in 
bilateral meetings , that its methodology was consistent with WTO  rules.  China ha d always seriously 
undertaken its tariff reduction commitments  under the WTO , and all its tariffs on MCO  products 
would be eliminated by July  2021, as scheduled.  
1.22.   The Committee took note  of the statements made . 
1.3  Implementation Issue Concerning Indonesia  
1.23.   The representative of the United States  expressed ongoing concern over  Indonesia's 
application of tariffs at the border on a category of ICT  products that appeared to exceed its 
WTO bound tariff commitments. By way of example, she cited Indonesia's duty -free tariff 
commitment for all products classified under tariff subheading  8517.62. However, US and 
Indonesian traders had reported that a 10%  duty was being levied for certain products in this tariff 
category. She indicat ed that the US had raised this issue  at the Committee  and bilaterally for over 
a year . Unfortunately, the issue had still not been resolved. For this reason, the US  requested to 
receive an explanation as soon as possible of how Indonesia intended to address the issue of its 
applied rates in excess of its WTO  bound tariff commitments.  
1.24.   The representative of Japan  thanked the United States for drawing their attention to this 
issue. Japan understood that  Indonesia had explained at the June meeting of the CMA that this issue 
stemmed  from technical  problems relating  to HS  transposition.  In this regard, Japan wished to 
receive further details of this issue  from Indonesia, including details of  its plan to address the 
problem.  
1.25.   The representative of the European Union  remained interested to hear more fr om Indonesia 
on this issue. As stated previously, the EU considered  that this was a matter that deserved close 
attention, especially in light of Indonesia's commitment to provide duty -free access on tariff lines 
under tariff heading  8517.62. She noted that  the EU would continue to monitor th e issue closely , 
and called upon Indonesia to ensure its compliance with its ITA  commitments.  
1.26.   In response, t he representative of Indonesia  noted that Indonesia gave serious attention to 
the imposition of import duties on the several ITA  products that were being questioned by the United 
States. Indonesia reaffirmed its statements made at the ITA  Committee meeting in October  2019, 
and in the CMA meeting in June  2020, indicating that it would continue to comply with and to respect 
every WTO  Agreement, including its commitments under the ITA  Agreement. Nevertheless, t he 
development of ITA  products and the sector's rapid and dynamic change in the last few years meant 
that I ndonesia's technical authorities had still to carry out the internal observations and G/IT/M/72  
 
