RESTRICTED  
  
G/TFA/M/15  
 
2 August 2021 
(21-6054) Page: 1/32 
Committee on Trade Facilitation  Original: English  
 
MINUTES OF THE MEETING OF THE COMMITTEE ON TRADE FACILITATION  
3–4 MARCH 2021  
CHAIRPERSON: MR CHRISTOPHER O'TOOLE (CANADA)  
Contents  
1   MATTERS RELATING TO THE IMPLEMENTATION AND ADMINISTRATION OF THE 
TRADE FACILITATION AGREEMENT (TFA)  ................................ ................................ ....... 2 
1.1   Notifications by Members ................................ ................................ .............................  2 
A. Notifications under Articles 15 and 16 of the Trade Facilitation Agreement  .......................  2 
B. Notifications under Article 17 of the Trade Facilitation Agreement  ................................ .... 6 
C. Notifications under Articles 1:4, 10:4:3, 10:6:2 and 12:2:2 of the Trade Facilitation 
Agreement  ................................ ................................ ................................ ......................  14 
D. Notifications under Article 22 of the Trade Facilitation Agreement  ................................ .. 16 
Article 22.3  ................................ ................................ ................................ .....................  16 
1.2   Status of the Ratification and Notification Process  ................................ .........................  16 
Update by the Secretariat  ................................ ................................ ................................ . 16 
2   EXPERIENCE SHARING/THEMATIC DISCUSSIONS  ................................ ....................  19 
A. Sharing experiences on measures taken to mitigate COVID -19 ................................ ..... 19 
Communication from the European Union (G/TFA/W/31/Rev.3)  ................................ .............  19 
Presentation by the World Customs Organization  ................................ ................................ . 19 
B. National Trade Facilitation Committee (Article 23.2 of the TFA)  ................................ ..... 19 
Presentation by UNCTAD  ................................ ................................ ................................ ... 19 
C. Time Release Study by the Special Secretary of the Federal Revenue of Brazil  
(Article 7:6 of the TFA) (G/TFA/W/33)  ................................ ................................ ................  20 
Presentation by Brazil  ................................ ................................ ................................ ....... 20 
3   SUPPORTING THE TIM ELY AND EFFICIENT RELEASE OF GLOBAL GOODS  
THROUGH ACCELERATED IMPLEMENTATION OF THE WTO TRADE FACILITATION 
AGREEMENT - COMMUNICATION FROM AUSTRALIA; BRAZIL; CANADA; COLOMBIA; 
EUROPEAN UNION; ICELAND; JAPAN; REPUBLIC OF KOREA, MEXICO; NORWAY; 
SINGAPORE; THE SEPARATE CUSTOMS TERRITORY OF TAIWAN, PEN GHU, KINMEN  
AND MATSU; THAILAND; TURKEY; AND THE UNITED STATES (G/TFA/W/25/REV.3)  .... 20 
4   REVIEW OF THE OPERATION AND IMPLEMENTATION  OF THE AGREEMENT IN 
ACCORDANCE WITH ARTICLE 23.1.6 OF THE TRADE FACILITATION AGREEMENT  .........  23 
Consultations on the Review – Report by th e Chairperson  ................................ .....................  24 
5   REQUEST FROM THE GLOBAL EXPRESS ASSOCIATION TO ADDRESS THE TRADE 
FACILITATION COMMITTEE - REPORT ON CONSULTATION S BY THE CHAIRPERSON  ..... 27 
6   RECENT AND UPCOMING ACTIVITIES  ................................ ................................ ....... 27 G/TFA/M/15  
 
- 2 - 
 
  Update on Activities of the Trade Facilitation Agreement Facility (TFAF)  ................................ .. 27 
7   OTHER BUSINESS  ................................ ................................ ................................ ..... 32 
 
1  MATTERS RELATING TO THE IMPLEMENTATION AND ADMINISTRATION OF THE TRADE 
FACILITATION AGREEMENT (TFA)  
1.1.  At their first meeting under this role, t he Chairperson  thanked Member s for the trust conferred  
to steer the work of the Trade Facilitation Committee  (TFC, the Committee) . They would  look forward 
to continuing with the collaborative spirit and Member -driven approach with which matters ha d been 
successfully handled these past years.  
1.2.  The agenda for the meeting had been  circulated in WTO/AIR/TFA/15, as well as its revision and 
corrigendum , circulated in WTO/AIR/TFA/15/Rev.1 and WTO/AIR/TFA/15/Corr.1, respectively.  
1.3.  The Chair  proposed to continue the practice of holding Item 2 of the agenda "Experience 
sharing/thematic dis cussions " in informal mode, to allow for frank and interactive exchanges. The  
Committee agreed to observers attending t he informal session . 
1.4.  It was so agreed . 
1.5.  The Chair turned to the agenda item, "Other Business".  
1.6.  The delegate of the United States  requested  to add an item to inform the Committee of an 
upcoming paper on the topic of consularization.  
1.7.  The Chair  added three items: (1) the dates for the Committee's meetings in 2021; (2) the E -
Subscriptions registration tool, and (3) 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 Member s 
A. Notifications under Articles 15 and 16 of the Trade Facilitation Agreement  
1.9.  The Chair informed the Committee that eight notifications had been received from seven 
Member s since the Committee's last meeting of 26 and 27 January 2021.  
1.10.   Bangladesh had submitted an addendum to its previous notification under Article 16 which 
had been  circulated  in document G/TFA/N/BGD/1/Add.4.  
1.11.   The delegate of the United States  thanked Bangladesh for their notification . 
1.12.   The delegate of the European Union  indicated the following : 
1.13.   The EU thanks Bangladesh for its notification. Moving commitments from B to C can be done 
in application of Article 19 but to do so, Bangladesh should have stipulated which assistance is 
required. Could Bangladesh complement its notification?  
1.14.   For the future , discussions and review of notifications would probably be more efficient if the 
Committee  only reviewed, at each formal meeting, notification s that have been on agenda or notified 
to Member s 2-3 weeks in advance because sometimes notifications are very comprehensive and 
more time is needed to check the notification and provide useful  comments if needed.  
1.15.   The delegate of Bangladesh  indicated the following:  
1.16.   Thank you and congratulations Chair. Bangladesh thanks the US and EU for their interest in 
Bangladesh' submission. Bangladesh notified its indicative dates of category C in document 
G/TFA/N/BGD/1/Add.4 dated 18 February 2021. Bangladesh has been looking for donors to G/TFA/M/15  
 
- 3 - 
 
  implement those category C provisions and invites donors and development partners to step in . 
Regarding  the question by EU, Bangladesh will get back soon after hearing fro m capital.  
1.17.   The Committee took note  of the notification and of the statements made.  
1.18.   The second notification was from Burkina Faso , circulated  in document G/TFA/N/BFA/1/Add.3. 
The notification  provide d definitive dates for the implementation of category B measures.  
1.19.   The delegate of Japan  appreciate d that Burkina Faso ha d notified the Committee of definitive 
dates for implementing the provisions it ha d designated in category B before  the extended 
notification deadline.  
1.20.   The delegate of the United St ates thanked Burkina Faso for their notification.  
1.21.   The delegate of the European Union  indicated the following:  
1.22.   The EU thanks Burkina Faso for notifying the definitive dates for its category B commitments 
in line with the extension agreed last year in the Fe bruary TFC meeting.  
1.23.   The EU notes that it has in place a West Africa Trade Facilitation Programme that is running 
for the period 2018 -2023 with an indicative amount of EUR 50 million . Therefore , we recommend if 
Burkina Faso could update on its needs for assistance and contact the EU delegation in the country 
accredited to cover Burkina Faso so that if there are any issues to raise on assistance, this will be 
taken care of.  
1.24.   The Committee took note  of the notification and of the statements made.  
1.25.   The Chair turned to the notification of Cambodia, which had been circulated in 
G/TFA/N/KHM/1/Add.2. The notification contain ed information on shifting a measure from category 
C to category B and provide d the definitive implementation date for that measure.  
1.26.   The delegate of the European Union  welcome d Cambodia's  notification. For better 
understanding of this positive development, c ould Cambodia explain how this was achieved?  
1.27.   The delegate of the United States  indicated the following : 
1.28.   The US thanks Cambodia for the notification and notes the commendable effort to shift your 
TFA commitment from  category  C to category  B. We would also b e interested to hear Cambodia's 
story regarding how it was able to accelerate implementation of the Trade Facilitation Agreement 
(TFA, the Agreement) amidst the challenges of the pandemic. We would encourage Cambodia to 
share that experience with the Commi ttee at a future meeting.  
1.29.   The delegate of the United Kingdom  indicated the following : 
1.30.   The UK thanks Cambodia for the notification and the notice of the definitive date of 
implementation of Article 7 :9, as well as redesignating this provision as category B.  The UK, through 
its support from UNCTAD1 and the World Customs Organization ( WCO) has been a supporter of 
Cambodia's  TF implementation efforts, in particular its National Trade Facilitation Committee ( NTFC). 
We feel this is positive. The UK looks forward to seeing further progress from Cambodia on its 
implementation of the  TFA. Like our EU and US colleagues , we really would like to know more from 
Cambodia about how it decided to shift its commitment from C to B, as we see this was a great 
developme nt and a good lesson for us all in the Member ship as we look towards implementation.  
1.31.   The delegate of Cambodia  indicated the following : 
1.32.   I congratulate you Chair on your appointment as the Chair of this important Committee. We 
believe that under your able le adership, the Committee will achieve further outcomes.  
 
1 United Nations Conference on Trade and Development.  G/TFA/M/15  
 
- 4 - 
 
  1.33.   Cambodia appreciates the efforts and works made by the Secretariat for the notifications. The 
notification concerns Article 7 :9 which was shifted from category C to B, with the definitive date of 
imple mentation 31 December 2025.  
1.34.   Thank you to the European Union (EU)  for their point regarding the shifting. I would like to 
inform them that the reason for shifting Article 7 :9 (Perishable Goods ) from C to B was because 
Cambodia is almost compliant and accord ing to the current situation, Cambodia has mostly 
implemented Article 7 :9. 
1.35.   I also thank the US and the UK for their interventions regarding the information sharing at 
the next Committee meeting. I will request to my capital to invite an expert to make a pr esentation 
regarding the progress that ha s been m ade in the implementation of the TFA.  
1.36.   The Committee took note  of the notification and of the statements made.  
1.37.   The next was notification was from Ecuador  and had been circulated in G/TFA/N/ECU/1/Add.2. 
The notification inform ed of a shift of provisions from category C to category B.  
1.38.   The del egate of the European Union  thanked  Ecuador for the notification and the shifting of 
category. Could  Ecuador complement this notification and indi cate by when it expect ed this B 
commitment to be definitely implemented?  
1.39.   The delegate of the United States  indicated the following:  
1.40.   We thank Ecuador for your notification and note the commendable effort to shift your TFA 
commitments from category C to cate gory B.  We are also interested in hearing from Ecuador about 
your experience shifting categories towards a more forward -leaning implementation of the 
Agreement. We hope Ecuador will share your story with the Committee in the near future.  
1.41.   The delegate of Ecuador  indicated the following : 
1.42.   Firstly, we echo our congratulations on your appointment. We thank the US and EU on their 
comments. Regarding our notification, briefly, I wish to respond to the question from the EU, vis-à-
vis the definitive date. As indicat ed in the Annex of the notification made by Ecuador, the definitive 
date is 15 January 2021. Hence, we have already reached the definitive date. To give you some 
background, and response to the US question, we carried out an analysis jointly with the NTFC and 
the National Customs Service. Based on this monitoring and follow -up of the activities that Ecuador 
carried out, as part of the TFA, it was determined that this activity had been implemented and 
complemented, hence we decided to provide a notification about this change of category. 
Nevertheless, I will share you r interest of having further information with our capital and I hope 
there could be presentation about this in an upcoming meeting.  
1.43.   The delegate of the European  Union  thank ed Ecuador for the clar ification and apologise d as 
they had missed the definitive date that had been notified. They underst ood that the provision was 
implemented in fact. The EU  looked forward to a sharing of experience , if this is possible , for any 
future meeting.  
1.44.   The Committee took note  of the notification and of the statements made.  
1.45.   The Chair  turned to a notification from Lesotho circulated in G/TFA/N/LSO/1/Add.2. The 
notification informed of an extension of the indicative dates for catego ry C measures.  
1.46.   The delegate of the United States  thanked Lesotho for their notification.  
1.47.   The delegate of the European Union  indicated the following:  
1.48.   We thank Lesotho for the notification, and we would like to recall that we have an aid 
programme which covers a S ADC (South African Development Community) region and Lesotho in 
particular for the period 2020 -2024 of an amount of EUR 6 million. We have another regional 
programme which spans form 2019 -2023 of EUR 13 million, and we would welcome Lesotho to G/TFA/M/15  
 
