RESTRICTED  
  
WT/GC/WPEC/M/9  
 
13 November 2023  
(23-7626) Page: 1/9 
Work Programme on Electronic Commerce  
18 October 2023  Original: English  
 
MINUTES OF THE MEETING  
DEDICATED DISCUSSION ON ELECTRONIC COMMERCE  
HELD IN THE CENTRE WILLIAM RAPPARD AND IN VIRTUAL FORMAT ON 18 OCTOBER 2023 
Chairperson: H.E. Ms Usha Dwarka -Canabady  (Mauritius), Facilitator of the  
E-commerce Work Programme and the Moratorium  
1.1.  The Chairperson  welcome d Members to the Dedicated Discussion, noting it as the first of a 
number of sessions focused on MC13 preparations.  As indicated in the convening notice, she 
informed Members that she would report on the group consultations held the previous week and 
would seek additional ideas and proposals on how to move forward.  On the consultations, s he 
reported  that, i n each of the  two one -hour sessions , she had recall ed the eight dedicated discussions 
held since January, as well as the two -day workshop with various intergovernmental organisations. 
She had also asked delegations to reflect  principally  on two main questions . The first was with regard 
to the specific issues discussed thus far and whether any of the m could be considered the subject of 
recommendations for Ministers' consideration . If so, what kind of recommendations could be 
envisaged for MC13 ? Were there any issues that should be explored f urther ? The second question 
had been with regard to the Work Programme in general and how  to ensure  it had  a delivery impact . 
Did the Work Programme  respond to the present e-commerce challenges and if not, what could be 
done to make it more effective ? Were there  other ways the WTO could contribute to the work on 
e-commerce to support its inclusive development ? 
1.2.  She said that, during the consultations, she had taken the liberty of highlighting some  of the 
things heard in the course of the thematic discussions, and more importantly as had been recorded 
in the minutes. These included:  Members' recognition of the WTO's role as an important forum for 
structured discussions and experience sharing; Member s' frequent reference to the WTO's convening 
power to enhance the coherence and collaboration with international inter -governmental 
organizations and other stakeholders; the WTO's important role in providing relevant technical 
assistance and capacity build ing; Members' reference to the WTO's rulebook – how the 
implementation of certain WTO Agreements and commitments c ould promote a conducive 
environment for e -commerce; reference to the WTO's rulemaking function and the possibility of 
developing principles o r regulatory frameworks for the inclusive development of e -commerce. As an 
example, she  asked if Members could  consider delving deeper on consumer protection and putting 
forward  or developing  concrete recommendations . She said that she remained guided by w hat 
Members want ed. Members set t he agenda, the pace and how to move forward but they still need ed 
to be in agreement. The Chairperson  had also noted that, with regard to the moratorium, Members' 
views remained divergent and that there was no convergence with respect  to definition, scope or 
impact.  She had  recalled that a number of papers on the moratorium had been put forward as far 
back as 2018, and  had asked delegations to reflect, more specifically, on the type of language 
needed for MC13, whether a mid way could be found and whether delegations could put forward 
language and proposals for a MC13 decision . She noted that a common message was that Members 
had expressed satisfaction that work was being done and that for the past several months 
discussions and the experience sharing had been constructive.  Members had noted the progress 
achieved in the Dedicated Discussions  and were of the view that this progress had to be 
acknowledged in the draft M inisterial Decision. Some delegations had preferred the language of the 
decision to be succinct.  
1.3.  She reported that m any delegations  had stressed that the reinvigoration of the Work 
Programme as mandated at MC12 ha d been achieved . In their view, the Dedica ted Discussions WT/GC/WPEC/M/9  
 
