WT/TPR/M/389/Add.1  
 
23 August 2019  
(19-5426) Page: 1/280 
Trade Policy Review Body  
12 and 14 June 2019  Original: English/ anglais/inglés  
 
 
  
TRADE POLICY REVIEW  
CANADA  
MINUTES OF THE MEETI NG 
Addendum  
Chairperson: H.E. Mr. Manuel A.J. Teehankee  (Philippines ) 
This document contains the advance written questions and additional questions by WTO 
Members, and replies provided by  Canada .1 
 
 
Organe d 'examen des politiques commerciales  
12 et 14 juin 2019  
EXAMEN DES POLITIQUE S COMMERCIALES  
CANADA  
COMPTE RENDU DE LA R ÉUNION  
Addendum  
Président : S.E. M. Manuel A.J. Teehankee  (Philippines ) 
Le présent document contient les questions écrites communiquées à l 'avance par les 
Membres de l 'OMC, leurs questions additionnelles, et les réponses fournies par  Canada .1 
 
 
Órgano de Examen de las Políticas Comerciales  
12 y 14 de junio  de 2019 
EXAMEN DE LAS POLÍTI CAS COMERCIALES  
CANADÁ  
ACTA DE LA REUNIÓN  
Addendum  
Presidente: Excmo. Sr. Manuel A.J. Teehankee  (Philippines ) 
En el presente documento figuran las preguntas presentadas anticipadamente por escrito y 
las preguntas adicionales de los Miembros de la OMC, así como  las respuestas facilitadas por  
Canadá .1 
 
_______________
                                                
1 In English only/En anglais seulement/En inglés solamente.  WT/TPR/M/389/Add.1  
 
- 2 - 
 
  TABLE OF CONTENTS  
 
ARGENTINA  ................................ ................................ ................................ ......................  3 
AUSTRALIA  ................................ ................................ ................................ ......................  6 
BRAZIL  ................................ ................................ ................................ ...........................  15 
CHILE  ................................ ................................ ................................ .............................  23 
CHINA  ................................ ................................ ................................ ............................  28 
COLOMBIA  ................................ ................................ ................................ .....................  51 
DOMINICAN REPUBLIC  ................................ ................................ ................................ .. 59 
ECUADOR  ................................ ................................ ................................ .......................  61 
EL SALVADOR  ................................ ................................ ................................ .................  71 
EUROPEAN UNION  ................................ ................................ ................................ .........  73 
HONG KONG, CHINA  ................................ ................................ ................................ ....... 93 
ICELAND  ................................ ................................ ................................ ......................  101  
INDIA  ................................ ................................ ................................ ..........................  105  
INDONESIA  ................................ ................................ ................................ ..................  145  
JAPAN  ................................ ................................ ................................ ..........................  151  
KOREA, REPUBLIC OF  ................................ ................................ ................................ ... 156  
MALAYSIA  ................................ ................................ ................................ ....................  159  
MEXICO  ................................ ................................ ................................ ........................  164  
NEW ZEALAND  ................................ ................................ ................................ .............  176  
NORWAY  ................................ ................................ ................................ ......................  182  
PHILIPPINES  ................................ ................................ ................................ ...............  183  
RUSSIAN FEDERATION  ................................ ................................ ................................ . 207  
THE SEPARATE CUSTOMS  TERRITORY OF TAIWAN , PENGHU, KINMEN AND  MATSU  ..... 210  
SINGAPORE  ................................ ................................ ................................ ..................  225  
SWITZERLAND  ................................ ................................ ................................ .............  229  
THAILAND  ................................ ................................ ................................ ....................  234  
TURKEY  ................................ ................................ ................................ ........................  246  
UKRAINE  ................................ ................................ ................................ ......................  251  
UNITED STATES OF AME RICA  ................................ ................................ .......................  262  
  WT/TPR/M/389/Add.1  
 
- 3 - 
 
  ARGENTINA  
Report by the Secretariat – WT/TPR/S/389  
3 TRADE POLICIES AND PRACTICES BY MEASURE  
3.1 Measures Directly Affecting Imports, 3.1.1 Customs procedures, valuation, and 
requirements, paragraph 3.7, page 4 7 
Question  
Paragraph 3.7 of the report states that in the future, the "Integrated Import Declaration " (IID) will 
be the only electronic release request option that can be used for goods regulated by participating 
government agencies. Is there a specific time frame for the implementation of this option?  
Reply  
The Canadian Border Services Agency (CBSA) fully in tends to move to a single release service option 
in the future. However, the current focus remains on decommissioning the legacy Other Government 
Department (OGD) release options. At present, the CBSA has not developed a schedule for 
decommissioning the re maining release options.  
Paragraph 3.11, page 49  
Question  
The Administrative Monetary Penalty System (AMPS) grants the Canada Border Services Agency 
(CBSA) the mandate to impose monetary penalties for non -compliance with customs requirements 
set out in CBS A laws, regulations and programme s. (i) Could Canada provide further details to those 
already specified in paragraph 3.12 as to whether a penalized importer can provide a disclaimer to 
explain its situation and avoid the penalty? (ii) If so, could Canada e laborate further on the nature 
of the disclaimer procedure?  
Reply  
As per s. 109.1 of the Customs Act (CA), "every person who fails to comply with any provision of an 
Act or a Regulation (…) is liable to a penalty of not more than $25,000 ". The person is notified via a 
Notice of Penalty Assessment (NPA). An importer does not have to provide a disclaimer explaining 
the situation; however, the importer may submit a request for ministerial review to dispute the 
penalty as per 129(1) of the CA. At that time, i t would be to the importer 's advantage to provide 
information/arguments. A request for a ministerial review may be submitted to the Recourse 
Directorate within 90 calendar days of the date of the penalty or date of service of the NPA. The 
Recourse Director ate performs an impartial review of the evidence taking into consideration the 
legislation, regulations and policies administered by the CBSA, the client 's point of view, including 
any extenuating circumstances and, where necessary, technical opinions from  CBSA experts or legal 
advice from the Department of Justice. Also note that s. 127.1 of the CA provides the Issuing 
Office/Port of Entry the ability to correct or cancel an enforcement action prior to Ministerial review. 
Importers who are not satisfied wi th the outcome of the ministerial review can further appeal to the 
Federal Court of Canada.  
3.2 Measures Directly Affecting Exports, 3.2.3 Export prohibitions, restrictions, and 
licensing, paragraph 3.124, page 90  
Question  
In paragraph 3.214, Canada state s that "at the federal level, there is no comprehensive listing of 
provincial state -owned enterprises ". (i) Given that the recent CETA with the European Union provides 
for disciplines regulating state -owned enterprises without distinguishing between levels  of 
government, Canada is consulted on how the scope of application of the Chapter at the provincial 
level has been delimited. (ii) In addition, Canada is consulted on its companies with "special rights 
or privileges " (whether at the federal or provincial level), as defined in Article 18.1 of the CETA.  WT/TPR/M/389/Add.1  
 
- 4 - 
 
  Reply  
(i)  The scope of the Comprehensive Economic and Trade Agreement (CETA) Chapter 18 does not 
distinguish between different levels of government. As such, the federal, provincial and territorial 
governmen ts have the same obligations and benefit from the same flexibilities. For example, the 
rules do not apply to a measure of a covered entity (including at the provincial and territorial level) 
if a reservation is set out in that Party 's Schedule to Annex I, II, or III.  
(ii)  For the purposes of CETA Chapter 18, the term 'covered entity ' includes the grant of special 
rights or privileges to supply a good or service, substantially affecting the ability of any other 
enterprise to supply the same good or service in the same geographical area under substantially 
equivalent conditions, and allowing the entity to escape, in whole or in part, competitive pressures 
or market constraints. CETA chapter 18 does not include a transparency provision or other 
requirement whi ch would oblige the Parties to maintain a list of covered entities.  
Question  
With respect to the activities of state -owned enterprises, and taking into account Canada 's 
commitments in the CETA, the T -MEC/CUSMA, and CPTPP, (iii) Canada is consulted on the activities 
of state -owned enterprises that provide financial services (support for imports, exports and 
investments), such as Export Development Canada, and that grant more favourable treatment to 
Canadian nationals over foreigners, including the possi bility that the beneficiaries are only Canadian 
nationals. (iv) It would be appreciated if Canada could provide, to the extent possible, a list of such 
policies and/or activities.  
Reply  
The Business Development Bank of Canada (BDC), which has a mandate to help create and develop 
Canadian businesses, with a focus on small and medium -sized enterprises; Export Development 
Canada (EDC), which has a mandate to support and develop trade between Canada and other 
countries, and Canada 's capacity to engage in that t rade and respond to international business 
opportunities; and the Farm Credit Canada (FCC), which has a mandate to ensure that agriculture 
and agri -food producers and processors have adequate access to capital to succeed in international 
markets and throug h all economic cycles do not provide more favourable terms to Canadian 
nationals.  
2 TRADE AND INVESTMENT REGIMES  
2.3 Trade Agreements and Arrangements, 2.3.2 Regional and preferential agreements, 
2.3.2.1 Reciprocal trade agreements, paragraph 2.20, page 34  and 
3.3.6.2 Legal, institutional and policy framework, paragraph 3.233, page 115  
Question  
As stated in paragraph 2.20, Canada is reported to have actively updated and expanded existing 
FTAs to modernize the provisions of some of them to include elements of inclusive trade. In turn, as 
stated in paragraph 3.233 in relation to the revised policy being pursued by the Canadian 
government, Canada will introduce a broader scope for the business ethics included in the Integrity 
Regime to cover areas rel ated to the fight against human trafficking and the protection of labour 
rights and the environment: In this regard, taking into account the inclusive approach to trade being 
taken by the Canadian government, Canada is consulted as to how it will apply in practice the new 
provisions included in the FTA chapters on Public Procurement related to inclusive trade, specifically 
the provisions on compliance with labour laws in the countries in which the good is produced or in 
which the service to be provided in a  public procurement is supplied.  
Reply  
Government Procurement Chapters of Canada 's currently in force FTAs do not include provisions 
related to labour laws.  WT/TPR/M/389/Add.1  
 
- 5 - 
 
  Please note that article 15.8.5 agreed in the TPP negotiations, with respect to promoting compliance 
with labour laws, was subsequently suspended in the CPTPP. The Government Procurement Chapter 
of CUSMA that includes a similar provision does not apply to Canada.  
Question  
How might Canada, and its contracting entities, promote compliance with l abour laws in the territory 
in which the good is produced, without this creating an obstacle to trade between the Parties or 
barriers to entry for suppliers of the other Party? How might a supplier of a final good certify that all 
inputs used to produce th at good (specifically imported ones) comply with the applicable labour 
provisions in the territory where those inputs are produced? If certification is required for inputs 
included in a good, has Canada considered that this could eventually increase the va lue of the final 
goods to be provided in a public purchase?  
Reply  
Government Procurement Chapters of Canada 's currently in force FTAs do not include provisions 
related to labour laws. Therefore, Canada will not speculate on how they might be applied. Howev er, 
promoting compliance with internationally agreed upon fundamental human and labour rights is 
important to Canada. In September 2018, Canada put in place a policy that requires suppliers selling 
apparel to the Government of Canada to self -certify that t hey and their direct Canadian and foreign 
suppliers comply with a set of eight fundamental human and labour rights. These rights include 
freedom from child labour, forced labour, discrimination and abuse, as well as access to fair wages 
and safe working co nditions. For further information regarding requirements for the ethical 
procurement of apparel, please visit: www.buyandsell.gc.ca . 
Question  
Given Canada 's approach to the inclusion of new provisions in its FTAs , it would be appreciated if 
Canada could provide further clarification on how the provision included in the CPTPP in the Technical 
Specifications article, paragraph 7, which is not usually included in other Public Contracting chapters, 
should be understoo d: What is the scope and/or objective of this provision? What is it intended to 
preserve? What is the relationship between the development of technical specifications and the 
storage and processing of information outside the Party 's territory?  
Reply  
The objective of this provision is to ensure that the Government of Canada can secure its own 
sensitive information and that of third parties (particularly that of individuals).  
5 APPENDIX T ABLES  
Table A2.1, page 211  
Question  
In relation to Table  A.2.1 (page 2 11), and the reference to disputes DS531: Canada "Measures 
Governing the Sale of Wine in Grocery Stores " (second complaint from the United States) and 
DS537: Canada "Measures Governing the Sale of Wine " (Complainant: Australia), it would be 
appreciated if Canada could confirm whether the agreement reached with the respective 
complainants would result in the total and complete elimination of the British Columbia legislation 
applicable to imported wines in regard to the "store within a store " system, the subj ect of the 
complaint in the context of both disputes, in respect of all origins.  
Reply  
British Columbia is moving forward with changes to measures relating to the sale of wine in grocery 
stores that will meet Canada 's international trade obligations by 1 November 2019, in line with the 
Canada – United States – Mexico Agreement (CUSMA) side letter. These changes will be published 
and made available in advance of implementation. The Government of British Columbia contin ues 
to work on the details of precisely how the commitment to amend the measures at issue will be met.  WT/TPR/M/389/Add.1  
 
- 6 - 
 
  AUSTRALIA  
Report by the Secretariat – WT/TPR/S/389  
3 TRADE POLICIES AND PRACTICES BY MEASURE  
3.1.6.1 Anti -dumping and countervailing measures, paragraph  3.66, pages 73 -74 
Question  
The report states once a formal AD or CV complaint is received, the CBSA has 21 days to determine 
if it is properly documented. Does this determination period include an assessment of the goods 
description provided by the applic ant? 
Reply  
Section 2(1) of the Special Import Measures Act provides the definition for "properly documented ". 
According to subparagraph (a)(i) of the definition, to be considered properly documented, the 
complaint must allege that the goods are being dumped or subsidized, specify the goods in question 
and allege that the dumping or subsidizing is causing injury or threatening to cause injury to the 
domestic industry. On receipt of a complaint, the Canada Border Services Agency must compare the 
complain t to the criteria identified in this definition, which includes that the complaint specifies the 
goods.  
Question  
What happens in situations where in assessing the application, CBSA considers that the goods 
description does not accurately describe the goods actually being produced in, or being imported 
into, Canada?  
Reply  
As per Section 2(1) of the Special Import Measures Act, to be properly documented the complaint 
must state in reasonable detail the facts on which the allegation that the specified goo ds are being 
dumped or subsidized and that the dumping or subsidizing has caused injury or is threatening to 
cause injury to the domestic industry is based. What is reasonable is determined based on the 
circumstances in each case and may be supplemented by  information obtained by the CBSA through 
its own research of the facts.  
If the information documented in the complaint is not sufficiently detailed, the complaint will not be 
considered "properly documented ". The complainant will be informed that addition al information and 
material is needed in order for the complaint to be properly documented in keeping with subsection 
32(1)(b) of the Special Import Measures Act.  
Question  
What happens in situations where an investigation is initiated but later it is deter mined that the 
goods description does not accurately describe the goods actually being produced in, or being 
imported into, Canada?  
Reply  
The Canadian Border Services Agency (CBSA) takes the utmost care in reviewing a complaint to 
ensure that it meets the requirements to be considered a properly documented complaint for 
initiating an investigation. In such a hypothetical scenario as described in the question, the 
investigation/inquiry would likely be terminated in keeping with section 35(1) of the Special I mport 
Measures Act as negligible volume would be found or the evidence would not disclose injury, 
retardation or threat of injury. In addition, a new complaint with a revised product description could 
be submitted and a new investigation may be initiated w ith respect to those goods.  WT/TPR/M/389/Add.1  
 
- 7 - 
 
  Paragraph 3.68, page 74  
Question  
The report states the investigative process generally takes about 260 days from the time the CBSA 
receives a complaint until the CITT makes a finding. Can Canada provide an update to the average 
actual investigation times since the last TPR?  
Reply  
The average length of the investigation process remains about 260 days from the time the Canadian 
Border Services Agency (CBSA) receives a complaint until the Canadian International Trade Tribuna l 
(CITT) makes a finding. This reflects the timeframes for each stage of a trade remedy investigation 
prescribed in the Special Import Measures Act.  
Paragraph 3.70, page 75  
Question  
The report states the decision whether or not to initiate an anti -circumve ntion investigation must be 
made within 45 days of receipt of a circumvention complaint. Why is the consideration period for 
anti-circumvention investigation applications (45  days) greater than for dumping/subsidisation cases 
and scoping inquiries, where the period is only 30 days?  
Reply  
In the case of anti -dumping and countervailing duty investigations, there are two distinct periods 
between receipt of a complaint and the initiation of investigation. As per the Special Import Measures 
Act, the Canadian Border Services Agency (CBSA) has 21 days after receiving a complaint to 
determine if the complaint is properly documented and 30 days after that determination to decide 
whether to initiate an investigation, for a total period of 51 days bet ween receipt of a complaint and 
the initiation of an investigation.  
In contrast, anti -circumvention investigations and scope proceedings do not have these two distinct 
periods and provide only that the decision whether or not to initiate an inquiry is made  within 45  days 
of the receipt of a complaint, for anti -circumvention investigations, or 30 days, for scope 
proceedings.  
The differences in timelines between receipt of a complaint and the decision to initiate an 
investigation reflect different levels of c omplexity across the different proceedings.  
Paragraph 3.82, page 78  
Question  
The report states unions representing persons employed in the production of like goods in Canada 
are now required to be identified in complaints and are considered to be party to the proceeding. 
What is the rationale behind this change?  
Reply  
Prior to the amendments to the Special Import Measure Regulations, unions in Canada did not have 
the explicit right to participate in trade remedy proceedings. In order to improve transparency  and 
allow labour union interests to be reflected in Canada 's trade remedy system, the Special Import 
Measure Regulations were amended to require that domestic producers include a list of relevant 
unions in complaints and to add unions to the list of parties that may make representations to the 
Canadian International Trade Tribunal in public interest inquiries.  WT/TPR/M/389/Add.1  
 