- 5 - 
 
  update us on its assistance needs and current situation and to contact our delegation in the country 
concerned.  
1.49.   The delegate of the United Kingdom  indicated the following:  
1.50.   The UK thanks Lesotho for its notification of its revised indicative dates for implementation of 
Article 5.3 and 10.3. The UK , through its support from UNCTAD and the WCO , have been a supporter 
of Lesotho's TFA implementation measures, in particular its NTFC. Timely implementation of the TFA 
is important to us as a critical tool for Member s in their immediate responses to the pandemic , and 
we look forward to supporting Lesotho and its implementation efforts.  
1.51.   The Committee took note  of the notification and of the statements made.  
1.52.   The next item s were two notifications from Mali which ha d been circulated in 
G/TFA/N/MLI/1/Add.2 and G/TFA/N/MLI/2. The first notification provide d the indicative dates for the 
implementation of category C measures, while the second notification contain ed information on the 
arrangements and progress made in the  provision of technical assistance and capacity building 
support of its category C designations.  
1.53.   The delegate of the United States  indicated the following:  
1.54.   We would like to take a moment and acknowledge the informative and instructive notification 
by Mali of the arrangements and progress in the provision of technical assistance and capacity 
building support for category C designations. This kind of notification is exactly what we need to see 
in the Committee, and we commend Mali for establishing best practi ce and encourage others to 
follow Mali's lead.  
1.55.   We are encouraged to see the variety of technical assistance providers already working with 
Mali to support implementation on a range of provisions. We hope that this document helps Mali 
identify partners for those remaining provisions where it seeks additional assistance. Providers have 
a clear signal where there is a need and we hope are open to further discussions with you.  
1.56.   We encourage Mali to consider sharing its experiences with the Committee in a regular  
meeting in our dedicated session on assistance and support later this Fall. 
1.57.   The delegate of the European Union  indicated the following:  
1.58.   Thank you for this notification. We support the statement made by the US. We recall that we 
have a regional aid program me that covers Mali within the Trade Facilitation West Africa (TFWA) 
Programme . We encourage Mali to get in touch with our colleagues in charge of this programme to 
take into account  their needs for assistance and see what can be done.  
1.59.   The Committee took note  of the notification and of the statements made.  
1.60.   Lastly on this agenda item, the Chair drew Member s' attention to a notification from Sierra 
Leone under document G/TFA/N/SLE/1/Add .2. The notification provide d the definitive dates for 
implementation of category B measures.  
1.61.   The delegate of Japan  indicated the following:  
1.62.   Japan appreciates Sierr a Leone's notification to the Committee of the definitive dates for 
implementing the provisi ons it has designated in category B with the extended notification deadline. 
Japan especially recognises the fundamental importance of notifications under Article 16 of the TFA 
and welcomes all the notifications made by Member s today. We encourage the rema ining Member s 
to follow suit and submit notifications by their respective deadlines. We also recognise that some 
LDCs and developing country Member s failed to provide certain notifications within the relevant 
deadline. Japan continues to encourage those Members to submit notifications as soon as possible 
and to explain the current situation in the Committee.  
1.63.   The delegate of the United States  thanked Sierra Leone for their notification.  G/TFA/M/15  
 
- 6 - 
 
  1.64.   The delegate of Nepal  indicated the following:  
1.65.   I wish to thank the Membe rs that present ed these notifications under the Article 15 and 16 of 
the Agreement.  
1.66.   I am pleased to share at this meeting that Nepal has submitted its notifications under Article 
15 and 16 of the Agreement including indicative dates of category C in a timely manner though it 
could not be incorporated in the agenda item.  
1.67.   More importantly, Nepal has notified its redesignation of categories by shifting 11 measures 
from existing category C to category B. As a result, Nepal now has two measures under the cat egory 
A, 19 measures under the category B and only 15 measures under the category C.  
1.68.   Additionally, Nepal has also notified the technical assistance requirement for the 
implementation of the category C measures.  This is an indication of Nepal's high level of commitment 
to the timely and effective implementation of the Trade Facilitation Agreement.  
1.69.   My delegation wishes to extend sincere appreciation to all donor country Member s and 
international organizations for their continued support and cooperation  extended to Nepal and the 
country expects enriched collaboration mainly to implement the category C measures in the days 
ahead.  
1.70.   The delegate of the European Union  indicated the following:  
1.71.   We are grateful  to Sierra Leone for its notification . We would like  to recall that the EU has  
supported the TFWA Programme by approximately  EUR 50 million. We encourage Sierra Leone to 
get in touch with our delegation for their assistance needs and to report on their assistance needs.  
1.72.   The delegate of Niger  indicated the f ollowing:  
1.73.   I would like to congratulate you on your appointment of Chairperson of our Committee. We 
wish you full success in your endeavour in leading our work.  
1.74.   Niger  had made a notification under Article 22 :3 regarding the arrangements with donors but 
it had not been possible to put this information onto the agenda . We would like to thank the 
assistance provided through the West Africa Trade Facilitation Programme and the International 
Trade Centre ( ITC) as well. We stil l have a long way to go. Niger was the first LDC to ratify the TFA 
but the notification of arrangements  and progress sho wed that Niger ha d not benefitted from the 
aid that was expected. Our capital is working at present to notify regarding requirements in the area 
of technical assistance  and also transparency as well, Article s 1:4, 10:6:2. 
1.75.   The Chair  indicated that the Committee had receive d a number of notifications from Member s 
after the agenda had been  issued. Those Member s were Burundi, Chad, Democratic Republic of 
Congo, Madagascar, Morocco, Niger, Nepal, Senegal,  and Tanzania. Those notification would  be 
reviewed at the next regular committee meeting.  
1.76.   The Committee took note  of the notification and of the statements made.  
B. Notifications under Article 17 of the Trade Facilitation Agreement  
1.77.   The Chair  recalled that Article 17 cover ed the Early Warning Mechanism and the extension of 
implementation dates for provisions in categories B and C. The text of paragraphs 1 and 2 of Artic le 
17 read as follows:  
1. (a) A developing country Member  or least -developed country Member  that 
considers itself to be experiencing difficulty in implementing a provision 
that it has designated in category B or category C by the definitive date 
establishe d under subparagraphs 1(b) or (e) of Article 16, or in the case of 
a least -developed country Member  subparagraphs 2(b) or (f) of Article 16, 
should notify the Committee. Developing country Member s shall notify the 
Committee no later than 120 days before the expiration of the G/TFA/M/15  
 
- 7 - 
 
  implementation date. Least -developed country Member s shall notify the 
Committee no later than 90 days before such date.  
(b) The notification to the Committee shall indicate th e new date by which the 
developing country Member  or least -developed country Member  expects to 
be able to implement the provision concerned. The notification shall also 
indicate the reasons for the expected delay in implementation. Such 
reasons may include  the need for assistance and support for capacity 
building not earlier anticipated or additional assistance and support to help 
build capacity.  
2. Where a developing country Member 's request for additional time for 
implementation does not exceed 18 months or a least -developed country 
Member 's request for additional time does not exceed 3 years, the 
requesting Member  is entitled to such additional time without any further 
action by the Committee.  
1.78.   The Chair  turned to the notification  from Peru which had been  circulated in document 
G/TFA/N/PER/1/Add.1 , in which  Peru had request ed an extension to the definitive implementation 
date of 22 July 2021 for Article 3. This notification had been  reviewed at the previous  Committee 
meeting, and at that time, it had been agreed to revert to this notification during this session.  
1.79.   The delegate of the United States  indicated the following:  
1.80.   At the last Committee meeting, the United States made note that Peru 's notification of the 
Early Warning Mechanism was untimely, and we the refore could not accept the notification. Since 
we cannot agree to accept the notification under Article 17, nonetheless we do see value in this 
transparency exercise, and we stand ready to offer our assistance in helping Peru make its goals. 
We would appr eciate if Peru could elaborate on how it plans to ensure it meets the new deadline it 
has set for itself. We look forward to Peru sharing that information with the Committee.  
1.81.   The delegate of the European Union  indicated the following:  
1.82.   The EU already expressed its position regarding these notifications from Peru and Ukraine. 
We appreciate the transparency of these notification. We regret that those have not been done 
during the timeline that is indicated in the TFA pertinent Article. We consider that t his would not 
necessarily be discussed by the Committee, the request for extension, given that Article 17 :2 states 
that  
"Where a developing country Member 's request for additional time for 
implementation does not exceed 18 months [which is the case for th ese 
two countries ] the requesting Member  is entitled to such additional time 
without any further action by the Committee .  
1.83.   Regarding Ukraine, we mentioned last time that the EU is providing assistance to Ukraine and 
given the COVID -19 difficulties last yea r, this explains the delay that is currently subject to 
discussion.  
1.84.   The delegate of the United States  indicated the following:  
1.85.   Thank you for reading out the actual text from Article 17. I would just like to take a moment 
to elaborate on our position and reading of the TFA.  
1.86.   As you stated, the first sentence of TFA Article 17 :1(a) indicates that where a developing 
country Member  "considers itself to be experiencing difficulty in implementing " a category B 
provision by the definitive date establ ished under TFA Article 16 :1(b), it "should notify the 
Committee ". That said, the second sentence of TFA Article 17 :1(a) clearly stipulates that the Member  
must do so – "shall notify the Committee " – no later than 120 days before the expiration of the 
implementation date.  G/TFA/M/15  
 
- 8 - 
 
  1.87.   To consider TFA Article 17 :1(a) a 'best endeavours clause ', meaning it is not necessary to 
meet the timelines, as some Member s suggest, and therefore accept an untimely notificati on, 
renders Article 17 meaningless, because such an interpretation means that a developing country 
Member  can choose whenever it wants to implement a category B provision simply by never telling 
the Committee that it plans to delay implementation until aft er the definitive date.  
1.88.   What is the purpose of Article 17 :2, which automatically grants a developing country Member  
additional time where its extension request does not exceed 18 months, or Article 17 :3, which allows 
the Committee to grant that Member  an extension greater than 18 months, if a Member  can sua 
sponte  grant itself an unlimited extension simply by not filing a request with the Committee?  
1.89.   What is the purpose of Article 17 :4, which requires the Committee to "give sympathetic 
consideration to grant ing requests for extension ", if a Member  can get whatever extension it wants 
simply by not filing a request for the Committee 's consideration?  
1.90.   To interpret the TFA Article 17 :1(a) requirement that a developing country Member  may 
request an extension of imp lementation dates for category B/C provisions later than 120 days before 
the expiration of the implementation date of such provisions renders this deadline meaningless. The 
verb "shall" as it appears in the second sentence of TFA Article 17 :1(a), and the b asic fact that this 
second sentence appears immediately after the early warning mechanism, clearly constricts how the 
first sentence of TFA Article 17 :1(a) functions. The deadline is clearly there for a reason and must 
be given effect.  
1.91.   This interpretation of TFA Article 17 :1(a) is supported by the language of TFA Article 17 :3, 
which stipulates that where a developing country Member  requires a first extension longer than 18 
months (see TFA Article 17 :2), "it shall submit to the Committee a request for an ext ension 
containing the information described in subparagraph 1(b) no later than 120 days … before the 
expiration of the original definitive implementation date …". It seems incongruous to set an obligatory 
deadline for requests of greater than 18 months but not for requests of 18 months or less.  
1.92.   This interpretation of TFA Article 17 :1(a) is further confirmed by the TFA Notification 
Requirements outlined on the WTO 's TFA website2. The WTO 's TFA website clearly informs all WTO 
Member  that Article 17 "is called the early warning mechanism because the request for an extension 
of category B and category C implementation dates must be notified in advance according to the 
time frames set forth in  Article 17 :1. Specifically, for developing countries  no later than 120 days 
before the expiration of the notified definitive date ". 
1.93.   The delegate of Japan  indicated the following:  
1.94.   We appreciate the efforts of these Member s (Peru, Tonga, and Ukraine) to imp lement the 
relevant provisions by the indicated new dates. Japan regrets that (Peru, Tonga, and Ukraine) failed 
to provide timely notifications in accordance with Article 17. We hope this will not be repeated in the 
future.  
1.95.   Japan thinks it is difficult to accept the request based on the provisions set forth in Article 17. 
Having said that, we wish to encourage the Member s' efforts to implement the relevant provisions 
of the TFA. Japan is interested to discuss measures for preventing a recurrence of overdue 
notifications under Article 17.  
1.96.   The delegate of Norway  indicated the following:  
1.97.   I am taking the floor now regarding the principals that we are discussing. I think the US has 
gone to the extent of how to read Article 17. I would like to reinforce that we pu t those rules in there 
on the early warning mechanism for a reason, including for predictability. Article 17 :2 with the 
automatic extension is the carrot, and that is a positive. So not using that carrot, going further, not 
abiding by the timeline, the way  we wrote and crafted the early warning mechanism is yes, as the 
US has elaborated on. I do see the argument that the EU makes that these Member s would still be 
abiding by the deadlines as such in the article when it comes to implementation . However, I think 
that going into a case as such, looking at it fr om a dispute perspective, is not the way to go, rather 
 
2 https://www.tfafacility.org/wto -tfa-notifications -general -overview . G/TFA/M/15  
 