- 2 - 
 
  should continue exploring further issues and deep diving into some of the topics identified. The 
development dimension had been  noted as a key aspect of work moving forward and, in that regard, 
developing countries had been encouraged to sh are their views on their priorities and suggestions 
for further work. Members had also shown support for enhancing technical assistance and capacity 
building; recognis ing the WTO's convening power; and  acknowledging the role of  the WTO as a 
useful forum for structured discussions on specific issues related to e -commerce. Several delegations 
had re-emphasised the importance of continued IGO collaboration as well as input s from other 
stakeholders particularly the private sector . On the moratorium, she reported that delegations  had 
repeated known positions. Many  had shared the view that the moratorium went hand in hand with 
the Work Programme and that both should be extended at MC13. Noting that divergences still 
remained, a large n umber of delegations had stressed the need to deepen work on the moratorium 
and intensify this, through further evidence -based discussions. In this regard,  she noted that  some  
delegations had made reference to recent studies and a suggestion had been  made for the WTO to 
present the findings of the joint report  it had been  working on together with the OECD, IMF, UNCTAD 
and the World Bank. She recalled that there had been a discussion on this report in the Public Forum. 
Several other delegations had noted tha t the moratorium's scope, definition and impact remained 
unclear and  had called on the proponents of the moratorium to elaborate further on these issues. 
She encouraged delegations to add anything that had not been captured in her report on the 
consultatio ns, in order to ensure a comprehensive view of what had transpired.  
1.4.  She then recalled that the focus now had to be  to deliver at MC13 on one or several paragraphs . 
She noted that this would take some time.  Before opening the floor to delegations , she referred to 
India's  submission , Promoting Competition in E -commerce  in document WT/GC/W/902 . She noted 
that the submission should be borne in mind when considering work going forward. It was also her 
understandin g that South Africa would join as a co -sponsor to the submission.  
1.5.  The representative of India delivered the following statement:  
1.6.  We thank you , Chair,  for organizing this session in the lead up to the Ministerial Conference. 
We also commend your work in co nvening the Work Programme Dedicated Discu ssions under the 
auspices of the General Council, a process which we hope will continue and help Members  understand 
this space better. We would like to focus on three issues:  
1. Our understanding is that the moratoriu m on customs duties on electronic transmissions 
("moratorium ") ends by 31 March 2024 as per the MC12 Ministerial Declaration 
WT/MIN(22)/32 . It would be good to understand from the proponents of the moratorium if 
they are bringing any agenda item to the next General Council meeting on this issue.  
2. We note with disappointment that the proponents of the moratorium have not engaged  
constructively in a discussion on its scope and definition. We again reiterate that this 
discussion is critical to informing Members'  positions. In the last session of the Work 
Programme, some Members  had suggested that they were preparing a paper in this  regard,  
and we look forward to the same. We would like to understand the following from the 
proponents:  
• Can the proponents quantify the benefits they , and not the developing countries , 
have received from the moratorium ? 
• Can this benefit derived by the developed countries be classified into the benefits 
derived by Big Tech and MSMEs ? 
• On the competition issue, we see a change in stance in many developed countries, 
where Big Tech monopolies are being questioned. How would the continuation of the 
moratorium  square off with this shift seen in various countries?  
• Further, we see a proliferation of direct tax measures like the sharing of advertising 
revenues between digital platforms and content creators , such as news 
organizations. Measures like Digital Servic e Tax are also being enacted by developed 
Members . These measures , adopted under the direct tax categories , can also be 
classified as protectionist measures. So, if direct taxes can be applied to electronic 
transmissions, why is there a resistance to a dis cussion on indirect taxes?  
• In this regard, we would like to draw Members'  attention to our paper WT/GC/W/902  
released last week, which highlights how competition is becoming a key challenge 
for the regulators in the developed as well as the developing count ries. We would 
welcome South Africa shortly as a co -sponsor.  WT/GC/WPEC/M/9  
 