- 5 - 
 
  investigations necessary to find out the root of the problem, and the best possible solution to it. 
Indonesia reiterated that it did not intend to take action outside its  commitments or obligations 
under the ITA  Agreement. To follow up, Indonesia would welcome any feedback , and was willing to 
continue further discussions with other Members on the issue.  
1.27.   The Committee took note  of the statements made.  
2  REVIEW OF PRODUCT COVE RAGE  
2.1.  The Chairperson  recalled that, since the Committee's meeting of 15  May 2012, and as 
requested by some delegations, the "review of product coverage" had been included as a regular 
item on the Committee's agenda. It provided an opportunity for the Commi ttee to receive reports 
and updates from those participants that were engaged in bilateral and plurilateral consultations 
relating to the review of product coverage pursuant to paragraph  3 of the Annex to the ITA.  
2.2.  The representative of Canada  reported on the work of the participants to the ITA  Expansion 
Agreement.  He informed the Committee that a lmost all participants to that Agreement ha d 
implemented, on an MFN  basis, their tariff reductions and elimination commitments under their 
national ITA  Expansion schedules. In addition, since the previous ITA  Committee meeting, 
one additional Member, Colombia, ha d submitted its modification and rectification to its respective 
Schedule of Concessions to the GATT  1994, in accordance with the 1980  Decision. Colombia's 
certification document ha d been circulated on 4  February  2020 in 
document  G/MA/TAR/RS/431/Add.1.  He reiterated that  the ITA  Expansion Agreement was open to 
all WTO  Members, and WTO  Members were strongly encouraged to consider participation in th is 
important initiative.  In that regard, the Group  of ITA  Expansion participants  would continue to reach 
out to other Members and provide them with information on the ITA  Expansion Agreement and its 
benefits. The Members of the Group st ood ready to provide  more information to any WTO  Member 
that may be interested in joining.  
2.3.  The Committee took note  of the statement made . 
3  NON-TARIFF MEASURES WORK PROGRAMME  
3.1.  The Chairperson  reminded the Committee that paragraph  3 of the Annex to the 1996  Ministerial 
Declaration stipulated that Participants should  meet periodically  to consult on non -tariff barriers to 
trade in information technology products. She reiterat ed that the Committee had attached great 
importance to Non -Tariff Barriers (NTBs) and that, since 2000, NTBs had become an essential part 
of the regular work of the Committee.  
3.2.  She rec alled that, on 7  May 2015, an industry -driven workshop dedicated to NTBs affecting 
trade in ICT  products had been organized. The main issues that had been raised at that workshop 
by industry representatives were: (i)  transparency; (ii)  standards for recogn ition of test results; 
(iii) e-labelling; and (iv)  energy efficiency. A factual report by the Chairperson had been circulated 
in document  G/IT/28. At subsequent meetings of the Committee, the Chairperson had been tasked 
to continue consultations on the fol low-up to the ITA  NTB workshop.  She also recalled that NTBs had 
also been extensively discussed at the ITA  20th Anniversary Symposium, which had been held in 
June 2017.  
3.3.  She further recalled that, at the Committee's meeting of 31  October  2019, Switzerland, as 
coordinator of the informal consultations on NTBs among a small group of participants, consisting of 
15 Members, had reported to the Committee on the work that the group had carried out. The main 
purpose of the group was to advance the work on NTM -related issues within the context of the 
ITA Agreement. The group had been working more specifically on the following issues: conformity 
assessment procedures; test results; e -labelling; and transparency. She invited the delegation of 
Switzerland to update the Committee on any further developments in this regard.  
3.4.  The representative of Switzerland  stated that his delegation had been coordinating an informal 
group of 15  Members interested in the advancement of NTM -related issues within the context of the 
ITA and i ts expansion . The Group had no specific progress to report at that time . Nevertheless, he 
reiterated that, should ITA  participants be interested in continuing to work on the issues just outlined G/IT/M/72  
 
- 6 - 
 
  by the Chair person , and deepening the work of the Group, Swit zerland stood ready to continue to 
work with them  in the current format.  
3.5.  Speaking for Switzerland itself, he reiterated the importance of NTMs  affecting  ICT products, 
as industry had illustrated at the 2015  workshop . NTMs  were nowadays the main obstacle to  trade 
in the ICT  sector , given that for most ICT  products tariffs were already at zero or close to zero.  
3.6.  The representative of the European Union  thanked Switzerland for its update. She noted that 
the ITA and its expansion had brought considerable benefit s in terms of eliminating tariffs, and that 
it was crucial  to follow -up on these benefits with progress to remove non -tariff barriers with a view 
to further facilitating trade in IT  products. The EU remained committed to that objective, even if 
they were aware of the challenges that were involved in moving towards commitment in regulatory 
areas under the umbrella of the ITA . To this end,  the EU stood ready to play its part in the small 
group discussions. Indeed, the EU was convinced that progress in t he work on NTMs  would bring 
tangible benefits to companies. In conclusion, she stated that the EU looked forward to engaging in 
any further work that might be undertaken in this area.  
3.7.  The Committee took note  of the statements made and agreed to revert to t he matter  at its 
next meeting.  
4  EMC/EMI PILOT PROJECT  
4.1  Draft List of the Types of Conformity Assessment Procedures for EMC/EMI used by 
ITA Participants (G/IT/W/17/Rev.27)  
4.1.  The Chairperson  recalled that one of the outcomes of the NTM  Work Programme had been th e 
completion of a pilot project which had led to the adoption of the "Guidelines for Electromagnetic 
Compatibility (EMC) and Electromagnetic Interference (EMI) Conformity Assessment Procedures". 
Upon adoption of these "Guidelines", the Secretariat had prep ared a note on the "Draft List of Types 
of Conformity Assessment Procedures for EMC/EMI used by ITA  Participants", as contained in 
document  G/IT/W/17 and its revisions. The note contained the responses to the survey and other 
notifications received from pa rticipants on the type of assessment procedures for EMC/EMI that they 
used. ITA  Participants had indicated on several occasions that they had found the information 
contained in this document to be very useful and that they wished to have it completed.  
4.2.  She elaborated  that, on 15  May and 10  September  2019, her predecessor had sent several 
reminder s to the 12  remaining participants that had not yet provided any information on their 
conformity assessment procedures (CAPs ). Since then, two   submissions had been received by the 
Secretariat, from Kazakhstan and Indonesia. Kazakhstan's submission was a survey response that 
had been circulated in document  G/IT/SPEC/Q4/36. Indonesia's submission was received on 
13 December  2019. In this context, an updated Secretariat  Note had been circulated on 
10 January  2020,  in document  G/IT/W/17/Rev.27. As of today, 10 out of the 53  ITA Participants 
had not yet provided information on their conformity assessment procedures . 
4.3.  She recalled that, at the informal meeting of the Committee held on 13  February  2020, some 
participants had suggested that  the Secretariat make a presentation on the background of the 
EMC/EMI  Pilot Project  to refresh delegations ' memories as to  the purpose and evolution of the Project 
so that they could b etter understand the usefulness of replying to the survey.  
4.4.  As a follow -up to Members' request s, the Secretariat  (Mr Xiaobing TANG)  made a presentation 
on the background of the EMC/EMI  Pilot Project .1 
4.5.  The representative of Japan  found the presentation help ful for deepening the Participants' 
understanding of the NTM -related work of the Committee. He commended the efforts of Participants 
and the Secretariat and strongly encouraged those participants  that had not responded to the survey 
to provide the ir inform ation as soon as possible. He also encouraged all Participants to discuss how 
to make better use of the information they had collected.  
 