- 9 - 
 
  to urge Members to abide by those deadlines as they are very important so that we m ake this 
Agreement work.  
1.98.   The representative of Sri Lanka  indicated the following:  
1.99.   First let me join other delegations in commending, certainly appreciating , your ability to come 
forward and take over the responsibilities of the Chair . Of course we always had a lot of trust in you 
so thank you for having sh own your ability to command this Committee , which we consider a very 
important committee.   
1.100.   We consider this Agreement, and also many countries are projecting this Agreement , as a 
new agreement within the WTO where we see that special and differential ( S&DT ) provisions have 
been crafted in a different structure . Most Members a re drawing examples and suggesting that this 
can be replicated in future agreements to be negotiated , including the fisheries  subsidies 
negotiations. Therefore, Sri Lanka is watching very closely the activities of this Committee and what 
other Member s are demonstrating when it comes to the implementation of special and differential 
treatment  provisions.  
1.101.    My delegation's interventi on at this moment is related to a systematic issue where we see 
Member s demonstrating their flexibility in terms of addressing the implementation issues of the 
developing countries.  Looking at the case of Peru, the only mistake that Peru has made is that i t 
failed to notify its intention to ask for a n extension to the implementation date and it failed to notify 
within th e 120 day  deadline . 
1.102.   The way Article  17 is drafted right now, it has been  considered as an obligation carved in 
stone.  That is the way those  who have spoken before  me have interpreted this. So, Members do not 
have any way to get themselves excluded from that obligation because it is stated in two places.  
Now there are two conditions to be met to consider this request as a genuine request. The first thing 
is that the request should be submitted before 120 days and the requested time -period to delay the 
obligation should be less than 18 months. When it comes to the second criteria it does not say 
anything beyond that . That means that when it comes to the length of time -period for 
implementation  that can be considered under sympathetic consideration , there is  a real possibility 
for the country to get an extended time period beyond 18 months.  
1.103.   The prob lem her e be is that, even for that , the country should have submitted its request 
before 120 days. Sri Lanka considers this as a systematic  issue because everybody is watching how 
Member s are really addressing TFA implementation issues of many developing c ountries . If you try 
to demonstrate this rigid criteria  and not giving any sympathetic consideration, it is sending a very 
wrong signal to the outer  world because we are trying to replicate the same mechanism in the 
fisher ies subsidies  negotiations. When it comes to these  negotiations, which  I am covering in very 
close supervision , we are debating whether this TFA mechanism can be replicated in the fisher ies 
subsidy negotiations discipline as an S&DT provision.  
1.104.    Countries who are opposing  Peru's request should bear this in mind as  well. How do you 
demonstrate that the TFA is a flexible agreement which can be replicated in all future disciplines ? In 
light of this spirit and solidarity, I am requesting the other Member s to understand this co untry's 
concern.  Peru has never approached Sri Lanka to support this, but we are raising this as a systemic 
issue. Sri Lanka is watching this; we are not going to make any declaration but Sri Lanka's category 
B indicative dates expired on 31 December 2019.  Sri Lanka has not thought about seeking an 
extension but this will be sending a lot of signals to a lot of countries like us who are not able to 
really fulfil these category B commitments and even for that matter category C commitments in the 
future.  
1.105.   As to how this Committee and other development partners are going to tackle these issues 
in the future , certainly we will draw a lot of parallels from this Committee 's discussion to the fisher ies 
subsid ies negotiations and of course as Ambassador of Sri Lanka,  I will be making a statement in 
the fisher ies subsid ies negotiations as to how and the way in which these TFA S&DT provisions are 
being integrated and implemented by other countries.  
1.106.   This is a very serious issue for us. We all have to look at the request of Peru in a more 
comprehensive and different way because they had indicated the difficulties . By missing a particular G/TFA/M/15  
 
- 10 - 
 
  deadline, for which they have given some reasons, I think that using the provisions as a yard stick 
to measure the country's capacity is not the right way to deal with this kind of request from 
developing countries.  There has to be more forward -looking  thinking because this Agreement, these 
provisions, will be quoted in other negotiations as well.  
1.107.   The Chair said that Member s' interventions  had e nriched the discussion  as to how the 
Committee  consider ed the specific request from Peru; how the paragraphs within Article 17 
interact ed with each other ; and also how the Committee should consider requests that were not 
within the deadl ines set out in paragraph 17 . 
1.108.   The delegate of Peru indicated the following:  
1.109.   I wish to echo the congratulations and we wish you every success. We welcome the 
comments made by the European Union, Japan, Norway, Sri Lanka and United States with regard 
to our notification. As WTO Member s know, the issue of TF is of the upmost relevance for Peru. 
Indeed, it is one of the four cornerstones of our national strategic export plan for 2025 which aims 
to promote consolidation and internationalisation of Peru's oversea s enterprise s in the long term.  
1.110.   The TFA has allowed us to put in place measures that aim to ensure transparency on 
international trade , to streamline processes tied to customs clearance , to decrease hinderances to 
the flow of goods , and facilitate monitori ng work. This has given rise to a decrease in times and cost 
associated with  foreign trade. In 2008 and 2009, Peru put in place a series of regulatory changes on 
issues tied to trade facilitation  and international logistics. We worked on a multi -secretarial level to 
put in place a new general customs law and relevant regulations. We developed new regulations on 
multi modal transportation, logistics platforms, coasting, and setting up a logistics m odule for foreign 
trade which would help to promote transparency of foreign trade operations when it comes to 
describing and listing prices of logistic services. In parallel, we developed relevant programmes with 
support from cooperation partners such as f acilitating foreign trade through a one stop shop for 
foreign trade programme, which has expanded the scope of implementation of the one stop shop. 
It includes market access , logistical portals, a risk management system,  and other aspects. This has 
allowed  us to ensure compliance with Article  10:4 of the Agreement.  
1.111.   Furthermore, in 2008, we began to structure the efficiency o f health management in the 
framework o f the TFA in Peru. Our partners include public and private bodies and the World Bank 
Group. This initiative aims to ensure implementation and improvement of five concrete measures 
within the TFA - notification of control inspection, test ing, risk management , authorised operators 
and cooperation amongst customs and border officials. Peru has put in place various measures and 
instruments to bolster our regulations on trade facilitation  which are tied to the provisions of this 
Agreement. Nevertheless, it was no t possible to wrap up all work tied to regulation on preferential 
rules of origin.  
1.112.   However , it is important to note that Peru has various measures in place , inter alia  on 
preferential agreement s. Our notification aimed to share with WTO Member s in a transp arent manner 
the fact that Peru is currently carrying out necessary internal coordination to issue regulations that 
take more time that we expected in our initial notification. In light of the pandemic, which began 
early last year, it became clear that we would need to seek swift solutions to logistical issues, 
avoiding physical movement for both operators and users. This gave rise to various standards on 
digitalisation and transparency in the logistics process  for foreign trade. This is why the adoption of  
the standards tied to early warning were postponed. It is foreseen that this regulation will include a 
form to request an early warning period of validity and modification, reasons for which an early 
warning mechanism might not be accepted, and other prov isions. Once this standard is put in place, 
this will ensure full compliance with Article  3 requirements of this Agreement. My delegation looks 
forward to cooperating with all Member s to ensure full compliance with the Agreement and to 
contribute to boosti ng transparent, open trade, in line with the guiding principles of the WTO.  
1.113.   The delegate of Mozambique  indicated the following:  
1.114.   The delegation of Mozambique would like to congratulate you on your appointment as Chair 
of the Trade Facilitation Committee and wish you success.  G/TFA/M/15  
 
- 11 - 
 
  1.115.   We welcome the developments on the implementation of the TFA and commend all Member s 
for all the efforts being devoted to implement the TFA according to each one's commitments under 
the Agreement.  
1.116.   We thank  delegations  for th e exchanges on the requests put forward by the three countries 
which, having faced difficulties and not be ing able to cope with their initial commitments, presented 
requests under the early warning mechanisms of the TF Agreement.  
1.117.   Having followed the previo us interventions, we would like to refer to the one made by HE 
Ambassador of Sri Lanka and to agree with her points of view, in the belief that Peru, Tonga and 
Ukraine had to make their requests due to unforeseen circumstances which meant that their action s 
did not occur as planned.  
1.118.   It is our point of view that within the implementation process of the TFA, flexibility is also 
necessary and important even if it has to be on a case-by-case basis, as in life circumstances  change 
and plans have do also change accordingly.  
1.119.   The Mozambique delegation would like to use this opportunity to express its recognition and 
gratitude to all partners who have been devoting resources to technically assist and support our 
countries in the implementation of the TF Agreement.  
1.120.   The delegate of Mali indicated the following:  
1.121.   Mali wishes to thank the donors who helped us to implement the TFA. Concretely, I wish to 
thank Denmark for the DANIDA  Project. They are one of the key partners to date helping Mali to  
implement  the Agreement. W e also wish to thank the other partners who helped us to carry out our 
work, including UNCTAD and the International Trade Centre. We recently shared notifications about 
transparency measures with as well as notifications  pursuant to Article  16. With regard to additional 
dates, despite the current pandemic we are currently working to flesh out timing and we have put 
in place a plan which will allow us to appropriately execute our work.  We believe that the TFA is of 
utmost importance to a country like o urs which needs support to make progress and ensure daily  
work in our country . I would like to thank the WTO yet again and thank all partners for their support. 
I would also like to thank the Chairperson and note that we truly appreciate the work of donors  
which helps us to ensure implementation of our work.  
1.122.   The delegate of India indicated the following:  
1.123.   At the outset, my delegation would like to take this opportunity to congratulate you on your 
appointment as Chairperson of this important Committee and wis h you all the success.  
1.124.   On the issue of extension of time sought by certain Member s, my delegation echoes concerns 
expressed by Sri Lanka. This is a systemic issue. What we are discussing here is substantive right 
vis-à-vis procedural requirements. My deleg ation would urge the Committee and Member ship to 
show flexibility, to enable Member s to implement this important Agreement.  
1.125.   The delegate of Nigeria  indicated the following:  
1.126.   Nigeria wishes to congratulate you on your appointment as Chair of this Committee a nd 
appreciate all the donors that have given support to Nigeria, particularly UNCTAD and the UK. A lot 
of activities have been organized in Nigeria, particularly on sensitization, a road map, and a few 
other activities that have been going on. We are only hopeful that we should be able to access the 
support under the Trade Facilitation Agreement Facility in the WTO. Thank you Chair. We look 
forward to working with you to ensure success on the implementation of the TFA.  
1.127.   The Chair recollect ed that a number of statements had been  made  speaking to the flexibility 
that Member s have in terms of considering these requests, while at the same time noting that the 
provisions of the Agreement were what they were,  and the intent was to allow for some additional  
transparency by Member s in advance if they were experiencing some difficulties.  
1.128.   Several  delegations  identified a tension between the provisions. There was also an openness 
to consider how to best help those Member s. The conclusion, based on the discussion  was twofold —G/TFA/M/15  
 
- 12 - 
 
  one, that the Committee was not in a position to accept the extensions requested at this time ; 
Member s appreciate d the transparency but there was also an interest to discuss possible measures 
to prevent such an occurrence going forward. It was important to come to some understanding for 
future situations where Member s might  consider the need to sub mit an Article  17 notification.  
1.129.   In the interest of trying to help the Committee come around to figuring out how be st to 
approach these notifications the Chair  offered to assist,  should Member s wish to hold informal 
consultations to decide on how best to proceed. There was an openness amongst Member s to help 
all Member s implement the Agreement. There was also a need th at the Committee underst ood how 
Article  17 was to be approach ed in the future, as well as the current notifications. If there was an 
interest, the Chair was happy to try to bring Member s together to discuss how best to address the 
tension that exists here.  
1.130.   The Chair proposed to set up consultations on the matter and report back to the Committee 
at its next meeting.  
1.131.   The Committee took note  of the notification and of the statements made.  
1.132.   The next notification was from Ukraine and had been  circulated in document 
G/TFA/N/UKR/1/Add.3. Ukraine request ed an extension to its definitive implementation date up to 
31 December 2021 for Articles 7 :5, 11:3 to 11 :8, and 11 :10. This notification was first reviewed at 
the last Committee meeting, and at t hat time, it was agreed to revert to this notification during this 
session.  
1.133.   The delegate of Ukraine  indicated the following:  
1.134.   Please accept our congratulations and best wishes on your appointment. We would like to 
thank the delegations of EU, India, Japan, Nigeria, Norway, Sri Lanka and US, and others, for the 
provided comments  in regard to  the notifications under Article  17, including notifications from 
Ukraine. We would like to thank the delegation of the US for the bilateral meeting which we 
conducted in the intersessional period. The comments that we received were quite useful and well 
noted. To follow on the initiated discussion, we would like to provide some additional information on 
this issue.  
1.135.    As it was already mentioned, Ukraine, with support from t he EU, within the EU BFM 
programme is currently implementing measures with a view to improving transit and post clearance 
audit procedures. These measures include implementation of a new computerised standard system 
at the national level , its integration i nto the EU transit system and introduction of a new post 
clearance audit IT system.  Therefore, the measures being implemented seem to go beyond the 
commitments undertaken by Ukraine under the TFA.  We would like to emphasise that Ukraine 
already maintains post clearance audit as provided for in Article 7 :5 of the TFA and ensures freedom 
of transit as described in Article  11 of the TFA.  However, a lockdown caused by the COVID -19 
pandemic has delayed the implementation of th at project and of Article s 7:5; 11:3 through  11:8, 
and 11 :10 of the TFA , which  had been notified by Ukraine as category C commitments.  We requested 
the Member ship to take into consideration the circumstances which caused the extension of the 
implementation.  Since one Member  expres sed their concern about the delayed submission of the 
request , and taking into account the actual implementation of the relevant commitments, Ukraine , 
after completion of its internal consultations , will duly inform the Member ship of its decision in 
respec t to the request.  
1.136.   The delegate o f Tonga  indicated the following:  
1.137.   Congratulations to you on your appointment. Tonga appreciates the opportunity to submit 
its notification requesting an extension to the implementation dates under the TFA. Tonga has not 
yet ratified the TFA . However, to date, Tonga has provided its definitive implementation dates to the 
Committee and is working on completing its ratification process. During October 2020, Tonga had 
the opportunity to review its category commitments, and reaffirm the need to extend its definitive 
implementation dates for provisions reflected in the cur rent notification on the deliberation before 
the Committee this morning. This was made possible with the technical assistance provided to Tonga 
by the World Bank Group . Because of COVID -19 restrictions, meetings between the lead team in 
Tonga and the World  Bank Group were conducted virtually. The main reason for the request is that G/TFA/M/15  
 