- 3 - 
 
  3. We would recommend that the agenda of the Work Programme for 2024 is discussed in one 
of the upcoming sessions of these dedicated discussions, where Members can bring ideas 
for future deliberatio ns, focusing on the development dimension.  
1.7.  The Chairperson  said that, based on the consultations and what she was hearing from 
Members, it was clear that more discussions were needed on the moratorium. In that regard, she 
suggested that the November session focus on the moratorium . In order to facilitate  these 
discussions , she encouraged Members to come up with written proposals for a potential MC13 
decision , using the existing background documents. Since there was no objection, she said that the  
November session would be dedicated to deepening discussions on the moratorium.  
1.8.  The representative of Barbados , on behalf of the ACP Group , delivered the following statement:  
1.9.  We do not have any objection to the Dedicated Discussion in November fo cusing on the 
moratorium. As the ACP Group, we  wanted at least to share some views with regards to our 
discussions today. We applaud the excellent work and engagement under your leadership in the 
Dedicated Discussions. These substantive discussions and sub missions and your effort to lead us in 
the reinvigoration of the Work Programme, as instructed by Ministers last year, provides us with 
ample material to report to MC13; not only on the Moratorium but on the elements of our rich 
discussions on specific iss ues under the rubric of the Work Programme in itself. We must ask 
ourselves, and this is the question you are asking of us; what concrete milestones do we want to 
emerge from the Work Programme that will usher the WTO and all Members into a solid position on 
e-commerce in the multilateral trading institution that is fit for everyone? We can resolve the 
moratorium question in many ways, but it must be in the context of the important information we 
gained in the Dedicated Discussions on the significance of e -commerce to developing countries  and 
what it can and is delivering for us. We agree that this work should be deepened.  
1.10.  We have different characteristics across the WTO Membership . However, what we have in 
common includes our objective to reduce the digita l divide and that all our trading channels and 
ecosystems are e -ready, in a manner that our enterprises, households, governments and consumers 
are participating. We support your work going forward . The development dimension of the 1998 
Work Programme conti nues to be an important feature in our engagement in the WTO's work. And 
as such the ACP Group will soon circulate a communication which reflects the key elements and 
contents of our engagement in the Dedicated Discussions as well as our vision for the way  forward 
for an MC13 Decision. We hope that you and Members can take our submission into account going 
forward, particularly in light of the Senior Officials meeting ( SOM) taking place next week, that will 
have a window of opportunity to reflect on e -comme rce in itself and in preparation for MC13.  
1.11.  The representative of the European Union  delivered the following statement:  
1.12.  We thank the Facilitator for her consultations and her report today. An e-commerce decision 
is one of the key outcomes of the Ministeria l Conference and the EU attaches great importance in 
having both the Work Programme on Electronic Commerce and the moratorium extended at MC13 , 
in the same decision, and in  line with our longstanding practice. We also thank the Facilitator for her 
leadership and all the effort she put in to reinvigorating the Work Programme on Electronic C ommerce 
since MC12, in line with the mandate of our Ministers. We also thank  all Members for the many 
submissions and contributions throughout t he year on a broad set of digital economy and digital 
trade issues , as well as those concerning the non -imposition of customs duties on electronic 
transmissions.  We think this work could be usefully acknowledged in the future Ministerial Decision.  
1.13.  In term s of forward -looking  work, we believe that our very interesting discussions throughout 
this year provided only for initial discussion on a very broad set of issues, including on 
development -related challenges and digital divide , as well as  the opportunitie s that digital trade 
provides. We are i nterested to hear from other Members , but certainly do  not consider that we have 
exhausted those conversations. In fact , and subject to  the interest of Members , we would be open 
to think of a set of trade-related  topics that deserve a deeper dive post-MC13  and have those 
reflected in the Ministers ' decision. There are different ways to identify and focus those trade -related  
topics, but one example could be – in relation to the consumer protection topic – to have a deep er 
dive or zoom in on some specific issues, such as  the exchange of information on the cross -border 
cooperation that addresses the challenges of enforcing consumer rights through different 
jurisdictions. We could have relevant international organization s and other stakeholders provid e their WT/GC/WPEC/M/9  
 
