RESTRICTED  
  
G/LIC/M/57  
20 December  2023 
(23-8731) Page: 1/21 
Committee on Import Licensing   
 
MINUTES OF THE MEETING HELD ON 31 OCTOBER  2023  
CHAIRPERSON: MR. NAT THARNPANICH  (THAILAND ) 
The Committee on Import Licensing held its fifty -eighth  meeting on 3 1 October  2023 under the 
chairpersonship of Mr . Nat Tharnpanich  (Thailand ). The agenda proposed for the meeting was 
circulated in documents WTO/AIR/LIC/17  and WTO/AIR/LIC/17/Corr.1 . 
 
 
Contents  
1   MEMBERS' COMPLIANCE WITH NOTIFICATION OBLIGATIONS: DEVELOPMENTS  
SINCE THE LAST MEETING  ................................ ................................ ............................  2 
2   WRITTEN QUESTIONS AND REPLIES FROM MEMBERS ON SPECIFIC TRADE  
CONCERNS (G/LIC/W/51/REV.9)  ................................ ................................ ................  3 
2.1   Document  G/LIC/Q/IND/29  ................................ ................................ ........................ 3 
2.2   Document  G/LIC/Q/IDN/51  ................................ ................................ ........................ 4 
3   NOTIFICATIONS  ................................ ................................ ................................ ...... 5 
3.1   Notifications under Article  1.4(a), Article  5.1-5.4 and Article  8.2(b) of the Agreement  .......... 5 
3.2   Notifications under Article  7.3 of the Agreement  ................................ ............................ 7 
4   ANGOLA: IMPORT LICENSING REQUIREMENTS – STATEMENT BY THE 
EUROPEAN  UNION  ................................ ................................ ................................ .......  7 
5   DOMINICAN REPUBLIC: NEW IMPORT LICENSING SYSTEM - STATEMENT BY  THE 
EUROPEAN UNION  ................................ ................................ ................................ .......  8 
6   EGYPT: IMPORT LICENSING REQUIREMENTS FOR CERTAIN AGRICULTURAL AND 
PROCESSED PRODUCTS - STATEMENT BY THE EUROPEAN UNION  ................................ .. 9 
7   INDIA: IMPORT LICENSING MEASURES ON PCS, TABLETS, AND OTHER  
ELECTRONIC PRODUCTS - STATEMENTS BY CHINA AND JAPAN ................................ .... 10 
8   INDIA: IMPORT ON VISCOSE STAPLE FIBER (VSF) - STATEMENT BY INDONESIA  ..... 11 
9   INDIA: IMPORTATION OF PNEUMATIC TYRES - STATEMENTS BY INDONESIA, 
THE SEPARATE CUSTOMS TERRITORY OF TAIWAN, PENGHU, KINMEN AND MATSU  
AND THAILAND  ................................ ................................ ................................ ..........  12 
10   INDONESIA: IMPORT LICENSING REGIME FOR CERTAIN TEXTILES PRODUCTS - 
STATEMENTS BY THE EUROPEAN UNION AND JAPAN  ................................ ..................  14 
11   INDONESIA: COMMODITY BALANCING MECHANISM - STATEMENTS BY  THE 
EUROPEAN  UNION AND JAPAN  ................................ ................................ ...................  15 
12   INDONESIA: IMPORT RESTRICTION: COMPULSORY REGISTRATION BY  
IMPORTERS OF STEEL PRODUCTS - STATEMENT BY JAPAN  ................................ ..........  16 
13   INDONESIA: IMPORT RESTRICTION ON AIR CONDITIONERS - STATEMENT  
BY JAPAN  ................................ ................................ ................................ ..................  17 G/LIC/M/57  
 
- 2 - 
 
  14   THAILAND: IMPORTATION OF WHEAT FEED - STATEMENT BY THE  
EUROPEAN UNION  ................................ ................................ ................................ ..... 18 
15   IMPROVING THE FUNCTIONING OF THE COMMITTEE ON IMPORT LICENSING 
(JOB/LIC/5)  ................................ ................................ ................................ ..............  19 
16   DRAFT REPORT (2023) OF THE COMMITTEE TO THE COUNCIL FOR TRADE  
IN GOODS (G/LIC/W/60)  ................................ ................................ ..........................  20 
17   IMPROVING TRANSPARENCY IN NOTIFICATION PROCEDURES OF THE  
 AGREEMENT – LAUNCH OF THE IMPORT LICENSING NOTIFICATION PORTAL  ..............  20 
18   DATE OF THE NEXT MEETING  ................................ ................................ ...............  21 
19   OTHER BUSINESS  ................................ ................................ ................................  21 
 
 
_______________  
 
The Chairperson  informed delegations about the consultation he had had regarding the appointment 
of a vice -chairperson. He said that unfortunately he had not yet been able to find a name that would 
attract consensus among delegations and that he would report to delegatio ns if he was  able to make 
any progress on this issue.  
The Chairperson  proposed the adoption of the agenda for this meeting, contained in 
documents  WTO/AIR/LIC/17  and WTO/AIR/LIC/17/Corr.1 . No items were raised under Other 
Business . 
The agenda was adopted . 
1  MEMBERS ' COMPLIANCE WITH NOTIFICATION OBLIGATIONS: DEVELOPMENTS SINCE 
THE LAST MEETING  
1.1.  The Chairperson  stated that he had been informed by the Secretariat that, to date, a total of 
42 notifications had been received under various provisions of the Import Licensing Agreement since 
the Committee 's previous meeting, 41 of which had been listed in the Airgram for consideration at 
that day 's meeting.  
1.2.  The Chairperson  noted that 14  notifications under Articles  1.4(a), 8.2(b) and 5.1 -5.4 had been 
submitted since the Committee 's previous meeting. These notifications had been submitted using 
the revised N/2  notification form contained in document  G/LIC/28  to notify new import licensing 
regulations or changes thereof. He reminded delegations that Members were required to notify their 
import licensing regulations and changes to those regulations within 60  days of their publ ication.  
1.3.  In addition, 28  N/3 notifications had been submitted under Article  7.3 of the Agreement since 
the Committee 's previous meeting. One Member, Myanmar, had submitted a notification of the 
Annual Questionnaire under Article 7.3 of the Agreement for the first time, thus bringing the number 
of Members who ha d not yet submitted any reply to the annual questionnaire down to 21. The 
Chairperson  thanked all those Members that had provided notifications for their efforts and 
dedication. He rec alled that submitting replies to the annual questionnaire before 30  September 
each year was an annual obligation for all Members. As  of that day 's meeting, only 24 Members had 
submitted their replies to the questionnaire for 2023. He further noted that 21  Members had never 
submitted a reply to the questionnaire and that 13  Members had never submitted any notification 
under the Import Licensing Agreement since joining the WTO. He encouraged those Members to 
notify and to contact the Secretariat for technical  assistance.  
1.4.  The Chairperson  noted that transparency was one of the key pillars of the rule -based 
multilateral trading system. He strongly encourage d all Members to submit their import licen ce 
notifications if they had not yet done so.  He recalled that Members in the Committee and the 
Secretariat had undertaken several initiatives to improve the record of notification compliance . The 
Secretariat had organized and held its 6th Workshop on Import Licensing and Notifications for 
Capital -Based Officials from Developing and Least -Developed WTO Members between 25 and G/LIC/M/57  
 
- 3 - 
 
  27 September 2023 in Geneva.  The Secretariat  had received 95 applications from 68 WTO Members 
of which 30 participants were selected , giving priorit y to Members who had faced ch allenges in 
submitting notifications.  This was the first time that this type of workshop had been held in person 
since the COVID -19 pandemic. It had been held in person in 2017, 2018 and 2019 and in virtual 
mode in 2021 and 2022.  The objective of this work shop was to improve Members ' understanding of 
the Agreement on Import Licensing procedures and increase their notification compliance rate.  The 
workshop had a practical focus on the preparation of notifications which justified and greatly 
benefited from an  in-person activity . In addition to the presentation on the Import Licensing 
Agreement and several practical sessions on drafting notifications,  the workshop also included an 
experience -sharing session where representatives from five Members presented thei r experiences  
to participants  on import licensing notification s. The Secretariat also offered participants the 
possibility of technical assistance on the preparation of outstanding import licensing notifications as 
follow -up after the workshop.  
1.5.  The Chairpe rson also stated that the Secretariat would  hold a training session for Geneva -based 
delegates to be held following this meeting of the Committee in the afternoon at 3.30  pm in the 
same meeting room.  While this session was designed mainly as an introductory session on import 
licensing for new delegates, representatives of all Members  were welcome to attend. The session 
would  be conducted in English with simultaneous interpretation to French and Spanish.  While the 
Secretaria t was always available to engage in these types of capacity -building activities focusing on 
notification requirements, he wanted to ask  Members to provide  guidance on how to ensure the 
fulfilment  of notification obligations under the agreement.  Before givi ng the floor to Members for 
comments under this item, he asked the Secretariat to present  some charts o n notification 
compliance , which had been prepared at the request  of Members , and which had been circulated to 
delegations as document  RD/LIC/18 . He suggested that, i f delegations  agree d, the Secretariat could 
incorporate any comments made  and circulate th is document to delegations as a Job document.  
1.6.  The Secretariat  presented document RD/LIC/18 , which provided an overview of the level of 
implementation of the transparency provisions contained in the Agreement on Import Licensing 
Procedures over the period 2013 to 2023.  
1.7.  The representative of the United States  indicated the following:  
1.8.  The United States would like to thank the Chair person  and the Secretariat f or providing an 
overview of Members ' notifications. Timely and complete notifications allow Members to better 
understand the trade practices of other Members. In this Committee, we know the value of a robust 
notification and we have been improving our noti fication  track record steadily. We want to keep that 
motivation going. As we can see from the Secretariat 's presentation, compliance with notification 
obligations  still needs to improve. For example, only 27% of Members have been in compliance with 
N3 notifications for the last five years. That number is just too low. The United States encourages 
all Members to submit their notifications as soon as possible.  
1.9.  The rep resentative of the European Union  indicated the following:  
1.10.  We would like to thank the Secretariat for the efforts and the work done with this very useful 
document, providing  a very clear picture of the state of play on notification s. Unfortunately, it  does 
not paint an optimistic scenario . We would like to invite you, Mr. Chair person , and the Secretariat 
to continue your efforts  in improving the situation . We would also like to  invite Members , who have 
not submitted  any notification in a long time  to contac t the Secretariat for technical assistance and 
explain their specific needs. This is very important, and we are looking for much more transparency 
in this Committee . We appreciate the efforts already made, but a lot of work remains  to be done.  
1.11.  The Committe e took note  of the statements made.  
2  WRITTEN QUESTIONS AND REPLIES FROM MEMBERS ON SPECIFIC TRADE CONCERNS 
(G/LIC/W/51/REV.9 ) 
2.1  Document  G/LIC/Q/IND/29   
2.1.  The representative of the United States  indicated the following:  G/LIC/M/57  
 