- 8 - 
 
  Paragraph 3.91, pages 81 -82 
Question  
The report states the CITT is required no later than two months prior to the expiry of a finding or an 
order, to issue a notice to all known interested persons informing them of the impending expiry. 
Additionally, on the basis of these views, the CITT determines, on day 50 of the expiry proceedings 
when an expiry (sunset) review of the finding or order is r equired. Do expiry (sunset) reviews extend 
beyond the original expiry dates of findings/orders? If yes, in what percentage of cases does this 
occur and what is the status of these findings/orders while the expiry (sunset) review is ongoing?  
Reply  
An expiry  review involves three phases: (1) a notice of expiry proceedings conducted by the 
Canadian International Trade Tribunal (CITT) to decide whether to initiate an expiry review; (2) the 
Canadian Border Services Agency 's (CBSA) investigation into the likeliho od of continued or resumed 
dumping and/or subsidizing; and (3) the CITT 's review into the likelihood of injury or retardation 
caused by the continuation or resumption of dumping and/or subsidizing.  
As per subsection 76.03(2) of the Special Import Measures Act (SIMA), the CITT must issue a notice 
of expiry no later than two months prior to the expiry of a finding or order. This notice will solicit 
views from interested parties as to whether the CITT should initiate an expiry review. If an expiry 
review is in itiated, under 76.03(7)(a) of SIMA, the Canadian Border Services Agency 's (CBSA) 
portion of the review is to be completed within 150 days of the initiation date. Subsection 76.03(10) 
provides that the CITT 's portion of the review is completed within 160 da ys of the CBSA 's 
determination, if a positive determination is made.  
As a result of these timelines, expiry reviews may continue beyond the original expiry date of a 
finding or order. During this time, the measure remains in force.  
If the CITT determines t hat the expiry of the finding or order is likely to result in injury to the 
domestic industry, it issues an order continuing the finding or order. If the CITT determines that the 
expiry is not likely to result in injury, it issues an order rescinding the f inding. Generally, the 
rescission of the finding or order is effective on the original expiry date and, if the order is rescinded 
after this date, section 7.2 of SIMA provides that any duties collected after the original expiry date 
will be refunded by the  CBSA.  
From 2015 -2018, seven of the seventeen expiry reviews extended beyond the original expiry date 
falling in those years. In 2018, all of the expiry reviews (six in total) were decided after the original 
expiry date.  
3.3.3 Sanitary and phyotosanitary requirements, Box 3.4, page 103  
Question  
The report notes that licences to import food under the Safe Food for Canadians Regulations (SFCR) 
will be valid for two years. What is the rationale for limiting licences for importers to two years a nd 
what process is required to renew a licence?  
Reply  
A licence under the Safe Food for Canadians Regulations is valid for two years. The time period of 
two years is long enough to avoid excessive burden on the licence holder yet provides a means of 
assuri ng that the licence holder reviews or re -evaluates the information provided with the application 
at least every two years.  
In order to renew a licence, the licence holder would be required to apply for a renewal on the 
Canadian Food Inspection Agency 's (CFIA) digital platform. Applying for a renewal involves accessing 
their licence information, reviewing the information for accuracy, updating any necessary 
information, paying a licensing fee and submitting the renewal for approval by CFIA.  WT/TPR/M/389/Add.1  
 
- 9 - 
 
  3.3.5 State tradi ng, state -owned enterprises, and privatization, paragraph 3.218, 
page  111 
Question  
Australia notes that the Ontario Government is currently reviewing Ontario 's beverage alcohol 
system with a view to modernising the rules for the sale and consumption of alc ohol in Ontario. The 
Ontario Minister of Finance has stated that as part of this review it is developing a plan to expand 
the sale of alcohol  (https://www.ontario.ca/page/have -your-say-alcohol -choice -and-convenience -
for-the-people#section -0). When will the results of this review be come public?  
Reply  
Ontario is undertaking a comprehensive review of the alcohol sector to inform its plan to expand the 
sale of beverage alcohol into corner, grocery and big -box stores. Ontario is reviewing feedback it 
has received from businesses, consume rs and key stakeholders to inform policy decisions related to 
the beverage alcohol sector review. Ontario will have more to say when the review of the alcohol 
sector is complete.  
Question  
Australia notes that the Ontario Government is currently reviewing O ntario 's beverage alcohol 
system with a view to modernising the rules for the sale and consumption of alcohol in Ontario. The 
Ontario Minister of Finance has stated that as part of this review it is developing a plan to expand 
the sale of alcohol ( https://www.ontario.ca/page/have -your-say-alcohol -choice -and-convenience -
for-the-people#section -0). Will the review result in changes to the curr ent administration of the 
alcoholic beverages by the Liquor Control Board of Ontario and the Alcohol and Gaming Commission 
of Ontario?  
Reply  
Ontario 's comprehensive review of the alcohol sector includes considering the roles of the Liquor 
Control Board of Ontario and the Alcohol and Gaming Commission of Ontario, which are Crown 
agencies involved in the sale, distribution and regulation of beverage alcohol in the province.  
3.3.7 Intellectual Property, 3.3.7.6 Geographical Indications, paragraph 3.31 1, 
pages  132-133 
Question  
The report states that once placed on the list of protected GIs, there is no term of protection. Does 
this mean that once a GI is registered there is no option or system for removing the term from the 
list even if the term becomes generic or loses its registration in the country of origin?  
Reply  
No. Geographical Indications (GIs) may be removed from Canada 's List of Geographical indications 
through cancellation procedures, for instance if the indication is not protected by t he law applicable 
to the territory in which the wine or spirit or the agricultural product or food is identified as 
originating.  
Paragraph 3.312, page 133  
Question  
The report notes that as a result of CETA there is a list of European Union GIs protected in  Canada 
under a modified trademark act. Have Canadian producers registered any GIs?  WT/TPR/M/389/Add.1  
 
- 10 - 
 
  Reply  
While Canadian producers have protected their wines and spirits as Geographical Indications (GIs) 
in Canada since 1997, to date only one Canadian producer has been granted protection for a food 
GI ("Maïs sucré de Neuville ") under Canada 's GI regime. Maïs sucré de Neuville received protection 
under Canada 's expanded GI regime on 18 April 2019.  
4 TRADE POLICIES BY SECTOR  
4.1.1 Agriculture, 4.1.1.1 Introduction, 4.1.1.2 Border measures, paragraph 4.10, 
page  141 
Question  
Australia understands that GAC will allocate a major share of its dairy TRQs to processors under the 
CPTPP based on the TRQ eligibility criteria published. How does Canada ensure allocations of licen ces 
to existing processors do not discriminate against distributors and new entrants to the market that 
seek to access these CPTPP TRQs?  
Reply  
Global Affairs Canada 's (GAC) interim allocation policies for Canada 's Comprehensive and 
Progressive Agreement for Trans -Pacific Partnership (CPTPP) dairy Tariff Rate Quotas (TRQs) allocate 
a majority of each TRQ to processors and further processors. GAC allocates these TRQ shares on a 
market share basis. This means each eligible processor and further pro cessor applicant receives an 
allocation based on their level of activity in the sector and in relation to the total activities of the 
other eligible applicants within their respective group of the TRQ.  
The majority of GAC 's interim allocation policies for dairy TRQs also reserve access to distributors. 
Import history is not an eligibility criterion for TRQ access. New entrants are therefore able to receive 
allocations to the extent they otherwise qualify under the TRQ allocation policy.  
4.1.1.4 Export measu res, paragraph 4.25, page 144  
Question  
Can Canada explain what domestic reforms it has undertaken since the Nairobi Decision to prepare 
for the elimination of the remaining export subsidy commitments at the end of 2020?  
Reply  
Canada has implemented the Nai robi Decision and will eliminate its export subsidies by the end of 
2020. Canada 's new modified export subsidy schedule was submitted to the WTO on 11 December 
2017.  
4.1.1.5 Evolution of support and protection, paragraphs 4.28 and 4.30, page 145  
Question  
When will Canada engage in genuine reform of its supply management system, including moving 
away from market price support, the most trade distorting form of support?  
Reply  
Canada reminds Members that in accordance with paragraph A of the Trade Policy Revi ew 
Mechanism, the intent of the review process is not to impose new policy commitments on other 
Members. The ability to maintain a market price support for milk is an important tool in the pricing 
pillar of Canada 's supply management system and a measure t hat all Members agreed to in accepting 
Canada 's schedule of commitments.  WT/TPR/M/389/Add.1  
 
- 11 - 
 
  4.1.1.6.2 Milk and dairy, paragraph 4.41, page 149  
Question  
In paragraph 4.41, the report states that changes in consumer preferences led to a structural surplus 
of skim milk and result in the introduction of Class 6 in 2016 and Class 7 in 2017. As part of the 
negotiations leading to the establishment of the CUSMA, Canada agreed to eliminate the Class 6 and 
7 pricing systems within six months after the entry into force of the Agree ment and apply charges 
to exports (beyond agreed thresholds) of skim milk powder, milk protein concentrates and infant 
formula upon entry of the Agreement. Can Canada confirm if all elements of Class 6 and 7, and their 
associated pricing, will be eliminate d entirely on a Most -Favoured Nation (MFN) basis, and not only 
in relation to trade between Canada and the United States?  
Reply  
The Canada -United States -Mexico Agreement (CUSMA) has yet to be ratified by all three parties. 
The milk classes in Canada are applied domestically. Processors of dairy products are billed at milk 
class prices by milk marketing boards, and with the exception of milk class 5(d), prices do not differ 
depending on whether the good is destined for domestic use or exported to the Unite d States, or 
any other WTO Member.  
Question  
In paragraph 4.41, the report states that changes in consumer preferences led to a structural surplus 
of skim milk and result in the introduction of Class 6 in 2016 and Class 7 in 2017. As part of the 
negotiation s leading to the establishment of the CUSMA, Canada agreed to eliminate the Class 6 and 
7 pricing systems within six months after the entry into force of the Agreement and apply charges 
to exports (beyond agreed thresholds) of skim milk powder, milk protei n concentrates and infant 
formula upon entry of the Agreement. If not, which elements of Class 6 and 7 will remain, and what 
will be the difference in treatment between CUSMA Parties and other WTO Members?  
Reply  
Under the terms of the Canada -United States -Mexico Agreement (CUSMA), milk class 6 and 7 will 
be eliminated within the timeframes specified in the Agreement.  
The Agreement has yet to be ratified by all three parties. The milk classes in Canada are applied 
domestically. Processors of dairy products a re billed at milk class prices by milk marketing boards, 
and with the exception of milk class 5(d), prices do not differ depending on whether the good is 
destined for domestic use or exported to the United States, or any other WTO Member.  
Question  
In parag raph 4.41, the report states that changes in consumer preferences led to a structural surplus 
of skim milk and result in the introduction of Class 6 in 2016 and Class 7 in 2017. As part of the 
negotiations leading to the establishment of the CUSMA, Canada agreed to eliminate the Class 6 and 
7 pricing systems within six months after the entry into force of the Agreement and apply charges 
to exports (beyond agreed thresholds) of skim milk powder, milk protein concentrates and infant 
formula upon entry of the Agreement. Can Canada explain what preparations it is undertaking in the 
lead up to the entry into force of CUSMA to eliminate Class 6 and 7, and whether other measures 
are being proposed to manage dairy over -supply and structural surpluses?  
Reply  
Since the signature of the Canada -United States -Mexico Agreement (CUSMA) on 30 November 2018, 
the Parties ' efforts have focused on domestic ratification procedures. The Government of Canada is 
currently working with Canadian industry and provincial governm ents to comply with the terms of 
the Agreement, which includes the elimination of milk classes 6 and 7 by industry and provincial 
governments. Canada is currently taking the necessary steps to ensure that the Agreement 's dairy 
provisions are fully implemen ted within the timelines specified in the agreement. Canada takes its WT/TPR/M/389/Add.1  
 
- 12 - 
 
  international obligations very seriously and will ensure that any new measures are fully in compliance 
these obligations.  
Question  
In paragraph 4.41, the report states that changes in co nsumer preferences led to a structural surplus 
of skim milk and result in the introduction of Class 6 in 2016 and Class 7 in 2017. As part of the 
negotiations leading to the establishment of the CUSMA, Canada agreed to eliminate the Class 6 and 
7 pricing s ystems within six months after the entry into force of the Agreement and apply charges 
to exports (beyond agreed thresholds) of skim milk powder, milk protein concentrates and infant 
formula upon entry of the Agreement. If other measures are being consider ed, can Canada assure 
WTO Members that such measures will not increase the level of trade distortion or have a flow on 
effect on global markets?  
Reply  
Canada takes its international obligations very seriously and will ensure that any new measures are 
fully in compliance with these obligations.  
Paragraph 4.44, page 149  
Question  
In paragraph 4.44, the report states that on 29 October 2018, the Canadian Federal Government 
announced the establishment of two new working groups, one of which "is to develop mitigation 
strategies to help dairy farmers and processors adjust to the short -term impacts of the CUSMA and 
the CPTPP. " Subsequently, Australia notes that in the 2019 Budget, the Government of Canada 
announced CAD 3.9 billion in compensation to help produ cers deal with assumed income losses from 
the CPTPP and the CETA, including the creation of a Quota Value Guarantee Program designed to 
protect against the reduction in the value of quotas when they are sold. Can Canada provide a 
breakdown of how the CAD  3.9 billion will be spent, including whether monies will be allocated for 
restructuring and reform, and whether the support will be in the form of market price support 
increases or other non -exempt direct payments under the Amber Box?  
Reply  
Following the re cent ratifications of the Comprehensive Economic and Trade Agreement (CETA) and 
the Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans -Pacific Partnership (CPTPP), Budget 2019 
proposes up to CAD 3.9 billion in support for supply -managed farmers:  
• Support wil l be offered to sustain the incomes of eligible dairy, poultry, and egg farmers, 
by making available up to CAD 2.4 billion. Of this amount, CAD 250 million has already 
been provided to support dairy farmers as a result of CETA, therefore a net amount of up  
to CAD 2.15 billion will be available in coming years to deal with income losses associated 
with these agreements.  
• Assistance will also be offered to protect the value of investments made by farmers in 
supply -managed sectors, through a Quota Value Guarant ee Program that will protect 
against reduction in quota value when the quota is sold. CAD 1.5 billion has been set aside 
for this demand -driven programme . 
At this point, no decision has been taken on how the funds will be distributed.  
Question  
In paragraph 4.44, the report states that on 29 October 2018, the Canadian Federal Government 
announced the establishment of two new working groups, one of which "is to develop mitigation 
strategies to help dairy farmers and processors adjust to the short -term impacts of the CUSMA and 
the CPTPP. " Subsequently, Australia notes that in the 2019 Budget, the Government of Canada 
announced CAD 3.9 billion in compensation to help producers deal with assumed income losses from 
the CPTPP and the CETA, including the  creation of a Quota Value Guarantee Program designed to WT/TPR/M/389/Add.1  
 
- 13 - 
 
  protect against the reduction in the value of quotas when they are sold. Does the creation of the 
Quota Value Guarantee Program further entrench existing protectionism and make it harder in the 
future to undertake reform of the system?  
Reply  
Canada 's intent in creating a Quota Value Guarantee Program (QVGP) is to protect the value of 
investments made by producers. At this point, no decision has been made in regard to the structure 
and operation of the programme . 
Question  
In paragraph 4.44, the report  states that on 29 October 2018, the Canadian Federal Government 
announced the establishment of two new working groups, one of which "is to develop mitigation 
strategies to help dairy farmers and processors adjust to the short -term impacts of the CUSMA and  
the CPTPP. " Subsequently, Australia notes that in the 2019 Budget, the Government of Canada 
announced CAD 3.9 billion in compensation to help producers deal with assumed income losses from 
the CPTPP and the CETA, including the creation of a Quota Value Gu arantee Program designed to 
protect against the reduction in the value of quotas when they are sold. Given only 16,000 Canadian 
farms – mostly dairy farms – operate under supply management, at what point will Canada consider 
it is no longer financially and  economically sustainable to maintain the highly protectionist and 
distortionary measures?  
Reply  
Canada reminds Members that in accordance with paragraph A of the Trade Policy Review 
Mechanism, the intent of the review process is not to impose new policy c ommitments on other 
Members. Canada takes the economic well -being of all its farmers seriously. All Canadian policies 
and programme s are fully in compliance with Canada 's trade obligations.  
4.2 Mining and Energy, 4.2.1 Overview, paragraph 4.97, page 165  
Question  
The report states that Canada accounts for a large share of the world 's proven oil and gas reserves 
and significant mineral wealth; and the mining and energy sectors are particularly important to the 
economy. The minerals sector contributed approx imately 19.5% to total goods exports in 2017. The 
energy sector contributed approximately 22.5% to total goods exports in the same year as well as 
to many (e.g. pipeline and environmental services) inputs into the sector and the mining value chain. 
Togethe r, the two sectors accounted for 42% of total exports. Does Canada have any trade policies 
that specifically impact the mining or mining equipment sectors, as these sectors do not appear to 
have been treated individually under the "Trade Policies by Sector ' part of the document?  
Reply  
Canada has no trade policies geared specifically towards the mining service and supply (MSS) sector. 
Federal programme s that benefit the sector are offered by the Trade Commissioner Service (TCS) 
and include the Global Opportu nities for Associations (GOA), which provided CAD 113,430 to Mining 
Suppliers Trade Association (MSTA) Canada in 2018/19, and CanExport, which reimburses Small 
and Medium -sized Enterprises (SMEs) for up to 50 % of eligible expenses associated with developin g 
new export opportunities and markets. The TCS has developed some promotional material related 
to cleantech in the MSS sector and the TCS Cleantech Global Campaign has provided support to the 
MSS sector with info sessions and B2B matchmaking. Initiatives that would support the export 
performance of the MSS sector are being explored through engagement as part of the Canadian 
Minerals and Metals Plan (CMMP).  WT/TPR/M/389/Add.1  
 
- 14 - 
 
  4.4.3.2 Maritime Transport, paragraph 4.250, page 201  and 4.4.3.2.1 Legal framework 
and developments, paragraph 4.262, page 202  
Question  
Were there any other changes required to implement commitments made under CETA with respect 
to maritime transport services?  
Reply  
No. All of Canada 's Comprehensive Economi c and Trade Agreement (CETA)  maritime transport 
services commitments were implemented domestically through changes to the Coasting Trade Act 
and the Transportation Modernization Act.  
Question  
Under what conditions may an EU service supplier engage in prov iding feeder services between 
Montréal and Halifax?  
Reply  
The Comprehensive Economic and Trade Agreement (CETA) provides for feeder services for 
international cargo between the Ports of Halifax and Montreal onboard EU registered vessels. For a 
continual or single trip, a coasting trade licence is not required for a foreign ship that is transporting 
bulk or containerized cargo, when the ship is registered in the first (or domestic) register of an EU 
member state, and whose owner is a Canadian ent ity, an EU entity, or an entity under Canadian or 
European control. For a single trip, a coasting trade licence is not required for a foreign ship that is 
transporting containerized cargo, when the ship is registered in the second (or international) regist er 
of an EU member state, and whose owner is a Canadian entity, an EU entity or an entity under 
Canadian or European control.  
Report by Canada – WT/TPR/G/389  
4.1 Canadian Free Trade Agreement (CFTA), paragraph 4.2, page 16  
Question  
How long will it take C anada to fully implement the CFTA and how does the CFTA ensure that goods 
imported under the CPTPP can move across borders within Canada uninterrupted?  
Reply  
The Canadian Free Trade Agreement (CFTA) entered into force on 1 July 2017, and aims to reduce 
barriers to trade, investment, and worker mobility within Canada. Upon entry into force, the rules 
applied automatically to all economic activity unless excluded from the Agreement. Although the 
CFTA's rules are fully in force, the CFTA established several processes and working groups, including 
the Regulatory Reconciliation and Cooperation Table (RCT), and mandated the launch of negotiations 
to determine how the CFTA 's rules will apply to the financial services sector. This multi -year work is 
ongoin g. Additional information on the RCT and its work plan items can be found on the CFTA website 
(https://www.cfta -alec.ca/ ). 
  WT/TPR/M/389/Add.1  
 