- 4 - 
 
  views on these specific topics, as we ll as have Members  exchang e information on capacity  building 
needs and technical assistance. In terms of our work from now to MC13 , the development dimension 
is key in our e -commerce W ork Programme  discussions. At this stage, and thinking of a possible 
MC13 draft decision, we would be  keen to hear from developing countries , in particular , on their key 
takeaways from our discussion thi s year and the key opportunities and challenges they consider 
worth exploring further. On the moratorium part of the decision,  we are  open to continu ing 
discussions ahead of MC13 and welcome a dedicated event with the five international organizations 
in November.  
1.14.  The representative of Korea, Republic of  delivered the following statement:   
1.15.  Let me start by joining previous speakers in expressing that we are pleased to see that the 
Work Programme on E lectronic Commerce has been genuinely revitalized thus far, especially thanks 
to your leadership and continuous efforts. My delegation believes that Members have fully 
implemented the mandates of MC 12 by actively discussing relevant topics of  the E-Commerce Work 
Programme. Over the past nine months, Members  have ha d valuable opportunities to exchange their 
e-commerce -related development status, efforts,  and challenges , as well as their different 
perspective s and views. Korea further values the dedicated discussions particularly because they 
have allowed us to listen to diverse voices from developing countries. With that said, I  would like  to 
present two points on our way forward in preparation for MC13. First, reg arding future meeting 
agenda, while we have discussed various topics thus far and have conducted one or two rounds of 
discussions per topic to gain a general understanding of Members' positions, it is meaningful to 
continue discussions for progress to be m ade. However, given the limited number of remaining 
scheduled meetings, it seems that focusing intensively on one or two  topics , such as the moratorium , 
that are of high interest to Member s, would enhance the effectiveness of the meetings.  Second, 
regardin g the operation of the meetings, the workshop with IGOs held in June helped Members  to 
deepen our understanding on e-commerce topics by providing evidence and studies presented by 
experts. Korea found this experience very useful. In this regard, it is nece ssary to engage in 
discussions while actively seeking input s from the field because we are addressing issues that have 
a significant impact on the real economy. Involving international organizations, experts and 
businesses in future meetings can lead to pr oductive and pragmatic discussions by capturing a wide 
range of perspectives. This approach is likely to result in a more informed and effective decision -
making process. Deliberating in a closed -off manner can limit our perspective and undermine the 
ration ality of our discussion. In particular, the moratorium has a substantial impact on  private 
enterprises , including small and women -owned businesses, making it even more crucial to listen to 
a diverse range of voices from the field.  
1.16.  The representative of Djibouti , on behalf of the LCD  Group , delivered the following statement:   
1.17.  The LDC s support your efforts , Madam Facilitator,  to find ing a landing zone for MC13 . We also 
thank you for all the work in the Dedicated Discussions.  The report for MC13 should reflect the robust 
reinvigoration of the Work Programme , in particular the development dimension as instructed by 
Ministers.  Rich discussion s have taken place on a number of areas including what should be the 
WTO's role and the interface with other organizations with competence in aspects of the Work 
Programme.  We wish to announce that the LDC Group will soon circulate an update on our 2019 
submission ( WT/GC/W/787 ). The revised submission is going through final review w ithin the 
LDC Group. It highlights some positive developments along with gaps that remain for 
LDCs.  Together with the contributions from individual LDCs , we hope that our group communication 
will be taken into account in the Work Programme and in the repor t to Ministers at MC13. This is for 
the purpose of nurturing constructive engagement under the Work Programme and the WTO's 
collaboration with other organisations.  
1.18.  The representative of Singapore  delivered the following statement:   
1.19.  First, we applaud your effort , Chair,  in convening this meeting as well as bringing us together 
and putting in all the hard work to find a way forward. We support a ministerial decision on this  
topic. We  think this will reflect how the WTO remains fit -for-purpos e and we do need something on 
the table at MC13. We support the discussion on the moratorium . We think this will be  an essential 
component of the decision ; especially given some of the more recent authoritative publications on 
the impact of moratorium, as India has alluded to, particularly on LDCs and developing countries. 
We think that will be a good opportunity for us to discuss some of the findings there. Lastly, we 
support diving into relevant development issues of interest to developing countries and L DCs. We WT/GC/WPEC/M/9  
 