- 4 - 
 
  2.2.  We have concerns regarding India 's new import licensing requirements for computers, tablets, 
and servers, especially given how quickly this measure was issued and will be imp lemented. We 
would appreciate India 's careful review and response to our questions, and we will engage on this 
issue further under Agenda Item 7 . 
2.3.  The representative of Japan  indicated the following:  
2.4.  Japan shares the questions and concerns submitted by the United States, and we will discuss 
this matter under  a later agenda item.  
2.5.  The representative of India indicated the following:  
2.6.  We are in the receipt of questions contained in document G/LIC/Q/IND/29. This document was 
received on 18 October  2023. Our capital -based authorities are currently  looking at the questions. 
We will share updates in due course. We would like to draw attention to the notification 38 -2023 of 
19 October 2023 available on the Directorate General of Foreign Trade website, which further 
clarifies the measure.  We will remain engaged with the U.S. and Japan on this issue.  
2.7.  The Committee took note  of the statements made.  
2.2  Document  G/LIC/Q/IDN/51   
2.8.  The representative of Indonesia  indicated the following:  
2.9.  Indonesia would like to thank Members interested in Indonesia 's import regulations. Regarding 
the concerns expressed by the United States, Indonesia has addressed the se concerns in document 
G/LIC/Q/IDN/ 51. Indonesia further take s note o f the comments  and additional questions. In the 
meantime, we will coordinate with our capital to address the concerns and questions raised.  
2.10.  The representative of the United States  indicated the following:  
2.11.  We thank Indonesia for their responses to the United States ' written questions.  We continue 
to have concerns regarding significant delays that importers have reported in receiving import 
licences from Indonesia across a variety of  sectors,  including certain agricultural products, ICT 
products,  footwear, and others, as well as reductions in volumes.  We will continue to engage on this 
issue with Indonesia and have recently submitted follow -up questions.  We look forward to reviewing 
Indonesia's responses to those.   
2.12.  The Committee took note  of the statements made.  
2.13.  The representative of the United States  indicated the following with respect to documents 
G/LIC/Q/ARG/22  and G/LIC/Q/ PHL/11 : 
2.14.  We would  like to also take this opportunity to remind Argentina and the Philippines that we  
are still waiting for their responses to questions we raised at the last meeting.  As a reminder, in 
October 2022, Argenti na introduced a new import licensing system.  Argentina 's non -automatic 
import licensing regime has impeded imports and  has been carried out in a non -transparent manner.  
We submitted detailed questions on the issue in document G/LIC/Q/ARG/22 and hope that Argentina 
will provide responses in the nearest future.  For the Philippines, the United States continues to be 
concerned by the Department of Agriculture 's administration and management of Sanitary and 
Phytosanitary Import Clearances, or SPS ICs, in the Philippines.  We would  like to ask the Philippines 
to respond to our outstanding questions submitted in document G/LIC/Q/PHL/11 as soon as possible.  
We also remain available to work with our Philippine counterparts to identify trade facilit ative 
approaches to address this issue.   
2.15.  The representative of Argentina  indicated the following:  
2.16.  I would  like to  thank the United States for their comments. We take due note of what  has 
been said  and we are submit ting the questions  from the United States to our capital  who is working 
on the written responses.  G/LIC/M/57  
 
- 5 - 
 
  2.17.  The representative of the Philippines  indicated the following:  
2.18.  The Philippines takes note of the questions from the United States. We will revert  with written 
responses  from our capital.  
2.19.  The Committee took note  of the statements made.  
3  NOTIFICATIONS  
3.1  Notifications under Article  1.4(a), Article  5.1-5.4 and Article  8.2(b) of  the Agreement  
3.1.  The Chairperson  informed Members that 14 N/2 notifications, submitted by 6  Members, had 
been listed on the agenda for the Committee 's consideration at the meeting. He stated that Members 
had notified new regimes and had continued to make gre at efforts to provide missing information 
on existing regimes using the notification form contained in document  G/LIC/28 . He thanked all 
those Members that had made efforts to improve the transparency of their respective import 
licensing regimes. With a view to m aking the review process more efficient, he said that he would 
not read out the document symbol of each notification one by one. Instead, he proposed that the 
Committee review the notifications in groups, following a sequence by notifying Member. He noted 
that this approach did not prevent any Member from raising questions regarding any particular 
notification under review.  
3.2.  The following notifications under Article  5.1-5.4, Article  1.4(a), and Article  8.2(b) of the 
Agreement were reviewed by the Committee: European Union ( G/LIC/N/2/EU /24 and 
G/LIC/N/2/EU/25 ); Hong Kong, China ( G/LIC/N/2/HKG/22 , G/LIC/N/2/HKG/23  and 
G/LIC/N/2/HKG/24 ); Myanmar ( G/LIC/N/2/MMR/8/Rev.1 , G/LIC/N/2/MMR/9 , G/LIC/N/2/MMR/10 , 
G/LIC/N/2/MMR/11 , G/LIC/N/2/MMR/12 , G/LIC/N/2/MMR/13 ); Switzerland and Liechtenstein 
(G/LIC/N/2/CHE/7 ); Thailand ( G/LIC/N/2/THA/7 ); Ukraine ( G/LIC/N/2/UKR/25 ). 
3.3.  The representative of Ukraine  indicated the following:  
3.4.  Despite the full -scale war of aggression unleashed by Russia and its tr emendously damaging 
consequences for Ukraine 's economy and trade, I would like to emphasize that Ukraine remains 
firmly committed to the fundamental rules of this organization  and continues to be transparent about  
its measures in the WTO. Even when the war  and military actions are going on, Ukraine keeps on 
notifying Members o f the adopted measures relat ing to import licensing procedures.  Ukraine has 
informed Members o f the adopted Resolution No. 860 of the Cabinet of Ministers of Ukraine of 
15 August 2023, according to which goods imported from the Republic  of North Macedonia , within 
the tariff quota established pursuant to the Free Trade Agreement between Ukraine and the Republic 
of North Macedonia of 18 January 2021 , are excluded  from the list of goo ds subject to import 
licensing. The introduced amendments allow import ation of agricultural goods from North Macedonia 
within the tariff quota without an import licen ce. The Customs Authorities allocate tariff quotas under 
the Free Trade Agreement between Ukraine and the Republic of North Macedonia on a first -come, 
first-served basis.  In addition, Ukraine 's changes and amendments to its import licensing procedures 
had also been duly and timely reflected in the annual questionnaire contained in document 
G/LIC/N/3/UKR/16. The regulation and effective implementation of licensing and regulatory policy 
reform remain among the priorities of the Ukrainian Government in its support of the business 
environment.  We would like to thank our partners for their unwavering support and call upon WTO 
Members to take measures to deprive Russia as the aggressor State of its ability to wage  war against 
Ukraine . This is a  war which causes destruction, death and suffering and  undermines the rules -based 
multilateral trading system.  
3.5.  The representative of the European Union  indicated the following:  
3.6.  The European Union  would like to commend Ukraine for its comprehensive notification , notably 
under Article 7.3, despite the lack of p roper infrastructure  and under very difficult circumstances. 
The European Union  really appreciates Ukraine 's commitment to fulfilling its transparency and 
notification obligation s in WTO . The European Union  stands firmly with Ukraine.  We will continue to 
provide firm support for Ukraine 's overall economic, military, social and financial resilience, including 
humanitarian aid. The European Union  urges Russia to immediately and unconditionally withdraw all G/LIC/M/57  
 