- 13 - 
 
  we now have an update of an aggressive and realistic implementation timetable, first reported to 
the WTO in 2018, which documents approximately 30 reform actions for categories B  and C between 
2020 and 2029. Actions, particularly those relating to law, regulations and automation required 
significant lead time and sequencing of reforms will be a critical component , particularly relating to 
implementation of activities between 2021 and 2024.  
1.138.   Most of  the request  is for the extension of an additional year or two, ending in 2021 this 
year, or in 2022 . There is one exception, which is an additional 6 years by which new legislation is 
required. The main reason for the extension request is  that the resources that were assigned for 
implementation were relocated and diverted for COVID -19 purposes. We all agree that COVID -19 
brought some unprecedented challenges and for small countries like Tonga, required unprecedented 
responses to put in pla ce the necessary protection at all our borders to contain the virus.  
1.139.   Tonga  therefore kindly requests the Committee to consider the challenges Tonga has faced 
which has resulted in the TFA not being ratified and the request for the extension of the 
implemen tation dates. We hope that the Committee will be sympathetic to Tonga's case to accept 
the notification.  
1.140.   The Chair , recognising the comments made for the notification of Peru and to hold informal 
consultations on the broader issues of Article  17, the reque sts submitted after the deadline identified 
in paragraph 1 of Article 17, asked if there were any comments in respect of the notifications of 
Ukraine or Tonga.  
1.141.   The delegate of the United States  indicated the following:  
1.142.   I have already made a long interventi on so I won't repeat that , but we look forward to talking 
with you about how to move forward with the untimely notifications because as I said earlier, we 
really do see value in the transparency exercise and the Committee has a great deal of expertise 
and donors and assistance providers that perhaps helps countries , and we can share experiences 
and thought s to move forward. The one thing I wanted to add and point out in addition to our reading 
of Article  17, we understand that it is a procedural requirement , but the real on the ground fact of 
Article  17 is that it will change the actual Agreement. Article 16 :5 says that all of these schedules of 
implementation become integral parts of the Agreement so when Article  17 is invoked, it actually 
changes the commitments and the Agreement itself unilaterally. So, we see it as having such 
significant impact. We cannot view it as a mere procedural requirement.  
1.143.   The representative of Sri Lanka  indicated the following:  
1.144.   Since I  am not participating regularly in other Committee sessions, I would like to get to 
know from you if there are agenda item s where we can really bring our proposals  and inputs , and 
implementation issues such as this  for the Committee 's attention . If it is t he case, we would like to 
see how we can proceed because th is is very important as we are about to embark on a review 
process and inputs can be quite useful in understanding what the real implementation issues are for  
very small developing countries . We recognise our bargaining power to attract technical assistance 
is less compared to many countries. If you look at the donors, the direction of their assistance is 
also focused very much on their trade policies so sometimes some countries will not be in the p riority 
list in providing technical assistance.  That is an essential element in the meeting of obligations so 
when we don't have technical assistance, then how do we really implement even our category C 
commitments because most of the countries will cease the situation. So we have to really prepare 
ourselves for the future when we are not able to really meet our category C commitments even by 
the indicated dates that they have to be implemented. Therefore, we should be prepared to have 
discussions to tackle  these implementation issues which are genuine , as Tonga has explained that 
in its case the challenge to make the deadline of 31 December 2020 is due to COVID -19. I think the 
Ambassador of Vanuatu indicated the difficulties they encountered and similar sma ll countries may 
be encountering such difficulties . There has to be a way to recognise these concerns and understand 
their predicament and accordingly adapt certain good practices within the Committee. Please guide 
us as to how we can bring these issues  to the Committee – outside of the review process that we 
are due to embark on. That would be useful for us.  
1.145.   The Chair  proposed that further discussions could take place at a future time, but based on 
past experience, there were two specific opportunities for  Member s to share experiences. One was G/TFA/M/15  
 
- 14 - 
 
  the regular experience sharing item on the Committee's agenda. Member s were free to include 
information related to their experiences in implementing the Agreement. Also, Article  21:4 of the 
Agreement provided that the Committee will hold at least one dedicated session per year, amongst 
other things, to discuss problems regarding the implementation of provisions or subparts of 
provisions of this Agreement. If there were other area s where a Member  wished to come forward 
with a specific topic to discuss within the Committee's mandate, they could add that to the agenda 
as well. There were some examples of that already in the Committee. The Chair hoped that helped 
to provide context an d going forward, that this opened opportunities for Sri Lanka or other Member s 
to bring forward their experiences in terms of implementing the Agreement and any issues they may 
have in doing so.  
1.146.   The Chair recalled that whilst the Committee was not in a pos ition at the moment to accept 
the extensions requested, recognising the points made by the United States, there was an interest 
amongst Committee Member s and willingness to help Member s in terms of the implementation. 
There was also an interest with all Co mmittee Member s to get clarity and understanding regarding 
the procedures in place and the implications of the utilisation of Article  17. 
1.147.   The Chair would hold informal consultations in the upcoming weeks to try to help Member s 
to exchange views more thorou ghly and seek to come up with a way to address these three 
notifications but also to discuss how to prevent an occurrence of overdue notifications on Article  17. 
A report would be provided at the next meeting.  
1.148.   The Committee took note  of the statements made . 
C. Notifications under Articles 1:4, 10:4:3, 10:6:2 and 12:2:2 of the Trade Facilitation 
Agreement  
1.149.   Transparency notifications were mandated by Article s 1:4, 10:4:3, 10:6:2 and 12:2:2 of the 
TFA. They all ha d the objective of providing transparency, eithe r 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.  Since the Committee 's last 
meeting, six transpar ency notifications had been received from five Member s. However, as per the 
corrigendum to the airgram, two of those notifications would not be reviewed during the meeting.  
1.150.   The Chair  drew the Committee 's attention to the notification of Mali ( G/TFA/N/MLI/3 ). 
1.151.   The delegate of the European Union  explained they had requested their notifications 
withdrawn from the agenda as some of the weblinks were not working properly. They were actively 
reviewing such links and hoped to update and notify them promptly. The EU  thanked Member s for 
their understanding.  
1.152.   The delegate of the United States  thanked Mali for the notification.  
1.153.   The Chair  moved to  a notification from Mongolia ( G/TFA/N/MNG/2/A dd.1/Rev.1). 
1.154.   The delegate of the United States  thanked Mongolia for their notification. This document 
would be invaluable to traders seeking more information on Mongolia 's import, export and transit 
procedures.  
1.155.   The delegate of Mongolia  congratulated the Chair for their appointment and wished him 
every  success. Mongolia thanked the United States for their comments.  
1.156.   The Chair  proceeded to the notification from Myanmar ( G/TFA/N/MMR/2 ). 
1.157.   The delegate of the European Union  indicated the following:  
1.158.   We have not had sufficient time to review Myanmar's notificat ion; we would like it to be 
examined further at the next meeting. We can already share that we have some concerns regarding 
the situation regarding customs procedures that have been reported to the EU. According to our 
information, there is room for furthe r efforts in combating illicit trade in Myanmar, whilst announcing 
trade facilitation for legitimate trade. We note that the lack of sufficient resources at certain border G/TFA/M/15  
 
- 15 - 
 
  points allow for only limited hours of work for customs clearance, which creates dis ruption. It has 
been reported that sometimes trucks spend more time waiting for the cargo clearance than driving. 
Overnight and day costs due to delays, red channels and other delaying factors are too common and 
result in added cost for forwarders and los ses for trucking companies.  
1.159.   Import formalities are reported as being often unaligned and time consuming. There are a 
wide range of practices among customs officers and some examples provided are an insurance policy 
which will be sent for full assessment if the policy is not provided during the normal customs 
processes. Customs officers demand a SAFE contract to show the exact quantity of the shipment, 
whilst SAFE contracts are issued for the total quantity of the orders, while the shipment is done only 
for partial quantities. It happens also that business operators have been charged with high customs 
penalties for honest clerical mistakes.  
1.160.   Myanmar should consider implementing reforms to facilitate business and provide stable 
regulatory environment. It is also  necessary not only to adopt legal text but to ensure a meaningful 
and genuine implementation by government officials. We would like to note also, that the EU put on 
hold all development cooperation activities that would support the military authorities , and this 
includes direct financial support and technical assistance in government ministries. The EU is 
currently reviewing all development assistance programmes to Myanmar to avoid providing financial 
and technical support for the military authorities afte r the coup, while seeking to maintain vital 
support for the population. The EU , in coordination with our EU Member States on the ground,  will 
maintain to the maximum exten t, all actions supporting the population and local communities and 
avoid taking measu res that will negatively affect the most vulnerable. This is an immediate first 
step. Work is on -going with other partners to review all cooperation programmes on the ground.  
1.161.   The Chair drew the Committee 's attention to the notification of Uruguay  
(G/TFA/N/ URY/2/R ev.2) . 
1.162.   The delegate of the United States  indicated the following:  
1.163.   We note that the links for information listed under 1:1(b), regarding applied rates of duties 
and tariffs, and 1:1(i), agreements related to import, export  or transit, takes the user to a login 
screen, but we are unable to read the pertinent information. Does Uruguay have plans to update 
those two weblinks on the notification?  
1.164.   The delegate of the European Union  indicated the following:  
1.165.   The EU would like to c all on the Member s who have not yet notified their commitments under 
the transparency measures to proceed without delay . It is extremely important for operators to have 
a clear and transparent access to measures that are implemented at the border.  
1.166.   The dele gate of Cambodia  indicated the following:  
1.167.   I would like to thank Mali, Mongolia, Myanmar, Uruguay for their notifications. My delegation 
would like to inform the committee that Cambodia has already notified under Article s 1:4, and 10:4:3 
dated 19 February 2 021 which is contained in document G/TFA/N/KHM/5. I was informed that our 
notification will be in the agenda for the next meeting. In this regard, it would be helpful if Member s 
could send question or comments in advance to the next meeting, so that we can  consult with our 
capital.  
1.168.   Cambodia also notified, in response to Article  16, the arrangements and progress in the 
provision of technical assistance and capacity building support of category C dated 19 February 
2021, as contained in document G/TFA/N/KHM/4.  
1.169.   I would also like to take this opportunity to thank donors and development partners for 
supporting and providing technical assistance to Cambodia.  
1.170.   We look forward to consulting with donors, the Secretariat and Member s on this matter 
possibly in the coming  months.  G/TFA/M/15  
 
- 16 - 
 
  1.171.   The Chair thanked Cambodia for the reminder to Member s to send questions on notifications 
received in advance so that missions  could  consult with capital before the next formal meeting. The 
notification of Cambodia, as well as those from t he Democ ratic Republic of Congo, Liberia and 
Morocco were received after the agenda was issued and they would  be reviewed at the next regular 
committee meeting.  
1.172.   The Committee took note  of the notifications and the statements made.  
D. Notifications under Article 22 of the Trade Facilitation Agreement  
1.173.   Notifications under Article  22 were of two types —Article  22.1 covered notifications by donor 
Member s on their recent capacity building activities; Article s 22.2 and 22.3 provided information on 
contact points.  
Article 22.3  
1.174.   Since the Committee 's last meeting on 26 January 2021, two Member s had submitted 
notifications under Article  22.3. 
1.175.   The Chair  drew the Committee 's attention to the notification of Cuba (G/TFA/N/CUB/3).  
1.176.   The delegate of the European Union  thanke d Member s for their notifications which were 
useful and pertinent for all the ongoing work and coordination of assistance to recipient Member s. 
1.177.   The Chair indicated that the final notification in the agenda was a notification from Mali 
(G/TFA/N/MLI/4 ). 
1.178.   Notifications from Chad, the Democratic Republic of Congo, Liberia, Morocco and Niger  had 
been received after the closing of the agenda and the Chair indicated that they would be reviewed 
at the next meeting.  
1.179.   The Committee took note  of the notifications and of  the statements made.  
1.180.   The Chair , on behalf of Cuba, thanked the European Union for their comments.  
1.181.   The Committee took note  of the notifications and of the statements made.  
1.2  Status of the Ratification and Notification Process  
Update by the Secretariat  
1.182.   The representative of the WTO Secretariat  presented  an update since the last Committee 
meeting held in January 2021. All the information presented had been sourced from the TFA 
Database website ( http:/ /www.tfadatabase.org ). 
1.183.   There had been no change in the number of ratifications since the last update and ten 
Member s had yet to notify their ratification.  
1.184.   To date, 84% of LDCs (26 Member s) that had designated category B commitments had also 
notified their category B definitive dates before the deadline of 22 February 2020. Nine LDCs had 
requested an extension of time until 21February 2021 to notify these dates. Seven Member s had 
already done so —Afghanistan, Burkina Faso, Chad, Lao PDR, Senegal, Sierr a Leone  and Solomon 
Islands.  Two Member s had yet to notify these dates —Djibouti and Mauritania.  
1.185.   The notification deadline for LDCs to notify category C indicative dates was 22 February 
2021. Out of the 32 LDC Member s that had notified the category C designations, 29 had already 
notified their category C indicative dates and three Member s had yet to d o so—Djibouti, Myanmar 
and Rwanda.  G/TFA/M/15  
 