1 Document  RD/IT/27.  G/IT/M/72  
 
- 7 - 
 
  4.6.  The representative of the European Union  thanked the Secretariat for the presentation, which 
was a good reminder of the project's background and possible next steps. She invited those 
participants that had not yet provided replies  to the survey  to do so  as soon as possible . 
4.7.  The representative of the United Kingdom  thanked the Secretariat for the presentation and the 
Members for their continued engagement in the pilot project . The UK supported the EMC/EMI  Pilot 
Project and saw it  as a positive exercise in improving transparency . She expressed the UK's intention  
to submit its own response to the survey in 2021, following the end of the Transition Period  between 
the UK and the EU . 
4.8.  In summary, t he Chairperson  encouraged those 10 delegations that had not provide d the 
information to the Secretariat to do so as soon as pos sible, so that the Committee could complete 
this work . To this end , she intended to undertake consultations with relevant delegations. As the 
finalization of this pilot project  was now in sight , she also asked Participants to reflect upon what 
steps, if an y, they would be prepared to consider with a view to maximizing the use fulness  of the 
information  collected . Participants were invited to share their insights with the Chairperson and 
Secretariat , or the full Committee , at any time . 
4.9.  The Committee took note  of the statement s made.  
5  DIVERGENCES IN CLASSIFYING INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY PRODUCTS 
(G/IT/14/REV.1/ADD.1; G/IT/W/6/REV.3; G/IT/W/33; G/IT/W/34; G/IT/27; 
JOB/IT/12; G/IT/29, AND G/IT/W/40/ADD.1 -21, G/IT/W/40/SUPPL.4, AND 
JOB/IT/25)  
5.1  Implementation of the Decision for the Classification of 18  Attachment  B products 
(G/IT/27)  
5.1.  The Chairperson  recalled that, on 20  July 2013, the Committee had adopted a Decision for the 
HS1996  classification of 18  Attachment  B items, which had been circulated  in document  G/IT/27. As 
required by this Decision, each participant must reflect the agreed classifications in its WTO  Schedule 
of concessions, as appropriate, following the 1980  Decision on the Procedures for Modification and 
Rectification of Schedules o f Tariff Concessions (BISD  27S/25).  
5.2.  She informed the Committee that, since the Committee's last meeting, no participant had 
approached the Secretariat for technical assistance  with the modification of their schedules . Taking 
into account that the technical  work involved in this exercise was time -consuming and could only be 
undertaken on a gradual basis , she encouraged developing -country  participants that were 
experiencing any difficulties in completing  the exercise to contact the Secretariat for technical 
assistance . 
5.3.  The Committee took note  of the Chair person 's statement . 
5.2  Implementation of the 2016  Decision for the Classification of an Additional 15 items 
(G/IT/29)  
5.4.  The Chairperson  recalled that, on 18  April 2016, the Committee had adopted the "Decision for 
HS2007  Classification of 15  Additional 'Attachment  B' Products", which had been circulated in 
document  G/IT/29. Most of the items covered by this Decision related to HS2007  headi ng 8486 
(machines and apparatus for the manufacture of semiconductor boules or wafers) and one  item 
related to heading  8471 (automatic data processing machines and units thereof).  
5.5.  She reported that, regarding the implementation of the 2016  Decision, no participant had 
approached the Secretariat for assistance since the Committee's last meeting.  
5.6.  The Committee took note  of the Chair person 's report . 
5.3  Note by the Secretariat (G/IT/W/40 and its supplements and addenda)  
5.7.  The Chairperson  noted that , regarding the re maining 22  Attachment  B items, as contained in 
the Note by the Secretariat titled "Divergence of Classification: Possible HS2007  Classification for G/IT/M/72  
 