- 6 - 
 
  its troops and military equipment  from the territory of Ukraine within its internationally recogni zed 
border.  
3.7.  The representative of the United States  indicated the following:  
3.8.  The United States thanks Ukraine for continuing to provide notifications to this Committee, 
including providing replies to the questio nnaire on import licensing procedures in September, despite 
the unimaginable conditions they face at home. We once again ask Russia to stop its illegal, 
unjustifiable, and unprovoked war in Ukraine.   
3.9.  The representative of Canada  indicated the following:  
3.10.  Canada will not engage in business -as-usual activities with the Russian Federation. Russia 's 
war of aggression now underway for almost two years is not only an attack on Ukraine and its people 
but also  a blatant violation of international law and the rules -based international system.  Respect 
for the rule of law is the basis of our international system. Without it, neither this organization nor 
the global economy would be able to function. Russia 's invas ion of Ukraine has been the greatest 
shock to global food and energy security in years. The consequences of Russia 's action s extend well 
beyond Ukraine 's borders and are, as such, a direct concern to all Members. Canada, once again, 
condemns Russia 's aggre ssion in the strongest possible terms and calls on Russia to immediately 
cease all hostile actions against Ukraine.   
3.11.  The representative of Japan  indicated the following:  
3.12.  Japan fully welcomes Ukraine 's import licensing notification, despite its extremely difficult 
situation. We fully support Ukraine 's commitment to the multilateral trading system.  At the same 
time Japan strongly condemns Russia 's aggression against Ukraine and urges Russia once again to 
stop th is aggression and withdraw its force s from the territory of Ukraine within its internationally 
recogni zed border immediately.  
3.13.  The representative of the Russian Federation  indicated the following:  
3.14.  The Committee on Import Licensing is not a platform to raise political issues. Those interested 
in the special military operation conducted by Russia in Ukraine can follow the work of relevant UN 
bodies like the Security Council and agencies. It is in these bodies where Russia share s in detail 
information on the root causes of the operation, as well as insights regarding the current phase of 
the operation.  The interventions that we have just heard under this item clearly violate  the mandate 
of this Committee, waste delegates ' time, and aim to justify a legitimate unilateral trade -restrictive 
coercive measures with extraterritorial effect. Such measures are a reason for the break in global  
supply chains, increased energy costs, cost of freight, and insurance that have led to  growing price 
levels across the world. Widescale economic repercussions in the world could have been avoided if 
the WTO Members that just took the floor had not  breached basic WTO obligations. I will not  list 
thousands of trade -restrictive unilateral coerciv e measures introduced by the Members that we have 
just heard, as we have spoken about these measures multiple times in different WTO bodies. I would 
just underscore that all additional costs  due to unilateral measures are passed on to consumers, 
resulting in growing global price level s, including food prices.  
3.15.  The representative of the Republic of Korea  indicated the following:  
3.16.  Korea thanks Ukraine for its continued efforts to provide its notifications for transparency in 
the WTO. Korea joins others in stro ngly condemning Russia 's armed invasion of Ukraine as a violation 
of the principles of the UN Charter.  Ukraine 's sovereignty, territorial integrity, and independence 
should be respected.  
3.17.  The representative of the United Kingdom  indicated the following:  
3.18.  The United Kingdom  supports Ukraine 's right to defend itself against Russia 's aggression and 
stands with its international partners in condemning Russia 's unprovoked and premeditated attack. 
We welcome Ukraine 's continuing efforts at notify ing and support their right to take a full role in the 
WTO and this Committee.  G/LIC/M/57  
 
- 7 - 
 
  3.19.  The Committee took note  of the notifications and statements made.  
3.2  Notifications under Article  7.3 of the Agreement  
3.20.  The Chairperson  noted that 27  notifications had been listed for t he Committee 's consideration. 
Montenegro had submitted an  additional N/3  notification after the Airgram had been issued, which 
would be reviewed at the Committee 's subsequent meeting.1 
3.21.  The following notifications under Article  7.3 were reviewed by the Com mittee: Argentina 
(G/LIC/N /3/ARG/19 ); Australia  (G/LIC/N/3/AUS/16 ); Burkina  Faso (G/LIC/N/3/BFA/7 ; 
G/LIC/N/3/BFA/8 ; G/LIC /N/3/BFA/9 ); Brazil  (G/LIC/N/3/BRA/12 ); Canada (G/LIC/N/3/CAN/22 ); 
European  Union (G/LIC/N/3/EU/12 ); Hong Kong, China (G/LIC/N/3/HKG/27 ); India 
(G/LIC/N/3/IND/23 ); Israel (G/LIC/N/3/ISR/6 ; G/LIC/N/3/ISR/7 ); JAPAN (G/LIC/N/3/JPN/22 ); 
Kazakhstan (G/LIC/N/3/KAZ/7 ); The Republic of  Korea (G/LIC/N/3/KOR/16 ); Macao , China  
(G/LIC/N/3/MAC/26 ); Myanmar  (G/LIC/N/3/MMR/1 ); New Zealand (G/LIC/N/3/NZL/10 ); 
Nicaragua ( G/LIC/N/3/NIC/15 ); Panama  (G/LIC/N/3/PAN/14 ); The Separate Customs Territory 
of Taiwan, Penghu, Kinmen and Matsu (G/LIC/N/3/TPKM/14 ); Singapore ( G/LIC/N/3/SGP/19 ); 
Türkiye  (G/LIC/N/3/TUR/20 ); Ukraine (G/LIC/N/3/UKR/16 ); United Kingdom ( G/LIC/N/3/GBR/3 ); 
United  States (G/LIC/N/3/USA/20 ). 
3.22.  The representative of Brazil  indicated the following:  
3.23.  The notification entry from Brazil describes the operation of the Integrated Foreign Trade 
System and provides detailed information on  import licens ing procedures applied by 14 consenting 
bodies. This notification is the result of hard work from all agencies participating  in the Integrated 
Foreign Trade System and counted on the support from the National Trade Facilitation Committee. 
The submission of the notification is a concrete result of Brazil 's commitment to the WTO 
transparency pillar.  
3.24.  The representative of Myanmar  indicated the following:  
3.25.  I would like to express our sincere thanks to the Secretariat for the support throughout the  
process of Myanmar 's N3 notification.  Since this is our first N3 notification, I would like to share our 
experiences regarding  this process. Myanmar started preparing the N3 notification , in accordance 
with Article 7.3 of agreement, at the end of 2022.  To be consistent with our previous N1 and 
N2 notifications, categorization of the non-automatic licensing process was carried out during the 
preparation of the N 3 notification.  Initial facts were received from various  ministries, departments, 
and organizations in respect of each community group . The legal provisions included in our previous 
notifications were considered in the categorization of community groups.  In the i nitial draft 
N3 notific ation, 18 community groups falling under the responsibility of  13 different departments 
and organizations were included, as well as eight ministries.  We sent an initial draft and requested 
suggestion s to the WTO Secretariat on 23 August 2023. We received t he reply from the WTO 
Secretariat with their suggestions on 31 August 2023. On 11 September 2023, we held an internal 
coordinati on meeting among 17 concerned departments and organizations to finalize and conclude 
the draft notification  and reply to  the suggestion  received from the WTO Secretariat.  Our revised 
N3 notification was sent to the Committee on 26 September 2023, incorporating the suggestions 
received from the Secretariat. The  final version of the N3 notification includes  19 community groups, 
one more community group than in the  initial draft, and 13 concerned departments and 
organizations.  
3.26.  The Committee took note  of the notifications and statements made.  
4  ANGOLA: IMPORT LICENSING REQUIREMENTS – STATEMENT BY THE EUROPEAN UN ION 
4.1.  The representative of the European Union  indicated the following:  
4.2.  The European Union maintains its deep concern over Presidential Decree 23/19 aiming to 
protect domestic industries in a manner that is not compatible with WTO rules. The European Union 
would like to remind Angola that these concerns have already been raised in previous WTO meetings 
 
1 Montenegro  (G/LIC/N/3/MNE/6 ). G/LIC/M/57  
 
- 8 - 
 
  since 2019, notably during the Council for Trade in Goods, the Committee on Market Access, and 
the Committee on Agriculture, as well at this Committee in Octob er 2021. To date Angola has not 
provide d any substantive reply or explanations on how it intends to bring this decree into the remit 
of WTO legality. Irrespective of its illegality with WTO rules, the European Union reiterate s the need 
for Angola to provid e the clearest picture on the process regarding this decree, and any changes it 
wishes to introduce and in which areas. Nonetheless, once more we strongly urge Angola to review 
the relevant measures in order to ensure compliance with WTO rules. Specificall y, concerning the 
remit of this Committee, the decree does not provide information on how these restrictions are 
implemented. Notably it is unclear if licen ces are to be used to manage these restrictions. Therefore, 
the European Union requests Angola to cl arify this question and remind s Angola of its obligation 
under the Import Licensing Agreement to notify the measure, should licen ces be involved in the 
implementation of this Presidential Decree. During the Committee on Market Access, Angola 
indicated that  trade data would be provided showing that EU export would not be affected. The 
European Union has not yet seen this evidence and looks forward to receiving the data. Depending 
on Angola 's engagement on this file, the European Union may further decide whic h approach to take 
to ensure an adequate protection of its trade interests.  
4.3.  The representative of Angola  indicated the following:  
4.4.  We thank the European Union  for the issue raised, and we consider valid the previous 
statements that we made in this Committee. We continue to inform that Angola has not  implemented 
the restrictions, judging by the volume of imported products from the European Union  and as 
demonstrated in the recent meeting of the Committee on M arket Access. On the other hand, it is 
important to inform that Angola has finished reviewing the decree and has moved to the phase in 
which sector s carry out the final review. In general, the concern  expressed by the European Union  
is not about restriction s that do not exist,  but rather  about  the existence of the decree, which is 
being reviewed.  
4.5.  The Committee took note  of the statements made.   
5  DOMINICAN REPUBLIC: NEW IMPORT LICENSING SYSTEM – STATEME NT BY THE 
EUROPEAN UNION  
5.1.  The representative of the European Union  indicated the following:  
5.2.  The European Union would like to reiterate its concerns about the legislation setting up a new 
system of import licences for agricultural products in the Dominican R epublic, including a new 
registry of importers. The very broad scope of the changes, covering several hundreds tariff lines, 
could lead to an increase of  the administrative burden for exporters and importers. In parallel to 
automatic licences, the new legi slation provides for non -automatic licencing, including products that 
are not covered by tariff -rate quotas. The proposed non -automatic licensing system for products not 
covered by tariff -rate quotas, introduces uncertainties about the criteria for grantin g import licences, 
and could pose an impediment to trade. The European Union would also like to receive an update 
on the registry of importers, which was due to become compulsory from 1 October. The 
European  Union would like to reiterate that WTO Members h ave recognized the need to minimize 
the incidence and complexity of import formalities as well as reduce and simplify import 
documentation requirements. The European Union would like, therefore, to ask the 
Dominican  Republic about its concrete plans and precise timing for further implementation so that 
EU operators can take the necessary measures.  
5.3.  The representative of the United States  indicated the following:  
5.4.  The United States is also concerned with the proposed new import licensing system for 
agricultu ral products by the Dominican Republic Ministry of Agriculture. We have discussed the 
Dominican Republic 's import licensing practices on several occasions and submitted comments 
numerous times. The WTO Import Licensing Agreement requires that import licens ing procedures 
be no more trade restrictive than the measure they implement and no more administratively 
burdensome than necessary. We are concerned that the new system introduces uncertainty in the 
criteria that the Ministry of Agriculture is using to adm inister licen ces and creates uncertainty for 
businesses. The United States understands that the Dominical Republic uses a licensing process 
requiring the Minister of Agriculture to sign each import licen ce request of non -tariff rate quota (TRQ) G/LIC/M/57  
 