- 15 - 
 
  BRAZIL  
Report by the Secretariat – WT/TPR/S/389  
1 ECONOMIC ENVIRONMENT  
1.2.3 Monetary and exchange rate policy, paragraph 1.25, pages 21 -22 
Question  
Canadian exporters have benefitted in recent years from a lower value of the Canadian dollar 
compared to major currencies such as the U.S. dollar and the euro. Their share of the globa l market 
for exports, however, has continued to erode, as losses of competitiveness were experienced in all 
categories of non -energy exports. Moreover, according to the Bank of Canada, rising trade tensions 
and increased trade -policy uncertainty since 2017  likely dampened investment and export growth 
over that period. " As the U.S. trade policy is envisioned to impose higher import tariff rates on 
European automobiles, parts and components, in what way the Canadian economy in general 
(i.e. GDP) and the Canadian production and exports of auto, parts and components in particular are 
expected to be affected by this measure? Is an estimation available of these possible impacts on the 
Canadian economy?  
Reply  
The question includes an assumption that Canada cannot comment on at this time. However,  if the 
price of EU goods were to rise relat ive to Canadian goods, Canada would be well positioned to 
compete for additional business.  
2 TRADE AND INVESTMENT REGIMES  
2.3.2.1 Reciprocal trade agreements, paragraph 2.21, page 34  
Question  
"On 30 November 2018, Canada, the United States and Mexico signed an agreement, known as the 
Canada -United States -Mexico Agreement (CUSMA) for Canada, which will replace the NAFTA when 
it enters into force. Canada had a number of negotiating objectives for CUSMA, including: preserving 
important NAFTA provisions an d market access into the United States and Mexico; modernizing and 
improving the agreement; and reinforcing the security and stability of market access into the United 
States and Mexico for Canadian businesses. As at February 2019, CUSMA parties were worki ng to 
advance their domestic procedures towards the ratification and implementation of the Agreement. " 
Has CUSMA represented a major change when comparison is made with NAFTA? What were the 
major changes impinged upon the Canadian economy by the new agreem ent? 
Reply  
Canada, the U.S. and Mexico have reached a mutually beneficial outcome for the economic 
prosperity of all three countries. NAFTA created an economically influential and competitive regional 
market whose preferential tariffs will continue unaffec ted under CUSMA. Because international trade 
has evolved significantly since 1994, the CUSMA includes several new and modernized provisions to 
address modern -day trade issues, including in the areas of good regulatory practices, digital trade, 
small and me dium-sized enterprises. It also brings labour and environment into the agreement and 
subjects them to dispute settlement.  
2.4 Investment Regime, 2.4.1 Framework, paragraph 2.36, page 37  
Question  
Since the U.S. and the European Union are responsible for roughly 75% of foreign investments in 
Canada, how would the country curb a possible slowdown of foreign and total investment? Will 
Canada in such a juncture spur which investment: public, private or both?  WT/TPR/M/389/Add.1  
 
- 16 - 
 
  Reply  
The statement in the report pertains to filings under the Investment Canada Act, which capture 
acquisitions of control of Canadian businesses and the establishment of new Canadian businesses 
by non -Canadians. It is not a proxy for FDI as conventionally meas ured by agencies such as Statistics 
Canada.  
At this time, Canada will not speculate on measures that could be undertaken in case of a possible 
slowdown of foreign and total investment. Canada is building its investment marketing infrastructure 
to ensure it  is positioned to take advantage of investment opportunities globally.  
3 TRADE POLICIES AND PRACTICES BY MEASURE  
3.1.4.2 Federal excise duties and taxes, paragraph 3.54, page 67  
Question  
The Federal Government levies excise duties and taxes on alcoholic beverages, tobacco products, 
certain petroleum products, and a few other items (e.g. automobile air conditioners and 
fuel-inefficient vehicles). Excise duties are charged either under the Excise Act or the Excise Act, 
2001, whereas excise taxes are charged under the Excise Tax Act. The tax rates are generally 
identical for imports and domestically -produced goods, but lower rates (or zero) apply to domestic 
brewers and to wine made entirely from Canadian -grown agricultural input. Lower excis e rates on 
beer apply to the first 75,000 hectolitres per calendar year for beer produced in Canada by a licensed 
brewer or anyone related to or associated with that brewer. How does Canada harmonize the lower 
rates or the exemption of excise duties on bee r produced by domestic brewers or wine made entirely 
from Canadian -grown agricultural input with its obligations under Article III of the GATT ( "NATIONAL 
TREATMENT ON INTERNAL TAXATION AND REGULATION ")? Do Canadian provinces discriminate 
between imported a nd domestically produced alcoholic beverages when levying excise duties at the 
provincial level?  
Reply  
Given the ongoing WTO dispute settlement process on elements of the alcohol tax regimes in 
Canada, it would be inappropriate to comment further at this t ime. 
Question  
The Federal Government levies excise duties and taxes on alcoholic beverages, tobacco products, 
certain petroleum products, and a few other items (e.g. automobile air conditioners and 
fuel-inefficient vehicles). Excise duties are charged eith er under the Excise Act or the Excise Act, 
2001, whereas excise taxes are charged under the Excise Tax Act. The tax rates are generally 
identical for imports and domestically -produced goods, but lower rates (or zero) apply to domestic 
brewers and to wine m ade entirely from Canadian -grown agricultural input. Lower excise rates on 
beer apply to the first 75,000 hectolitres per calendar year for beer produced in Canada by a licensed 
brewer or anyone related to or associated with that brewer How does Canada add ress the question 
of national treatment for imported alcoholic beverages in its Free Trade Agreements, including the 
treatment at the regional level?  
Reply  
Canada takes its international trade obligations very seriously, which includes the negotiation of i ts 
Free Trade Agreements. Given the ongoing WTO dispute settlement process on elements of the 
alcohol tax regimes in Canada, it would be inappropriate to comment further at this time.  
3.2.5 Export finance, insurance, and guarantees , paragraph 3.128, page 9 1 
Question  
Could Canada clarify in which situations does EDC need loans from the Ministry of Finance?  WT/TPR/M/389/Add.1  
 
- 17 - 
 
  Reply  
The legislation that establishes EDC, the Export Development Act, includes a mechanism which 
allows EDC to request loans from the Minister of Finance. To the best of our knowledge, this 
mechanism has never been used. EDC 's Borrowing Plan is included in its Corporate Plan and is 
available at the link below.  
https://ww w.edc.ca/en/about -us/corporate/corporate -reports.html   
Question  
Could Canada clarify how these Ministry of Finance loans to EDC are financially structured? For 
example, what are the criteria used to define interest and the term of payment?  
Reply  
The legislation that establishes EDC, the Export Development Act, includes a mechanism which 
allows EDC to request loans from the Minister of Finance. To the best of our knowledge, this 
mechanism has never been used. EDC 's Borrowing Plan is included in its Cor porate Plan and is 
available at the link below.  
https://www.edc.ca/en/about -us/corporate/corporate -reports.html  
3.3 Measures Affecting Production and Trade, 3.3.1 Incentives, 3 .3.1.1 Incentives 
programmes, paragraph 3.138, page 94  
Question  
With regard to the Strategic Aerospace and Defence Initiative (SADI), could Canada clarify whether 
the same company can participate in the SADI initiative and receive export credits from EDC?  
Reply  
The Strategic Aerospace and Defence Initiative (SADI) is no longer accepting applications. 
Participation in the SADI initiative is independent of support from other programme s. 
3.3.4 Competition policy and price controls, 3.3.4.1 Main regulatory and institutional 
framework, paragraph 3.192, page 105  
Question  
Could Canada clarify how the Competition Tribunal 's rulings relate to the incentives granted by the 
Member? For instance, can a conviction in the court prevent access by a particular company to 
government support?  
Reply  
A criminal conviction under section 45, 46, 47, 49, 52 or 53 of the Competition Act will lead to 
automatic ineligibility to do business with the government for up to five years, under Public Services 
and Procurement Can ada's Integrity Regime (Ineligibility and Suspension Policy): 
https://www.tpsgc -pwgsc.gc.ca/ci -if/guide -eng.html#s1  
4 TRADE POLICIES BY SECTOR  
4.3 Manufacturing, 4.3.2 Automotive industry, paragraph 4.156, page 179  
Question  
"Canada is part of the fully integrated North American market with an annual production of almost 
2.24 million vehicles, of which 85% are exported. Canada 's automotive industry benefits from 
Canada 's FTAs, which include the NAFTA, the CETA, the Canada -Korea FTA, and the CPTPP. These WT/TPR/M/389/Add.1  
 
- 18 - 
 
  trade agreements allow automotive investors in Canada to benefit from integrated global supply 
chains. " Will CUSMA cause any major change to the North -American automotive r egime as prevalent 
within NAFTA? In particular, is the regional value chain of the automotive sector supposed to change 
significantly when CUSMA enters into force?  
Reply  
CUSMA contains strengthened rules of origin for vehicles and automotive parts that wil l support 
production in the North American region and reaffirm Canada 's attractiveness as an investment 
destination. More specific information can be found on the Global Affairs Canada website 's summary 
on the automotive rules of origin: https://international.gc.ca/trade -commerce/trade -agreements -
accords -commerciaux/agr -acc/cusma -aceum/auto.aspx?lang=eng  
4.3.4 Steel, paragraph 4.166, page 183  
Question  
Is it possible at this stage to gauge the impact on Canadian production and exports of steel and 
aluminum consequent upon the imposition of tariffs by the U.S.? 
Reply  
Based on Statistics Canada, exports of steel mill prod ucts from Canada to the U.S. from June 2018 
to April 2019 declined 24 %, by value, compared to June 2017 to April 2018. Over the same period, 
exports of aluminum products from Canada to the U.S. declined 15 %, by value.  
Question  
What was the final balance in  terms of Canadian production and trade (exports and imports) of steel 
and aluminum after the retaliation?  
Reply  
When the United States (U.S.) imposed tariffs on Canadian steel and aluminum, Canada imposed 
reciprocal, dollar -for-dollar countermeasures agai nst imports of steel, aluminum, and other products 
from the U.S., to encourage the full removal of the U.S. tariffs. Canada has not developed a final 
balance with respect to production and trade during that period.  
Question  
Was the Canadian economy (i.e. GDP and employment) much affected by these measures?  
Reply  
At this time Canada is not able to provide a detailed economic analysis as to the impact that these 
measures have had on the economy as a whole.  
4.4.1 Financial services, 4.4.1.2 Banking serv ices, 4.4.1.2.1 Commercial banks, paragraph 
4.181, page 186  
Question  
Canada 's banking industry is considered as one of the soundest in the world, according to WEF 's 
Global Competitiveness Report. As at end -2018, the federally -regulated banking sector comprised 
35 domestic banks, 21 foreign -bank subsidiaries, 28 full service foreign -bank branches, four 
foreign -bank lending branches, and 23 foreign -bank representative  offices. Foreign banks are 
particularly active in corporate lending, trade finance, and capital markets. Federally -regulated 
banks account for the majority (91%) of total deposit -taking institution assets. Financial 
cooperatives (credit unions and caisses  populaires – discussed in the following section) account for 
9%. The industry remains highly concentrated, with the six largest domestic banks holding about WT/TPR/M/389/Add.1  
 
- 19 - 
 
  90% of the total assets of federally -regulated deposit -taking institutions. During the TPR period,  
Canadian banks continued to expand their international operations, particularly in retail banking, 
capital markets, and wealth management. Their international assets increased by 43% between 
2010 and 2015, to reach CAD  1.3 trillion.  Canada 's banking syste m is sound, and the non -performing 
loan ratio remained below 1% over the past few years. " What are the differences between these 
categories with regard to banking supervision? Are there different periodicity, criticality and 
comprehensiveness?  
Reply  
The Of fice of the Superintendent of Financial Institution 's (OSFI) supervisory approach is risk -based, 
in that it focuses on the nature, size, complexity and risk profile of an institution. OSFI recognizes 
the importance of allowing financial institutions to com pete and take reasonable risks, and it holds 
boards and senior management ultimately responsible for the viability of their institutions.  
As discussed in section 4.185 of the Secretariat Report, subsidiaries of foreign banks are 
incorporated under the Bank Act and are subject to the same regulatory and prudential requirements 
as domestic banks.  
You will find a list of applicable OSFI Guidelines here: http://www.o sfi-bsif.gc.ca/eng/fi -if/rg-ro/gdn -
ort/gl -ld/pages/default.aspx . 
For Foreign Bank Branches (FBBs) operating in Canada, the Guide to Foreign Bank Branching sets 
out the various prudential, regulatory and legislative criteria and information requirements relative 
to applications for the establishment and commencement of business of a FBB. FBBs are limited in 
terms of the types of deposits they can accept as liabilities; however, unlike foreign bank 
subsidiaries, FBB 's are not subject to OSFI 's liquidity adequacy requirements (LAR) guidelines.  
FBBs are also subject to less stringent capital requirements when compared to banks incorporated 
in Canada. A lending branch is required to maintain assets on deposit equal to CAD 100,000. A 
full-service b ranch is required to maintain assets on deposit equal to CAD 5 million or 5% of the 
liabilities of the Authorized Foreign Bank in respect of its business in Canada, whichever is greater. 
OSFI expects a full -service branch to maintain a buffer above this am ount to take into account the 
projected fluctuations in the FBB 's liabilities. The assets held on deposit must be of a type approved 
by the Superintendent and must be kept with a Canadian financial institution approved by the 
Superintendent. The Superinten dent may also require an Authorized Foreign Bank to maintain 
additional assets as necessary to protect depositors and creditors. Please refer to OSFI Guideline 
A-10 Capital Equivalency Deposit for more information: http://www.osfi -bsif.gc.ca/Eng/fi -if/rg-
ro/gdn -ort/gl -ld/Pages/a10fbb.aspx . 
Question  
Is the institution charged with controlling the degree of banking concentration the same institution 
responsible for regulating concentration in other economic sectors?  
Reply  
Regulated financial service providers are overseen by a number of authorities, depending on the 
institution and the type of activity being regulated. As discussed in the Secretariat Report, the 
regulation and oversight of financial institutions is shared among federal, provincial, and territorial 
authorities.  
Federally, the Minister of Finance has overarching authority over federal financial sector legislation, 
supported by the Depart ment of Finance Canada. This includes the governing legislation setting out 
clear independent mandates for each of the four federal financial sector oversight bodies, which 
includes: the Bank of Canada, the Canada Deposit Insurance Corporation, Financial C onsumer 
Agency of Canada, and the Office of the Superintendent of Financial Institutions. Federal agencies 
have well -established mechanisms to ensure collaboration, information sharing and cooperation. 
Further details on each agencies ' mandate are discusse d in the Secretariat Report.  
  WT/TPR/M/389/Add.1  
 
- 20 - 
 
  Each province and territory also has its own regulatory framework governing, for example, securities 
firms, payday lenders, and non -federally incorporated insurers and credit unions. Mechanisms exist 
for collaboration among federal and provincial -territorial regulatory agencies and ministries 
responsible for financial sector policy. As discussed in the Secretariat Report, federal and provincial 
authorities are responsible for the prudential oversight and management of stabili ty risks arising in 
institutions under their own jurisdictions.  
The Competition Bureau is Canada 's competition authority. It is an independent, federal law 
enforcement agency responsible for the administration and enforcement of Canada 's competition 
laws a cross all sectors, including financial services. As a law enforcement agency, the Competition 
Bureau does not have a regulatory function, rather it conducts reviews of merger transactions and 
investigations of anti -competitive behaviour ranging from cartel s, bid rigging, deceptive marketing 
practices, abuse of dominance, competitive collaborations, among others.  
4.4.1.2.2 Other deposit -taking institutions, paragraph 4.195, page 189  
Question  
Financial cooperatives can incorporate either under provincial or t erritorial laws, or under the federal 
Bank Act (either as a new institution, or by transitioning from the provincial to the federal 
framework). Currently, most of them are regulated provincially. They are typically affiliated through 
credit union centrals,  which provide liquidity and payment services to their corporate members. The 
Canadian Credit Union Association (formerly the Credit Union Central of Canada) is the national trade 
association representing financial cooperatives (except those from Quebec). Do cooperatives need 
to have specific purpose in their financing lines? Are their loans limited to a specific group or is the 
percentage of leverage lower than other financial institutions?  
Reply  
The Office of the Superintendent of Financial Institution (OSFI) only regulates credit unions that are 
incorporated under the Bank Act (known as Federal Credit Unions or FCUs). Credit unions 
incorporated under the laws of a province are subject to the specific requirements of the province in 
which the y are based, which may vary. Under Canada 's federal framework, FCUs are subject to the 
same regulatory and capital requirements as domestic and foreign bank subsidiaries. This includes 
requirements with respect to leverage and lending.  
Leverage requirement s: http://www.osfi -bsif.gc.ca/Eng/fi -if/rg-ro/gd  
Report by Canada – WT/TPR/G/389  
3 TRADE POLICY DEVELOPMENTS 2015 -2019  
Diversification, paragraph 3.3, page 6  
Question  
"Diversifying Canada 's trade through multilateral trade liberalization and an ambitious bilateral and 
regional trade agenda is essential to the country 's continued economic prosperity and 
competitiveness. To complement efforts to improve access to new markets, Canada has recentl y 
unveiled a new Export Diversification Strategy, with the goal of increasing overseas exports by 50% 
by 2025. " Once export growth is mainly grounded on external demand, how does Canada intend to 
reconcile the targets contained in the new Export Diversific ation Strategy with challenging global 
growth perspectives?   
Reply  
Canada 's Export Diversification Strategy is oriented around the target of increasing overseas exports 
by 50 % by 2025. To help achieve this goal, the Government of Canada has a role in reduc ing trade 
frictions (costs) between Canada and international markets, such as through the tariff reductions 
and measures to eliminate non -tariff barriers that are often found in free trade agreements. The 
Government of Canada is working to ensure that Cana dian exporters have the opportunities and 
access to diversify in fast growing markets and sectors. Canada has several new trade agreements WT/TPR/M/389/Add.1  
 
- 21 - 
 
  in place and is seeing the benefits of these agreements (e.g. CETA, CPTPP). Canada is currently 
negotiating free trad e agreements (FTAs) with Mercosur and the Pacific Alliance and is in exploring 
the potential for launching FTA negotiations with ASEAN. In addition, Canada provides various trade 
services and programming to its exporters. For example, the Trade Commissione r Service offers 
advice and market intelligence that is often of great value to Canadian exporters targeting new 
international markets.  
3.1 Multilateral Trade Policy, 3.1.1 Canada and the WTO, paragraph 3.8, page 7  
Question  
Does the Canadian government have an estimation of the possible impact on its economy of a 
scenario of escalating trade tensions within the international system?  
Reply  
At this time Canada does not have an analysis to share as to the possible impact on the Canadian 
economy of escalating trade tensions within the international system.  
4.1 Canadian Free Trade Agreement (CFTA), paragraph 4.2, page 16  
Question  
Would Canada please explain to what extent the Canadian Free Trade Agreement will in effect result 
in a greater harmonization regarding the preparation, adoption and application of standards, 
technical regulations, and conformity assessment procedures between the central level of 
government and the provincial level?  
Reply  
The Canadian Free Trade Agreement (CFTA) aim s to reduce barriers to trade, investment, and 
worker mobility within Canada, including through its obligations on technical regulations, standards 
and conformity assessment procedures (Article 302). This includes provisions that may lead to 
increased harm onization between Canada 's federal, provincial and territorial governments, such as 
requirements to, wherever appropriate: (i) base technical regulations on relevant national, de facto 
national or international standards; (ii) use relevant national or inte rnational guides and 
recommendations as a basis for conformity assessment procedures; and (iii) cooperate to develop 
national standards. In addition to these specific rules, the CFTA 's Regulatory Reconciliation and 
Cooperation Table (RCT) was established t o address regulatory differences across jurisdictions that 
act as a barrier to trade, investment or labour mobility within Canada, including those in the area of 
Technical Barriers to Trade. The RCT also oversees the CFTA 's regulatory cooperation process 
through which Canada 's federal, provincial and territorial governments can cooperate to avoid the 
creation of barriers in new and emerging sectors. The RCT released its first annual work plan for 
2018-2019, identifying 23 items.  
Additional information on t he RCT and its work plan items can be found on the CFTA website : 
(https://www.cfta -alec.ca/ ). 
Question  
If available, could Canada please provide an example of how the CFTA has contributed for the 
reduction or elimination of trade -restricting regulatory distinctions and/or obstacles in a sub -central 
level?  
Reply  
The Canadian Free Trade Agreement 's (CFTA) Regulatory Reconciliation and Cooperation Table 
(RCT) was established to address regulatory differences acros s jurisdictions that act as a barrier to 
trade, investment or labour mobility within Canada. The RCT released its first annual work plan for 
2018-2019, identifying 23  items. Two reconciliation agreements with respect to Organic Labelling 
for Aquaculture Pr oducts and Inspection Requirements for Produce, have been completed and fully WT/TPR/M/389/Add.1  
 