- 5 - 
 
  think that we can find way s to discuss trade specific policy measures that can help to address some 
of these concerns , for example, using development policy to support domestic industrialization . 
Generally , direct policy measures like this are more  efficient , useful and effective in achieving the 
policy outcomes that developing and LDC countries would like to see ; and indirect measures which 
generally have systemic impact would be a detriment to developing countries and LDCs. This is also 
in respons e to what India has just raised.  
1.20.  The representative of the United Kingdom  delivered the following statement:  
1.21.  Thanks for bringing us together this morning and for your consultations last week. I do  not 
have much to add to your helpful summary today – our k ey points were reflected. We w ould echo 
the EU on the importance of extending both  the moratorium and the Work Programme  at MC13 and 
we are open to discussing future trade -related topics for deep -dives. W e would like to hear  the 
priorities from developing Members  in particular. On your specific questions on the moratorium, we 
would support your way forward in having another  Dedicated Discussion in Nov ember  as well as 
inviting the international organization s to present the upcoming joint report. Finally, I would just 
like to underline that the MC12 Ministerial Decision does not definitively say that the moratorium will 
end by  31 March 2024. We should not prejudge the decisions of our Ministers.  
1.22.  The representative of Antigua and Barbuda , on behalf of the OECS , delivered the following 
statement:   
1.23.  Thank you for your role,  Madam Facilitator,  not only this morning but since you have assumed 
these responsibilities, in bringing us together, and for actually reinvigorating the Work Programme. 
For Antigua and Barbuda, the OECS and Small States, the development dimension of e -commerce 
is very impor tant and in our view,  it needs continued and sustained attention. E -commerce is very 
much a fast -moving issue,  and we fear that developing countrie s and s mall states run the risk of the 
gaps that already exist becoming even larger gaps. We also believe tha t it is very useful and helpful 
for the WTO to utilise its convening power. At the end of the day, this would be a collaborative effort. 
There should be stronger IGO collaboration and there are IGOs that specialize in this field and their 
expertise and exp erience should be utilised. We have the question of competition  that was just raised 
by India, and it is a very important dimension that we ought to look at. It is receiving more attention, 
even in developed countries. When we consider the moratorium, we also need to remind ourselves 
that the non -application of duties  on electronic transmissions , i.e. the moratorium, is embedded in 
many regional trade agreements, to which we are party to in our region , and further afield even 
among developed countries . I think we would have a certain amount of disentanglement to do on 
this issue.  We also have the JSI on e -commerce  and at some point, there will need to be some kind 
of convergence because the JSI on e -commerce covers the vast majority of e -commerce that takes 
place in the multilateral trading system. I know that the legal status of the JSIs is not definitively 
decided, but they exist and at some point, we will have to conten d with what they import for the 
multilateral trading system.  Finally , Chair, we endorse the propos ed November session on the 
moratorium and its related issues where we can certainly have a deeper dive into these issues and 
to come up with a table of solutions that we can put before MC13.   
1.24.  The representative of Switzerland  delivered the following statement:  
1.25.  Thank you , Madam Chair,  for the useful consultations you held and for your report. We would 
also like to thank you for your investment in the structured discussions. Your engagement has  been 
key in revitalising the exchanges under the Work Programme. Switzerland is pleased with the level 
of engagement . Much ground has been covered over the past year, including exchanges on the 
moratorium. For future work, the next phase of the exchanges on the Work Programme would in 
our view benefit from targeting and deepening its work. This could be done by selecting one or two 
topics, in addition to the moratorium, that are trade -related and enjoy a good degree of interest 
across the Members hip. In th is respect, we welcome the upcoming contribution that has been 
announced by the LDC Group. Furthermore, we strongly favour to continue engaging with other 
international organisations in the context of the Work Programme. Such engagement helps 
understand wh at these organisations do in the field of building e -commerce capacities and digital 
skills, including in the field of regulatory frameworks. We should reflect on how to better leverage 
these organisations. On the moratorium, Switzerland 's position is well-known  and, in the absence of 
a possibility to achieve a permanent solution, we would expect a decision similar to the ones made 
at MC11 and at previous M inisterial Conference s. Regarding the MC12 Decision, we should read it in 
its entirety. The Decision says that the moratorium might lapse unless Members decide otherwise. WT/GC/WPEC/M/9  
 
- 6 - 
 
  Finally, we endorse your proposal to dedicate the November session to the moratorium and to review 
the most recent studies and policy notes on the moratorium.   
1.26.  The representative of United States  delivered the following statement:  
1.27.  Thank you, Chair, for convening today's meeting and having informal consultations last week. 
We also support extending the W ork Programme  and the moratorium. We have s uccessfully 
reinvigorated the W ork Programme  thanks to your leadership. We agree with suggestions that we 
ought to, in part, use the Ministerial Decision  to capture the progress we made in the W ork 
Programme  since MC12. We also hope we can agree to a set of topics for the future of the W ork 
Programme . On this point, i t is important to hear from developing countries and LDCs. Their input 
was crucial to making the current process focused on key issues that garnered very valuable 
substantive contributions from  all Members . In reflecting on ways to improve the W ork Programme , 
one idea is that perhaps we could choose a smaller number of topics and come back to them more 
than once. That may encourage responding to other Member s' suggestions and more interactive 
sessions.  Looking ahead at a post -MC13 Work Program me, one element I think we should keep is 
the convening of international organizations . The workshop in June was extremely valuable,  and we 
thank the Chair for convening it.  We should also consider adding a private sector session  that will 
help enrich our discussions by bringing more viewpoints to the table. Finally, we agree with the 
Facilitator's suggestion  to use the November session to discuss the moratorium.  
1.28.  The representative of Costa Rica  delivered the following statement:   
1.29.  We would like to thank you for this meeting, your work as facilitator and your report. 
We appreciate the discussions that we have had under your guidance and are pleased to see how 
the Work P rogramme has been reinvigora ted thanks to your leadership. We want to stress the 
importance of extending the Work Programme and the moratorium. This is one of the key points for 
the Ministerial Conference. The WTO cannot take backwards steps in this area, becasue  we would 
be undermin ing the progressive liberalization objectives set out in the Marrakesh  Agreement and 
would not be meeting the needs of today's world, of the business world and of small and 
medium -sized enterprises, in particular. We have presented ideas, studies and posit ions on the 
moratorium and had a very interesting discussion in July. We also believe that our discussions must 
be informed by evidence that may be provided by other international organizations and the private 
sector. We  welcome the submission  announced by  the LDCs. We support your proposal for the 
November meeting to be focused on the moratorium and for us to be able to discuss it in further 
detail.  
1.30.  The representative of Hong Kong, China  delivered the following statement:  
1.31.  We appreciate the consultations held last week to express our views on the Work Programme.  
I do not  have much to add and would like to echo previous speakers on two points . First, Hong Kong, 
China would also like to see the extension of the mora torium  and the Work Programme  go hand in 
hand at MC13 . Second,  we welcome a discussion on the mora torium  in the November 's session and 
hope to engage relevant  intergovernmental  organisations to share their recent studies on the 
moratorium  to give our discussion a further push ahead of MC13.  
1.32.  The representative of Japan  delivered the following statement:  
1.33.  We thank the Facilitator's  leadership for convening the dedicated discussions under the  Work 
Programme on Electronic Commerce. During past dedicated sessions, we have discussed many 
topics, including the moratorium on customs duties  on electronic transmissions . We had a good 
opportunity to hear about the challenges that developing Members and LDC Members are faced with. 
We are satisfied with the level of Members'  engagement. Given this, we believe that the Work 
Programme on Electronic Commerce has been successfully reinvigorated so far.  In particular, we 
evaluate that we had a very good discussion on the moratorium on customs duties among a wide 
range of Members , based on the proposal on the scope, definition and impact of the moratorium. 
With regard to  the question by the Facilitator, we can support the idea of discussing the moratorium 
at the November session.  We have a couple of key take -aways from this year 's discussion. For 
example, in the future we could have more in -depth discussion on some specific trade -related topics 
that are of common interest to as many Members as possible, so that we could have fruitful 
discussion s among Members . We could not only invite international organization s but also invite WT/GC/WPEC/M/9  
 