- 9 - 
 
  products. W e are concerned that the licensing process is used in a discretionary manner to limit 
trade. We ask the Dominican Republic to take into account our comments and address our concerns.  
5.5.  The representative of the Dominican Republic  indicated the following:  
5.6.  The Dominican Republic thanks the European Union and the United States for their comments 
and the presentation of their particular concerns with our import licensing system for agricultural 
products. These instruments of the trade policy of the Dominican Rep ublic were notified to this 
Committee between 19 and 30 September 2022. This mechanism has been articulated under all 
provisions of the Agreement on Import Licensing Procedures and in particular Articles 2 and 3. We 
specifically highlight the instruments n otified under the documents G/LIC/N/2/DOM/1  and 
G/LIC/N/2/DOM/2 . It should be noted that, prior to the formal notification of these regulations, the 
Dominican Republic made them available for 30 days to all stakeholders and our main trading  
partners, showing transparency and predictability in trade.  Likewise, a notification was made under 
the framework of the Economic Partnership Agreement with the European Union and CARIFORUM. 
Moreover, these instruments were notified  in the Free Trade Agre ement between the 
Dominican  Republic, Central America and the United States; and finally, in the Economic Partnership 
Agreement between the United Kingdom and CARIFORUM with the objective that our main trading 
partners were aware of the regulatory developm ents of the Dominican trade policy.  The instrument 
referred to in document G/LIC/N/2/DOM/1  provides for the creation of a register containing data on 
natural and legal persons importing agricultural products. This was designed to establish statistical 
information and facilitate the processing of applications by eliminating the need to deposit 
documentation previously submitted to the corresponding authorities. Secondly, to open spaces for 
trade facilitation and the supervision of the commitments assumed in the different trade agreements 
in force, without representing any res triction to trade.  The criteria for issuing import licences are 
detailed in the regulation notified under the symbol G/LIC/N/2/DOM/2 . Finally, we would like to 
emphasize  that these regulations are being implemented gradually and progressively, witho ut 
disruptions in the administrative processes. The bodies in charge of the process are working on the 
implementation aspects in accordance with these relevant provisions.  
5.7.  The Committee took note  of the statements made.  
6  EGYPT: IMPORT LICENSING REQUIREMENTS  FOR CERTAIN AGRICULTURAL AND 
PROCESSED PRODUCTS – STATEMENT BY THE EUROPEAN UNION  
6.1.  The representative of the European Union  indicated the following:  
6.2.  The European Union remains concerned about the system of issuing import permits for meat 
and poultry implem ented by Egypt. As mentioned on previous occasions, the system of granting 
import permits lacks transparency. The procedures of the committees and calendars of their 
meetings are not publicly shared. Rejections of import permits are communicated orally, wi thout 
any possibility of appeal. There are no rules stipulating under which conditions import permits are 
approved under each act.  
6.3.  The European Union thanks Egypt for providing written replies to its additional questions but 
regrets that Egypt has not yet notified to the WTO the two decrees establishing the system of issuing 
import permits for meat and poultry (Prime Minister 's Decree No. 2080/2018 and Prime Minister 's 
Decision No. 222/2018). The European Union maintains its view that the current system is  
inconsistent with Article XI of the GATT (de jure and de facto import prohibition through quantitative 
restriction), as well as with several provisions of the Agreement on Import Licensing Procedures. 
The granting or non -granting of import licences based on local market demand has an equivalent 
effect to import quotas, which are not allowed under Article 17 of the EU -Egypt Association 
Agreement. The European Union urges Egypt to notify the two decrees to the WTO as a matter of 
priority. The European Union also invites Egypt to establish a clear and transparent procedure that 
outlines and makes publicly available the criteria and modalities for obtaining an import permit, the 
rules for rejections and appeals as well as a calendar of committee meetings.  
6.4.  The representative of Egypt  indicated the following:  
6.5.  I would like to thank the European Union  for its continued interest in this topic. I would like to 
note that the subject matter raised by the European Union has also been taken  up in the context of G/LIC/M/57  
 
- 10 - 
 
  bilateral exchange s. I refrain from repeating the details stated by Egypt at the Committee 's meeting 
in May 2023. However, I would like  to stress a number of points . On imports of meat and poultry, I 
would like to reiterate that both decrees referred to by the European Union do not constitute 
quantitative restriction s and are not inconsiste nt with Article XI of the GATT 1994.  Details o f the 
two decrees and of the relevant committees have been provided by Egypt in its written response to 
Members contained in docu ments G/LIC/Q/EGY/6  and G/LIC/Q/EGY/8 . I would urge the 
European  Union or any other trading partner  to share with Egypt bilaterally any specific cases in 
which import permits were denied. On the issue of import of seed potatoes and the mechanism 
notified in the SPS Committee, I would like to reiterate  again  that it is not targeted to restrict imports.  
In a number of bilateral meetings, Egypt has explained that this mechanism was instituted to avoid 
viral infections in seed potatoes and t o have a reliable tracing system. Bilateral communications and 
meetings at the technical level have been conducted with a number of EU member States and there 
is a mutual understanding of issues among  both sides and, in particular, on the need for Egypt to  
have a traceability system and the technical assistance need ed in this respect. Field inspections have 
been postponed since the entry into force of the mechanism.  Finally, I would like to stress that Egypt 
stands ready to reply to any additional questions  and to continue bilateral exchanges as necessary.  
6.6.  The Committee took note  of the statements made.  
7  INDIA: IMPORT LICENSING MEASURES ON PCS, TABLETS, AND OTHER ELECTRONIC 
PRODUCTS – STATEMENTS BY CHINA AND JAPAN  
7.1.  The representative of China  indicated the fol lowing:  
7.2.  We refer to the statement made at the Committee on Market Access on 16 October 2023. On 
3 August 2023, India abruptly announced that a licensing requirement for importing laptops, tablets, 
and personal computers would be imposed immediately. One da y after the initial announcement, 
India decided to delay the implementation of the licensing requirement until 1 November 2023. We 
take note that on 19 October 2023, some changes and exemptions were made to the import licensing 
requirement in Notification No. 38/2023, issued by the Directorate General of Foreign Trade (DGFT), 
Department of Commerce, Ministry of Commerce & Industry of India. On the same day, DGFT issued 
Policy Circular No. 06/2023 -24 providing clarifications on the implementation of Import M anagement 
Systems for IT hardware. According to the said Policy Circular, it seems that importers need to apply 
for import authorizations in order to import relevant products. We would like to encourage India to 
provide more information on the import autho rizations, including the purpose of the import 
authorizations and the process of applying for and granting the authorizations.  
7.3.  The representative of Japan  indicated the following:  
7.4.  On 3 August 2023, India announced that the import of Laptops, Tablets, All -in-one Personal 
Computers, and Ultra Small Form Factor Computers and Services shall be "restricted " and be subject 
to a new import licensing requirement set out in  DGFT Notification  No. 23/2023. Meanwhile, in 
September, Indian officials announced the introduc tion of  an import management system, instead 
of import licensing, in order to monitor the import situation from 1 November. We are concerned by 
this highly ambiguous and unpredic table situation because the details of the system and procedures 
seem not to have been publicized domestically nor notified to the Import Licensing Committee. The 
latest Notification No. 38/2023 does not address this concern.   
7.5.  First, we would like to receive clarification  that the requirement of a valid licence for Restricted 
Imports , provided in Notification No. 23/2023 , will no longer  be applied , rather than merely 
suspended. We would  also like to  receive  clarification  that the import management system on ly 
requires the submi ssion of  relevant information and does not require any authorization or approval. 
We are concern ed that Policy Circular No. 06/2023 -24, titled "Implementation of Import 
Management Systems for IT Hardware ", which was issued on 19 Octobe r 2023, seems to provide 
that the import of those IT hardware is still "restricted " and subject to an import authorization, which 
may substantially mean an import licensing requirement. We request India to provide us with a 
precise explanation about the system and procedures to be applied to those items.  In addition, we 
request India to explain what information and data will be required and for what purpose. We  have 
learnt that the import management system requires operators to register for the portal and  to 
provide relevant information such as country or region  of origin , import quantity and sales price in 
India. We invite India to inform  us about the  precise requirements.  Finally, Japan requests India to G/LIC/M/57  
 