- 22 - 
 
  implemented. Through the Safe Food for Canadians Act and its regulations, the scope of products 
that may be labelled as organic was broadened to include aquaculture products, and  requirements 
for quality inspections for blueberries and grade inspections for apples and potatoes prior to 
transportation from one province to another were removed.  The work of the RCT is ongoing. 
However, progress is already being made on several of the  items.  For example, in January 2019, 
the federal -provincial -territorial Ministers Responsible for Labour endorsed the National Occupational 
Health and Safety Reconciliation Agreement. This agreement aims to harmonize several occupational 
health and safety  standards, such as first aid kits, eye and face protection and personal flotation 
devices. Simplifying regulatory requirements will help organizations and businesses work more 
seamlessly across multiple jurisdictions, including reduce costs without compro mising health and 
safety protections for workers. Also, in January 2019, the federal -provincial -territorial Council of 
Ministers Responsible for Transportation and Highway Safety agreed to establish the same weight 
limits for wide base single tires as dual  tires within their respective jurisdictions, which will reduce 
costs and increase fuel efficiency.  For more information, please visit the CFTA website on regulatory 
reconciliation. https://www.cfta -alec.ca/ . 
Paragraph 4.6, page 16  
Question  
Would Canada please provide information regarding the role of the RCT in the alignment of its 
domestic trade rules with the country 's international trade agr eements?  
Reply  
The Canadian Free Trade Agreement 's (CFTA) Regulatory Reconciliation and Cooperation Table 
(RCT) was established to address regulatory measures that act as a barrier to trade, investment or 
labour mobility within Canada. The RCT is a federal -provincial -territorial body established by the 
CFTA to oversee the regulatory reconciliation process and promote regulatory cooperation across 
Canada. Its mandate is to address barriers identified within Canada, including diverging or 
duplicative regulati ons that impede the flow of goods, services, or investment. Article 402 of the 
CFTA states that if a Party to the Agreement proposes to adopt or modify a regulation that may have 
a significant effect on trade or investment within Canada, that Party must pu blish online a description 
of the proposed regulation at an early appropriate stage in order for Parties and interested persons 
to become acquainted with it; allow reasonable time for Parties and interested persons to provide 
written comments and take such  comments into account; and endeavour to allow at least 30 days 
for comments, taking into account international obligations.  
  WT/TPR/M/389/Add.1  
 
- 23 - 
 
  CHILE  
Report by the Secretariat – WT/TPR/S/389  
3 TRADE POLICIES AND PRACTICES BY MEASURE  
3.1 Measures Directly Affecting imports, 3.1.4 Other charges affecting imports, 3.1.4.2 
Federal excise duties and taxes, paragraph 3.54, page 67  
 
Question  
Chile would be grateful if Canada could explain how this differential treatment between domestic 
and imported products is compatible with the national treatment principle (GATT Article III).  
Reply  
Given the ongoing WTO dispute settlement process on elements of the alcohol tax regimes in 
Canada, it would be inappropriate to comment further at this time.  
3.1.4.3 Provincial product -specific taxes, Table 3.16, pages 69 -70 
Question  
Chile would be grateful if Canada could clarify whether this distinction is made solely among 
Canadian national producers or whether said distinction is regardless of wh ether it is locally produced 
or not. If the first case applies (only among domestic producers), Chile would appreciate if Canada 
could provide information regarding what rate would be applicable to imports in this context.  
Reply  
Small, medium and large producers are classified as such based on their reported annual hectolitre 
production; there is no preferential treatment to any one country of origin.  
3.1.7 Other measures affecting imports, paragraph 3.10 8, page 87  
Question  
Section 3.1.7 explains t hat Canada applied counter -measures on the United States following the 
United States ' imposition of measures against steel and aluminum. Chile asks that Canada share the 
legal basis for the application of said counter -measures.  
Reply  
When the United States  (U.S.) imposed tariffs on Canadian steel and aluminum, Canada imposed 
reciprocal, dollar -for-dollar countermeasures against imports of steel, aluminum, and other products 
from the U.S., to encourage the full removal of the U.S. tariffs. These were imposed  under the 
authority provided for under section 53(2) of the Customs Tariff.  
3.3.2 Standards and other technical requirements, 3.2.2.1 Standards, paragraph 3.149, 
page 96  
Question  
In relation to Paragraph 3.149, Chile would appreciate if Canada could provide information regarding 
the SCC 's role of promoting the participation of Canadians in standardization activities: how is this 
participation promoted and by means of which activities?  
Reply  
It is important to the Standards Council of Canada (SCC) to e ffectively engage Canada 's experts to 
participate in Canada 's standardization network. SCC is dedicated to ensuring effective Canadian WT/TPR/M/389/Add.1  
 
- 24 - 
 
  representation at international forums of priority and strategic importance to Canada. Thus, SCC 's 
member programme  is involved in the recruitment of expert volunteers by promoting the benefits 
and importance of being involved in standardization to a range of stakeholder groups including, but 
not limited to, industry, government, academia and consumers. Because SCC does not develop 
standards, the recruitment of experts is primarily for the management of Canada 's participation in 
international standardization, such as the International Organization for Standardization (ISO) and 
the International Electrotechnical Commission (IE C). The activities undertaken to promote the 
participation of Canadians in standardization include a dedicated page on SCC 's website on volunteer 
opportunities and benefits; the technical committees that are currently recruiting members are 
advertised in S CC's Monthly News Letter; and SCC 's social media engagement is targeted at raising 
awareness of opportunities in standardization.  
3.3.2.2 Technical regulations, paragraph 3.165, page 99  
Question  
Regarding the entry into force of the regulations, Chile woul d be grateful if Canada could clarify 
whether it has taken into considerations the WTO 's recommendation that regulations enter into force 
at least 6 months following their publication.  
Reply  
The Cabinet Directive on Regulation sets out the Government of Ca nada's expectations and 
requirements in the development, management, and review of federal regulations. The Directive 
requires departments and agencies to ensure that Canada 's international commitments, such as 
under the World Trade Organization and Canada 's Free Trade Agreements, are met when carrying 
out their regulatory activities, including the publication and entry into force of regulations.  
Question  
Chile would be grateful if Canada could provide information on the procedure for responding to 
comments sent by other members of the WTO during the period of public international consultations.  
Reply  
The Cabinet Directive on Regulation sets out the Government of Canada 's expectations and 
requirements in the development, management, and review of federal regulations. The Directive 
requires departments and agencies to consult for a minimum of 70 days on proposals for new and 
amended technical regulations that may have a significant effect on international trade, including 
with trading partners that may be affected. There are no requirements to formally respond to 
comments received during this consultation period, including those received from other members of 
the WTO. The publication of the final regulations includes a summary of comments received du ring 
the consultation period and offers the opportunity to outline how the regulation responds to the 
issues raised.  
Question  
Chile would be grateful if Canada could inform us whether the RIAS methodology and public national 
and international consultations  also apply to the proposed legislation presented before Congress and 
which have the status of Technical Regulations or Conformity Assessment Procedure.  
Reply  
In Canada, proposed legislation presented before Parliament is not subject to Regulatory Impact 
Analysis Statement (RIAS) requirements; however, it does not typically constitute technical 
regulations or conformity assessment procedures. Legislation sets out objectives and outcomes with 
details such as conformity assessment procedures typically set ou t in subsequent regulations for 
which RIAS requirements exist.  WT/TPR/M/389/Add.1  
 
- 25 - 
 
  Paragraph 3.170, page 100  
Question  
Chile would be grateful if Canada could provide information regarding the place or means whereby 
Canada 's technical regulations are published. In this context , please clarify whether there is a 
centralized website of if they are published by each regulatory agency.  
Reply  
In accordance with the Statutory Instruments Act, all approved regulations must be published in the 
Canada Gazette, Part II, after they are ma de and registered except where they are exempted under 
section 15 of the Statutory Instruments Regulations (C.R.C., c. 1509).  
In addition, Canada 's Justice Laws Website contains all official Canadian consolidated Acts and 
regulations as a convenient way fo r the public to view the state of the law, without having to carry 
out research and put together the various amended provisions. https://laws -lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/ . 
3.3.2.3 Accreditation and conformity assessment, paragraph 3.172, page 101  
Question  
Chile would be grateful if Canada could specify whether it accepts foreign tests and/or certifications, 
and if so, under which modality.  
Reply  
The Standards Council of Canada accepts foreign test re sults and/or certification of other National 
Accreditation Bodies that are signatory to the same scopes in the International Accreditation Forum 
(IAF) or the International Laboratory Accreditation Cooperation (ILAC). However, the Standards 
Council of Canad a is not a regulatory body and the acceptance of test result and/or certification is 
often at the discretion of the relevant regulatory authority.  
In terms of Telecommunication Equipment, the regulatory body uses Mutual Recognition 
Arrangements such as the  APEC TEL MRA for Conformity Assessment of Telecommunication 
Equipment.  
Paragraph 3.181, page 102  
Question  
Chile would be grateful if Canada could provide information regarding the existence of current Mutual 
Recognition or Regulatory Cooperation Agreement s. 
Reply  
For a complete list of Canadian participation in conformity assessment agreements, including mutual 
recognition arrangements, please refer to Table  A3.3 in the Secretariat Report for Canada 's 2019 
Trade Policy Review (TPR) , page 224 . 
Canada also has three regulatory cooperation agreements currently in place:  
• Canada -United States Regulatory Cooperation Council (RCC)  
• Regulatory Reconciliation and Cooperation Table (RCT) under the Canadian Free Trade 
Agreement (CFTA)  
• Regulatory Cooperation Forum  (RCF) under the Canada -European Union Comprehensive 
Economic and Trade Agreement (CETA)  WT/TPR/M/389/Add.1  
 
- 26 - 
 
  For additional information, please see the following: Cabinet Directive on Regulation: 
https://www.canada.ca/en/treasury -board -secretariat/services/federal -regulatory -
management/guidelines -tools/cabinet -directive -regulation.html . 
Policy on Regulatory Development: https://www.canada.ca/en/treasury -board -
secretariat/services/fe deral-regulatory -management/guidelines -tools/policy -regulatory -
development.html . 
3.3.3 Sanitary and phytosanitary requirements, paragraph 3.184, page 103  
Question  
Regarding the establishment of maximum residue limits (MRLs), Chile would be grateful if Cana da 
could provide information on whether they are based on any international standard.  
Reply  
Prior to the registration of a pesticide, Canada conducts a thorough review of applicant -submitted 
scientific studies, including crop field trials, which form the b asis of the pesticide Maximum Residue 
Limits (MRLs). Consultation on all proposed Canadian pesticide MRLs, to replace or be added to the 
MRLs already established, is conducted via the Proposed Maximum Residue Limit (PMRL) public 
consultation document. In e ach PMRL document the international situation and trade implications 
are addressed, including differences, if any, with Codex MRLs. Proposed Canadian MRLs may vary 
from those adopted by Codex for a number of reasons, including differences in pesticide use patterns 
and the locations of the crop field trials included as part of the residue chemistry data. Moreover, 
Codex establishes chemical/commodity MRLs based upon supporting residue trial data which reflect 
the different use patterns that are registered/ap proved in various member countries, to reflect 
specific needs in terms of the nature/scope of pests and varying pest pressures. Therefore, Codex 
MRLs are set at levels high enough to accommodate the use pattern generating the highest residues 
in the suppor ting trials.  
Paragraph 3.187, page 104  
Question  
Chile would be grateful if Canada could provide information on whether the PAHS includes industry 
representatives. Likewise, please provide information on how coordination between Government and 
industry regarding SPS is conducted and how internal coordination at the Government level is 
conducted.   
Reply  
Implementation of plant focussed activities outlined within the Plant and Animal Health Strategy 
(PAHS) for Canada is being overseen by the recen tly established Canadian Plant Health Council. The 
eleven -member Canadian Plant Health Council brings together federal, provincial, and territorial 
governments, academic and industry representatives from the horticulture, grains, crop protection 
and inputs , and forestry sectors. One industry representative and one provincial government 
representative serve as co -chairs to the Canadian Plant Health Council. All members are responsible 
for engaging their respective organizations and across related association s, organizations, ministries, 
and departments as required to solicit input. Members of the Canadian Plant Health Council work 
through consensus and have established three multi -partner working groups that include industry, 
government, and academia represen tatives. The working groups are tasked with providing tangible 
priority action in the areas of biosecurity, emergency response, and surveillance.  With respect to the 
animal component of the PAHS, in 2018 , the National Farmed Animal Health and Welfare Counc il 
assumed the role of coordinating body. The National Farmed Animal Health and Welfare Council was 
a pre -existing body consisting of representatives from the federal, provincial, and territorial 
governments, and the farmed animal industry. The National Fa rmed Animal Health and Welfare 
Council has both government and industry co -chairs. The National Farmed Animal Health and 
Welfare Council itself is supported by working level committees with also include federal, provincial, 
territorial, and industry repres entation.  Activities are coordinated through the establishment of 
shared priorities, the sharing of information, and where feasible the coordination of funding activities WT/TPR/M/389/Add.1  
 
- 27 - 
 
  to help ensure synergistic use of resources. In addition, the National Farmed Animal Health and 
Welfare Council has assumed management of the Canadian Animal Health Surveillance System 
(CAHSS), an industry and government partnership, comprised of regional and species based 
surveillance networks. Surveillance is a key element of the PAHS.  
4 TRADE POLICIES BY SECTOR  
4.4 Services, 4.4.2 Telecommunications, paragraph 4.219, page 194  
Question  
Chile would be thankful if Canada can explain why it includes IPTV under broadcasting, since it 
operates over Internet (telecommunications), and in the sam e paragraph it says that it does not 
regulate Internet Broadcasting. Does it mean that Canada regulates those services twice or that it 
does not regulate IPTV?  
Reply  
Canada regulates Internet Protocol television (IPTV) when it is provided over proprietary networks 
by telecommunications providers using high -speed telecommunications facilities. This is similar to 
how Canada regulates other broadcasting distributors that use technologies such as cable and direct -
to-home satellite to deliver TV serv ice to customers. These services redistribute programming from 
conventional over -the-air television and provide access to discretionary services (e.g. pay, speciality 
and pay -per-view services). Canada does not currently license digital media broadcasters that 
deliver their services through the open Internet, due to the Exemption Order for Digital Media 
Broadcasting Undertakings issued by the Canadian Radio -Television and Telecommunications 
Commission.  
4.4.3 Transport, 4.4.3.1 Air transport and airports, 4. 4.3.1.1 Air transport, paragraph 
4.232, page 197  
Question  
Chile would be thankful if Canada can further explain the concept of "Domestic Air Services 
Operators ". Does it mean internal routes (cabotage) or any Airline that operates in Canada?  
Reply  
A domest ic air service is a commercial air service provided wholly within Canada (i.e., cabotage).  In 
order to provide a domestic air service, the operator must hold a valid economic licen ce for domestic 
air transportation issued by the Canadian Transportation Age ncy. Only operators that are Canadian 
owned and controlled may be issued an economic licen ce. An operator that is not Canadian owned 
and controlled is not permitted to engage in cabotage.  
  WT/TPR/M/389/Add.1  
 
- 28 - 
 
  CHINA  
Report by the Secretariat – WT/TPR/S/389  
SUMMARY  
Paragraph 10, page 10  
Question  
Please give further explanations on why most long -standing foreign investment restrictions remain 
in place, although there has been a relaxation of ownership rules for the airline sector.  
Reply  
The Government of Canada has ma de no announcements to further relax restrictions on market 
access for other related industries. Canada introduced important changes to the air transportation 
sector in December 2018 by easing the foreign ownership limits on the voting interests in Canadia n 
air carriers providing passenger or all -cargo air services from 25% to 49%.  
Question  
Does Canada have plans to further relax the restrictions on market access for related industries? If 
yes, please give some details.  
Reply  
The Government of Canada has ma de no announcements to further relax restrictions on market 
access for other related industries.  
Paragraph 14 , page 11  
Question  
The provinces levy various provincial taxes based on a 5% value added tax at the Federal level. In 
this case, the levels of VAT are inconsistent among different provinces. How will Canada prevent 
enterprises in provinces with higher VAT from being attracted to those with lower tax rates? Has 
Canada applied other preferential tax policies to solve the problem?  
Reply  
The Harmonized S ales Tax (HST) is a value -added tax (VAT) that applies to most property and 
services acquired for consumption in an HST province in Canada: i.e., in Ontario, Nova Scotia, New 
Brunswick, Prince Edward Island, or Newfoundland and Labrador. Under the HST, the  consumption 
of a property or service is generally considered to occur in the place that is the "destination " (rather 
than the origin) of the supply of that property or service. For example, if services are supplied to a 
person in an HST province such as Ontario (i.e., Ontario is the destination of the supply), then 
Ontario 's HST rate of 13% would generally apply  to that supply of services. In addition, if a property 
or service is supplied in a province and is subsequently brought into another province where a higher 
HST rate applies, the person bringing the property or service into that province may be required t o 
self-assess HST.  
Paragraph 22, page 12  
Question  
Canada formally eliminated export subsidies for wheat, coarse grains, oilseeds, vegetable oils, 
oilcakes, and vegetables in December 2015, and has committed to eliminate its remaining export 
subsidies by th e end of 2020 in accordance with the Nairobi Ministerial Decision on Export 
Competition. The main programmes and services supporting the agricultural sector are provided 
through a joint federal and provincial/territorial policy framework of a five -year dur ation. What WT/TPR/M/389/Add.1  
 
- 29 - 
 
  important projects or services did the joint federal and provincial/territorial policy framework support 
after Canadas elimination of export subsidies?  
Reply  
Over the 2013 -2018 period, Growing Forward 2 (GF2) was the joint federal, provincial a nd territorial 
framework that supported Canada 's agriculture sector. The Canadian Agricultural Partnership is the 
joint framework, currently in place, covering the 2018 -2023 period. Canada would like to clarify that 
the programme s under the Partnership are  not linked to export subsidies and that no specific projects 
or services have been put in place by Canada to support the agricultural industry for the elimination 
of export subsidies.  
Question  
Canada formally eliminated export subsidies for wheat, coarse grains, oilseeds, vegetable oils, 
oilcakes, and vegetables in December 2015, and has committed to eliminate its remaining export 
subsidies by the end of 2020 in accordance with the Nairobi Ministerial Decision on Export 
Competition. The main programmes and  services supporting the agricultural sector are provided 
through a joint federal and provincial/territorial policy framework of a five -year duration. What 
export subsidies are still yet to be eliminated by Canada and why? What measures can be taken to 
ensure that these subsidies can be eliminated on schedule?  
Reply  
Canada would first like to clarify that its new programme s under the Canadian Agricultural 
Partnership are not linked to export subsidies.  
a) As per Footnote 4 of the Nairobi Ministerial Decision o n Export Competition, Canada continues 
to have a quantity and outlay commitment on export subsidies for butter, cheese, skim milk 
powder and products using dairy ingredients until the end of 2020.  
 
b) Canada has implemented the Nairobi Decision and will eliminate all remaining export subsidies 
by the end of 2020.  
Question  
Canada formally eliminated export subsidies for wheat, coarse grains, oilseeds, vegetable oils, 
oilcakes, and vegetables in December 2015, and has committed to eliminate its remaining ex port 
subsidies by the end of 2020 in accordance with the Nairobi Ministerial Decision on Export 
Competition. The main programmes and services supporting the agricultural sector are provided 
through a joint federal and provincial/territorial policy framewor k of a five -year duration. Please give 
more details on Canada 's current policies on export subsidies, including objects for subsidies and 
how to subsidize. Regarding that Canada has committed to eliminate its remaining export subsidies 
by the end of 2020 i n accordance with the Nairobi Ministerial Decision on Export Competition, which 
are the specific objects of export subsidies?  
Reply  
1) The Canadian Dairy Commission (CDC) supports exports, consistent with Canada 's trade 
obligation, through the Dairy Export Pr ogram. Applicants must be federally licenced plants or 
exporters and all exports are within Canada 's export subsidies commitments.  
 