- 8 - 
 
  the Remaining 37  'Attachment  B' Items", it had originally been circulated in document  G/IT/W/40, 
based on th e Swiss proposal for a three -step procedure (JOB/IT/12).  
5.8.  She recalled that, at the Committee's meeting of 31  October  2014, it had been agreed that: 
"Participants are expected to submit a communication to the Secretariat no later than 30  June 2015, 
indicati ng: (a)  the items that, in the participant's opinion, should be classified differently from the 
HS2007  codes listed in column  8 of the Annex to this document; and (b)  the HS2007  subheading(s) 
that, in the participant's opinion, are relevant for the classif ication of the item in question." It was 
also agreed that "The Secretariat will compile communications received in a separate document. On 
that basis, participants would then be expected to assess the next steps that could be taken to 
reduce any remaining divergence in classification."  
5.9.  She reported that, so far, the Secretariat had received comments from 21  participants. These 
had been circulated as addenda to document  G/IT/W/40. Comments had been received from the 
following participants: Norway (G/IT/W/40/ Add.1); Chinese Taipei (G/IT/W/40/Add.2); Switzerland 
(G/IT/W/40/Add.3); the European Union (G/IT/W/40/Add.4); Hong Kong, China 
(G/IT/W/40/Add.5); China (G/IT/W/40/Add.6); Japan (G/IT/W/40/Add.7); Canada 
(G/IT/W/40/Add.8); the United States (G/IT/W/40/Add. 9); India (G/IT/W/40/Add.10); Macao, 
China (G/IT/W/40/Add.11); El Salvador (G/IT/W/40/Add.12); the Republic of Korea 
(G/IT/W/40/Add.13); Panama (G/IT/W/40/Add.14); Thailand (G/IT/W/40/Add.15); Guatemala 
(G/IT/W/40/Add.16); Mauritius (G/IT/W/40/Add.17); Mon tenegro (G/IT/W/40/Add.18); the Russian 
Federation (G/IT/W/40/Add.19); Seychelles (G/IT/W/40/Add.20); and New Zealand 
(G/IT/W/40/Add.21).  
5.10.   All these comments had been consolidated into document  G/IT/W/40/Suppl.4, which also 
considered the 2016  Decision on t he classification of the additional 15  items. Therefore, there 
remained 22  Attachment  B items for which Participants should provide their comments with a view 
to arriving at a common HS  classification.  
5.11.   In this regard, she invited delegations that had not y et provided their comments on the 
possible HS2007  classification of the remaining 22  items to do so as soon as possible, with a view 
to arriving at a common classification for these products within existing HS  nomenclature and to 
fulfil the mandate of para graph  5 of the Annex to the  Ministerial Declaration on Information 
Technology Products.  
5.12.   The Committee took note  of the Chairperson's statement.  
5.4  The request to update the "ITA  Model List" – JOB/07/96 , dated 25  June  2007  
5.13.   The Chairperson  recalled that , at the Committee meeting held on 14  May 2019, the delegation 
of the United States had requested the Secretariat to update this JOB  document  (JOB/07/96)  to 
include HS2012 and HS2017  nomenclatures. In the view of the US  delegation, this document tracked 
ITA product coverage and classification divergences through the changes in nomenclature from 1996 
through to 2007. It had been particularly helpful to the US with regard to monitoring and tracking 
implementation issues and trade flows in ITA  products. She informe d the Committee that , in 
response to the request, the Secretariat had recently update d the ITA  Model List , which had been 
circulated in document  JOB/IT/25.  
5.14.   The Secretariat  (Mr Eric Ng Shing) made a presentation on document  JOB/IT/25 .2 
5.15.   The representative o f Japan  thanked the Secretariat for its hard work and informative 
presentation. He considered that the new Model List not only provided a better understanding of the 
correlation between HS2012 and HS2017  with previous HS  nomenclatures, but also  provided mo re 
clarity about which subheadings were covered by the ITA. 
5.16.   The representative of India thanked the Secretariat for the presentation and requested a copy 
of it to share with Capital.  
 