- 7 - 
 
  other type of stakeholders, including academia and business sectors, to workshop s or other type of 
sessions organised by the WTO. We could then have more in -depth and broader inf ormation sharing 
from many angles.  With regard to the ministerial decision or recommendations, we are still 
considering this issue . But at this juncture we are delighted to hear how other Members think about 
the dedicated discussions held  this year. In our  view, we should at least extend the moratorium at 
MC13, while continuing discussion s on the Work Programme. In any case, we believe that the 
language of the Ministerial decision or recommendation should be succinct, so that we could get to 
the agreement i n a timely manner.  
1.34.  The representative of Canada  delivered the following statement:  
1.35.  First, thank you , Madam Facilitator,  for convening the consultations on the Work Programme 
last week. We heard some thought -provoking interventions and suggestions, and we a re encouraged 
by the level of engagement by Members . This, in and of itself , speaks to the importance that 
Members place on continuing the important work of the Work Programme on Electronic C ommerce. 
As we noted, Canada believes that a lot has been accompl ished since committing to "reinvigorate " 
the Work Programme at MC12, as many Members and yourself , Madam Facilitator, so eloquently 
enumerated last week. You asked, Madam Facilitator, whether any specific recommendations can be 
made to Ministers . While Can ada continues to reflect on what we  have heard, we are convinced that 
there is a good basis for a way forward to narrowing vital recommendations that will take us past 
MC13. As a starting point and as expressed last week, Canada continues to support the ex tension 
of the W ork Programme  together with the renewal of the moratorium. On other substance, as already 
noted by many today and last week, Canada proposes to maintain momentum by continuing to 
explore some topics already covered in more depth . A continued exploration of the pillar of trust and 
confidence in e -commerce in particular is interesting to us, and the first discussion on online 
consumer protection was fruitful and informative, so we think there is greater potential there. 
We also see va lue in suggestions made for deeper engagement with and convening of stakeholders 
and other international partners  and organizations. Canada would also welcome views from 
developing and LDC Members and  what they see as important next steps for the Work Programme  
and look forward to the communication from LDCs alluded to earlier. We also endorse your 
suggestion for dedicated engagement on the moratorium in November.  
1.36.  The representative of Chinese Taipei  delivered the following statement:  
1.37.  Regarding recommendat ions on the Ministerial Decision, we see the need to address the 
reinvigoration of our Work Program me and its continuation beyond MC13. We support inviting 
international organizations as well as private stakeholders. To aim at a deliverable outcome, we 
need to adopt a pragmatic approach by narrowing the scope of discussion. We reiterate the 
importance of focusing on the previous topics which had gained more convergence from Members , 
rather than expanding new ideas. Apart from the moratorium, topics of consu mer protection or 
regulatory frameworks with a particular focus on trade -related aspects could be some of the area to 
delve into. Lastly, we can support the Facilitator 's suggestion to discuss the moratorium at the next 
session.  
1.38.  The representative of Austr alia delivered the following statement:  
1.39.  Australia 's position was well reflected in your summary , Ambassador,  so I will be very brief. 
Australia welcomes focusing the November Dedicated Discussion on the moratorium, given the views 
expressed today and in th e consultation session we participated in last week. While Australia 
considers that our dialogue on the scope and definition of the moratorium has been thorough and 
definitive, we would support further work on this issue including – as has been suggested t oday – 
examining recent studies that are contributing strongly to the body of evidence behind this rule.  
1.40.  The representative of Pakistan  delivered the following stateme nt: 
1.41.  Thank you for facilitating this session and the informal sessions . We really appreciate your 
leadership on the Work Programme on E lectronic Commerce and how to take it forward. We also 
welcome the recently circulated proposal from India, which raises critical questions about the market 
distortive bar of platforms across the e -comme rce value chain. Our position on the moratorium is 
well-known. However, we would like to hear more . We would like to hear more from the proponents 
of the moratorium  on how it helps developing countries as well as LDCs. Therefore, in order to move WT/GC/WPEC/M/9  
 