- 11 - 
 
  provide relevant information and appropriate trans ition period s before introducing any new measure. 
Japan further demands that India refrain from introducing any measure s, regardless of  name and 
means, that substantially impose import licensing requirement which are inconsistent with 
Article  XI:1 of the G ATT 1994 and Article 3.2 of the Import Licensing Agreement.   
7.6.  The representative of the United States  indicated the following:  
7.7.  We thank India for the preliminary responses that it provided in agenda item 2 and look forward 
to written responses to our questi ons. India 's new import licensing requirements for computers, 
tablets, and servers will have a significant impact on trade in these products, including for US exports 
to India, once implemented. We are concerned about the lack of notice or opportunity for public 
comments as well as information about the requirements and how the new import licensing system 
would operate, which creates uncertainty for exporters and downstream users. The surprise 
announcement of these import licensing requirements, without not ice or opportunity for public 
comment creates uncertainty about doing business in India, making it harder for India to generate 
the type of manufacturing jobs it is intending to create. We would welcome the news about a further 
implementation delay beyond 1 November 2023, but request that India rescind the requirements, 
in light of their potential impact on trade and WTO requirements.  
7.8.  The representative of Chinese Taipei  indicated the following:  
7.9.  We would like to share the concerns raised by previous Members  regarding India 's import 
restriction s on PCs, tablets, and other electric products. We urge India to strictly follow WTO rules 
when enacting any new regulations, including  not creating any trade -restrictive or distorting effects, 
and adhere to the transpa rency requirements. We reiterate that it is  importan t that India provides 
sufficient opportunities and an appropriate  time period for traders and other interest ed parties to 
comment on the proposed regulations, and a reasonable time period to adapt to new requirements.  
7.10.  The representative of the Republic of Korea  indicated the following:  
7.11.  Korea shares the concerns expressed by others, and we are closely monitoring th e 
development of India 's plan to impose a new measure. In this context, Korea requests that India 
provide additional information regarding its proposed scheme,  hoping that India refrains from 
introducing trade -restricted measures.  
7.12.  The representative of India indicated the following:  
7.13.  We thank the delegations of China , Japan , the United States, Chinese Taipei and Korea for 
their interest in the proposed measures for PCs, tablets, and other electronic products. We  refer to 
the statement made under agenda item 2 on this issue.  The points raised by the delegations today 
are being examined and we will respond to them in due course. We also remain open for bilateral 
discussions on this issue. We may provide a more detailed statement later.  
7.14.  The Committee took note  of the statements made.   
8  INDIA: IMPORT ON VISCOSE STAPLE FIBER (VSF) – STATEMENT BY INDONESIA  
8.1.  The representative of Indonesia  indicated the following:  
8.2.  Indonesia wishes to express its dissatisfaction with India 's implementation of the Viscose Staple 
Fibers Order  of 2022.  India's regulation on VSF products creates uncertainty in the trade process 
and also leads to a decline in Indonesian VSF product exports entering the Indian market. Since the 
implementation of t he VSF regulation, Indonesian companies have been unable to export to India 
because certification has not yet been completed. This situation not only generates a reduction  in 
bilateral trade between Indonesia and India but also compromises Indonesian indus try's rights and 
company interests.  Indonesia further expresse s concern about the different treatment of Indonesian 
companies in terms of factory inspection schedule. According to information received by Indonesian 
companies, India has performed factory in spections for companies residing outside of India. 
Indonesia hopes that India will be able to provide non -discriminatory treatment to all companies 
that are certified.  Furthermore, in terms of market access, Indonesia is interested in seeking 
clarification  and transparency from India on the import regulations for VSF products, including G/LIC/M/57  
 
- 12 - 
 
  requirements for obtaining import approval, import recommendations, and other items, so that 
Indonesian companies can be assured of entering the Indian market.  Indonesia bel ieves that India 's 
position toward VSF products from Indonesia has impeded exports and has the potential to breach 
Article 3.2 of the Import Licensing Agreement and Article XI:1 GATT 1994.  Lastly, Indonesia urges 
the Indian Government to reconsider its pol icy of limiting VSF imports in a timely manner , in order 
to ensure compliance with India 's commitment to the WTO Import Licensing Agreement, as well as 
the WTO principles of MFN, non -discrimination, and the elimination of unnecessary trade barriers.  
8.3.  The re presentative of India indicated the following:  
8.4.  India would like to thank the delegation of Indonesia for their interest in this issue. This issue 
is related to quality control procedures and is already being discussed in the TBT Committee. As 
such, we woul d request the delegation of Indonesia to refer to the responses provided in the TBT 
Committee.  
8.5.  The Committee took note  of the statements made .  
9  INDIA: IMPORTATION OF PNEUMATIC TYRES – STATEMENTS BY INDONESIA, 
THE SEPARATE CUSTOMS TERRITORY OF TAIWAN, PENGHU, KINMEN AND MATSU AND 
THAILAND  
9.1.  The representative of Indonesia  indicated the following:  
9.2.  Indonesia reiterated its objections to India, claiming that India has not provided a sufficient 
solution to the issue of limiting tyre imports. Indonesian tyre shipments to India continue to be 
prevented from entering the Indian market. Indonesia is mindfu l that the Indian Government has 
amended its tyre import policy from "free" to "restricted. " Furthermore, we find that India 's current 
import policy has become increasingly stringent, with every container containing imported tyres sent 
to India being sampl ed for customs purposes in order to comply with provisions related to warehouse 
registration where imported tyre products will be saved. Indonesia is aware that, as part of the 
aforementioned t yre import restriction policy, India has compelled importers to  provide separate 
statements by electronic mail detailing import restrictions for specific types and size categories of 
tyres that can be produced domestically in India. Indonesia believes that limiting tyre imports based 
on specific types and sizes is a s ort of quantitative restriction that is inconsistent with the GATT and 
the Import Licensing Agreement. Indonesia also believes that the restriction on tyre imports is 
discriminatory because it is applied selectively, namely only to a number of WTO Members who have 
the potential to become a threat to domestic Indian tyre manufacturers . This is potential ly contrary 
to one of the WTO 's main principles, namely the principle of non -discrimination. Moreover, Indonesia 
is of the view that the policy of restricting  Indian t yre imports has impeded market access for 
Indonesian t yre manufacturers in India. Indonesia urges the Indian Government to reconsider its 
policy on limiting t yre imports promptly in order to ensure compliance with India 's commitment to 
the WTO Imp ort Licensing Agreement, as well as the WTO principles of transparency and 
non-discrimination.  
9.3.  The representative of Thailand  indicated the following:  
9.4.  Thailand reiterates its serious concern regarding India 's restrictive import policy on tyres. We 
have voi ced this concern on multiple occasions in various WTO bodies. However, regrettably, we 
have yet to witness any substantial progress in addressing these issues. First and foremost, we 
would like to highlight a substantial discrepancy in the information prov ided by India concerning the 
import of tyres from Thailand. The official data from Thailand shows a notable decrease in the 
number of tyres exported to India in 2022, amounting to 400 ,000 tyres, a significant 48.59% 
decrease from the 720 ,000 tyres exported in 2021. In stark contrast, the information shared by 
India suggests an import volume of 870 ,000 tyres in 2022, a remarkable increase from 
450,000 tyres in 2021. Thailand firmly believes that the figures provided by India do not accurately 
reflect  reality, and we urge India to promptly rectify this disparity by providing precise and 
transparent data.  Furthermore, we are deeply concerned about the decline in Thailand 's exports of 
tyres to India during the first 8 months of 2023. This decline of 32% compared to the same period 
in the previous year raises significant concerns regarding the continued adverse impacts of India 's 
import policy on our exports.  Additionally, we are deeply worried that India may have implemented G/LIC/M/57  
 
- 13 - 
 
  import quotas on tyres, which,  coupled with the lack of transparency in its import policy, could distort 
trade to the detriment of international suppliers.  
9.5.  To address these concerns, Thailand urgently requests India to provide information regarding 
the following  elements : (1) the admin istration of the restrictions, including the time frame or period 
for processing applications related to tyre imports ; (2) the import licen ces granted to Thailand over 
the recent period, as well as details regarding the number and volume of these licen ces; (3) the 
distribution of such licen ces among supplying countries, specifically with regard to the tyre industry.  
Thailand firmly believes that transparency and accurate data are fundamental to resolving this issue 
and ensuring a fair and mutually beneficia l trading relationship between our two countries. We call 
upon India to provide the requested information without delay, thereby taking a step toward 
resolving these concerns and fostering a spirit of cooperation and openness within the WTO.  
9.6.  The representa tive of Chinese Taipei  indicated the following:  
9.7.  My delegation would like to draw India 's attention to its Notification No.  12/2015 -2020, which 
amended India 's import policy concerning new pneumatic tyres from 'Free' to 'Restricted '. We are 
disappointed that Members ' concerns have not been appropriately addressed. The import licence 
application process for tyres is lengthy, the rules fail to provide complete information and traders 
are not informed of the reasons for their licence application s being refused. According to statistics 
from the Ministry of Commerce and Industry of India, the quantity of our tyre exports to India from 
2020 to 2022 sharply decreased by 50% compared to the exports in 2019. At the same time, 
according to the Indian Au tomotive Tyre Manufacturers Association (ATMA), India 's tyre exports in 
2022 went up by 70%. These figures demonstrate that India 's tyres have benefited from the 
unrestricted markets in other Members, whereas tyre producers in other WTO Members had to face  
increased trade barriers to enter the Indian market. Article 3.2 of the Import Licensing Agreement 
stipulates that "non-automatic import licensing shall not have trade restrictive or distortive effects 
on imports additional to those caused by the impositi on of the restriction ". However, in this case, 
the trade restrictive effect of India 's tyre licensing policy is evident. We request India to address the 
problematic measures that result in quantitative restrictions and to ensure that its licensing regime 
is administered in a manner consistent with WTO rules.  
9.8.  The representative of Japan  indicated the following:  
9.9.  Japan expresses its ongoing concern about the continued occurrence of cases in which the 
quantity approved by India 's authority is limited to less th an the quantity applied for by Japanese 
companies, without any reasons provided. Having received no response from India, Japan would like 
to ask India once again to provide detailed explanations on: (i) what have been the reasons for 
limiting the approved quantity; and (ii) what are the rationale and criteria to decide whether India 
will grant an import licen ce or limit the approved quantity, and in which laws and regulations are 
such rationale and criteria provided. As India mentioned  at the last meeting o f this Committee that 
our questions would be conveyed to their capital, we request India to provide us with the results of 
the relevant communications with their capital. India also explained that this measure is 
implemented in accordance with the Import L icensing Agreement, including the timeframe of 
granting the licen ces. We request that India elaborate more specifically  on how WTO  consistency is 
ensured in its measure and implementation.  
9.10.  The representative of the European Union  indicated the following:  
9.11.  The European Union  would like to reiterate its concerns regarding India 's restrictive measure 
on import of pneumatic t yres. In order to save time, I would like to refer to our previous intervention s 
in this Committee  and in the TBT Committee.  
9.12.  The representa tive of the United States  indicated the following:  
9.13.  The United States supports Members ' concerns about  India's lack of transparency and 
timeliness regarding the import procedures for t yres. We also request that India review and respond 
to all pending applications in a timely manner.  G/LIC/M/57  
 