2) As per Footnote 4 of the Nairobi Ministerial Decision on Export Competition, Canada continues 
to have a quantity and outlays  commitment on export subsidies on butter, cheese, skim milk 
powder and products using dairy ingredients until the end of 2020. These export subsidies are 
restricted to the quantity and outlays commitments as set out in Canada 's modified export 
subsidy sch edule. Canada will comply with its WTO obligations and eliminate all export 
subsidies by the end of 2020.   WT/TPR/M/389/Add.1  
 
- 30 - 
 
  Paragraph 26, page 13 and  
3 TRADE POLICIES AND PRACTICES BY MEASURE  
3.3 Measures Affecting Production and Trade, 3.3.1 Incentives, 3.3.1.1 Incentives 
programmes, paragraph 3.136, page 94  
Question  
According to the Report by the Secretariat, in June 2018, Canada announced that it would make 
available up to CAD 2 billion to defe nd and protect the interests of Canadian workers and businesses 
in the steel, aluminium and manufacturing industries. In October 2018, Canada imposed provisional 
safeguard measures on seven categories of steel products, in response to an increase in import s. 
Please provide more information on how the measures mentioned above protect the interests of 
related Canadian industries.  
Reply  
Canada 's action to make available up to CAD 2 billion to Canadian workers and businesses in the 
steel, aluminium and manufact uring industries was taken in recognition of the impact that trade -
restrictive actions imposed by the United States against Canadian steel and aluminum may be having 
on Canadian businesses, workers and communities. Likewise, the imposition of 200 -day provi sional 
safeguard measures in October 2018 on seven categories of steel products was taken to provide 
Canadian producers and workers interim relief from the effects of excessive imports while the 
Canadian International Trade Tribunal inquired into whether f inal safeguards are warranted.  
Question  
How to strike a balance among protecting the interests of domestic industries, responding to an 
increase in imports and the conformity with WTO rules?  
Reply  
Canada recognizes that the application of safeguards to protect domestic producers from serious 
injury caused, or threatened, by an increase in imports is unique among trade remedy actions and 
that special consideration must be given to the rules governing  their use. The 200 -day provisional 
safeguard measures imposed by Canada on 25 October 2018 on imports of seven steel products 
were taken with due consideration for Canada 's obligations under the Agreement on Safeguards.  
Concurrently, the Government of Canada referred the matter to the Canadian International Trade 
Tribunal for inquiry in order to obtain the Tribunal 's independent advice on whether final safeguards 
are warranted. The Tribunal 's inquiry was conducted in an independent and tra nsparent manner and 
afforded all interested parties the opportunity to have their views heard and considered, as required 
by WTO rules.  
Question  
How to avoid excessive disturbance in market competition caused by relevant financial support to 
certain indust ries? 
Reply  
The Government of Canada does not provide financial support that will cause disturbances in market 
competition and is mindful of its WTO obligations in this regard.  
Question  
Please provide more details about surtax that applies to imports. Exce pt for the seven categories of 
steel products mentioned above in the summary, are there any other objects on which surtax applies 
to imports are levied?  
 WT/TPR/M/389/Add.1  
 
- 31 - 
 
  Reply  
When the United States (U.S.) imposed tariffs on Canadian steel and aluminum, Canada imposed 
reciprocal, dollar -for-dollar countermeasures against imports of steel, aluminum, and other products 
from the U.S., to encourage the full removal of the U.S. tariffs. On 17 May 2019, the U.S. and 
Canada announced the lifting of U.S. section 232 tariffs on Can adian Steel and aluminum, as well as 
Canada 's retaliatory countermeasures. As announced by the Minister of Finance on 20 May 2019, 
Canada 's countermeasures are no longer in effect.  
In addition, Canada imposed 200 -day provisional global safeguard measures on 25 October 2018 on 
imports of seven steel products (energy tubulars, concrete reinforcing bar, heavy plate, hot -rolled 
sheet, pre -pained steel, wire rod and stainless -steel wire).  Concurrently, the Canadian International 
Trade Tribunal (CITT) initiated a global safeguard investigation on imports of these products, to 
determine if final safeguards are warranted. The CITT issued its report and recommendations to the 
Government of Can ada on 3 April 2019. The CITT found that heavy plate and stainless steel wire 
from the subject countries is being imported in such quantities and under such conditions as to be 
a principal cause of a threat of serious injury to the domestic industry and re commended a remedy 
in the form of a tariff rate quota. As recommended by the CITT, Canada imposed final global 
safeguard measures in the form of a tariff rate quota on imports of heavy plate and stainless steel 
wire, effective 13 May 2019. More information  can be found in Canada 's notification to the Committee 
on Safeguards (G/SG/N/8/CAN/3/Suppl.1;  G/SG/N/10/CAN/1; G/SG/N/11/CAN/1/Suppl.1)  
2 TRADE AND INVESTMENT REGIMES  
2.4 Investment Regime, 2.4.1 Framework, paragraph 2.32, page 36  
Question  
The ICA continu es to be the main investment law for reviewing foreign investment into Canada; it 
has been amended several times, including recently to liberalize the net benefit review threshold 
and add national security review transparency. Please make a specific introd uction on add national 
security review transparency.  
Reply  
In 2016, for the first time, Canada published information about the administration of the national 
security review system in the Annual Report with respect to the Investment Canada Act (ICA).  This 
disclosure was made mandatory in 2017.  Additionally, in 2016, Guidelines were issued under the 
ICA that provided clarifications for investors regarding the procedures and timing for national 
security reviews and provided a non -exhaustive list o f factors that will be considered by the 
Government during the assessment of potential national security risks.  
Question  
The ICA continues to be the main investment law for reviewing foreign investment into Canada; it 
has been amended several times, includ ing recently to liberalize the net benefit review threshold 
and add national security review transparency. Please clarify whether there are any discriminatory 
arrangements for foreign state -owned enterprises in the national security review system.  
Reply  
There are no discriminatory arrangements for foreign state -owned enterprises under the national 
security review system.  
Paragraph 2.33, page 36  
Question  
The ICA requires that certain investments by non -Canadians be notified or reviewed for their likely 
net e conomic benefit to Canada. The "net benefit " assessment factors are set out in the law. The 
requirement for review is based on a threshold, which is dependent on the type or origin of the 
investment and is updated every year (Box  2.1). Only acquisitions of  control of Canadian businesses WT/TPR/M/389/Add.1  
 
- 32 - 
 
  that exceed the prescribed dollar -value threshold are subject to the net benefit review requirement 
and must be approved by the minister responsible before implementation. For acquisitions of 
Canadian businesses that do not surpass the relevant monetary threshold, only a notification is 
required. As far as we are concerned, Canada has different access thresholds for foreign investment. 
Please give further information on why Canada sets different thresholds for private compani es and 
state-owned ones.  
Reply  
As described in the public guidelines on the net benefit review of investment by state -owned 
enterprises issued under the Investment Canada Act (ICA), it is the policy of the Government of 
Canada to ensure that the governance  and commercial orientation of SOEs are considered in 
determining whether acquisitions of control in Canada by the State Owned Enterprises (SOEs) are 
of net benefit to Canada. The Guidelines provide that, when assessing whether such acquisitions of 
control  are of net benefit to Canada, the Minister will examine, as part of the assessment of the 
factors enumerated in section  20 of the Act, the corporate governance and reporting structure of 
the non -Canadian. This examination will include whether the non -Canadian adheres to Canadian 
standards of corporate governance (including, for example, commitments to transparency and 
disclosure, independent members of the board of directors, independent audit committees and 
equitable treatment of shareholders), and to Can adian laws and practices, including adherence to 
free market principles.  
3 TRADE POLICIES AND PRACTICES BY MEASURE  
3.1 Measures Directly Affecting Imports, 3.1.1 Customs procedures, valuation, and 
requirements, paragraph 3.7, page 47  
Question  
Paragraph 3.7 briefly describes the construction of the Single Window Initiative (SWI) of Canada 
and mentions that the Integration Import Declaration (IID) platform will be the only electronic 
release request option available for Participating Government A gencies (PGAs) in the future. Please 
further elaborate on the development plan of the IID in 2019 and your consideration of international 
cooperation over the SWI?  
Reply  
In 2019, the Canada Border Services Agency (CBSA) will continue to work with trade cha in partners 
(TCPs) to finalize onboarding and increase the usage of the Single Window (SW) Integrated Import 
Declaration (IID), even as we move to finalize system refinements. The CBSA intends to 
decommission a number of legacy release service options for Participating Government Agencies 
(PGAs) requirements whose functionality is replaced by the IID, once the system is fully functional. 
The CBSA will continue to share information about the SW at international fora, such as the World 
Customs Organization, t o support an open dialogue on best practices with trade partners. However, 
at this time there is no work underway to expand the IID internationally.  
3.1.6.1 Anti -dumping and countervailing measures, paragraph 3.81, page 78  
Question  
Please clarify the deta iled criterion concerning the Price Distortion during AD/CVD investigation.  
Reply  
In determining whether a particular market situation exists, the CBSA will consider whether there 
are any circumstances in the market affecting the sales of like goods for use in the country of export, 
such that a proper comparison is not possible. In these cases, the CBSA will publish the factors 
examined in making this determination in the Statement of Reasons.  
• The following circumstances may indicate the presence of a par ticular market situation 
such that domestic sales of like goods in the country of export do not permit a proper 
comparison:  WT/TPR/M/389/Add.1  
 
- 33 - 
 
  • government regulations which have an effect on domestic selling prices such as price 
floors, price ceilings, production quotas, impo rt and export controls;  
• taxation policies that distort domestic selling prices;  
• government support programme s (financial or otherwise) that distort domestic selling 
prices;  
• the presence and activities of state -owned or state -controlled enterprises in the d omestic 
market as suppliers or purchasers of the like goods (also including other state -owned or 
state-controlled enterprises such as financial institutions);  
• the acquisition of production inputs or processing services that do not reflect market -based 
costs because they are acquired from suppliers which are state owned or state -controlled 
or that are affected by government influence or control;  
• any other circumstances in which normal market conditions or patterns of supply and 
demand do not prevail and have  an impact on domestic selling prices or terms and 
conditions of sale.  
Question  
Concerning the Price Distortion, please clarify which party has the burden of proof, the Petitioner or 
the Respondent.  
Reply  
It is the responsibility of all parties to provide the information requested by the CBSA to assist the 
President of the CBSA in deciding whether to form the opinion under paragraph 16(2)(c) of the 
Special Import Measures Act that a particular market situation exists which does not permit a proper 
compariso n with the sale of the goods to the importer in Canada. It is the responsibility of the CBSA, 
through the investigative process, to decide, on the basis of fact, whether to form this opinion.  
Question  
Please clarify whether there is any targeted country wi th respect to the amendment concerning the 
Price Distortion, i.e., whether it aims to the Non -market Economy Countries as previously stipulated.  
Reply  
The new particular market situation provisions do not target any specific country or countries.  
Paragraph 3.82, page 78  
Question  
Please clarify how to make the decision on the standing issue to initiate the investigation as normally 
the Unions do not have relevant information on the dumping and injury issues.  
Reply  
Under this change, unions now have explicit rights to participate in an investigation; however, they 
are not able to act as complainants. Therefore, there is no impact on how standing is administered.  
Paragraph 3.89, page 81  
Question  
As of 31 December 2018, there were 83 definitive AD measures in place, compared to 53 reported 
in the last TPR for December 2014 (Chart 3.5 and Table A3.1). [...] Please clarify whether it is WT/TPR/M/389/Add.1  
 
- 34 - 
 
  possible for the Chinese Respondents to apply for change of circ umstance review as almost all the 
dumping calculation of these AD cases were based on China 's non -market economy as stipulated by 
Canadian Law other than Price Distortion Principle stipulated.  
Reply  
At any time, a party may request that the Canadian Intern ational Trade Tribunal conduct an interim 
review of the measure, to determine whether, as a result of new facts or changes in circumstances 
since the finding or order, it should be rescinded or continued, with or without amendment.  
3.1.7 Other measures aff ecting imports, paragraphs 107 -108, page 87  
Question  
Please clarify whether the Canadian government imposed countermeasures in the form of surtaxes 
against CAD  16.6 billion in some imports from the U.S. is in line with WTO relevant Agreements.  
Reply  
When the U.S. imposed tariffs on Canadian steel and aluminum, Canada imposed reciprocal, dollar -
for-dollar countermeasures against imports of steel, aluminum, and other products from the U.S., 
to encourage the full removal of the U.S. tariffs. These were i mposed under the authority provided 
for under section 53(2) of the Customs Tariff.  
On 17 May 2019, the U.S. and Canada announced the lifting of U.S. section 232 tariffs on Canadian 
steel and aluminum, as well as Canada 's countermeasures. As announced by th e Minister of Finance 
on 20 May 2019, Canada 's countermeasures are no longer in effect.  
3.3.2 Standards and other technical requirements, 3.3.2.1 Standards, paragraph 3.152, 
page 97  
Question  
Standards are developed through consensus by committees of interested stakeholders, and may 
include representation from categories such as industry, governments, authorities having 
jurisdiction, academia, consumers, and public interest bodies. Does Canada allow foreign companies 
or individuals to participate in an y related technical committees?  
Reply  
The Standards Council of Canada (SCC) oversees voluntary standardization in Canada through its 
accreditation programme  for standards development. This accreditation programme  is outlined in 
the Requirements & Guidance – Accreditation of Standards Development Organizations document. 
This document contains requirements for Standards Development Organizations (SDOs) to ensure 
equal access to the standards development process by concerned interests. SCC 's requirements do 
not prevent the participation of anyone with appropriate technical expertise to the subject matter of 
the standard. However, the SDOs do need to ensure the standard fulfils the needs of Canadian 
stakeholders since the standards they are developing under SCC accreditation are National 
Standards of Canada.  
Question  
Standards are developed through consensus by committees of interested stakeholders, and may 
include representation from categories such as industry, governments, authorities having 
jurisdiction, acad emia, consumers, and public interest bodies. If it does, then what are the 
procedures for the participation in technical committees?  WT/TPR/M/389/Add.1  
 
- 35 - 
 
  Reply  
The Requirements & Guidance document grants the responsibility for the development of standards 
to the accredited Standards Development Organizations (SDOs). Therefore, the procedures for 
participating in technical committees are managed by each SDO. For a directory of SCC 's accredited 
SDOs, please visit their website: http://www.scc.ca/en/accreditation/programs/standards/directory . 
3.3.2.2. Technical regulations, pages 98 -100 
Question  
Section 2.12 of the Agreement on Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT) stipulates that "Members sha ll 
allow a reasonable interval between the publication of technical regulations and their entry into force 
in order to allow time for producers in exporting Members, and particularly in developing country 
Members, to adapt their products or methods of prod uction to the requirements of the importing 
Member ". On 31 March 2018, Natural Resources Canada issued an amendment to the Energy 
Efficiency Regulations in the Canada Gazette and issued a relevant notification (G/TBT/N/CAN/551) 
through the WTO. The goal of  the amendment is to introduce or improve minimum energy 
performance standards (MEPS) for 17 categories of products. However, after the release of the 
regulations, WTO members were not given the necessary transition period. In addition, there are no 
unifie d test methods for some of the new products in Canada. For example, there are different test 
methods between provinces in Canada on the energy efficiency of ceiling fan light kits. In Quebec, 
tests are conducted by adopting IEC60879 -based CSA C814 -96. In O ntario, tests are conducted by 
adopting the test method of DOE based on the U.S. federal electronic regulations. By implementing 
the new amendment to the Energy Efficiency Regulations in the above -mentioned circumstances, 
Canada will create great burdens on the testing and certification of production enterprises in 
exporting countries . Please explain the consistency of the above practice with the WTO rules, and 
consider gradually implementing the new Energy Efficiency Regulations after unifying the test 
methods on product energy efficiency in Canada.  
Reply  
Canada issued notification (G/TBT/N/CAN/551) relating to an Amendment to the Energy Efficiency 
Regulations to the WTO on 24 April 2018. The final date for comments for WTO Members was 17 June 
2018. We note that China provided comments on the measure after this date. The final amendments 
were published in the Canada Gazette, Part II, on 11 October 2018, with the measure entering into 
force six months after this date ( 11 April 2019 – see G/TBT/N/CAN/551a for the final text of the 
measure). Some elements of th e regulations entered into force on the date of the final publication 
in order to allow manufacturers more flexibility in bringing new models of products into Canada. 
Canada remains open to answering any technical questions that China may have on the Amend ment 
in a bilateral context.  
3.3.3 Sanitary and phytosanitary requirements, pages 102 -104 
Question  
The Safe Food for Canadians Act (SFCA) and the Safe Food for Canadian Regulation (SFCR) came 
into effect on 15 January 2019, putting higher requirements for exporting countries. Food regulations 
in Canada previously were based more on separate commodity laws and regulations, such as the 
Meat Inspection Act and its regulation and the Fish Inspection Act and its regulation. The introduction 
of the SFCA and the S FCR is to establish a more rigorous, prevention -based comprehensive 
supervision approach for all food commodities. The Regulation identifies three key elements of food 
safety: on licensing, traceability, and preventive control programme s on food safety. Al though the 
Canadian Federal Government claims that it will comply with international treaties and relevant 
international standards, many food safety standards in the SFCA and the SFCR are higher or different 
from the current international standards, guidel ines or recommendations identified by the 
Agreement on the Application of Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures (the SPS Agreement). This, 
to a certain extent, constitutes a disguised restriction on trade. Could Canada elaborate on the 
consistency of the abo ve new regulations with WTO rules and relevant national standards and 
guidelines?  WT/TPR/M/389/Add.1  
 