- 17 - 
 
  1.186.   LDCs were required to inform the Committee of their donor arrangements by 22 February 
2021. Out of the 32 Member s that had notified category C designations, five Member s—Bangladesh, 
Cambodia, Madagascar, Mali and Niger ha d notified their donor arrangements. Th at left 27 Member s 
that had yet to do so.  
1.187.   Regarding notification deadlines which had already passed and for which notifications 
remained outstanding, starting in chronological order with the deadlines in 2017 and 2018  for LDCs 
and developing countries to notify their category A, B, C designations, there were three developing 
country Member s and three LDC Member s that had yet to do so. The next deadline of 22 February 
2018 was for the notification of category B indicati ve dates by LDCs and there was one outstanding 
notification to be presented. The next deadline was that of 22 February 2020, corresponding to the 
notification by LDCs of their category B definitive dates. Currently, two LDCs had yet to make those 
notificat ions. On the developing countries, the notification deadline for category C definitive dates 
had been 22 August 2019 and three developing country Member s had yet to make that notification. 
Finally, the deadline to receive the technical assistance requireme nts for their category C 
designations had been 22 February 2017 and there were four developing country Member s that had 
yet to make that notification. The same notification was required from LDCs by 22 February 2019 
and there were eight LDC Member s that ha d yet to make that notification.  
1.188.   There were 95 Member s that had notified category C designations and of those Member s, 
86 had submitted their technical assistance requirements and ten had notified their donor 
arrangements and progress made in the provision of technical assistance and capacity building 
support. So far, there had not been any notifications received on don or arrangements and progress 
from donor Member s. 
1.189.   Turning to implementation progress, the latest notifications that had been received since the 
last meeting came from Bangladesh, Burkina Faso, Cambodia, Ecuador, Lesotho, Mali and Sierr a 
Leone . 
1.190.   The global ov erview of TFA implementation commitments for the entire Member ship stood 
at 69.7%. The rate of TFA implementation commitments of developing countries and LDC Member s 
and to date this stands at 60.4%.  This was composed by 50.8% of commitments allocated in 
category A, 7.2% of category B commitments and 2.5% of category C commitments with notified 
implementation dates that had already passed.  
1.191.   Since the last meeting, the Committee had received ten notifications under the transparency 
mandated obligations. In ad dition, since the last meeting, two notifications had been received under 
Article  22:3.  
1.192.   The delegate of Japan  indicated the following:  
1.193.   Japan appreciate d if the remaining WTO Member s that have not ratified the TFA could share 
in the Committee any informatio n pertaining to the current situation surrounding domestic 
processes.  
1.194.   The delegate of Cambodia  indicated the following:  
1.195.   I would like to thank the Secretariat for the comprehensive effort and for every effort 
contributed to the set of notifications. I shoul d congratulate Member s, especially LDCs who 84% 
have fulfilled their notification obligations  for category B definitive dates . We are very proud of this 
achievement. We look forward to working closely with Member s and the Secretariat especially for 
further  notifications.  
1.196.   The delegate of the United States  thanked  the Secretariat for its analysis and presentation 
today. They always found  the data that was provided quite useful . 
1.197.   The delegate of European Union  indicated the following:  
1.198.   We would like to express our heartfelt thanks for the excellent work that has been provided 
by the WTO Secretariat. This is very comprehensive but at the same time very focused and precise. 
It is very useful to provide us with a clear understanding, object ive understanding of the state of G/TFA/M/15  
 
- 18 - 
 
  play for the implementation of the commitments with regard to this agreement, TFA, and we highly 
appreciate the effort that has been turned in by the Secretariat. Our thanks once again.  
1.199.   The delegate of the Central African Republic  indicated the following:  
1.200.   I would like to congratulate the Trade Facilitation Committee for this report on the state -of-
play of the implementation of commitments. It gives us a very far -ranging view regarding 
notifications and the current level of commitments. This is very good work. This allows  us to better 
understand the implementation of this Agreement. Our Ambassador would like to congratulate the 
Chair of the Committee on his appointment . The Central African Republic notified  on 12 February 
2021, under  Article 22 .3, the contact points to coordinate the technical assistance and information . 
Regarding the arrangements that have been concluded and also when it comes to technical support 
and capacity building and the provisions for category C , there are some difficulties as you know , but 
as you said earlier, we could discuss this in the framework of experience sharing. We look forward 
to being able to share on this when we come to the item on experience sharing.  
1.201.   The delegate of Norway  indicated the f ollowing:  
1.202.   I just wanted to add our thanks to the great work that the Secretariat has been doing on 
laying out the information accumulated on notifications and notification processes. I just wanted to 
underline that this information and the presentation is going to be an important building block for 
the review that we are going to be doing this year so a lot of this information is going to be important 
to have in that review so thank you very much.  
1.203.   The delegate of Vanuatu  indicated the following:  
1.204.   I want to thank the Secretariat very much for the presentation which gives us an idea of the 
progress and it has been most helpful. I would like to think that by the next Committee meeting we 
will be able to see some movements because despite the earlier a genda item when a number of 
delegations spoke of some of setbacks that we are experiencing, I think that the overall picture that 
was just presented gives us a good idea of where we stand on this so I am very encouraged by the 
analysis that was provided by  the secretariat. I thank the Secretariat for the good job.  
1.205.   The delegate of China  indicated the following:  
1.206.   Firstly , I would like to congratulate you on being elected to the Chair of this Committee. It 
is a very important Committee for us, and you can count  on our full support. I also want to take this 
opportunity to thank the Member s who sent their notification to the Secretariat and would like to 
take the opportunity to thank the Secretariat for their hard work to prepare this report. When we 
look at this report there are still some Member s who have not sent their notification to the Secretariat 
and also this morning we talked a lot about some developing or LDCs who have not fulfilled their 
obligations of this agreement on time. Could the Committee or Secre tariat contact each of these 
Member s to see the reason why they are unable to make this notification or the difficulties that they 
are facing. All these difficulties and the challenges should be discussed this year as this is the year 
of the review of this  Agreement. Maybe we can discuss this one by one and we can try to find a 
solution and make real progress this year on the implementation of this Agreement.  
1.207.   The delegate of Mali indicated the following:  
1.208.   I would also like to take this opportunity to congrat ulate the Chair  on this new responsibility,  
new function. I would also like to thank the Secretariat of the WTO for this report. It is very focused, 
and this also stimulates us to move ahead with the implementation of this very important 
Agreement, the Tra de Facilitation Agreement. I know that certain Member s have seen that they are 
being stimulated to move forward and if they are able to do that I think we will be able to attain the 
various results that we are hoping to reach so I would like to thank you a ll on behalf of Mali.  
1.209.   The delegate of the European Union  indicated the following:  
1.210.   We find China's proposal very interesting —that the Secretariat contact Member s to see if 
they have difficulties and how we could further prepare for the next meetings. We are  very interested G/TFA/M/15  
 
- 19 - 
 
  in this proposal and we also note Norway's statement that this extremely comprehensive, factual,  
and excellent report by the Secretariat could be a good start for the four year review . 
1.211.   The Chair  suggested  that there were opportunities for the suggestion brough t forward by 
China, on which the EU had shown interest. It was best for Member s to come forward through the 
experience sharing exercises and share that type of information . There was an ongoing dialogue 
between the Secretariat and Member s on implementation issues. The Secretariat was available  to 
answer questions that Member s had regarding the best ways and how to proceed in certain areas 
or at least provide some factual background in formation on how best to answer any questions that 
Member s may have . Without prejudice to Member s positions, the topic that China raised was 
probably going to  come up out of review to come over the next years.  Perhaps this was an issue 
that could be  consid ered further, and Member s were encourage d to be proactive and come forward 
with the difficulties they might  be having or any questions they might  have regarding notifications 
and the implementation of the Agreement. Member s could e ither come forward to the  Committee or 
ask the Secretariat for assistance.  
1.212.   The Committee took note  of the information provided 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  Member s were willing to share would be made available on a dedicated website 
(https://tfadatabase.org/trade -facilitation -committee/meetin g/2021 -03-03) with related links also 
being included in the minutes of the  meeting. If a delegation requested it, their intervention would 
also be recorded in the minutes of the meeting.  
2.2.  Member s addressed the following  issues:  
A. Sharing experiences on measures taken to mitigate COVID -19 
Communication from the European Union (G/TFA/W/31/Rev. 3) 
2.3.  The Committee held an informal discussion of the EU proposal based on the document 
G/TFA/W/31 /Rev.3,  circulated the day before . There  was a proposal  from India in relation to one 
sentence in paragraph 7.  
2.4.  The European Union  indicated that it was not acceptable at this time to agree to that change . 
2.5.  The Chair  proposed that the EU and India continue discussions and o nce an agreement was 
reached , a fourth revision to the  document  would be circulated  under a silent procedure.  
2.6.  It was so agreed . 
Presentation by the World Customs Organization  
2.7.  Information  on the presentation can be found under the following  link: 
https://tfadatabase.org/uploads/thematicdiscussiondocument/WCO_intervention_on_item_2.docx  
 
B. National Trade Facilitation Committee (Article 23.2 of t he TFA)  
Presentation by UNCTAD  
2.8.  Information  on the presentation can be found under the following  link: 
https://tfa -production.s3.eu -central -1.amazonaws.com/thematicdiscussiondocument/2021 -03-
03_UNCTAD_WTO_TF_Com_NTFC_support.pptx  
 G/TFA/M/15  
 
- 20 - 
 
  C. Time Release Study by the Special Secretary of the Federal Revenue of Brazil (Article 
7:6 of the TFA) (G/TFA/W/33)  
Presentation by Brazi l 
https://tfadatabase.org/uploads/thematicdiscussiondocument/TRS_Brazil_Presentation_WTO_TFA.
pdf 
 
3  SUPPORTING THE TIMELY AND EFFICIENT RELEASE OF GLOBAL GOODS THROUGH 
ACCELERATED IMPLEMENTATION OF THE WTO TRADE FACILITATION AGREEMENT - 
COMMUNICATION FROM AUSTRALIA; BRAZIL; CANADA; COLOMBIA; EUROPEAN UNION; 
ICELAND; JAPAN; REPUBLIC OF KOREA, MEXICO; NORW AY; SINGAPORE; THE SEPARATE 
CUSTOMS TERRITORY OF TAIWAN, PENGHU, KINMEN AND MATSU; THAILAND; TURKEY; 
AND THE UNITED STATES (G/TFA/W/25/REV.3)  
3.1.  The delegate of the United States  indicated the following:  
3.2.  On behalf of the co -sponsors, the United States is pleased to include on today's agenda 
document G/TFA/W/25 /Rev.3  of the communication entitled "Supporting the timely and efficient 
release of Global Goods through Accelerated Implementation of the WTO Trade Facilitation 
Agreement ". In rev ision 3, we welcome  six new co -sponsors to the communication Canada, Republic 
of Korea, Mexico, Singapore, Thailand , and Turkey. This communication asked no Member  to make 
any new commitments or change any existing commitments. In this communication we are asking 
Member s to commit to accelerate their implementation of the TFA where possible as a means to 
ensure the timely movement of goods across borders which is critical at this time during the global 
pandemic. We urge all Member s to join this communication and we would plea se to engage and 
answer any questions you may have.  
3.3.  The delegate of the United Kingdom  indicated the following:  
3.4.  The United Kingdom would like to thank the United States and the co -sponsors for their work 
on this communication to date. The pandemic has real ly highlighted the challenges of maintaining 
efficient trade in times of pressure. It 's brought home for us the need to accelerate the 
implementation of the Agreement so that trade operates most efficiently. Just to say Chair, that we 
are supportive of thi s communication and that we are engaging with the co -sponsors on a few light 
textual edits.  
3.5.  The delegate of the Separate Customs Territory of Taiwan, Penghu, Kinmen and Matsu 
indicated the following:  
3.6.  As this is the first time that I am taking the floor I w ould just like to welcome you in your 
position and as a co -sponsor of the proposal I would like to welcome Canada, Republic of Korea, 
Mexico, Singapore, Thailand and Turkey who join the communication as co -sponsors. We would also 
like to join previous spea kers to welcome other Member s to join the communication supporting the 
timely and efficient release of global goods through the accelerated implementation of the Trade 
Facilitation Agreement.  
3.7.  The delegate of Japan  indicated the following:  
3.8.  Japan thanks the United States for its updates and welcomes all the new co -sponsors of this 
communication. We share an appreciate with our fellow co -sponsors for the need for accelerated 
implementation of the TFA which is our common ground and have great value in the curre nt 
situation. Japan welcomes further support for this communication from other Member s, including 
developing country Member s in the hope of accelerating the implementation of the TFA.  
3.9.  The delegate of Canada  indicated the following:  
3.10.   Canada wishes to thank t he United States for this update and joins other co -sponsors of this 
to find a means for Member s to step up measure on the TFA agreement. Last year we saw that 
developing Member s were able to address essential good and supplies in document G/TFA/ W/24 
from the Ottawa  group . In addition, d iscussions on that meeting at the informal meeting last fall G/TFA/M/15  
 