- 14 - 
 
  9.14.  The representative of India indicated the following:  
9.15.  India would like to thank various Members for their continued interest in this issue. We refer 
to our s tatement made in the previous Committee on Import Licensing where we provided specific 
information about this agenda item. We would also like to refer to our response provided in the 
previous meetings of the Council for Trade in Goods, Committee on Market Access and Committee 
on Import Licensing. My delegation would like to reiterate that the non -automatic licensing 
requirements for tyres are administered in a manner consistent with the rules of the WTO Agreement 
on Import Licensing Procedures, including wi th respect to the timeframes for the grant ing of import 
licences. We are engaging bilaterally with the concerned Members including providing information 
and data on the applications received and licen ces granted.  
9.16.  The Committee took note  of the statements m ade.  
10  INDONESIA: IMPORT LICENSING REGIME FOR CERTAIN TEXTILES PRODUCTS – 
STATEMENTS BY THE EUROPEAN UNION AND JAPAN  
10.1.  The representative of the European Union  indicated the following:  
10.2.  The European Union recalls the concerns it has raised in previous meetings  with regard to 
overlapping import licensing requirements for textiles, which create uncertainty and lack of 
predictability for exporters, with negative impacts on business operations and on trade flows. The 
European Union would therefore like to ask Indon esia to clarify the current import regime for finished 
textiles. The European Union would also be grateful for further details on the possible application of 
the commodity balance system to textile products.  
10.3.  The representative of Japan  indicated the follow ing: 
10.4.  Japan would like to reiterate its concern on this matter. Indonesia substantially prohibited 
importation of certain textile products for retail sales by strengthening the import registration and 
approval system provided in the Minister of  Trade Order No. 77 of 2019. Since then, the world 's 
export s of textile products to Indonesia dropped sharply. Exports of carpet products classified under 
HS57 were hit particularly hard.  While the new Minister of Trade Order No. 20 of 2021 has seemingly 
replaced the previous Ministerial Order, it has not altered the system in terms of substance and has 
not changed the system 's trade -restrictive effects.  Moreover, Indonesia implemented safeguard 
measures against the importation of carpet products classifie d under HS57 in February 2021. In 
their investigation, the Indonesian authorities determined the increase of imports arbitrarily  by 
setting the period of investigation from 2017 to 2019, immediately prior to the sharp reduction 
resulting from the import re gistration and approval system.  Japan therefore considers that these 
measures do not fulfil the requirements for safeguard measures, especially the one stating that 
safeguards should be applied only to the extent necessary. In addition, we understand that textile 
products are also subject to the commodity balancing  mechanism which we will raise under  the next 
agenda item. Having received no clear reply, we want to clarify if carpets and other textile floor 
coverings  classified under HS57  have become subject  to the commodity balancing mechanism 
despite the application of the safeguard measures. In any case, Japan urges Indonesia to abandon 
both the commodity balancing mechanism and  the safeguard measures on carpet products as soon 
as possible because they are  duplicate and unnecessar ily to appl ied on top of the import registration 
and approval system.  
10.5.  The representative of Indonesia  indicated the following:  
10.6.  Indonesia thanks Members for their continuous interest in Indonesia 's textile import policy. 
The application for import approval is currently done electronically, and once the required documents 
are complete and correct, import approval is carried out immediately in accordance with the 
provisions of  the Import Licensing Ag reement.  Regarding the c oncern s raised  about the 
implementation of  the commodity balance  mechanism , Indonesia believes that the aforementioned 
policy will result in accelerated import licensing procedures. This is partly due to the commodity 
balance 's priority of simplification and transparency principles.  Regarding  the implementation of 
safeguard measures on carpet products, we believe th is issue should be addressed in another 
Committee.  G/LIC/M/57  
 
- 15 - 
 
  10.7.  The Committee took note  of the statements made . 
11  INDONESIA: COMMOD ITY BALANCING MECHANISM – STATEMENTS BY THE 
EUROPEAN  UNION AND JAPAN  
11.1.  The representative of the European Union  indicated the following:  
11.2.  The European Union  reiterates its concerns on Indonesia 's commodity balance system.  While 
welcoming efforts to ensure a c oordinated and streamlined approach on the management of import 
and export licen ces, the European Union  stresses that the commodity balance mechanism might 
result in further restrictions to trade flows – in turn raising questions as to the compliance of th is 
initiative with Indonesia 's WTO obligations, as it might amount to an import/export restriction.  The 
lack of clarity on the actual implementation of the commodity balance, including its scope and 
timelines for the application to different groups of prod ucts, presents additional challenges for 
economic operators in terms of legal certainty and predictability.  Accordingly, the European Union  
would like to reiterate its request to Indonesia for clarifications as to the practical functioning of the 
commodity  balance mechanism and its scheduled implementation  and concerned products.  
11.3.  The representative of Japan  indicated the following:  
11.4.  Under the commodity balancing mechanism an SPI (Import Permit) is required before the 
import of subject products, and the export and import permits are issued through the "National 
Commodity Balance System (SNAS -NK)", based on the supply -demand balance of the subject 
products determined  in advance by the Government. The previous system of import application and 
approval ceased to operate in December 2022. However, in January 2023 some delays and glitches 
in the operation of the National Commodity Balance System were found, which have cau sed serious 
confusions such as delays in the issuance of import permits. For many of the products covered, such 
as air conditioners and textiles, some import obstacles remain , for example, the dates and amounts 
of approvals have been unpredictable, or only  a small portion of the quantity applied for could be 
approved.  
11.5.  We have heard that steel products are temporarily not subject to the commodity balancing 
mechanism and we would like the exclusion from the list to be clarified in the laws and regulations. 
Application s for the API -U licen ce (for general business owners) have not been accepted since 
December last year, and other serious incidents  have occurred. Although the relevant ordinance was 
promulgated in September, we have heard that the related laws an d regulations need to be modified. 
We would like to request that the laws and regulations be improved as soon as possible and that the 
situation be remedied. In addition, problems such as the fact that  only a small fraction of the quantity 
is approved , persist with respect to the import licen ces for manufacturers.  
11.6.  At the July meeting  of the Council for Trade in Goods , Indonesia stated that this system "does 
not intend to impede imports by the WTO Members and is a necessary step for the development of 
the do mestic economic and business environment ". However, regardless of Indonesia 's intention, 
the commodity balancing mechanism has trade restrictive effects on imports and is therefore likely 
to violate Article XI:1 of the GATT and other provisions. In additio n, the specific formula for 
calculating the commodity balance and the specific method for determining the approved import 
volume are not specified in the law, which is inconsistent with the obligation to publish trade rules 
as stipulated in Article X of the GATT. We are also concerned that this system could violate the 
Import Licensing Agreement, given that actual operations have caused significant obstacles to import 
licensing. We demand that the situation be remedied as soon as possible.  
11.7.  The representativ e of the United Kingdom  indicated the following:  
11.8.  The United Kingdom  shares concerns expressed by others on Indonesia 's commodity balance 
mechanism.  The lack of transparency regarding the scope and substance of the regulation creates 
an environment of economic uncertainty for UK traders, which compounds the impact of existing  
procedural delays in entering the Indonesian market. In particular, the United Kingdom  is concerned 
about the expansion of the policy to include further products.  G/LIC/M/57  
 