- 36 - 
 
  Reply  
The Safe Food for Canadians Regulations (SFCR) are based on Codex Alimentarius Commission 
(Codex) standards, guidelines, and recommendations and principles and were modernized to remove 
prescription and allow innovation. The SFCR apply the same level of rigour to imported, exported 
and domestic products. Food that is imported into Canada must comply with the SFCR and must 
have been made in a manner and under condition s that provide the same level of protection as food 
made in Canada. In this regard, the SFCR does not constitute a disguised restriction to international 
trade.  
Canada consulted with domestic and foreign stakeholders as part of the process of modernizing i ts 
food safety system, which included informing World Trade Organization (WTO) Members through 
numerous WTO notifications and hosting two information sessions on the margins of WTO Committee 
on Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures meetings, one in July 2014  and one in March 2017. 
Throughout this process no major concerns were raised.  
3.3.5 State trading, state -owned enterprises, and privatization, paragraph 3.218, 
page  111 
Question  
"Export Development Canada (EDC) is a financially self -sustained Crown Corpor ation operating at 
arm's length from the Government. As Canada 's export credit agency, the EDC 's mandate is to 
support and develop export trade and help Canadian enterprises respond to international business 
opportunities. The EDC provides insurance and fi nancial services, bonding products and small 
business solutions through a wide range of programmes (Table 3.20), often in partnership with other 
financial institutions. In addition to serving Canadian exporters and their international customers, 
the EDC al so supports Canadian direct investment abroad as well as investment into Canada. The 
EDC normally funds itself in global capital markets but may also, if need be, seek loans from the 
Ministry of Finance. The EDC collects interest on its loans and premiums on its insurance products 
and has a treasury department that sells bonds and raises money in global capital markets. Even 
Export Development Canada (EDC) is a financially self -sustained Crown Corporation operating at 
arm's length from the Government as men tioned, Please clarify whether EDC can be considered to 
be managing the public issue on behalf of Canadian Government.  
Reply  
EDC is mandated to support and develop, directly or indirectly, Canada 's export trade and Canadian 
capacity to engage in that trade  and to respond to international business opportunities. The 
corporation is not mandated to manage public issues on behalf of the Canadian Government.  
Canada would also like to take this opportunity to clarify the following statement in the question: 
"EDC normally funds itself in global capital markets but may also, if need be, seek loans from the 
Ministry of Finance. The EDC collects interest on its loa ns and premiums on its insurance products 
and has a treasury department that sells bonds and raises money in global capital markets. " Please 
note that EDC is a self -financing crown corporation. Since 1993 (the year of the first dividend), EDC 
has paid the Government of Canada CAD 7.4 billion in dividends and been profitable in all but one 
year since the organization 's inception in 1944. In 2019, EDC was pleased to pay the Government 
of Canada a dividend of CAD 1.01 billion . 
Question  
Please clarify whether t he EDC plan is prohibited subsidy and is against WTO Subsidy Agreement as 
it is directly relevant to the export.  
Reply  
EDC financing is compliant with Canada 's WTO obligations.  WT/TPR/M/389/Add.1  
 
- 37 - 
 
  3.3.7 Intellectual property rights, 3.3.7.1 Overview, paragraphs 3.273 -3.277, 
pages  123-124 
Question  
Please give a brief introduction to the new progress that Canada has made in intellectual property 
legislation.  
Reply  
The 2018 Intellectual Property Strategy is designed to remove barriers to innovation, particularly 
any legislative loopholes that allow those seeking to use IP in bad faith to stall innovation for their 
own gain. On this front, Canada has recently passed new amendments to certain IP laws to clarify 
acceptable practices and prevent misuses of IP rights. Thes e amendments target three major issues: 
tackling bad faith trademarks, clarifying patent practices, and improving efficiency in copyright 
tariff-setting.  
First, to prevent the cluttering and misuse of the trademark registration system, notably what is 
some times referred to as "trademark squatting, " Canada introduced new bad faith trademark 
opposition and invalidation grounds. Use is now required to enforce a trademark within the first 
three years after registration.  
Second, Canada has ensured that subsequen t owners of a standard essential patent must honour 
licensing commitments made by previous owners of the same patent and has clarified that it is not 
an infringement to conduct research on the subject matter of a patent. Notably, Canada has also 
created a College for patent and trademark agents, who will be responsible for the formalization of 
a code of conduct and disciplinary process.  
Finally, Canada has amended the Copyright Act to provide explicit markers to guide participants and 
the Copyright Board of  Canada so that they can prepare and engage more efficiently in tariff 
proceedings. These amendments include the establishment of a formal substantive and procedural 
mandate for the Board, and a requirement that the Board consider specific criteria in its 
decision -making. The Copyright Board reforms also provide for faster and more timely proceedings.  
Question  
Please introduce the major challenges confronting intellectual property legislation and typical cases 
tried by the Supreme Court over the past three years in this regard.  
Reply  
Supreme Court of Canada case information can be found online : (https://www.scc -csc.ca/ ). Over 
the past three years, cases related to intellectual property that have been heard at the federal level 
include issues such as patent utility, patent infringement, and copyright infringement. Some 
examples include AstraZeneca Canada Inc. v. Apotex I nc. 2017 SCC 36, Google Inc. v. Equustek 
Solutions Inc. 2017 SCC 34, and Rogers Communications Inc. v. Voltage Pictures, LLC 2018 SCC 38.  
Question  
Please introduce the specialized intellectual property justice system.  
Reply  
Canada does not have a specializ ed intellectual property justice system. Canada 's intellectual 
property laws include civil enforcement remedies (and criminal penalties, in the case of the Crown) 
that may be sought in federal and provincial courts, with some overlapping jurisdiction and s ome 
exclusive jurisdiction. The Patent Appeal Board and the Trademarks Opposition Board also handle 
some administrative matters and the Copyright Board of Canada is responsible for setting tariff rates 
in the case of collective administration of copyright.  WT/TPR/M/389/Add.1  
 
- 38 - 
 
  Question  
What impact would be exerted on intellectual property legislation and law enforcement after the 
signing of United States -Mexico -Canada Agreement?  
Reply  
As in any free trade agreement, obligations, including those related to intellectual property, are 
implemented through domestic legislation and operationalised through the domestic legal 
frameworks of each Party 's territory.  
Information regarding Canada 's implementation of its Canada -United States -Mexico Agreement 
(CUSMA) obli gations required upon entry into force of the Agreement may be found online under 
"An Act to implement the Agreement between Canada, the United States of America and the United 
Mexican States. " (https://www.parl.ca/DocumentViewer/en/42 -1/bill/C -100/first -reading ). Intellectual 
property obligations that are subject to a transition period are not included in the bill outlined above. 
Additional information can also be found in paragraph 3.285 of the Secretariat Report.  
Question  
Please describe the distribution of responsibilities of Canada 's federal and provincial/territorial 
governments in terms of intellectual property protection.  
Reply  
There are a number of federal Acts and R egulations that set the rules for intellectual property (IP) 
protection in Canada (e.g. Patent Act, Trade -marks Act, Copyright Act, Industrial Designs Act). The 
manner in which IP protection is implemented, administered, and enforced will depend on the 
particular aspect of IP under consideration. For example, with respect to trademarks there can be 
concurrent jurisdiction, where certain actions can be brought before either the provincial Superior 
Courts or the Federal Court of Canada.  
Question  
Please elaborate on the main contents of the IP strategy?  
Reply  
The Government of Canada is investing CAD 85.3 million over five years to help Canadian 
businesses, creators, entrepreneurs and innovators understand, protect and access intellectual 
property (IP) th rough a comprehensive IP Strategy. As part of the IP Strategy, the Government will 
be making sure that Canadian businesses, creators, entrepreneurs and innovators have access to 
the best possible IP resources through IP awareness, education and advice; str ategic IP tools for 
growth; and IP legislation. Taken together, these measures will help Canadian innovators maximize 
the value of their creations and enhance further innovation. For more information, see 
www.canada.ca/ip -strategy . 
3.3.7.2 General institutional and regulatory framework, paragraph 3.285, pages 127 -128 
Question  
Please explain how to define "biologic drugs eligible for protection " and the main contents of the PTA 
system?  
Reply  
With respect to the definition of biologics, Article 20.49(2) of the CUSMA intellectual property (IP) 
chapter requires that each Party shall apply the obligation to, at a minimum, "a product that is 
produced using biotechnology processes and that is, or contains, a virus, therapeutic serum, toxin, 
antitoxin, vaccine, blood, blood component or derivative, allergenic product, protein, or analogous WT/TPR/M/389/Add.1  
 
- 39 - 
 
  product, for use in human beings for the prevention, treatment, o r cure of a disease or condition ". 
Canada does not have a patent term adjustment (PTA) regime. With respect to PTA, Article 20.44(3) 
of the CUSMA IP chapter requires that a "Party shall provide the means to, and at the request of the 
patent owner shall, ad just the term of the patent to compensate " for "unreasonable delays in a 
Party's issuance of a patent ". The term of an "unreasonable delay ", and elements that may be 
excluded from the calculation of such a delay, is elaborated in Article 20.44(4) of the CU SMA IP 
chapter. Canada will have a 4.5 year transition period to meet this obligation following the entry into 
force of the Agreement.  
Question  
Please elaborate on the contents of the border enforcement measures, civil and criminal procedures 
stipulated in Combating Counterfeit Products Act?  
Reply  
Information on Canada 's Combating Counterfeit Products Act can be found under Section 3.3.7.10 
IP Enforcement, in paragraphs 3.330 and 3.331 of the Secretariat Report.  
Question  
Please introduce the main reasons for the establishment of the drug patent linkage system, the main 
content and situation of implementation of the system, including problems arising from the p rocess 
of enforcement, the impact of the system on innovative drug makers, generic drug makers and 
public health, and the content, consideration and impact of the 2017 revisions to that system.  
Reply  
Canada 's patent linkage regime was first introduced in 1993 under the Patented Medicines (Notice 
of Compliance) Regulations. Detailed information on the regime may be found online in the 
"Guidance Document " on "Patented Medicines (Notice of Compliance) Regulation s". 
(https://www.canada.ca/content/dam/hc -sc/documents/services/drug -health -product -review -
approval/drug -products/guidance -documents/notice -compliance -regulations.pdf ). 
Additional information can also be found in the Regulatory Impact Analysis Statement, available as 
a part of a September 2017 Canada Gazette process on regulations a mending the Patented Medicines 
(Notice of Compliance) Regulations ( http://www.gazette.gc.ca/rp -pr/p2/2017/2017 -09-07-
x1/html/sor -dors166 -eng.html ). 
Question  
Please introduce the policies and legal provisions relating to the establishment of medical institutions 
by foreign investors in Canada.  
Reply  
Although the federal government plays a role in supporting health care by providing funding to the 
provinces and terr itories, provincial and territorial governments have primary jurisdiction in the 
administration and delivery of health care services. This includes the regulation of medical 
practitioners and health care providers. Therefore, the legislation, regulations, and policies governing 
the establishment of medical institutions by foreign investors in Canada will depend on the 
jurisdiction the investor is targeting.  WT/TPR/M/389/Add.1  
 
- 40 - 
 
  3.3.7.9 Copyright, paragraphs 3.322 and 3.323, pages 134 -135 
Question  
Please further elaborate on the contents of the specific amendments to the Copyright Act and 
whether Canada has any plan or timetable to join the Beijing Treaty on Audiovisual Performances in 
the near future?  
Reply  
The specific amendments to Canada 's Copyright Act during  the review period are outlined under 
Section 3.3.7.9 Copyright under paragraphs 3.322 and 3.323, on page 136 of the Secretariat Report. 
Canada did not sign the Beijing Treaty on Audiovisual Performances. At this time, Canada has not 
signalled intent to ac cede to the Treaty.  
4 TRADE POLICIES BY SECTOR  
4.1 Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries, 4.1.1 Agriculture, 4.1.1.1 Introduction, 
paragraph 4.5, page  138 
Question  
By contrast, in sectors where domestic production is subject to supply management, Canada is a 
net importer (of dairy products, poultry, and eggs). Please specify the operation mode of Canadas 
supply management mechanism of dairy products, poultry, and eggs. How does Canada determine 
the supply quantity of target products? Please provide  relevant law or policy texts.  
Reply  
For dairy, demand for domestic dairy products is assessed using domestic disappearance method. 
The total amount of milk produced must equal demand on a monthly basis. Quota is set at the 
national level. If production ex ceeds or is insufficient, compliance measures are taken to ensure that 
production meets demand on a timely basis.  
For poultry and eggs, all agencies have a proclamation (via the Farm Products Agencies Act) which 
gives them the authority to set the producti on allocation to supply the Canadian demand. Each 
agency has a Board of Directors which comprised of representatives from provincial commodity 
boards and various stakeholders representing the whole value chain to plan and manage production 
of their commodi ty. Agencies ' orders and regulations are approved by the Farm Products Council of 
Canada. Each agency has a unique methodology and process (such as an advisory committee, 
processors requirements, and formula based on demand) for setting their allocation, b ut all are 
based on filling Canadian demand while taking into account anticipated imports.  
Additional details are in each respective agency 's Federal -Provincial Agreements.  
4.1.1.2 Border measures, paragraph 4.8, page 141  
Question  
Under the CETA, Canada agreed to transfer 800 tonnes of cheese within its existing WTO TRQ from 
the non -EU reserve to the EU reserve. It also established additional duty -free TRQ access for 16,000 
tonnes of cheeses and 1,700 tonnes of industrial cheeses. Under the CETA, W TO TRQ is transferred 
to the EU reserve, and additional TRQ access is established for specific member. In that case, how 
can Canada assure that other WTO members are treated non -discriminatorily when they export like 
product in WTO TRQ?  
Reply  
The transfer of 800,000 kilograms of Canada 's 20,411,866 kilograms WTO Tariff Rate Quota (TRQ) 
for cheese to the European Union (EU) was done in accordance with GATT Article XIII: 2 to maintain 
the relative shares of supply due to new EU member State accessions (13 new  member States since 
2004). Canada 's WTO TRQ for cheese applies to all imports of cheese from all WTO Members and is 
therefore consistent with GATT Article I. Canada continues to maintain market access for non -EU WT/TPR/M/389/Add.1  
 
- 41 - 
 
  WTO Members through the non -discriminatory administration of the non -EU portion of its WTO TRQ 
for cheese.  
4.1.1.4 Export measures, Table 4.3, page 144  
Question  
As Table  4.3 indicates, during the period of 20132018, Canada subsidized the export of skim milk 
powder. The subsidy approached WTO commitments from 2013/14 to 2016/17 while zero in 
2017/18. What measure(s) has Canada taken to stabilize the export of skim milk pow der after the 
sharp decrease of subsidies in 2017/18?  
Reply  
As of 2017, export subsidies were no longer used for skim milk powder due to changing market 
conditions. It is the business decision of the processor to either sell these products on the domestic 
market, or to export them. Canada has not taken any measures to stabilize the export of skim milk 
powder.  
4.2 Mining and Energy, 4.2.1 Overview, paragraph 4.98, page 165  
Question  
Sectoral policy is particularly complex, as it involves economic, environment al and social 
considerations. Indeed, many resource development and extractive projects are located in - or near -
Indigenous communities, with which the Government of Canada has a legal duty to consult when 
their rights may be affected by a proposed resourc e project. Canada is in the process of putting in 
place better rules for the governance of such projects and creating a modern energy regulator. This 
new approach will provide investors and companies certainty that good projects can move forward, 
while als o ensuring inclusive engagement in review processes and that the environment is protected. 
As a key element of this endeavour, in June 2018, Bill C -69 was passed in the House of Commons, 
with amendments following feedback from Indigenous peoples, industry stakeholders, and the 
broader public. Canada will continue this engagement as the proposed legislation makes its way 
through the Parliamentary process. How does the Government of Canada precisely define Indigenous 
people?  
Reply  
In Canada, the identificatio n of Indigenous peoples is preferred to a formal definition. The Canadian 
Constitution recognizes three groups of Indigenous peoples: Indians (more commonly referred to as 
First Nations), Inuit and Métis. These are three distinct peoples with unique histor ies, languages, 
cultural practices and spiritual beliefs. Additionally, we use census -data to identify Indigenous 
peoples which is collected based on individual 's identification as Indigenous. More than 1.67 million 
people in Canada identify themselves as an Indigenous person, according to the 2016 Census.  
Question  
Sectoral policy is particularly complex, as it involves economic, environmental and social 
considerations. Indeed, many resource development and extractive projects are located in - or near -
Indigenous communities, with which the Government of Canada has a legal duty to consult when 
their rights may be affected by a proposed resource project. Canada is in the process of putting in 
place better rules for the governance of such projects and creating a modern energy regulator. This 
new approach will provide investors and companies certainty that good projects can move forward, 
while also ensuring inclusive engagement in review processes and that the environment is protected. 
As a key element of this en deavour, in June 2018, Bill C -69 was passed in the House of Commons, 
with amendments following feedback from Indigenous peoples, industry stakeholders, and the 
broader public. Canada will continue this engagement as the proposed legislation makes its way 
through the Parliamentary process. Please specify the rules that are the "better rules " mentioned 
here. Please elaborate on the new approach, and is there a time limit for being approved? Can the 
new approach enhance investors ' confidence after its implemen tation?  WT/TPR/M/389/Add.1  
 
- 42 - 
 
  Reply  
The new legislation reflects values that are important to Canadians – including early, inclusive and 
meaningful public engagement, partnerships with Indigenous Peoples, timely decisions based on the 
best available science and Indigenous knowl edge; and sustainability for present and future 
generations. It would also establish shorter timelines, enshrined in the legislation and set out with 
clear criteria, to help keep the new process on track and predictable. This would restore confidence 
that good projects can move forward in a responsible, timely and transparent way that protects the 
environment, creates jobs and builds a strong economy.  
Paragraph 4.99, pages 165 -166 
Question  
Improvements are being broadly implemented across the sector. For ex ample, oil sand emissions 
per barrel decreased 29% from 2000 to 2016. In spring 2017, the Minister of Natural Resources 
launched the Generation Energy initiative, a national dialogue from which emerged that Canada 's 
energy future is one where energy effici ency is enhanced, innovation in clean power is fostered, 
renewables are adopted, oil and gas is cleaner, and communities, including those of Indigenous 
peoples, are supported. The Government of Canada is acting on this advice and is working with 
provinces and territories to enhance and develop clean growth strategies. The implementation of 
new clean growth strategies can significantly increase the cost of oil and gas investors. Will the 
Government of Canada introduce incentive policies or subsidy programmes  to encourage and attract 
investors?  
Reply  
Canada is taking an approach to energy that will grow the economy and protect the environment. 
These objectives are not opposed. We are producing cleaner oil and gas and creating revenues to 
fund the transition. Canada has the lowest marginal tax rate for new business of all G7 countries 
and we are taking concrete actions to maintain a competitive investment climate economy wide and 
ensure that good energy projects get built. A number of new tax measur es were included in Canada 's 
2018 Fall Economic Statement which offer support to energy sector investors including:  
1. Accelerated Investment Incentive that provides an enhanced tax benefit to capital investments 
in their first year.  
2. Immediate expensing of ma chinery and equipment used in Canada for manufacturing and 
processing goods.  
3. Immediate expensing of clean energy investments allowing specified clean energy equipment 
to immediate write -off full costs.  
Furthermore, the modernization of our environmental and regulatory processes, we are creating 
systems that will build public confidence, enhance regulatory certainty, avoid unnecessary delays 
and reduce risk.  
Paragraph 4.100, page 166  
 
Question  
 
Increased U.S. production of oil and gas from sh ale formations drove down prices, and reduced U.S. 
requirements for imports of natural gas. The authorities indicated that the consumption of Western 
Canadian natural gas by the Central Canadian markets of Ontario and Quebec was displaced, to 
some extent, by cheaper U.S. imports from the nearby Marcellus shale gas basin. Lower natural gas 
prices were followed by the fall in world oil prices, reducing revenues and royalties in the upstream 
sector. As a result, some greenfield projects were delayed or cancell ed, and drilling activity declined 
since 2015. Despite these challenges, Canada saw significant positive activity in its oil and gas sector 
in 2018. For example, Canada received final investment decisions with LNG Canada, which will 
enable access to higher  global natural gas prices. Imperial 's Aspen oil sands project was also 
secured. Further, low prices for natural gas and natural gas liquids (e.g. propane and ethane) created 
additional opportunities for the export of natural gas liquids outside of North A merica, as well as for WT/TPR/M/389/Add.1  
 
- 43 - 
 
  additional petrochemicals production in Canada. What measures will the Government of Canada take 
to address these above -mentioned challenges?  
 