- 8 - 
 
  the proce ss forward , we support the November session that may discuss the moratorium,  but we 
would also suggest that it includes a discussion on regulatory cooperation among Members  to create 
more competitive  e-commerce markets.  
1.42.  The representative of Chile deliver ed the following statement:  
1.43.  Thank you, Facilitator, for convening this meeting and for your report on the consultations. 
The delegation of Chile believes that we have fulfilled the mandate from MC12 to reinvigorate the 
Work Programme  on Electronic Commerce . We agree that we need further discussion on the 
moratorium. Our delegation does not want any backtracking and we support the extension of the 
moratorium, as our small and medium -sized enterprises, the main drivers of growth in a small 
country like ours, would not be able to adapt to different customs regimes if it is not extended.  
1.44.  The representative of Argentina  delivered the following statement:  
1.45.  We wish to join other Members in expressing our satisfaction at the reinvigoration of work 
under this Work Programme, which has enabled us to fulfil the mandate received at MC12. 
As Argentina has already stated at previous meetings, we believe that there are topics that deserve 
further discussion and therefore support the renewal of the Work Programme  on Electr onic 
Commerc e at the upcoming Ministerial Conference. Lastly, we support the proposal to hold a 
dedicated session on the moratorium at the meeting scheduled for November.  
1.46.  The representative of South Africa  delivered the following statement:  
1.47.  Thank you, Mada m Facilitator , for the consultations that you convened last week and for the 
manner in which you have led the dedicated discussions. My delegation supports the idea of 
deepening discussions on the topic of competition policy in the context of e -commerce. I n this vein , 
my delegation is pleased to co -sponsor the submission entitled Promoting Competition in 
E-Commerce  (WT/GC/W/902 ). Competition policy  in e-commerce calls for deeper engagement , 
including experience sharing among competition authorities. We have no objection to the suggestion 
of a third Dedicated Discussion in November  dedicated to the moratorium . I reiterat e that in the 
April Dedicated Discussion on the moratorium on customs duties on e lectronic transmissions , my 
delegation posed four questions to demanders  of the moratorium. We hope that proponents of the 
moratorium will provide written answers as requested . 
1.48.  The Chairperson  appreciated Members'  approach to the meeting  and confirmed the following 
understandings. First, the November Dedicated Discussion would focus on the moratorium  and there 
would be a presentation of the report that the WTO, OECD, UNCTAD, th e IMF and the World Bank 
were preparing  jointly . In the interest of time, the WTO Secretariat would present the report and 
the other o rganizations could be invited to attend to respond to possible  questions by Members. 
Second, the next Dedicated Discussions were scheduled for 8 December and 25 January. By that 
time, Members would need to have some text to discuss. She suggested that , in between those 
sessions , she could hold shorter informal meetings  to look at specific issues and focus on the kind 
of language for a MC13 decision. She noted that although there might not be major developments 
between then and February, she believed there was a good basis to set the pace for the future  and 
encouraged Members to work on that basis .  
1.49.  She not ed that there might be things that Members could agree upon. First, she heard from 
Members, at the meeting and in her consultations, that there was agreement that work ha d been 
reinvigorated . She asked if there were any objections to this statement. There were none. Second, 
she heard that the WTO was an important forum for Dedicated Discussions and exchanges . This was 
confirmed by the number of papers submitted and the papers that were still being submitted, even 
though the thematic sessions had been conclu ded. She believed this was a good sign. Third, she 
pointed to the convening power of the WTO  and asked whether anyone disagreed that the WTO 
should continue us ing its convening power . Forth, on technical assistance , she said this element 
might merit a deep er discussion. She heard from Members that the WTO should play a role in 
providing technical assistance on e -commerce. This had been raised in the Committee on Trade and 
Development ( CTD) in the past . A deeper discussion  could be had  around how the WTO could provide 
this technical assistance: whether in its traditional form  or in more i nnovative ways , including in 
cooperation with other agencies . She encouraged Members to share their ideas. She noted that 
some of the statements referr ed to the digital divide and asked how provision of technical assistance WT/GC/WPEC/M/9  
 