- 16 - 
 
  11.9.  The representative of the United States  indicated the following:  
11.10.   The United States remains deeply concerned with Indonesia 's commodity balance policies, 
as stated earlier, under agenda item 2 and in previous meetings of this Committee.  We hope that 
Indonesia  is able to share additional details providing a clear explanation of how products are added 
to this commodity balance policy, the reason for delays experienced by certain agricultural importers 
in receiving licen ces, and when Indonesia intends to notify t his measure to the WTO. While Indonesia 
has previously explained that this policy was designed to build better trade governance and 
transparency in furtherance of its goal of import substitution, we strongly urge Indonesia to not 
expand its policy to other  products, and to rethink this trade -disruptive policy. We hope to work with 
Indonesia to ensure that this policy does not create an unnecessary barrier to trade.  
11.11.   The representative of the Republic of Korea  indicated the following:  
11.12.   Korea shares the concern s expressed by others regarding Indonesia 's commodity balancing 
mechanism. It has been reported that our businesses still encounter challenges such as undue delays 
in the issuance of the recommendations and limited quantity of import quotas, stemming from the 
implementation of the commodity balancing mechanism. In particular, Korea believes that 
Indonesia 's measures , based on its own projections of domestic supply and demand, serve as import 
restrictions and significantly contribute to trade distortions. Th is appears to be inconsistent with 
Article  XI:1 of the GATT 1994. Accordingly, Korea requests that Indonesia improve the functioning 
of the mechanism, particularly by providing clarifications on the timeline for import recommendation 
issuance and the appro val of import quotas, to ensure that the system does not act as a means to 
restrict import quantities.  
11.13.   The representative of Indonesia  indicated the following:  
11.14.   Indonesia seeks to address Members ' concern regarding  the c ommodity balance. The 
commodity balance strives to establish and enable a better business environment, business 
certainty, and the free flow of goods. The c ommodity balance is a policy evaluation instrument that 
the Government uses to provide transparency through reliable statistics. It will be carried out by the 
relevant ministries/institutions. As a result, it is not an additional burden for Indonesia 's import 
regime. Indonesia believes that the aforementioned policy will result in simpler import licensing 
procedures in Indonesia. This is mo stly related to the priority of simplification and transparency 
principles under  the commodity balance.  The c ommodity balance will provide relevant ministries 
with complete, detailed, transparent, and accurate data. Its objective for business is to enhance 
certainty in doing business, transparency, and forecasting for business growth.  
11.15.   The Committee took note  of the statements made . 
12  INDONESIA: IMPORT RESTRICTION: COMPULSORY REGISTRATION BY IMPORTERS OF 
STEEL PRODUCTS – STATEMENT BY JAPAN  
12.1.  The represent ative of Japan  indicated the following:  
12.2.  We have heard that steel products are temporarily not subject to the commodity balancing 
mechanism and would like the exclusion from the list to be clarified in the laws and regulations as 
soon as possible. Besides, Japan remains concerned by Indonesia 's import licensing measure on 
steel products based on Indonesia 's Minister of Trade Order No. 20 of 2021. We continuously find 
cases where the Indonesian authorities issue a substantially smaller amount of import licen ces for 
steel products than the amount of licen ces applied for by importers regardless of the types of licen ces 
concerned. This is inconsistent with Article 3.2 of the Import Licensing Agreement and Article XI:1 
of the GATT.  
12.3.  In the last Import Licensing Com mittee meeting, Indonesia explained that this measure just 
checks submitted documents and thus does not constitute trade restriction. However, Japan 's 
exports based on the API -U have been substantially suspended since December 2022, which clearly 
constitut e a trade restriction. We still cannot understand why Indonesia needs to reduce the amount 
of licen ces in order to ensure public health and safety. We would like to ask Indonesia to explain 
how such technical standards can serve as the rationale for a redu ction in the amount of import G/LIC/M/57  
 
- 17 - 
 
  licences, as opposed to the elimination of harmful products. At the same time, we expect Indonesia 
to provide details on where and how this rationale is stipulated in the regulations.  
12.4.  The representative of the United States  indicated the following:  
12.5.  We share Japan 's concerns about Indonesia 's import licensing requirements for steel products, 
including registration and pre -shipment inspection requirements that have the potential to restrict 
trade in this important area. We encourage Indonesia to  ensure that it issues import licen ces 
automatically, without delays, and without limiting the quantities applied for by importers.  
12.6.  The representative of the European Union  indicated the foll owing:  
12.7.  The European Union shares the concerns expressed by Japan on the Indonesian requirements 
for import licen ces for steel products, which appear to have restrictive and distortive impacts on 
trade in steel products.  Accordingly, the European Union  urges Indonesia to re -evaluate the measure 
at stake and bring it in conformity with WTO rules – namely by issuing licen ces for steel products 
automatically, without delays, and without limiting the quantities applied for by the importers.  
12.8.  The representative of  Indonesia  indicated the following:  
12.9.  Indonesia expresses gratitude for Members ' interest in the regulation on steel import  licensing 
enacted in Indonesia. As indicated at the previous meeting  of the Committee , the primary objective 
of the rule is to ensure that all steel product s accessing the Indonesian market meet the standards, 
specifications, and qualifications linked to health and safety elements for the use of imported steel 
products.  We also believe that this policy is carried out in compliance with t he WTO principles of 
transparency and non -discrimination, is consistent with the Import Licensing Agreement, and is not 
designed to restrict imports. Regarding the implementation of the commodity balance, Indonesia 
believes that the aforementioned policy w ill result in accelerated import licensing procedures. This 
is partly due to the commodity balance 's priority of simplification and transparency principles.  
12.10.   Addressing the concern  of the United States , Indonesia would like to emphasize that the 
import verification (VPTI) measure solely entails document check s to verify the conformity  of 
imported goods with import documentation from the Members of origin. Indonesia underline s that 
import verification does not impede trade and is intended to ensur e health and safety while also 
protecting the environment.  
12.11.   The Committee took note  of the statements made . 
13  INDONESIA: IMPORT RESTRICTION ON AIR CONDITIONERS – STATEMENT BY JAPAN  
13.1.  The representative o f Japan  indicated the following:  
13.2.  Japan remains concerned by Indonesia 's import restriction on air conditioners based on the 
Minister of Trade Order No. 20 of 2021 and the Minister of Trade Order No. 25 of 2022, which set 
out the commodity balancing mechani sm. Japan recognizes that the imports of air conditioners 
continue to be hampered by the instability and unpredictability of the volume and timing of 
approvals, and the decreasing trend of approved volume compared to the applications. We are 
concerned that  these measures constitute an import restriction having trade restrictive effects and 
thus are inconsistent with Article 3.2 of the Import Licensing Agreement, Article XI:1 of the GATT, 
and Article 2.1 of the TRIMs. Japan submitted a written questionnaire through the TRIMs Committee 
in September 2021 but regrettably has not received any response yet. We expect to receive 
Indonesia 's written answers as soon as possible. At the May 2023 meeting of the Import Licensing 
Committee , Indonesia explained that impor t licensing applications are made electronically and 
import permits are issued in a relatively short -term, if all the necessary documents are submitted 
appropriately. However, we see a clearly different reality. As we have explained, there are significant 
delays and obstacles in import licensing procedures and this has not been improv ing. We call for the 
situation to be remedied as soon as possible.  G/LIC/M/57  
 
- 18 - 
 
  13.3.  The representative of the Republic of Korea  indicated the following:  
13.4.  Korea shares the concerns expressed by J apan regarding Indonesia 's import restriction on air 
conditioners. It has been reported that our businesses still face challenges in fully participating in 
the Indonesian market, mostly due to the limitation of approved quantit ies stemming from 
Indonesia 's measure, even though requested quantities are aligned with market demand. In 
particular, our businesses are concerned about the fact that a pproved quantit ies fall short of their 
initial request s without clear explanations, as well as undue delays in approval procedures. From 
Korea 's perspective, this measure appears to be inconsistent with WTO rules, notably Article XI:1 of 
the GATT 1994. Korea requests that Indonesia provide s further clarificati ons and resolve s this issue 
in a timely fashion so as not to hamper our bilateral trade.  
13.5.  The representative of Indonesia  indicated the following:  
13.6.  We would like to reiterate the clarification we provided at the previous meeting  of this 
Committee  that the re gulation Japan refers to  aims to improve the licensing system as well as to 
ensure the administration of surveillance of products importation. The application for import approval 
is currently done electronically, and once the paperwork is complete and prop er, the import approval 
is carried out promptly in accordance with the provisions of  the Import Licensing Agreement. As a 
result, Indonesia feels that there are no restrictions on the import of air conditioner s. 
13.7.  The Committee took note  of the statements ma de. 
14  THAILAND: IMPORTATION OF WHEAT FEED – STATEMENT BY THE EUROPEAN UNION  
14.1.  The representative of the European Union  indicated the following:  
14.2.  The European Union  reiterates its long -standing concerns on the import procedures for feed 
wheat, including the local corn purchase requirement. This measure raises questions on WTO 
compatibility, as well as with regard to transparency in the decision making – as we express ed in 
detail in previous meetings of this and other committees, to which we refer. The import procedures 
were presented as being of "temporary nature ". However, over six years after its introduction, the 
scheme remains in place – despite repeated mentions by Thailand of an ongoing review, and the 
increase in average domestic corn prices over the last years. The European Union  welcomes the 
announcement by the new Thai Prime Minister that his Government will not pursue any agriculture 
price intervention measu res, as they are market distortive. Accordingly, the  European Union 
requests Thailand to provide information on the timeline for the discontinuation of the corn deficiency 
payment scheme, and, in the same vein, to discontinue the distortive feed wheat impo rt licen ce 
regime in place since 2017. Furthermore, we continue to urge Thailand to address the concerns we 
have repeatedly expressed, including with regard to the notification of the import licen ce 
requirements.  
14.3.  The representative of Thailand  indicated th e following:  
14.4.  Thailand thanks the European Union for its continued interest and inquiries regarding 
Thailand 's import policy for wheat. We greatly appreciate the European Union 's engagement on this 
matter. We wish to confirm that Thailand has taken good not e of the concerns raised by the European 
Union today, as well as those previously discussed at the meetings of this Committee and the 
Committee on Market Access. These concerns have been duly conveyed to our capital for careful 
consideration. Thailand wish es to reaffirm its steadfast commitment to our obligations under the 
WTO. We would like to refer to previous statements we made at recent meetings of  this Committee  
and the Committee on Market Access. We wish to reiterate that the review of the wheat impor t 
measure is an ongoing process, and consultations with relevant stakeholders on this important crop 
are currently in progress.  
14.5.  The Committee took note  of the statements made . G/LIC/M/57  
 