Reply  
 
Canada is working towards a more diversified oil and gas sector through, for exampl e, such measures 
as exploring new market opportunities for natural gas exports and encouraging value -add industrial 
activity in petrochemicals. To alleviate capacity and market access constraints, we continue to work 
with industry and the provinces to supp ort the development of quality infrastructure that is in the 
public interest (e.g. projects such as TransCanada 's NOVA Gas Transmission Ltd. system 
expansions). Further, through collaboration across levels of government as well as with industry, 
Canada is working to create and maintain an attractive investment environment to support the oil 
and gas sectors. The 18 planned liquefied natural gas (LNG) projects on Canada 's east and west 
coasts, highlight the development and growth of a sustainable an d vibrant LNG industry in Canada.  
 
By standing to increase access to world markets, the LNG Canada project presents a significant 
opportunity to offset the challenges of declining prices, and the displacement of Canadian natural 
gas exports to traditional  markets. This project also demonstrates that Canada is committed to 
supporting project proponents in the development of LNG and diversifying our energy sector.  
 
By the end of 2018, Canada saw FDIs for two world -class propane dehydrogenation and 
polypropyl ene facilities, increasing investment in the petrochemical industry by over CAD 7 billion 
and further creating new opportunities and uses for Canadian energy products. The Government of 
Canada plans to continue this momentum by advancing our efforts to wor k collaboratively with our 
provincial and territorial partners to attract new investment in the petrochemical industry. This 
includes examining existing mechanisms available to industry and developing new tools and financial 
incentives.  
 
Question  
 
Increase d U.S. production of oil and gas from shale formations drove down prices, and reduced U.S. 
requirements for imports of natural gas. The authorities indicated that the consumption of Western 
Canadian natural gas by the Central Canadian markets of Ontario an d Quebec was displaced, to 
some extent, by cheaper U.S. imports from the nearby Marcellus shale gas basin. Lower natural gas 
prices were followed by the fall in world oil prices, reducing revenues and royalties in the upstream 
sector. As a result, some gre enfield projects were delayed or cancelled, and drilling activity declined 
since 2015. Despite these challenges, Canada saw significant positive activity in its oil and gas sector 
in 2018. For example, Canada received final investment decisions with LNG Ca nada, which will 
enable access to higher global natural gas prices. Imperial 's Aspen oil sands project was also 
secured. Further, low prices for natural gas and natural gas liquids (e.g. propane and ethane) created 
additional opportunities for the export o f natural gas liquids outside of North America, as well as for 
additional petrochemicals production in Canada. Will the Government of Canada sign long -term 
economic stability agreements with LNG project investors, to secure taxes, and ensure long -term 
stable economic returns of the projects of both parties?  
Reply  
Canada has worked to support LNG investments through low corporate taxes, increased duration of 
export licences from 25 years to 40 years, accelerated capital cost incentives for LNG facilities unt il 
2025, and investments to support infrastructure, marine protection, and increased environmental 
performance.  
 
The British Columbia government is also committed to supporting the LNG industry and recently 
announced several support measures, including th e elimination of the LNG tax, aligning of industrial 
electricity rates for LNG facilities, removing the Provincial Sales Tax (PST) during construction of the 
LNG facilities, and introducing a Clean Growth Incentive Program.  
 
The CAD 40 billion LNG Canada p roject, the largest private sector investment in Canadian history, 
demonstrates Canada 's commitment to a clean, sustainable and competitive LNG sector. This 
investment also signals that Canada is committed to supporting the development of LNG and 
diversify ing our energy markets.  WT/TPR/M/389/Add.1  
 
- 44 - 
 
  4.2.2 Institutional and legal framework, paragraph 4.104, page 167  
 
Question  
 
The Government of Canada is proposing to create the Canadian Energy Regulator (CER), a new 
federal energy regulator with the required independence and the proper accountability to oversee a 
strong, safe and sustainable Canadian energy sector in the 21st century. Legislation has been 
introduced in Parliament to this end (Bill C -69, An Act to enact the Impact Assessment Act and the 
Canadia n Energy Regulator Act, to amend the Navigation Protection Act and to make consequential 
amendments to other Acts). The CER would be located in Calgary, and would replace the NEB. It is 
expected to introduce modern and effective governance; enhanced certai nty and timelier decisions; 
strengthened safety and environmental protection; more inclusive engagement processes; and 
greater Indigenous participation. The creation of the Canadian Energy Regulator, which will replace 
the National Energy Board, may cause a great change in the government approval process for oil 
and gas development projects. Will it affect the validity of existing NEB licenses, or the approval 
procedure of the licenses which are in the process of approval?  
 
Reply  
 
Existing decisions of the National Energy Board would be treated as decisions of the Canadian Energy 
Regulator (CER) and be enforced by the new regulator. No project proponent would be asked to 
return to the starting line. All applications received before the comin g into force of the Canadian 
Energy Regulator Act would be reviewed according to the provisions of the existing NEB Act, and if 
applicable, the current Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency (CEAA) 2012, as well as the 
Government 's interim principles for  project reviews (January 2016).  
 
4.2.3 Trade policy developments, Table 4.15, pages 168 -169 
 
Question  
 
Under the Canada Oil and Gas Operations Act, the approval of the Minister of Energy, Mines and 
Resources of a "benefits plan " is required to receive aut horization to proceed with any oil and gas 
development project. Is there any procedural or monetary limitation on the approval of the Minister 
of a benefit plan?  
 
Reply  
 
There are no limits or thresholds related to benefits as the Canadian Oil and Gas Oper ations Act. An 
operator is responsible to submit a Benefits Plan to the Department of Indigenous and Northern 
Affairs Canada (CIRNA) well in advance of the anticipated start date of a proposed oil and gas work 
or activity to allow CIRNA a sufficient period  of time to internally review a Benefits Plan. Failure to 
do so may result in a delay to the start of a work or activity as the authorization of an oil and gas 
work or activity will not be granted until the Minister has approved or waived the requirement f or 
the approval of a Benefits Plan. Further information about the benefits plan can be viewed here: 
https://www.rcaanc -cirnac.gc.ca/eng/1321288048056/1538589222061# chp3.1 . 
 
4.2.4 Taxation, paragraph 4.116, pages 170 -171 
 
Question  
 
In particular, accelerated capital cost allowances (ACCAs) for tangible assets and Canadian 
Exploration Expense (CEE) treatment for intangible assets were phased out in oilsands projects as  
of 2015. Please explain why ACCAs above -mentioned were phased out in oilsands projects?  
 
Reply  
 
At the Pittsburgh 2009 Summit, Canada committed to phase out and rationalize over the medium 
term inefficient fossil fuel subsidies that encourage wasteful consumption. At each subsequent 
Summit Canada has reaffirmed this commitment and completed a compreh ensive, domestic review, 
as well as a peer review, of fossil fuel subsidy programme s. WT/TPR/M/389/Add.1  
 
- 45 - 
 
   
Details of Canada 's implementation strategies to rationalize and phase out Inefficient Fossil Fuel 
Subsidies (IFFS), such as accelerated capital cost allowances (ACCAs), can be found in the G20 's 
September 2015 "Summary of Progress Reports on the Commitment to Rationalize and Phase Out 
Inefficient Fossil Fuel Subsidies " (pages 9 -13). http://g20.org.tr/wp -
content/uploads/2015/11/Summary -of-Progress -Reports -on-the-Commitment -to-Rationalize -and-Phase -
Out-IFFS.pdf  
 
4.2.5 Developments in subsectors, 4.2.5.1 Natural g as, petroleum and pipelines, 
paragraph 4.127, page 174  
 
Question  
 
The development of new oil pipeline transport infrastructure for supplying both the domestic and 
export markets is a priority. Please introduce how Canada will accelerate the construction of  
westbound pipelines and  enhance the capacity thereof.  
 
Reply  
 
The Government of Canada understands the importance of getting our oil and gas resources to 
market and is very active on a number of fronts to ensure additional pipeline market access out of 
Western Canada. On the West Coast - our government instructed the National Energy Board (NEB) 
to reconsider its recommendation following the Federal Court of Appeal decision which quashed the 
certificate for the Trans Mountain Expansion project (TMX). The Go vernment of Canada remains 
committed to moving the process forward in the right way. On pipelines to the U.S., the Government 
approved the Line 3 Replacement project in 2016 and construction in Canada is nearing completion. 
Canada approved the Keystone XL pipeline in 2010 and we continue to support the project that is 
currently through the pre -construction regulatory phase in the U.S.  
 
Paragraph 4.129, page 174  
 
Question  
 
In May 2018, the Trans Mountain Pipeline and related infrastructure was pu rchased by the 
Government of Canada. In August 2018, the Federal Court of Appeal quashed the Governor in 
Councils Order in Council and the NEB certificate for the project. A NEB reconsideration process and 
new Indigenous consultations process, initiated by  the Government of Canada, is underway. Please 
introduce the approval process of the Trans Mountain Pipeline Expansion Project by the Government 
of Canada.  
 
Reply  
 
Following a hearing process, on 22 February 2019 , the National Energy Board (NEB) released i ts 
Reconsideration Report. The report concluded that the project is in the Canadian public interest and 
should be approved, subject to 156 recommended conditions and 16 new, non -binding 
recommendations to the Governor in Council (GIC). According to the Nat ional Energy Board Act the 
GIC has 90 days to make a decision on the Project, but this timeline has now been extended to 
18 June 2019, to ensure consultation teams have sufficient time to conclude phase III Crown 
consultations with over 117 indigenous grou ps, as ordered by the Court. The Government of Canada 
continues to make real progress in the Phase III Indigenous consultations. Consultation teams 
continue to meet with potentially impacted Indigenous groups. This process includes engaging in 
meaningful, two-way dialogue — to discuss and understand priorities of the groups and to offer 
responsive accommodations, where appropriate. The Government has consistently said that a 
decision would only be made on the project once it is satisfied that the duty to co nsult has been 
met. Through this process, Indigenous groups advised that more time is needed to complete the 
Phase III consultations. To meet this obligation, to respond to what has been heard from Indigenous 
groups, and with advice from Federal Representa tive Justice Iacobucci, the Governor in Council (GiC) 
has extended the timeline so that a decision on TMX can be made by 18 June 2019. The Government 
of Canada 's goal is to make a decision at the end of this period.  
 WT/TPR/M/389/Add.1  
 
- 46 - 
 
  4.4.3 Transport, 4.4.3.1.2 Airports, paragraph 4.241, page 199  
 
Question  
 
Airports in Canada were owned and operated by the Government of Canada prior to 1994. The 
National Airport Policy was introduced to change the Government 's role regarding airports, from 
owner and operator to t hat of regulator and, in the case of National Airport System (NAS) airports 
run by airport authorities, landlord, with the purpose of reducing the administrative and financial 
burden related to the management, operation and development of the national airp ort network. 
Please describe the administrative system of Canadas airport 's, including the approval system of 
airport construction, and the operation and management mode, etc.  
 
Reply  
The administrative system of Canada 's National Airport System (NAS) airports is set out in paras 
4.241 and 4.242 of the Secretariat Report. The National Airports System is defined in the National 
Airports Policy of 1994 and represents the largest airports in the Canada. Collectively, the 26 airports 
represent over 90% of passenger traffic in Canada. The majority of the NAS airports, 22 of 26, are 
operated by airport authorities.  
Airport Authorities are private, not -for-profit, non -share capital corporations that are neither owned 
nor control led by the federal government. Airport Authorities are not part of the federal government, 
nor are they Crown corporations or agents of the Crown. Airport Authorities do not report to a 
Minister of the Crown, nor do they report to Parliament. The Governmen t of Canada and the Minister 
of Transport do not have any authority to intervene in the day -to-day business and affairs of Airport 
Authorities.  
 
The Federal Government 's role concerning airports is that of safety and security regulator and, in 
the case of  airport authorities, of landlord.  
 
Airport Authorities own the tangible and intangible assets required to operate an airport, and lease 
Real Property Assets from the federal government for use in operating that airport. Airport 
Authorities are solely resp onsible for the day to day operation of the airport including the use of the 
Real Property Assets. In addition to complying with the terms of the ground lease, Airport Authorities 
are subject to safety and security regulations of general application.  
  
Construction, operation, and management decisions at National Airport System airports are made 
and implemented by Airport Authorities. They are not subject to government approval other than to 
ensure compliance with legislated and regulatory safety standards.  They must also conform with the 
ground lease which requires that the lands and facilities are operated and maintained in a manner 
ensuring the future operation of the airport itself.  
 
Three of the remaining airports are located in the capital cities of th e Yukon, Northwest Territories, 
and Nunavut and are owned and operated by the territorial governments. The fourth is in the city of 
Kelowna and is operated directly by the city. They are subject to the same safety and security regime 
as other airports and otherwise do not report to the Federal Government.  
 
Question  
Airports in Canada were owned and operated by the Government of Canada prior to 1994. The 
National Airport Policy was introduced to change the Government 's role regarding airports, from 
owner and  operator to that of regulator and, in the case of National Airport System (NAS) airports 
run by airport authorities, landlord, with the purpose of reducing the administrative and financial 
burden related to the management, operation and development of the  national airport network. 
Please give a brief introduction to the allowance, subsidies which the government provides to the 
airports, and the related tax and charge policies.  
 WT/TPR/M/389/Add.1  
 
- 47 - 
 
  Reply  
 
Airport Authorities have sole responsibility for meeting costs and generating revenues and are 
completely financially self -sustaining. The Government does not guarantee the borrowings or debts 
of Airport Authorities. Airport fees are not regulated by the federal government, nor are the business 
activities of Airport Autho rities regulated. The only restrictions placed on an Airport Authority 's use 
of Airport Lands are set out in its ground lease with the federal government, which provides that an 
Authority 's non -airport activities cannot interfere with the operation and fut ure development of the 
airport.  
 
In exchange for the right to use the airport facilities leased from the Federal Government, airport 
authorities pay rent based on a proportion of their gross revenues, up to an amount representing 
12% of the total revenues.  No costs or other expenses are deducted when calculating the amount 
of rent payable.  
 
Because airport authorities are non -share capital corporations and are not -for-profit corporations for 
the purposes of the Income Tax Act (i.e. they may not pay dividend s or similar and all revenues are 
to be used solely for the purpose of running the airport and associated facilities), they are not subject 
to corporate income tax.  
 
Airport authorities receive no ongoing funding from the Federal Government, some smaller 
authorities have received ad hoc funding for specific capital projects in the past, but there is no 
permanent mechanism in place to provide such funding to Airport Authorities.  
 
The Department of Transport 's Airports Capital Assistance Program exists to sup port safety related 
capital projects at airports with fewer than 525,000 passengers a year. Airport authorities operating 
airports that fall under this threshold (at this time six of the 22) are expressly excluded from this 
Programme  as it does not permit any funding to an airport owned by the federal government, 
regardless of who operates it.  
 
Question  
 
Airports in Canada were owned and operated by the Government of Canada prior to 1994. The 
National Airport Policy was introduced to change the Government 's role regarding airports, from 
owner and operator to that of regulator and, in the case of National Airport System (NAS) airports 
run by airport authorities, landlord, with the purpose of reducing the administrative and financial 
burden related to the mana gement, operation and development of the national airport network. Is 
there any access restriction on foreign investment in civil aviation transport services, such as 
transport aviation, general aviation, airport, air traffic control, aircraft maintenance,  ground service, 
aviation fuel and computer reservation system? If there is, what are the measures?  
 
Reply  
 
Canada introduced important changes to the air transportation sector in December 2018 by easing 
the foreign ownership limits on the voting interests  in Canadian air carriers providing passenger or 
all-cargo air services from 25% to 49%. Because Airport Authorities are corporations without share 
capital, there is no equity in which to invest. And, therefore, the Airport Authority itself may not be 
sold in whole or in part. There are no specific restrictions on provision of airport related goods 
services to airport operators. Canada maintains limited commitments in its GATS schedule on aircraft 
repair and maintenance, ground handling services and compute r reservation services.  
 
Question  
 
Airports in Canada were owned and operated by the Government of Canada prior to 1994. The 
National Airport Policy was introduced to change the Government 's role regarding airports, from 
owner and operator to that of regulator and, in the case of National Airport System (NAS) airports 
run by airport authorities, landlord, with the purpose of reducing the administrative and financial 
burden related to the management, operation and development of the national airport net work. Is 
there any plan or timetable for further opening up for the above -mentioned civil aviation services?  
 WT/TPR/M/389/Add.1  
 
- 48 - 
 
  Reply  
 
There are currently no plans or timetables for further opening up any of the above mentioned civil 
aviation service sectors.  
 