- 9 - 
 
  could bridge that gap . She recalled that during the trade policy review of  the Central African 
Economic and Monetary Community (CEMAC ) countries , she had been struck by the fact that six 
countries in the region had legislation for electronic commerce but not all of them had electronic 
commerce and not  many had the basic infrastructure for conducting electronic commerce . As such, 
she welcomed the statements on  cross-border  collaboration , because , through it , issues such as 
facilitating payments across borders  could be addressed  and explained . Technical assistance was 
therefore important and merited a deeper discussion.  Fifth, s he also noted a lot of interest on 
consumer protection , as on e area where Members could deepen their discussions. She recognized 
that there were discussions taking place elsewhere that could not be ignored. The WTO had its 
mandate, but Members were free to bring any  topic they wished to discuss and invit e the 
stakeholders they wished to be involved. She was pleased to see that some Members had taken the 
initiative to hold discussions outside the Dedicated Discussions. There had been an event organized 
by India, Indonesia and South Africa and there would be  a forthcoming event organized by Norway 
and the United States. She welcomed these initiatives as they informed Members' discussions.  
1.50.  The Chairperson summarized that there had been no objection to  the following : the 
reinvigoration of work under the Work P rogramme;  WTO being a n important forum for dedicated 
discussions and exchanges ; making use of the convening power of the WTO ; and WTO continu ing 
to provide technical assistance as it currently d id, pending further  discussion s. She then asked 
Members whethe r there was anything they wished to add or remove  and sought further ideas on 
what could be discussed during the December and January meetings . She had heard competition 
but was open to more ideas . And of course, there was the development dimension.  
1.51.  The representative of Barbados  delivered the following statement:  
1.52.  On the issue of consumer protection, we realise that it is one of the areas that the ACP  Group 
would have identified at the beginning of the year. Definitely , given the need to also focus on some 
of the issues that are of interest to developing countries and LDCs, it is something that we will reflect 
upon. So, it is not something we would necessarily want to pronounce today. As you have said at 
the beginning, this is the first of a series of meetings that we will have along these lines , so we 
would want to pause on the listing of issues that we might want to take forward, at least for the 
time being. We want  to reiterate that the ACP Group will also bring forwar d its views on the way 
forward in terms of the Work Programme on Electronic Commerce and the moratorium.  
1.53.  The Chairperson  thanked Barbados and said she looked forward to the ACP submission. 
She recalled that the SOM would take place on 24  and 25  October. W hile there would not be a 
session on e -commerce per se , there would be a plenary session to address all the mandated issues 
titled, Plenary Session on Other Areas in view of MC13 , on the second day of the SOM. She therefore 
encouraged Members to raise the issues on which there was convergence, as this would pave the 
way and provide guidance ahead of MC13.  She reiterated that the next Dedicated Discussion  on 
14 November w ould be on the moratorium with the presentation of the joint report  on Digital Trade 
for Development . She would wait until after the SOM and the Dedicated Discussion in November to 
convene small informal discussions on a potential MC13 decision. She would report to the General 
Council meeting on 1 and 2 November.  She r ecalled that the minutes  of meetings held since January 
are contained in the WT/GC/WPEC/M  series. The minutes of the last dedicated discussion ha d been 
circulated in WT/GC/WPEC/M/8 . Prior to the November Dedicated Discussion on the moratorium , 
she would ask the Secretariat to circulate the document containing the references to all the 
documents already circulated on the moratorium  and she would welcome any proposal  on what a 
decision o n the moratorium could look like.  
1.54.  The meeting was adjourned.  
__________