- 21 - 
 
  took stock of certain measures and we will continue to underscore and support the work of the CTF  
in order to ensure implementation of the TFA and the best practices in this respect.  
3.11.   The delegate of Egypt  indicated the following:  
3.12.   Egypt would like to thank the proponents of this communication and we would like to share 
with the committee some comments on the measures taken by Egypt regarding the implementation  
of the TFA in relation to this communication:  
3.13.   Concerning paragraphs (2) and (3) urging Member s to expedite the implementation of the 
Trade Facilitation Agreement, as well as fully implementing Article  23:2 regarding establishing or 
maintaining a mechanism  for the Trade Facilitation Committee, we confirm in this regard the 
following:  
3.14.   Egypt joined the Trade Facilitation Agreement in February 2017 but the National Trade 
Facilitation Committee headed by the Egyptian Customs Authority was created in 2011, with the 
participation of representatives of all relevant stakeholders including the private sector. The 
committee is responsible for determination and classification of Egypt's obligations in the Trade 
Facilitation Agreement, as well as identifying needs required for the full implementation of the 
Agreement.  
3.15.   With regard to paragraph (5) regarding dissemination, improvement of transparency and 
exchange of information between governments and the private sector through a unified website, 
free of charge and availab le to the public, we confirm in this regard the following:  
3.16.   In order to improve the services provided to its clients via the Internet, the Customs Authority 
has issued Decision No. 95 for the year 2020 regarding the formation of a committee to monitor the 
electronic services provided by the Customs Authority through its website; this includes the 
publications of decisions issued regarding the mechanisms of dealing with the pandemic.  
3.17.   With regard to paragraph (6) regarding the implementation of Article 7 :1 of the Trade 
Facilitation Agreement Customs Law No. 207 of 2020 has been issued, which includes many practices 
that will accelerate the rates of release time, to implement these procedures, the Customs Authority 
is in the process of activating the advance car go information system. Also, in this context, Circular 
No. 23 of 2020 has been issued, which includes giving priority to shipments of goods that was 
released according to the pre -arrival processing system.  
3.18.   With regard to paragraph (8) of urgent shipments, the Customs Authority has issued 
instructions to the various customs points in light of the current pandemic COVID -19 to give top 
priority to food and strategic commodities, medicines and medical supplies in completing the daily 
release procedures of impor ted shipments.  
3.19.   With regard to paragraph (9) concerning cooperation between border agencies, the Egyptian 
customs authority has already signed a cooperation protocol with the Sudanese customs to facilitate 
trade between the two countries in these exceptiona l circumstances.  
3.20.   On paragraph (10) regarding reviewing the articles related to the requirements of consular 
documentation, lading bills or certificates of origin, a ministerial decree was issued to allow accepting 
the documents submitted by importers witho ut requiring legalization by the chambers of commerce 
and Egyptian embassies abroad and releasing shipments coming from the European Union and other 
countries as long as they fulfil the rest of the other requirements along with the importers pledge to 
the validity of the documents submitted.  
3.21.   Regarding p aragraph (12) urging all Member s to take proactive steps to automate customs 
operations, we confirm that the National Single Window project has already been launched . This is 
an integrated information platfor m to achieve integration and coordination of procedures and 
information between the different competent authorities concerned with foreign trade . This  allows 
the stakeholders to submit all documents and transactions at once through a logistics service centre 
or via an electronic portal in order to fulfil all regulatory requirements related to the release of goods.  G/TFA/M/15  
 
- 22 - 
 
  3.22.   The implementation of the single window system has actually started gradually in the Egyptian 
ports, starting with the Cairo Airport as of March 2019, the West Port Said Seaport from May 2019 , 
and the Sokhna Port as of July 2020 . The system was opened in Alexandria Port in November 2020 
and Damietta Port in January 2021.  
3.23.   The delegate of Brazil  indicated the following:  
3.24.   I congratulate my colleague fr om the Federal Revenue for presenting the study and it shows 
that Brazil is really committed to the full implementation of the TFA. That is why we are one of the 
first co -sponsors of the document proposed by the United States and we do exhort all Member s to 
join in our efforts to implement 100% of the Trade Facilitation Agreement.  
3.25.   The delegate of Switzerland  indicated the following:  
3.26.   Switzerland thanks the US and other co -sponsors for their pertinent and very timely 
communication. Switzerland is supportive o f this communication. The implementation of the TFA is 
very important for the economy and a smooth flow of international trade is even more relevant in 
the current crisis to fight the pandemic. In fact, the COVID -19 crises showed the relevance of trade 
facilitating measures. Switzerland itself implemented trade facilitating measures to ensure a smooth 
flow of potential medical goods. It seems reasonable to my delegation to bring COVID -19 related 
aspects more inten sively to the attention of this Committee.  
3.27.   The delegate of the Turkey  indicated the following:  
3.28.   The government of Turkey would like to thank the United States for updating the Committee 
on the communication. As a new co -sponsor , Turkey is honoured to be part of such a valuable 
initiative. Articles included within the communication are crucial for accelerating protective garments 
and other medical goods and currently the vaccine. Turkey would like to underline the importance 
of coo rdination and co -operation among all government agencies and between private sector 
stakeholders. TFA provides a great initiative within Article  8 and Article  23:2. The concept of border 
agencies co -operation all Member s coordinate better on the between di fferent government agencies. 
Article 23 :2 brings the private sector to the picture and the COVID -19 crisis showed us that well -
functioning NTFCs are not only bodies for implementing trade facilitation reforms but allow countries 
to overcome great crisis ha ppening on the international supply chain.  
3.29.   The delegate of India indicated the following:  
3.30.   My delegation would like to thank the proponents of the paper G/TFA/W/25 /Rev. 3. My 
delegation strongly believes in the importance of trade facilitation and the TFA. To optimize the gains 
of trade facilitation , India has put in place a National Trade Facilitation Committee  and also a national 
trade facilitation action plan. Action points in our trade facilitation plan are mapped to the WTO TFA 
commitments and aligned to  our policy objectives of improving the Ease of Doing Business. Following 
this proactive approach, India has also implemented some of its category B commitments ahead of 
their original implementation date. Document G/TFA/N/IND/1/Add.1 provides details of t hose early 
implementations. This reflects India's commitment towards trade facilitation . However, when it 
comes to accelerated implementation of the TFA provisions my delegation believes that we would 
be better advised to leave it to the Member  concerned i nstead of saddling them with some kind of 
binding commitment. In fact, our experience so far shows that many of us are already trying to do 
that to the best of our abilities. As regards to WTO's role in providing health solutions to COVID -19 
my delegation believes that WTO has a very important role to play in enabling countries to cope with 
this unprecedented crisis. In fact, India, along with a large number of Member s, has already 
submitted a proposal for waiver from certain provisions of the TRIPs Agreeme nt for prevention, 
containment and treatment of COVID -19. Similarly, we believe that the Council for Trade in Services 
should also examine the need for easier cross border movement of health care professionals and 
provisions of heath care services through other modes to help handle the COVID -19 crisis better.  
3.31.   The delegate of the United States  indicated the following:  
3.32.   I would like to thank the co -sponsors who took the floor today talking about the importance 
of this communication and I welcome the comments from India, Egypt, Switzerland, and the United 
Kingdom. I look forward to engaging with you a bit more on this communication. I would just like to G/TFA/M/15  
 
- 23 - 
 
  make one point of clarification in terms of something my colleague from India stated and to be clear 
that this  communication has no binding obligation in it whatsoever. The communication itself is 
asking Member s to reflect on existing commitments and to how they might accelerate their 
implementation and we heard from Member s today that many Member s are doing that.  I look 
forward to following up and I welcome any other Member  with any questions to please reach out to 
us. 
3.33.   The Committee took note  of the information and of the statements made.  
4  REVIEW OF THE OPERATION AND IMPLEMENTATION OF THE AGREEMENT IN 
ACCORDANCE WI TH ARTICLE 23.1.6 OF THE TRADE FACILITATION AGREEMENT  
4.1.  The Chair drew the Committee's attention to a proposal circulated by the United States in 
document G/TFA/W/35 to update the meeting agenda of the Committee on Trade and Facilitation.  
4.2.  The delegate of the United States  indicated the following:  
4.3.  In light of this year 's four  year review, the United States welcomes discussion from Committee 
Member s regarding our modest proposal contained in G/TFA/W/35 to update the agenda to 
accurately refle ct current TFA timelines and deadline.  
4.4.  In summary, we propose to remove the "Review of Notifications Under Article 15 of the TFA " 
as a standing agenda item, recognizing that the Committee may review new Article 15 notifications 
on an ad hoc  basis; and to a dd a new standing agenda item for Member s to provide updates on 
overdue Section I and Section II notifications.  
4.5.  The objective of our proposal is to increase the Committee 's ability to close the gap in TFA 
implementation of Section I and II notifications th rough robust Committee discussion.  
4.6.  The delegate of Japan  indicated the following:  
4.7.  Japan appreciates the United States' initiative and fully supports the proposal. We especially 
welcome having a new standing agenda item for Member s to provide updates on ove rdue 
notifications, which would help Member s understand the current situation. It would also facilitate 
the notifications under Article  16 of the TFA, among others, which Japan believes is fundamental for 
the implementation of the TFA.  
4.8.  The delegate of Brazil indicated the following:  
4.9.  Brazil supports the proposal made by the Unites States to update the meeting agenda of the 
WTO Committee on Trade Facilitation since the vast majority of Member s have already submitted 
their notifications based on Article  15 of the TFA . As the deadline for submitting such notifications 
has already expired, there is no need for it anymore. In addition, there is no impediment for 
interested Member s to request the inclusion of a point on the agenda of future TFC meetings for the 
submission of new notifications under Article 15.  
4.10.   The delegate of  the Separate Customs Territory of Taiwan, Penghu, Kinmen and Mats u 
indicated the following:  
4.11.   We would like to thank the United States for their efforts on the proposal to update the WTO 
Committee's TF meeting agenda as part of the four year review of the TFA agreement. How to close 
the gap between those overdue notifications is an issue  worth  to discuss at the Committee. We 
welcome the proposal to be included in the four year review for di scussion.  
4.12.   The delegate of India indicated the following:  
4.13.   My delegation would also like to thank the delegation of the United States for their paper 
G/TFA/W/35. We have shared the same with our capital. Depending on the feedback from New Delhi 
we will rever t back to this Committee on this issue . 
4.14.   The representative of Sri Lanka  indicated the following:  G/TFA/M/15  
 
- 24 - 
 
  4.15.   First, I would like to thank the United States delegation for its proposal  to remove this agenda 
item where we continue to have the opportunity to discuss noti fications made under Article  15. In 
light of the provisions in Article  13 paragraph 2 , which is a general article  with the title "G eneral 
Principles ", we cannot totally exclude that there is a relevance to Article  15 because it has expired. 
The way that the Agreement has be en structured, Section II has Article  13 as the general principle. 
Whatever the interpretation we may have on subsequent articles has to be read in conjunction with 
the general principles. For th at reason, my  delegation is not yet convinced that there is no relevance 
for Article  15 and that  we should not have this agenda item.  
4.16.   These  are very pertinent points that we have to really mull over and come to some 
understanding whether this has some rele vance or not . Until such time, I am not in a position to 
agree with the solution made by the United States delegation. I think it is a fair perspective from 
my country's point of view because it has this particular request and if we agree on it, it may hav e 
far reaching implications on other articles as well. The moment they become expired everybody will 
start to make suggestions that we have to remove that particular agenda item because there  is no 
relevance . What we suggest is to have a careful look at th e general principles enshrined in Section 
II Article  13 where it says the developing countries as long as they are experiencing difficulties in 
implementation, there is always the right for them to take some avenues to address their concerns. 
In light of t his, we are not in a position to agree on this proposal Chair.  
4.17.   The delegate of Norway  indicated the following:  
4.18.   From our side, we support this proposal, the suggestions and the proposal from the United 
States. This is a relatively new Committee and there is , as others have said , a lot of energy in it. It 
is therefore good to also be able to continuously revise what we are doing, including an agenda 
which should never be set in stone. I think the concern expressed the Ambassador of Sri Lanka 
pointed out now w ould in any case be addressed and be able to, in a dynamic form, be able to put 
these issues back on the agenda when necessary.  
4.19.   The delegate of the European Union  indicated the following:  
4.20.   We welcome this proposal put forward by the United States. We apologize that we have had 
no sufficient time to consult the various services involved in the Commission to take a position and 
we support in principal but we have not formal approach yet so we will get back as soon as possible.  
4.21.   The delegate of the United States  indicated the following:  
4.22.   I would like to thank those Member s who took the floor this afternoon in responding to our 
proposal. I look forward to having continued discussions about this proposal in future meetings and 
I am certainly happy to discuss w ith any Member s bilaterally, any concerns they may have.  
Consultations on the Review – Report by the Chairperson  
4.23.   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 Facilitation Agreement entered into force on 22 February 2017; therefore, 
the first review of the Agreement was required to be carried out this year.  
4.24.   At the last meeting of the Committee, it had been  agreed that the Chair would consult with 
delegations on how best to conduct this review. In that regard, in a communication sent on 15 
February, the following questions had been  posed to delegations to get a sense of expectation 
regarding the process aspects of the review: How will the Committee carry out the review? How will 
the review be structured? How will the Committee identify the co ntent of the review? What is the 
Committee's deadline for the completion of the review?  
4.25.   At the informal open -ended consultations  of 26 February, the Chair had p rovided a report on 
these consultations and proposed a calendar for conducting a review. The report and proposed 
calendar had been  circulated to Member s immediately after the meeting. The consultations had 
indicated that there was a collective desire to conduct a solid, positive oriented review exercise ; one 
that was not overly burdensome for Member s and one that should be carried out in a timely manner. 
Member s wanted to keep the process moving along with the objective of having it completed ahead G/TFA/M/15  
 