2 Document  RD/IT/28.  G/IT/M/72  
 
- 9 - 
 
  5.17.   The Committee took note  of the presentation and statements made . 
6  NEW PARTICIPANTS  
6.1.  The Chairperson  informed the Committee that there was no request currently pending for 
accession to the  Agreement . She pointed out that encouraging broader participation in the ITA was 
one of the i mportant functions of the Committee , and its meeting s provided an opportunity for 
participants to report on their outreach activities with non-ITA Participants.  
6.2.  The representative of the United Kingdom  expressed support for wider participation in the ITA 
and related discussions . She highlighted that t he UK had always been a strong proponent of the 
Agreement because of the benefits that greater liberalization of information technology goods could 
bring, especially to developing countries.  Technology enhanced  productivity, economic growth, and 
communication, which were key to meeting development goals.  The UK therefore encouraged 
continuous consultation with non -ITA Members, in particular with developing countries . 
6.3.  The Committee took note of the statement made.  
7  DRAFT ANNUAL REPORT (2020) OF THE COMMITTEE TO THE COUNCIL FOR TRADE IN 
GOODS (G/IT/W/50)  
7.1.  The Chairperson  informed the Committee that the Committee's draft annual report  (2020)  to 
the CTG had been circulated in document  G/IT/W/50 . 
7.2.  The Committee adopted  the draft report on the understanding that it would be modified to 
include any update and reflect discussions at the meeting3. 
8  OTHER BUSINESS  
8.1.  The Chairperson  informed the Committee that she would take up the follo wing three  issues 
under this agenda item: (i)  the date and programme of the proposed ITA  workshop ; (ii) the date of 
the next meeting; and (iii)  an announcement regarding Secretariat staff changes in connection with 
the Committee.  
8.1  Date and programme of the proposed ITA  workshop  
8.2.  The Chairperson  recalled that, at the Symposium held on 27 -28 June 2017 on the 
20th Anniversary of the ITA, some participants had proposed the organization of another 
ITA workshop. As a follow -up to that request, the Secretariat had requested an ITA  event (scheduled 
for the second half of 2020) to be included in the WTO's Biennial Technical Assistance and Training 
Plan 2020 -2021. 
8.3.  At the Committee's last formal meeting , held on 31  October  2019, it had been agreed that 
once the biennial TA plan had been approved, the Chair person  would undertake consultations with 
interested delegations to decide on the exact timing and main themes of the proposed ITA  event.  
8.4.  The biennial TA plan had been approved  in December  2019. On 19 February  2020, Participants 
agreed that the proposed ITA  workshop would be scheduled for 28 -29 October  2020. However, 
during the Chairperson 's consultations with certain  delegations in September  2020, one participant 
suggested that  the Committee should have  a "refresher" discussion on the ITA  workshop , given that 
the COVID -19 Pandemic had prevented the Committee from meeting during the first  half of the year. 
Therefore , the Chair person  circulated an  email to ITA  Participants , on 22 September  2020, 
announcing that the ITA  workshop would be postponed until the spring of 2021 . 
8.5.  Regarding the program me of the upcoming workshop, the Chairperson referred to the first draft 
programme prepar ed by her predecessor , which had been circulated  on 5 May 2020. With a view to 
revising  the program me, she intended to hold informal consultations with interested participants in 
the coming days.  To this end, d elegations were encouraged to contact her and the Secretariat after 
the Committee 's meeting , when she would welcom e any idea or suggestion on possible topics, 
 