- 19 - 
 
  15  IMPROVING THE FUNCTIONING OF THE COMMITTEE ON IMPORT LICENSING 
(JOB/LIC/5 ) 
15.1.  The Chairperson  recall ed that  at formal and informal meetings held in 2023, delegations were 
invited to  share their views on how to advance work in the Committee on the Council for Trade in 
Goods (CTG)  discussions on the improvement of the functioning of its subsidiary bodies. Several 
delegations intervened  and made suggestions at these meetings. To facilitate subsequent 
discussions in the Committee,  delegations were also requested to send their ideas a nd suggestions 
for improving the current functioning of the Committee in writing by 28 April 2023.  All suggestions 
made by delegations orally and in writing were compiled in a list which  was circulated as JOB/LIC/2 
of 15 May 2023. The Chairperson had further co mpiled a table , which attempted to reflect the state 
of play of Members ' submissions  and discussions held during the meetings on 14 March and 
23 May 2023, and which was  circulated as document JOB/LIC/4 of 31 August 2023.  The Committee 
had been requested to report to the CTG to update it on the discussions on the measures to improve 
the functioning of the  Committee. This report ha d to be submitted to the CTG for consideration at 
its meeting in November  2023. For this purpose, a draft report  on improvements in the functioning  
of the Committee had been  circulated in document JOB/LIC/5  for the Committee 's consideration  at 
this meeting.  
15.2.  The representative of the European Union  indicated the following:  
15.3.  The European Union would like to reiterate that the Import Licensing Notification Portal and 
the eAgenda make the work of the Committee more convenient. These improvements should 
encourage Members to reply to points raised in this body and reduce pressure on the Committee on 
Market Access and the Counci l for Trade in Goods, where the same items are often repeated. We 
welcome the Import Licensing Information Session for delegates,  which will be held later today in a 
hybrid format.  This is something we were looking for and I am sure our capital -based colle agues will 
be able to connect and to learn from it. Overall, we support the report on improvements in the 
functioning of the Committee on Import Licensing as prepared by the Secretariat.  
15.4.  The representative of the United States  indicated the following:  
15.5.  We w ould like to thank the Secretariat and the Chairperson for the compilation of the table 
and the report as well as the Members who expressed interest in improving the functioning of this 
Committee. We support many of the improvements already made by the Com mittee and suggestions 
for future improvements including better use of digital tools and integration of eAgenda, an 
annotated agenda with dedicated links to documents, timing the Committee to coincide with adjacent 
meetings, and providing documentation and  assistance to capital and Geneva -based delegates. We 
believe that these are all important factors to consider in allowing Members to fully participate in 
our committee work. We note that the Airgram and minutes of the Committee meetings in 
October  2022 and May 2023 have not been linked to the previous meeting section on the eAgenda. 
It would be useful to have them all in one place under previous meetings. We also wonder if Members 
would be interested in simplifying the tracking of outstanding questi ons or issues raised. We 
understand that some committees keep items on the agenda for the next meeting automatically, 
unless Members who ask questions or raise concerns state during the meeting that the issue was 
resolved or ask for them to be dropped. For  example, previous questions from the United States to 
Argentina, Indonesia and the Philippines from May  2023 would remain on the agenda for October 
until Members respond to our questions, and we state that we do not have any additional questions. 
For Spec ific Trade Concerns (STCs), we would keep STCs from Members who place them on the 
agenda but allow other Members to join specific STCs, while the new eAgenda is open, thereby 
facilitating earlier discussion and consultation between Members. We wonder if Me mbers would be 
interested in trying this procedure for this Committee. We welcome continued discussion of these 
improvements and hope to engage with Members on how to implement all these suggestions.  
15.6.  The representative of the United Kingdom  indicated the f ollowing:  
15.7.  The United Kingdom would like to express its appreciation to the Secretariat for preparing the 
JOB/LIC/5  document. The United Kingdom supports efforts by the Committee to improve its 
functioning through initiatives such as the introduction of the eAgenda for meetings to improve 
transparency and inclusiveness for Geneva and capital -based colleagues. We look forward to the 
report to the Council for Trade in Goods expressing views from Members.  G/LIC/M/57  
 
- 20 - 
 
  15.8.  The representative of the European Union  indicated the follo wing:  
15.9.  The United States made a suggestion, which I would like to react to, noting that I would also 
need to revert back to capital. A priori, the European Union does not want to keep points on the 
agenda on an automatic basis. I think that it should be for  Members to put an item on the agenda 
or to withdraw it. Members should be able to check if they have an update on a Specific Trade 
Concern (STC) or if they have received replies to the questions. Moreover, we would not want to 
keep points automatically on  the agenda, if they are not getting anywhere. We could pursue this 
discussion further, however, this is our preliminary reaction.  
15.10.   The Committee adopted  the report on improvements in the functioning of the Committee 
(JOB/LIC/5 ). 
16  DRAFT REPORT (2023) OF THE COM MITTEE TO THE COUNCIL FOR TRADE IN GOODS 
(G/LIC/W/60 ) 
16.1.  The Chairperson recalled that the Committee was required to submit an annual report about 
its activities to the Council for Trade in Goods under Article 7.4 of the Agreement. A draft report 
covering the ac tivities of the Committee in 2023 had been circulated in document G/LIC/W/60  for 
the Committee 's consideration. Since issuing this draft report, the Committee had received a new 
notification from Argentina, circulated as document G/LIC/N/3/ARG/19 , which needed to be included 
in the report. The report, including its annexes, would therefore be updated to reflect this 
notification.  
16.2.  The Committee adopted  the report ( G/LIC/W/60 ). 
17  IMPROVING TRANSPARENCY IN NOTIFICATION  PROCEDURES OF THE AGREEMENT – 
LAUNCH OF THE IMPORT LICENSING NOTIFICATION PORTAL  
17.1.  The Chairperson recalled that improving transparency was an important focus of the 
Committee 's work. Since the last formal meeting on 23 May 2023, the Committee had held one 
informal meeting on 29 September 2023, to advance work on transparency issues. The Chairperson 
had circulated to all delegations a summary of key issues discussed at that informal meeting of the 
Committee on 29 September 2023 ( ICN/LIC/3/Add.1 ).  
17.2.  The Chairperson  reported on the progress made by the Committee and the Secretariat in 
developing and testing the new Import Licensing Notification Portal, which was ready to be launched 
by the Committee. He recalled that, at the informal meeting held on 14 Ma rch 2023, the Secretariat 
had introduced a new IT tool for Members ' consideration as a possible Import Licensing Notification 
Portal. The new online portal had been developed with the aim to facilitate Members ' drafting and 
submission of N2 and N3 notifica tions and building of the Import Licensing database. There was 
broad consensus among Members that the Secretariat should have gone ahead and completed work 
on this online portal with a view to its approval and launch by the Committee by the end of 2023. 
He informed the Committee that work ha d advanced quickly on the side of the Secretariat and the 
new Import Licensing Notification Portal was ready to be launched by the Committee. The Secretariat 
had worked together with the IT Division to make the fully fun ctioning version of the notification 
portal and database  available  to delegations shortly after this meeting. Concurrently, the Secretariat 
would continue to work behind the scenes to upload Members ' notifications which were still 
submitted by email, onto the portal. He asked Members to be patient if they found that their most 
recent notifications had not yet been fully uploaded onto the portal. He also recalled that the 
Secretariat ha d prepared guidelines on the portal, which had been circulated to delegations as 
document JOB/LIC/3  of 12 June 2023 and a training video on the use of the Portal. The Secretariat 
remained available to assist delegations with registration and training on the port al. A presentation 
on the portal would be included as part of the training session for new delegates, which would take 
place in the afternoon at 3.30  pm after the present meeting of the Committee.  
17.3.  A representative of the Secretariat  gave a short presentati on on the Import Licensing 
Notification Portal, highlighting its main features, and informed Members of the ongoing work the 
Secretariat would be undertaking on the portal after its launch.  G/LIC/M/57  
 
- 21 - 
 
  17.4.  The representative of the United States  indicated the following:  
17.5.  We thank the Secretariat for continuing to introduce new technologies to facilitate Members ' 
submission of notifications. While we appreciate the updates on the latest developments, we also 
appreciate that Members continue to have the option to use the Noti fication Portal or to submit 
notifications via email to the Secretariat. Due to our clearance process, it would be difficult for us to 
use the Notification Portal for the submission of the annual questionnaire. We would like to ensure 
that the Portal does not have the opposite effect of facilitating the submission of notifications. We 
would like to also remind all Members with outstanding notifications that timely and complete 
notifications allow the WTO negotiating arm to function, improve the operation of  WTO agreements, 
and allow Members to better understand the trade practices of other Members. We encourage 
Members to submit their notifications as soon as possible.  
17.6.  The representative of the United Kingdom  indicated the following:  
17.7.  The United Kingdom expre sses its continued gratitude to the Secretariat for progressing in its 
work on the introduction of an online notification platform and database. We would particularly like 
to thank Carlo, Donna, Irina, and Andras for all their hard work getting to this poi nt and welcome 
today 's launch. We hope this will expedite the process of submitting import licensing notifications 
and encourage greater efficiency. We think we can take inspiration from other WTO committees that 
use similar tools to best maximi ze their us e.  
17.8.  The representative of the European Union  indicated the following:  
17.9.  We would like to welcome the work of the Secretariat, notably Donna, Irina and Andras, and 
all others behind the scenes, who worked very hard on the development of the new Import Licensi ng 
Notification Portal. We look forward to the launch of this new tool envisaged for today. We also 
appreciate the Secretariat 's guides and educational video to be shared with experts from capitals 
and new delegates later today. We encourage Members to com ply with their transparency obligations 
and use the new portal as much as possible, as a new facilitating tool for all operators, including 
from outside.  
17.10.   The Chairperson  concluded by encouraging Members to use the Portal as much as possible, 
so that Member s could realize its full benefits.  
17.11.   The Committee formally launched  the new Import Licensing Notification Portal and Database, 
which was made available to Members after the meeting.  
18  DATE OF THE NEXT MEETING  
18.1.  The Chairperson  informed delegations that the Secretariat had tentatively reserved Tuesday, 
21 May 2024 as the date of the Committee 's next formal meeting. The final date would be confirmed 
in an email well before the meeting. He noted that additional meetings may have b een convened as 
required.  
18.2.  The Committee took note  of the statement.  
19  OTHER BUSINESS  
19.1.  No points were raised under Other Business.  
19.2.  The meeting was adjourned . 
__________