- 25 - 
 
  of the next Ministerial Conference (MC -12). As for the process,  there appeared to be common 
agreement th at the most expedient wa y of achieving this outcome would be to have a multi -prong 
approach.  Member s would be invited to provide written submissions over a specific period of time 
on topics of interest to them. Informal meetings dedicated to a discussion o f these submissions could 
be held on the margins of the regular committee meetings as required.  The Committee would then 
be updated by the Chair at each regular meeting and there would be an opportunity for additional 
discussions, especially for those Memb ers that had been unable to participate in the informal 
dedicated session.  
4.26.   The Chair believe d the proposed calendar set out a reasonable pace for the review and 
provide d time for delegates to work with capital -based colleagues to formulate their contributi ons to 
the discussion of the review should they wish to do so. Regarding a structure for the report, there 
was a preliminary agreement that it should mirror the structure of the TFA. Section I covering the 
TFA provisions, section II dealing with the special flexibilities of the TFA and section III covering any 
proposals related to the institutional arrangements and final provisions. Member s also wished that 
the Secretariat draft a factual report regarding the first four years of the implementation of the 
Agreement. As for the substance that goes into the report , that aspect would be driven by Member s 
through submissions and discussions. As the Committee engage d in this work over the coming 
months, it is incumbent on delegates to decid e how best to provide input and support information 
on the topics they wished to be covered on the report. Lastly,  at the consultations meeting on 26 
February,  a delegation made a suggestion that the Committee move its dedicated capacity building 
session f orward this year from October to the June meeting.  
4.27.   The Chair asked of delegations if they were ready to adopt this roadmap regarding the 
calendar and the organization of the sections of the report.  
4.28.   The delegate of India indicated the following:  
4.29.   My delegati on would like to thank you for your efforts for review mandated under Article  
23:1:6 of the TFA. In this context, my delegation 's response to the four questions/issues raised by 
you are:  
4.30.   As regards the modality for carrying out the review, it  may be carrie d out through dedicated 
sessions, held on the side -lines of the regular meetings of TFC or otherwise.  
4.31.   As regards how should the review be structured? Should it be organized around each section 
of the Agreement? Or should specific themes be identified? – my delegation believes that instead of 
adopting a section by section approach, this Committee should aim to prepare a report regarding 
the difficulties/challenges faced by the Member s in TFA implementation, with a view to arrive at 
innovative solutions to ad dress such difficulties/challenges. While doing so, priority need s to be 
accorded to the least -implemented TFA Commitments. Such a review should also focus on promised 
assistance to Member s for implementing category C Commitments. Further, such a review s hould 
also aim to collate a report on benefits of the TFA to developing countries including LDCs, as 
compared to the past projected benefits of TFA implementation. Such a report would be helpful in 
outreach efforts of respective NTF Cs. 
4.32.   The content of the review may preferably be on the basis of written proposal/request of 
Member  countries with reference to implementation difficulties/challenges or assistance request(s) 
pertaining to a particular Section/provision.  
4.33.   As regards what should be the Commi ttee's deadline for completion of the review, my 
delegation believes that this Committee may consider completing the review over two to three  
Sessions with a session spaced every alternate month. The Review timeline should, however, not be 
linked with the MC-12. 
4.34.   The delegate of Nepal , on behalf of the LDC Group  made the following statement : 
4.35.   First, I wish to extend my sincere appreciation to you, Chair, for updating on the consultations 
that you held and also for having consultation s with the LDC group with a view to conducting the 
periodic review in a timely, participatory, and effective manner.  G/TFA/M/15  
 
- 26 - 
 
  4.36.   On behalf of the LDC group, we have already submitted our written responses to your 
questions to facilitate the review process. It would be highly appreciated if you  could please take 
into account our responses while proceeding ahead.  
4.37.   The LDC group specifically expects discuss ions on the agenda of periodic review regularly at 
the formal meetings the S ecretariat 's contribution to preparation of summary reports, the 
opportunity to incorporate Member s' view in terms of challenges in the implementation of the 
Agreement and lessons learnt under submissions from Member s, and a background note from the 
Secretariat, linkages of provisions, implementation commitments, and disbu rsement of capacity 
building assistance by donor Member s to LDC Member s, among other  items. 
4.38.   Furthermore, reflection of impacts of the COVID -19 pandemic, major issues and solutions 
thereof, and forward -looking recommendations including gaps and future cours e of action, 
concluding the review by 2021 probably before the MC -12, are also equally important while 
conducting the review. The LDC group stands ready to constructively engage with the entire review 
process of the Agreement.  
4.39.   The delegate of the European Union  indicated the following:  
4.40.   The EU welcomes this agenda item and the reporting by the Chair on his consultation. The EU 
considers that the overall review process should not be excessively burdensome nor disproportionate 
with the objective of implementin g fully the Agreement. A factual report produced by the Secretariat 
would certainly facilitate the process. Informal sessions within the days already booked for the TFC 
meetings should also be planned, to facilitate progress on this matter.  
4.41.   Our common obje ctive should be to have a comprehensive consensual report by the end of 
the year, with success stories for communication purpose s 
4.42.   We should have a comprehensive and realistic image of where we stand in terms of 
implementation of the Agreement. In light of its timing, the review could also be the opportunity to 
understand better how COVID -19 has impacted - and continues to affect - operations of customs 
globally and how Member s reacted/adjusted to the challenges.  
4.43.   In order to  start the process, we would welcome that developing countries  and LDCs continue 
updating their notifications on their needs for assistance and their state of play of implementation 
and the challenges related to their implementation.  
4.44.   This exercise should a lso be the opportunity to consider how we can improve our working 
methods. We mention the need to improve the agenda setting regarding the notifications.  
4.45.   In addition, to ensure sufficient preparation ahead of the meetings, for specific trade concerns 
and for dedicated session on aid, the agenda should be set well in advance. In order to ensure that 
expertise is available during our discussions, we should en courage that experts from Capitals support 
delegates in Geneva remotely. To do so, we would favour  that meetings of the TFC be, whenever 
possible, back -to-back with the WCO meetings in order to facilitate the presence of customs experts.  
4.46.   We are open to tes t and try how an e -agenda (on a pilot basis) could help. Although this 
committee does not have STCs, we consider that these working arrangements should be considered 
to improve our efficiency. This system might ensure that agenda points are known earlier w hich 
would facilitate the work of this committee.  
4.47.   We should also encourage the participation of businesses in seminars organized back to back 
to TFC meetings, to inject some reality check to our work. Econometric analyses can also be of use 
even if they wi ll never replace the assessment at the border by operators. One may consider 
extending good working practices implemented by other WTO committees or in the WCO. For 
instance, we could invite WCO to inform us on its interaction with business, its reports an d how 
these inputs feed into its work.  
4.48.   The Chair  proposed that the Committee conduct a review following the steps and dates 
presented at the informal consultations of the 26 February and circulated to Member s that day.  G/TFA/M/15  
 
- 27 - 
 
  4.49.   It was so agreed . 
5  REQUEST FROM THE GLOBAL EXPRESS ASSOCIATION TO ADDRESS THE TRADE 
FACILITATION COMMITTEE - REPORT ON CONSULTATIONS BY THE CHAIRPERSON  
5.1.  The Chair recalled that at the Committee meeting of 20 October 2020 , a request  to address 
the Committee from the Global Express Association  (GEA), which represent ed DHL, FedEx, and UPS , 
had been brough t to Member s' attention . Following the Committee meeting , the GEA had sent a 
letter to the Chair of the TF Committee outlining their request in more detail. This letter had been  
circulated to the Committee on 9 December 2020.  
5.2.  An informal meeting had been  convened on 13 January to have a first consultation on the 
request. The  Secretary of the Committee had outlined the practice in other WTO Committees 
regarding their engagement with the private sector. There followed an exchange of views and there 
was interest expressed in the Committee to accommodate the request. Different su ggestions  had 
been expressed  to how that might be done including through thematic sessions. Views had also been  
expressed that the engagement should not be too narrow by hearing the views of only one sector.  
5.3.  It was agreed at the Committee meeting of 22 -23 January that the Chair would carry out 
consultation s in order to have an exchange of views on how to engage with the private sector , taking 
into consideration that the GEA  was not part of the Annex D organization s. Consultations  had taken 
place between 17 and 24 February as part of the consultation s on the four year review of the TFA. 
Once again, it  was clear from delegations that there was general support to accept the GEA 's request. 
Accordingly, the Chair had p roposed to hear from the GEA as well as other  interested private sector 
organizations on the margins of the April meeting of the Committee.  
5.4.  If this was agreeable, the Chair w ould submit a reply to the GEA and suggest holding a webinar 
on the margins of the April Committee meeting to which Committee Member s could  attend if they 
wished . 
5.5.  It was so agreed . 
6  RECENT AND UPCOMING ACTIVITIES  
Update on Activities of the Trade Facilitation Agreement Facility (TFAF)  
6.1.  The representative of the TFAF indicated that the update covered activities since the last report 
at the Committee meeting of 20 October 2020.  
6.2.  The report started with a big thank you to the new donor to the Facility —the Czech Republic. 
A donation had been received at the end of 2020.  
6.3.  In the period since October  2020, the biggest focus of the Facility's work had been on the 
website and grant program.  
Website  
6.4.  Work continued on a much -needed upgrade. It was the first upgrade since its launch in 2014 
and would enhance the user experience an d allow the TFAF to provide new features and functions. 
The aim was to have a soft launch of the new version by late spring and an official launch 
approximately one month later.  
6.5.  The Facility had continued to add resources and partners to the TF and COVID -19 Repository. 
The TFAF, working with the International Air Transport Association (IATA), Annex D organizations 
and other partners, had created a searchable repository to facilitate access to TF and COVID -19 
related resources in one location. This repositor y now contained around 400 resources from 
approximately 30 organizations and associations. It could be found on the TFAF website under the 
media and resources tab.  
6.6.  A new page had been added to the website under "Grants" that provided information on the 
grants that had been awarded. The page revealed information on the Member  or regional G/TFA/M/15  
 
- 28 - 
 
  organization that had received the grant, the TFA provisions covered, and the project implementation 
period . It was also possible to download the application.  
TFAF Grant Pro gram 
6.7.  Seventeen Member s had completed an expression of interest (EoI) application. This was the 
first step of the TFAF grant process in which a Member  that applied first provides information on the 
TFA provisions for which it required support. This informat ion was then circulated to donors and 
development partners to see if anyone can assist with implementation.  
6.8.  Of these seventeen EoIs, four had triggered a response from donors that could provide the 
necessary assistance. In these cases, the Facility put th e donor and Member  in touch and TFAF 
stepped out of the picture. The Facility would  relaunch the process if the Member  later signal led a 
continuing need.  
6.9.  Unfortunately, one Member  that had applied was in arrears and currently not eligible. Another 
was a WTO Observer and therefore only eligible for the Expression of Interest process , but not 
eligible for a grant.  
6.10.   The remaining eleven  requests had moved to the next step of the process which was a TFAF 
project preparation  grant. The project preparation grant was conducted by a consultant who work ed 
in close cooperation with the requesting Member . It result ed in a project proposal that could  be 
provided to donors and development partners. An important role of the consultant was to help 
identify potential donors. If no donor was found, then the project proposal provid ed the information 
needed for a TFAF project implementation  grant. Of these 11 requests:  
6.11.   One project preparation grant ha d been completed for Grenada  for eight provisions of the 
TFA. The TFAF, the consultant that prepared the project proposal, and Grenada were currently in 
discussions with a potential donor. If this was not successful, or a donor/development partner could 
not assist with all eight TFA provisions, th en Grenada could  apply for a TFAF project implementation 
grant for any of the eight provisions requiring support.  
6.12.   Two project preparation grants would  be completed in March  for Namibia and the Dominican 
Republic. The consultants working on these grants were already working to help identify donors for 
implementation. Two potential donors h ad already signalled they might  be able to assist Namibia.   
6.13.   Four more project preparation grants ha d recently been awarded and would  finish at various 
times in the coming months —Guyana  (10 measure), CARICOM (regional, one measure), Jamaica 
(one measure) and Mongolia (four measures) had all been awarded grants, with consultants 
identified and contracted  
6.14.   Project preparation grants were ready to launch for an additional four Member s. The Facility 
was only  waiting for final approval from each Member  before signing contracts with the consultants —
Sri Lanka, Bangladesh, Nepal and Kyrgyz Republic  
6.15.   An additional ten Member s had expressed intere st in the TFAF grant program but ha d not yet 
provided all the information necessary for the Expression of Interest. At this stage , not much 
information was needed but it was necessary  to send donors sufficient information on 
implementation needs so they could determine if they could  assist.  
6.16.   To provide further clarification on how the grant process work ed, following this report, 
Grenada, Namibia and the Dominican Republic would  share their experience with Member s. 
6.17.   So far, the requests were all for multiple p rovisions of the TFA ; some for as many as ten or 
twelve  provisions. It was hoped  that donors would  be able to provide the necessary implementation 
assistance. If all the needs signalled by the current applicants bec ame project implementation 
grants, this would exceed the current TFAF budget.  It would then become necessary to  reach out to 
donors to discuss this situation.  G/TFA/M/15  
 