3 The Committee's final report was circulated in document  G/L/1371. G/IT/M/72  
 
- 10 - 
 
  format, or structure for the ITA  workshop . As for the timing of the workshop , she suggested that it 
would be ideal if it could take place back -to-back with the next formal meeting of the Committee , in 
the spring  of 2021.  
8.6.  The representative of the European Union  expressed her disappointment that  it had not been 
possible for  the workshop to be organized back -to-back with this Committee meeting , as had been 
initially planned, because  of the unusual circumstances under the COVID -19 pandemic. She 
highlighted that the COVID -19 situation had demonstrated the even greater importance of digital 
solutions and the ITA  Agreement , which had made the ITA  workshop even more relevant at this 
momen t. She indicated that t he EU  industry had expressed great interest in participating in the 
workshop ; she also encouraged the Chair person  and the Secretariat to find the most suitable date 
for the workshop at the beginning of 2021 , and to finalize the progr amme as early as possible.  
8.7.  The representative of Chinese Taipei  supported holding the ITA workshop back -to-back with 
the Committee's next formal meeting . Regarding possible topics for the workshop, she was pleased 
that Chinese Taipei's suggestions had been  included in a first  draft programme . In response to the 
current situation, she emphasized the importance of the role that new ICT -related services (such as 
industry 4.0, 5G, cloud computing, and artificial intelligence) could play in advancing the 
develop ment of the industry , including through improving market access for these services. She 
further argued that the current development of e -commerce was closely related to ICT  products and 
could contribute to Members' adaptation to the "new normal" and econom ic recovery following the 
pandemic. On NTBs affecting trade in ICT  products, she believed that experience -sharing  by 
Members on cost -effective acceptance of conformity assessment results  could be useful . In addition, 
topics such as t he role of the international system  (especially the WTO ) in the mutual recognition of 
test results , and how ITA  Participants had addressed NTBs  at the regional level , could also be further  
explored . Regarding the format of the workshop,  she believed that in view of the u ncertainty of the 
pandemic situation in the spring of 2021, a mixed format workshop  which  would allow both physical 
and virtual participation  would be preferable . 
8.8.  The representative of the United Kingdom  expressed the UK's support for holding the workshop 
back-to-back with the next meeting of the Committee , in the spring of 2021. She highlighted the 
importance of working together to identify the socio -economic opportunities that IT products and 
digitalization could bring, as well as the challenges affecting  trade in those products. The UK was 
pleased to see some of these topics listed in the draft agenda and looked forward to a discussion on 
how Participants could minimize the impact of non -tariff barriers to trade. The UK was formulating 
some inputs and loo ked forward to discussing these with the Chair person  and Members in the near 
future.  
8.9.  The representative of Switzerland  stated that Switzerland continued to support the organization 
of an ITA  workshop. Such a workshop would afford an opportunity to bring ITA issues to Members' 
attention , and the industry's most challenging problems in particular. Views and experiences  shared 
by industry representatives  would enhance Members' understanding of trade obstacles  in the 
IT sector . It could also outline possible areas of future work within the context of the ITA and its 
Expansion. On the content of the workshop, Switzerland was of  the view that NTMs should be 
addressed as priority. Regarding the date of the wor kshop, Switzerland remained flexible, but 
believed it would be a good option to hold it back -to-back with the ITA  Committee 's 2001 spring 
meeting.  
8.10.   The representative of the United States  agreed that there should be further thinking and 
consultation on the exact date and agenda of the proposed ITA  workshop as the majority of the 
discussion on the workshop had occurred back in the winter before the global pandemic. In addition, 
2021 was the 25th Anniversary of the ITA, which would be an important theme to incorporate into 
any workshop.  
8.11.   The representative of Japan  believed that it would be beneficial for all industry stakeholders 
to review what was going on in the ITA -related sect or from various perspectives. The ITA  workshop 
would be a good opportunity for this and Japan strongly supported this event. Japan was flexible 
about timing and topic but preferred to have the workshop in the spring of 2021 at the latest. As for 
topic, Jap an wished to discuss the latest advancements in IT  technology and products , and Japan ese 
industry representatives were ready to make a presentation on this topic.  G/IT/M/72  
 
- 11 - 
 
  8.12.   The Committee took note  of the statements made.  
8.2  Date of next meeting  
8.13.   The Chairperson  informed the Committee that the next meeting of the Committee would be 
held in the spring of 2021  (specific date to be confirmed) . 
8.3  Secretariat staff changes concerning  the Committee  
8.14.   The Chairperson  informed the Committee that Mr  Xiaobing TANG would shortly  retire from 
the WTO  Secretariat , and that Dr Xiaodong WANG would replace him as Secretary to the Committee  
after this meeting . 
__________