- 29 - 
 
  Coordination of Partner Organizations  
6.18.   The Facility had  continue d to stay in close communication with partner organizations. They 
had been  encouraged to keep information on their assistance programs on the TFAF  contact point 
and profiles webpage.  
Activities  
6.19.   In light of the intervention made by the United States  at the C ommittee meeting in October  
2020, the TFAF  had curtailed participation in activities and events during this period. They had  tried 
to continue to provide support in other ways. For example, the LDC coordinator circulated the links 
to TFAF's  "How to Prepare  Notifications " webpage before the February 2021 deadline  and there had 
been a big increase in hits to this page.  
6.20.   After consulting with the new Chair, the TFAF had  reached out to the United States  to begin 
discussions on their concerns and suggestions. It was appreciate d that they  had raised their concerns 
in the Committee given  that if any changes need ed to be made to the Operational Guidelines then 
the Member ship need ed to be involved.  
6.21.   The Operational Guidelines set out the TFAF structure, activities, and  reporting requirements 
to the Member ship, and they met the requirements of the donors that provided funds to the Facility 
trust fund. In creating these guidelines , various groups  had been consulted and had provided inputs : 
the LDC  Group , African Group, ACP Group , and the broader donors . Draft copies of the Guidelines 
had been made available at Trade Facilitation Preparatory Committee meetings to ensure all 
Member s had been  reached.  
6.22.   Creating the Guidelines had been  a yearlong  process and it had involved numerous revisions 
based on Member s' input that each had to be circulated again for comment. This process had 
continued until all Member s were satisfied with the result. The Facility was  happy to repeat this 
process, if necessary, if it would  lead to changes that would  help TFAF better serve the Member s. 
Reports  
6.23.   The Facility was preparing the annual report for 2020 and would  aim to make it available on 
the TFAF  website well before the end of June 2021 deadline , as required in the Operational 
Guidel ines. 
Aid4Trade – panel  
6.24.   At the request of the LDC group , the TFAF , along with the World Bank Group, were 
collaborating on a panel for the Aid for Trade Stocktaking event  on trade facilitation and COVID -19. 
6.25.   The A4T event would  be virtual for the first time. The organizers of the individual panels were 
required to advertise and manage registration for their panel through their own website. The Facility 
was pleased to coordinate this panel through the TFAFacility.org website . The information could  be 
found through the homepage. The LDC focal point from Nepal would  provide details about this TF 
and COVID -19 panel session.  
6.26.   The delegate of Nepal , also on behalf of the LDC Group , indicated the following:  
6.27.   I wish to thank the TFAF  for the reporting update. I am pleased to inform that the LDC Group , 
in collaboration with the World Bank Group and the WTO Trade Facilitation Agreement Facility are 
organizing a session entitled "Trade Facilitation, Critical for COVID -19 Recovery " during the 
upcoming Aid for Trade Stocktaking Event. In this session , participants will learn from a variety of 
experts about the challenges faced by border agencies when COVID -19 started and how trade 
facilitation was critical in overcoming these challenges. The spea kers will share lessons learned that 
will also provide guidance for the distribution of vaccines and COVID -19 recovery phase. The session 
will focus on issues and solutions in developing and least -developed countries and small island 
developing states. The  session will take place on 25 March at 15h30 –17h00. It will be held on Zoom 
and we will have interpretation in the 3 WTO official languages. Participants need to register online G/TFA/M/15  
 
- 30 - 
 
  in order to attend the session. More information, registration link can be fo und www.tfafacility.org  
webpage.  
6.28.   The delegate of Namibia  indicated the following:  
6.29.   We thank the Facility for the report, and we are very glad that two donors have shown interest 
to assist  Namibia. Namibia is full y committed to implement all categories of the Trade Facilitation 
Agreement. However, for the implementation of some of these categories, especially B and C, 
Namibia still has challenges to implement some of the commitments . For example, the online trade 
information portal used to be under the Ministry of Finance which does not function anymore. On 
the recent and upcoming activities, Namibia received a project preparation grant from TFAF for 
eleven  category C provisions . The consultant is working on the project proposals for these provision s. 
The TFAF Team during this time worked with Namibia under very extreme conditions . 
6.30.   As you are aware , COVID -19 has made it difficult especially when it comes to meeting face -
to-face. Once the consultant is done with the proposal, it will be submitted to the National Trade 
Facilitation Committee of Namibia for inputs and approval before the application of TFAF for the 
implementation of the grant. The project proposal resulting fro m this grant will be finalized on 31 
March 2021. We hope that this project proposal will help Namibia to find donor support for the 
implementation of the identified provisions under the TFA Agreement. The consultant has already 
undertaken some initiatives to engage donors both in Namibia as well as in the SACU region. To 
conclude , Namibia has eleven  activities under category B and C that are due for implementation in 
December 2021. Hence it is very important that assistance  through donor funding is provided  in 
order to implement  them. In addition , Namibia is currently in the process of establishing the National 
Single Window Facility to compl ement the implementation of the TFA. In this regard Namibia is 
currently identifying  areas in which assistance is requ ired to implement all the project . 
6.31.   The representative of Sri Lanka  indicated the following:  
6.32.   We thank the TFAF  and the Secretariat for this very detailed and comprehensive presentation . 
We heard the other interventions where they were suggesting or indicati ng rather very positive 
pictures about the usefulness of the Facility . Sri Lanka's  experience has not been quite so rosy. I 
should  not say disappointing  but it has not been so positive . The reasons are twofold  - because we 
had certain category C commitments where deadlines are due to expire toward the end of this year 
and in addition,  we have some categories which run to 2023 -2024 and even beyond that. There , I 
think we may have a lot of time but when it comes to a rticles that are due to expire at the end of 
this year , we are quite concerned as to how we are going to implement them if we do not receive 
the requested technical assistance.  
6.33.   We began this exercise by first registering areas of interest with the Secretar iat. They 
suggested that there wasn't any positive feedback from the donors,  so they wanted us to benefit 
ourselves from the Project Preparation Grant. Our experience suggests that there have been many 
experts which we have got ten from other donor assistan ce programmes. I should here of course 
mention the EU, which is the largest grant provider, I think amounting to EUR 8 million which 
spanned over a 4-year period . Then we also must acknowledge the assistance granted by the United 
States government, the Wor ld Bank Group, the Australian government  and t he government of 
Germany. Some of this assistance had enabled us to establish our trade information portal because 
originally it was meant to provide only the information to the importers . However,  with the fun ding 
we got from GIZ  and ITC, we modified the structure which enabled us to provide  additional features 
to the  information to be used by the exporters. I think that we can certainly make a presentation in 
the days to come about that particular modification , where not many countries have looked at the 
information provision to the exporter because we had also to take care of both sectors, not only 
importers interests, so like that I think that we have got funding. Those have really been helpful to 
us. 
6.34.   However,  this PPG aspect, our capital -based  officials say that there have been a lot of 
experts/consultants that have come and presented many ideas and some proposals. I think we are 
wasting a lot of money on this consultancy,  but actual implementation of those project proposals is 
the key . The question is h ow do we utilize the fund to give us some additional value in meeting our 
requirements ? Because under this PPG each country is entitled to receive 30,000  USD and I presume, 
that it is not in regard to th e implementation of a particular article but maybe it comprises an area G/TFA/M/15  
 
- 31 - 
 
  of requirements. We do not have much clarity whether such consultancy will be available for the 
implementation of all commitments or only for an "x" number of commitments. I think we a re a 
country that faces a dichotomy as to how we should proceed further when it comes to getting the 
technical assistance because as we stated, we have certain deadlines to meet by the end of this 
year. 
6.35.   Regarding  the single window, the World Bank carried o ut many studies and there had been a 
lot of delays in releasing the feasibility studies . This has really put us in difficulty . The World Bank 
were supposed to come up with a suitable model for Sri Lanka to adjust when it comes to 
implementing the single wi ndow. We have a lot of delays when it comes to the releasing of such 
studies. Sometimes when there are delays, the kind of models that they have proposed become 
absolutely  redundant so again we have to look at the new environment like the COVID -19 challeng es. 
6.36.   Our experience has not been very positive when it comes to attracting technical assistance 
under the TFA and we would like to register these  valuable points under this agenda item. Again, 
we are not blaming anyone but we will have to really look at whe re things have gone wrong and to 
address them . We hopefully wish to work with the Secretariat and our donors as to how we can 
resolve this issue.  
6.37.   The delegate of Vanuatu  indicated the following:  
6.38.   Vanuatu is a very small country in the Pacific. With regard t o the Trade Facilitation Agreement 
Facility, the constraints raised by the previous speaker are noted and I wanted to express the view 
that of course there is funding limitation under the TFA Facility. My understanding is that for us in 
Vanuatu, we have re ceived some funding support from the Enhanced Integrated Framework ( EIF), 
from Australia, from UNCTAD, from the EU, from New Zealand and our PACER Plus Agreement . We 
are very grateful for that and thank you to the TFAF representative  for the report that yo u have just 
done. 
6.39.   I thank all the countries who have given so generously to the Facility and I ask that more give 
in this Facility because we know that the WTO is managing the funds in a very prudent manner and 
we like that . However, we think there should be more funding. Donors who are listening , please 
provide more funding to the Facility.  
6.40.   The delegate of the United States  indicated the following:  
6.41.   The United States thanks TFAF for its report and looks forward to the Secretariat circulating 
the TFAF  guidelines for Member s' review. The United States is happy to meet again to discuss this 
issue, and in the meantime, we ask TFAF to maintain its current approach and only fund grants.  
6.42.   The Chair  read the following statement from the Dominican Republic , on its behalf:  
6.43.   The Dominican Republic recently received a project preparation grant from the WTO's Trade 
Facilitation Mechanism for three provisions of the Trade Facilitation Agreement that we notified under 
category C. After circulating our needs to donors i n an expression of interest, the TFAF team worked 
with the Dominican Republic to prepare a project preparation grant for the WTO's Trade Facilitation 
Mechanism.  
6.44.   After circulating our needs to donors in an expression of interest, the TFAF team worked with 
us during the period of COVID -19 restrictions and distance work to finalise our grant application 
information. The grant was approved, and the WTO TFAF hired an expert consultant with extensive 
experience in the region to work with us to prepare project pro posals that will help us secure donor 
support.  
6.45.   The consultant is working directly with the relevant ministries and agencies of the national 
trade facilitation committee and has contacted donors working in our country and in the region to 
see if they can he lp. Some potential sources of support are being explored.  
6.46.   Before finalizing the project proposal, the consultant will meet with us to get our input and 
approval on the way forward, including the unmet needs that have been drafted as grant applications 
for the implementation of the TFAF.  G/TFA/M/15  
 
- 32 - 
 
  6.47.   This exercise has also served to further refine the needs in order to give the necessary 
continuity to the implementation of the measures that had already started to be implemented; foster 
teamwork by working towards concret e goals; deepen the existing cooperation between the actors 
involved; to increase the capacities of the actors involved in the implementation of each measure; 
to raise the awareness of a larger number of actors of the existing needs of their country in ord er to 
complete the implementation of these measures.  
6.48.   The project proposals resulting from this grant will be finalised by 31 March 2021. We hope 
that these project proposals will help us to find donor support for the implementation of the three 
provisions of the TFA.  
6.49.   The representative of the TFAF responded to Sri Lanka and indicated that the grant for the 
provisions they had requested was ready to launch and TFAF would  contact them to see if they 
wanted to move forward or not , given their past experiences with PPGs . The Facility was also happy 
to discuss Sri Lanka's  feedback with donors and see if they already ha d project proposals ready that 
could perhaps move directly into the project implementation grant as  well. The TFAF would  contact 
Sri Lanka directly . 
7  OTHER BUSINESS  
7.1.  The delegate of the United States  indicated the following:  
7.2.  The United States is pleased to take the floor to preview a paper we will be circulating for the 
next Trade Facilitation Committee meeting entitled, "Revisiting the Need for Global Action to 
Eliminate Consularization Requirements. " 
7.3.  During today 's unprecedented global health crisis, Member s are called to utilize the tools 
provided in TFA Article 10.1; namely, to review trade requirements and minimize unnece ssary and 
costly formalities, including consularization requirements.  
7.4.  Traders, in particular MSMEs, are struggling to operate amid disrupted supply chains, 
hampered cross -border mobility, and sharp increases in trade costs due to the pandemic.  
7.5.  The US paper will make the case for eliminating consularization. We look forward to having 
future discussions on this very timely and important issue.  
7.6.  The Chair thanked the United States for the preview on their paper and looked forward to 
seeing it and di scussing it in future meetings. As for the dates of the next Committee meetings, a s 
agreed by the Committee at its last session , as well as considered in the roadmap for the four year 
review of the TFA, the next confirmed dates of the next meeting will tak e place on 22 and 23 April, 
22 and 23 June, 27 and 28 July and 19 to 21 October.  
7.7.  The Chair remind ed Member s of the new feature with respect to the e -registration system . The 
e-registration delegation coordinator was now able to identify the delegates for Councils, Committee,  
or other bodies . This information would  show up when scroll ing through the directory. It was  also 
possible  to sort the delegate list by Council, Committee or Body and create a mailing list to simplify 
reaching out to groups of colleague s. It was appreciated that this information would be  shared with 
colleagues in each delegation and also that delegation coordinators, if they have not already done 
so, would  provide that information through the e -registration system. It was  to be a handy t ool to 
identify who the counterparts were in specific committees or councils and it was quite user friendly . 
He encourage d delegates  to register the WTO Committees and Councils or other bodies for which 
they were responsible.  
7.8.  The Committee agreed  to invite the Annex D organizations as well as the Global Alliance on 
Trade Facilitation  to the next meeting . 
7.9.  The meeting was adjourned . 
__________