4.4.3.2 Marit ime transport, 4.4.3.2.1 Legal framework and developments, paragraph 
4.254, page 202  
 
Question  
 
The Coasting Trade Act provides the rules for vessels operating in Canada 's coastal waters 
conducting commercial marine activities. Those operating above the continental shelf must be 
participating in activities related to the transport, exploration or exploitation of the minerals and 
non-living natural resources of the continental shelf. The Act prioritizes Canadian vessels over foreign 
vessels, by requiring t hat Canadian non -duty-paid vessels and foreign vessels obtain a licence. 
Canadian duty -paid vessels do not require such a licence. Canadian non -duty paid vessels and 
foreign vessels will only be granted such licences when no Canadian vessel is suitable or available 
for such services. Further, these vessels must have import duties and taxes paid on the vessel for 
its temporary use in Canada. According to the Canadian Transportation Agency, between 75 and 88 
licences were issued per year between 2015 and 2018 . There are also procedures or permits to be 
obtained for the use of foreign workers as crew on coastal trade vessels. Please clarify whether 
operating in Canada 's coastal waters conducting commercial marine activities refers to coastal 
transport of Canada ? Which administrative institutions are responsible for the issuance of related 
licenses?  
 
Reply  
 
Under Canada 's domestic marine cabotage regime, undertaking any commercial marine activity from 
a vessel in Canadian waters, or above the continental shelf, i s considered cabotage (or the Coasting 
trade). The licensing and administration of Canada 's coasting trade framework; i.e., the issuing of a 
temporary coasting trade licen ce involves five different departments and agencies. Transport Canada 
is responsible for the policy and application of the Coasting Trade Act, Immigration, Refugees and 
Citizenship Canada for immigration -related issues, Employment and Social Development Canada to 
address temporary entry of foreign workers issues, the Canada Border Services  Agency to address 
taxes and duties on vessels, and the Canadian Transportation Agency for issuance of licences.  
 
4.4.3.2.2 Ports, paragraph 4.263, page 203  
 
Question  
The National Marine Policy (1995) laid out a comprehensive framework for major elements o f 
Canada 's marine transportation system, including the port system, which consists of Canada Port 
Authorities (CPAs), public ports (which may be owned by Transport Canada or by other entities), 
and private ports. In all cases, the Minister of Transport has  the authority to establish the regulatory 
framework regarding marine safety, security, and environmental protection; and monitor compliance 
with regulatory requirements. The CMA provides the legislative framework for CPAs, public ports, 
and the St. Lawren ce Seaway. It was amended in 2017, in order to provide CPAs, or their wholly -
owned subsidiaries, access to additional financing arrangements from the Canada Infrastructure 
Bank. There are 18 CPAs; these ports are deemed by the CMA as being vital to Canada 's domestic 
and international trade. In 2017, ports and marine shipping carried over CAD 200 billion worth of 
Canadian imports and exports, and CPAs alone handled approximately 60% of Canada 's marine 
commercial cargo tonnage. Transport Canada is also respon sible for some smaller ports in Canada 
such as regional and remote ports. Please introduce Canada 's domestic port management system, 
and please further explain the differences and relationship between CPA, public ports and private 
ports.  
Reply  
 
Canada 's domestic port management system is set out in para 4.263 of the Secretariat Report. The 
1995 National Marine Policy laid out a detailed framework for Canada 's marine transportation 
system. Its key principles emphasize accountability to users and the public, business discipline and 
self-sufficiency – to shift the cost of port operations from the general taxpayer to users. In 1998, WT/TPR/M/389/Add.1  
 
- 49 - 
 
  Parliament enacted the Canada Marine Act (CMA), which: created 18 Canada Port Authorities, 
designated several other ports as Public  Ports and gave the Minister of Transport important 
authorities to regulate port activities and performance, including: marine safety, marine security, 
and environmental protection. Canada Port Authorities are federally incorporated, autonomous, non -
share corporations that operate at arm 's length from the federal government. They operate on a 
commercial basis with a view to being financially self -sufficient. They also fulfil important public 
policy objectives (supporting economic development) and regulatory requirements (safety, security, 
and environmental protection). Canada 's Public Ports have a regional orientation. They may be 
owned by Transport Canada or by non -federal entities (e.g. private entities, provinces or 
municipalities, or a not -for-profit entity). Pursuant to the CMA, the Governor in Council may 
designate as a Public Port any navigable waters, any lands covered by these waters, and any port 
facility, for the purposes of safe shipping and navigation. The Minister of Transport may fix fees at 
public ports in respect of: ships, vehicles, aircraft, and persons coming into or using the facility; 
goods loaded and unloaded from ships or crossing within the limits of a public port; and any service 
provided by the Minister in respect of the op eration of the public port.  
 
There are also a number of non -federal ports in Canada. Transport Canada 's role is limited to a 
regulatory and compliance monitoring role (e.g., Canada Environmental Assessment Act, 2012; 
Navigable Waters and Protection Act).   
Report by Canada – WT/TPR/G/389  
1 CANADA IN THE GLOBAL TRADING SYSTEM  
Paragraph 1.2, page 4  
 
Question  
 
Please specify the consistency between the poison -pill clause of the United States -Mexico -Canada 
Agreement and the WTO rules.  
 
Reply  
 
In the absence of a reference to a specific provision of the agreement, Canada is unable to elaborate.  
 
3 TRADE POLICY DEVELOPMENTS 2015 -2019  
3.5 Canada in Other Multinational Fora, 3.5.1 The Group of Twenty (G20), paragraph 
3.45, page 14  
 
Question  
 
Canada has be en among the most transparent of members in providing steel support information 
and encourages full transparency by all participants so that a complete picture of support to the 
global sector can be established.  Please describe Canada 's contributions to st eel capacity reduction 
and the number of reduced steel capacity over the past three years based on the principle of the 
forum - A Global Response to a Global Challenge.  
 
Reply  
 
At the Global Forum, it is recognized that Canada 's steel sector operates on ma rket-based principles 
and does not contribute to the issue of excess steel capacity. This is evident in Canada 's steelmaking 
capacity which  has remained steady at 17.47 million metric tons since 2015. Canada 's contribution 
to addressing global excess capac ity is to commit to maintaining a market -based steel production.  
 
4 OTHER KEY GOVERNMENT INITIATIVES  
4.2 Intellectual Property (IP), paragraph 4.8, page 17  
 
Question  
 
Please introduce the main amendments to the Patent Act, the Copyright Act, the trade -marks Act, 
the Industrial Design Act and the Plant Breeders ' Rights Act updated by Canada since 2015?  
 WT/TPR/M/389/Add.1  
 
- 50 - 
 
  Reply  
 
Information on Canada 's intellectual property legislation is summarized in "Table A3.6 National IP 
Legislation and International Agreements, December 2018, " on pages 237 -239 of the Secretariat 
Report.  
 
Paragraph 4.11, page 17  
 
Question  
 
Please introduce the considerations and main contents of the improvement of the regime for the 
protection of geographical indications.  
 
Reply  
 
As noted in paragraph 3.292 of the Secretariat Report, Bill C -30, "An Act to implement the 
Comprehensive  Economic and Trade Agreement between Canada and the European Union and its 
member States and to provide for certain other measures ", came into force on 21 September 2017, 
and amended the Patent Act to introduce a Certificate of Supplementary Protection (CS P) system, 
to allow a period of added protection, capped at a maximum of two years, for eligible patents 
covering eligible products (human and veterinary drugs). Additional information can be found in the 
noted paragraph.  
 
Canada already had in place a reg ime for the protection of wines and spirits geographical indications 
(GIs). Bill C -30 also amended the Trade -Marks Act to protect certain agricultural products and food 
products as geographical indications (GIs) and provided an avenue for other interested actors from 
the agriculture and food sectors to apply for GI protections. Additional information about Canada 's 
GI regime can be found online  at: (http://www.ic.gc. ca/eic/site/cipointernet -
internetopic.nsf/eng/wr04244.html ) 
 
 
 
 
 
  WT/TPR/M/389/Add.1  
 
- 51 - 
 
  COLOMBIA  
Report by the Secretariat – WT/TPR/S/389  
2 TRADE AND INVESTMENT REGIMES  
2.2 Trade Policy Formulation and Objectives, paragraphs 2.6, 2.9 and 2.10, pages 30 -31, 
2.4 Investment Regime, 2.4.1 Framework, paragraph 2.37, pages 37 -38 and  
3 TRADE POLICIES AND PRACTICES BY MEASURE  
3.3.2 Standards and other technical requirements, 3.3.2.2 Technical regulations, 
paragraph 3.161, page 98  
Question  
Does Canada consider that the provisions recently agreed on to update its FTA with Chile and in the 
CPTPP Agreement fully address the inclusive approach to trade from the perspective of its regional 
trade agreements?  
Reply  
The inclusive trade elements contained in Canada 's modernized agreements with Chile (CCFTA) and 
Israel (CIFTA), as well as in the CPTPP are important milestones in the development of its inclusive 
approach to trade. Canada concluded Trade and Gender Chapters in the CCFTA and CIFTA, and small 
and medium -sized enterprise (SME) Chapters in the CIFTA, the Comprehensive and Progressive 
Agreement for Trans -Pacific Partnership (CPTPP), and the Canada -United States -Mexico Agreement 
(CUSMA) as well as a gender equality provisions in the CPTPP and CUSMA preambles. Th at being 
said there is always room for improvement and the development of our inclusive approach to trade 
is ongoing. Neither agreement wholly encompasses all elements of Canada 's inclusive approach to 
trade. Canada will continue its emphasis on incorporat ing gender and inclusivity provisions in future 
FTAs and in FTA modernizations. For example, Canada is seeking the inclusion of chapters and 
provisions that relate to Trade and Gender, SMEs, and Indigenous peoples in its negotiations with 
the Pacific Allia nce and Mercosur, as well gender responsive and inclusive provisions across those 
agreements.  
Paragraphs 2.6, 2.9, 2.10, 2.37 and paragraph 3.162 pages 98 -99 
Question  
Does Canada believe that building on the provisions of its previous FTAs can also contrib ute to such 
an inclusive approach to trade?  
Reply  
Canada believes that building on the provisions of its previous FTAs can also contribute to an 
inclusive approach to trade. The inclusion of a Trade and Gender chapter in the modernized 
Canada -Chile FTA and  Canada -Israel FTAs are excellent examples of that. The chapter acknowledges 
the importance of incorporating a gender perspective into economic and trade issues to ensure that 
economic growth benefits everyone. It also provides a framework for Canada and i ts trading partners 
to undertake cooperation activities on issues related to trade and gender; and it establishes a 
bilateral Committee to oversee these cooperation activities. The recently modernized Canada -Israel 
FTA also contains a dedicated Trade and S MEs chapter which expand on the commitments that 
Canada undertook in the Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans -Pacific Partnership 
(CPTPP) small and medium -sized enterprise (SME) Chapter. In September 2018, at the first 
Comprehensive Economic a nd Trade Agreement (CETA) Joint Committee, Canada and the EU 
adopted Trade and Gender and SME recommendations which seek to recognize the importance of 
making trade policies more gender -responsive and SME sensitive to ensure that the benefits of CETA 
reach  everyone. In addition, the CPTPP agreement, in its preamble, reaffirms the importance of 
promoting inclusive values, including gender equality. Canada will also continue its emphasis on 
incorporating gender and inclusive provisions in future FTAs. For exa mple, Canada is seeking the 
inclusion of chapters and provisions that relate to Trade and Gender, SMEs, and Indigenous peoples 
in its negotiations with the Pacific Alliance and Mercosur, as well as gender responsive and inclusive 
provisions across those ag reements.  WT/TPR/M/389/Add.1  
 
- 52 - 
 
  Paragraphs 2.6, 2.9, 2.10, 2.37 and paragraph 3.163 page 99  
Question  
How does Canada consider its inclusive approach to trade as contributing to the development of the 
objectives and goals of the WTO Agreement? If so, in what way and in what area s does it contribute 
to the development of these objectives?  
Reply  
Predictable and stable access to international markets is essential to global economic prosperity. We 
must acknowledge, however, that the impacts of international trade are felt differently  by different 
group and that the benefits of trade have not always been equitably distributed. Therefore, Canada 's 
inclusive approach to trade is about ensuring that the benefits of trade are experienced as broadly 
as possible. This includes actions to ens ure that women and women -owned businesses can fully 
participate in international trade; to help small and medium -sized enterprises (SMEs) integrate into 
global markets and supply chains; and that minority -owned businesses (e.g. aboriginal -owned 
businesses)  can succeed in trade. By improving the access and participation of these, and other 
groups, in international trade we will help increase economic prosperity, promote development and 
help achieve objectives like the sustainable development goals. These are  the objectives of the WTO 
agreements. Canada will continue to champion inclusive principles at the WTO in order to help 
achieve our common goals.  
Paragraphs 2.6, 2.9, 2.10, 2.37 and paragraph 3.164 page 99  
Question  
How does Canada ensure that its inclusive approach to trade is not inconsistent with the provisions 
of the WTO Agreement?  
Reply  
Nothing about Canada 's inclusive approach to trade contemplates derogating from Canada 's rights 
and obligations under the WTO Agreements. In fact, Canada 's incl usive approach is designed to 
ensure that the benefits of trade are more equitably distributed within society. In order to achieve 
this objective, it is imperative that Canadian exporters ' access to markets remains stable and 
predictable. Critical to accom plish this objective is adherence to the rules and principles of the WTO 
Agreements; failure to do so would be counter -productive to our objective.  
2.4 Investment Regime, paragraph 2.30, pages 35 -36 
Question  
How has the one -stop shop tool facilitated FDI i n Canada? What kind of procedures can foreign 
investors carry out through the one -stop shop? What have been the main results recorded since the 
creation of the one -stop shop? Which government entities are involved in the operation of the one -
stop shop and how are inter -agency coordination tasks carried out?  
Reply  
Invest in Canada is working collaboratively with provincial, territorial and municipal governments to 
identify the gaps and barriers that exist to foreign direct investment to ensure its efforts an d services 
are complementary.  It works seamlessly across federal departments and with provincial, territorial 
and municipal governments to provide best in class concierge services – acting as a business 
interlocutor between investor clients and our governm ent partners – to accelerate new investment 
and reinvestment opportunities. By offering investors a single -window to help them navigate 
programme s and identify the support they need, Invest in Canada will accelerate the decision making 
process for business es, enabling them to bring job -creating investments to communities across our 
country.  WT/TPR/M/389/Add.1  
 
- 53 - 
 
  2.4.2 Policy, paragraph 2.39, page 39  
Question  
What strategies is Canada considering promoting  the country as a major destination for global FDI?  
Reply  
The Government promotes Canada as a top destination for global investment by communicating a 
clear and compelling value proposition to foreign investors around the world.  To ensure that 
investors around the world understand Canada 's value proposition and see it as a smart global 
investment destination, Invest in Canada will focus on building Canada 's international brand 
recognition through proactive marketing and promotion.  In 2019 -20, th e Foreign Direct Investment 
(FDI) brand will be rolled -out along with a sustained and agile international marketing campaign 
that supports the Agency 's efforts to boost Canada 's international profile as a competitive business 
location and partner of choice . Business to business marketing and promotion will be a primary 
focus. The Agency will continue to optimize its brand identity and pursue collaborative promotional 
opportunities with our cross -Canada government partners. The Agency will deploy an engageme nt 
strategy, based on clear criteria that will enable us to pursue leadership and promotional 
opportunities at key international signature events in order to advocate for the Canadian investment 
advantage.  
Global Affairs Canada will continue to work with I nvest in Canada to increase foreign direct 
investment, to make investing in Canada simpler and more attractive, and to reinforce a positive 
profile of Canada 's openness to international commerce. The Department will also seek to make 
Canada a top destinati on for global investment and to attract more foreign direct investment through 
the implementation of free trade agreements. Canada has a global network of investment and trade 
professionals (the Trade Commissioner Service) present in more than 100 cities w orldwide to assist 
investors in investing in Canada.  
2.4.6 Incentives and promotion, paragraph 2.46, page 41  
Question  
In which sectors has the policy of attracting and facilitating high -impact FDI been concentrated? 
What is the criterion used to differenti ate high -impact FDI from FDI that is not high -impact? What 
type of tools has been considered to attract this type of FDI?  
Reply  
The Government of Canada supports increased and diverse foreign investment from all major 
sectors. In Budget 2017, the Governmen t of Canada announced a new vision for Canada 's economy 
as a global leader in innovation, anchored by the Innovation and Skills Plan. In this plan, the creation 
of the six Economic Strategy Tables will support innovation in advanced manufacturing, agri -food, 
clean technology, digital industries, health/bio -sciences and resources of the future. Canada 's 
proactive Foreign Direct Investment (FDI) efforts will closely align with the six Economic Strategy 
Tables while remaining reactive to investment from other sectors.  
Paragraph 2.49, page 41  
Question  
What were the main results of the FTZ -MP? What kind of tools was used to publicize the free trade 
zones? What kind of financial support did the Programme  provide to regional organizations to 
promote the local benefits of free trade zones?  
Reply  
The FTZ -MP was a 5 -year pilot contribution programme  aimed at providing support to regional and 
local organizations to promote free trade zones through eligible activities such as the creation of 
promotional tools and materials. Despite promoting the programme  throug h provincial and regional WT/TPR/M/389/Add.1  
 
- 54 - 
 
  development agencies, the pillar had a very low uptake. Consequently, collection of performance 
data for intermediate and ultimate outcome results was not pursued.  
3 TRADE POLICIES AND PRACTICES BY MEASURE  
3.1 Measures Directly Af fecting Imports, 3.1.1 Customs procedures, valuation, and 
requirements, paragraph 3.12, page 50  
Question  
Is it compulsory to carry out export and import formalities through the EICS and EXCOL systems? 
Are these systems interconnected? Has Canada considered  integrating all platforms for commercial 
operations (exportation and importation) into one? For example, in the Single Window (SWI). What 
were the reasons for not having them integrated?  
Reply  
Only goods included in the Export or Import Control Lists as e stablished by the Export and Import 
Permit Act (R.S.C., 1985, c. E -19), which are not eligible for a General Import Permit or General 
Export Permit, must carry out export and import formalities through the EICS and EXCOL systems. 
Connections exist between these systems, such as through business profile databases. Considerable 
investigation, testing and development have been made by Global Affairs Canada (GAC) towards 
trying to integrate its EICS and EXCOL system into a single platform. Currently, these two systems 
exist separately due to fundamental differences between the controlling of strategic goods versus 
non-strategic goods (at the policy, regulation and process levels). GAC is part of the Single Window 
Initiative (SWI), led by the Canadian Border Serv ice Agency (CBSA), and is currently piloting a 
limited number of commodities in the system. It is expected that GAC non -strategic controlled 
commodities be accessible through SWI in 2020.  
3.1.5 Import prohibitions, restrictions, and licensing, paragraph 3. 62, page 72  
Question  
Could Canada expand on the operation of the "licensing [system] applied to enforce requirements 
under the Export and Import Permits Act "? What is the procedure that users must follow? How do 
government entities participate? Does each entity operate its own system or are operations carried 
out through a single system?  
Reply  
As authorized by the Export and Import Permits Act (EIPA), a permit is required in order to lawfully 
import into Canada any goods or technologies listed on Cana da's Import Control List (ICL). Canada 
has a range of goods over which it imposes import controls through the ICL, including Military goods 
and firearms (paragraphs 70 -73 and 91), Chemical Weapons Convention items (paragraph 74), 
certain steel products (pa ragraphs 80 -82), certain apparel and textile goods (paragraphs 85 -86), 
and agricultural products (paragraphs 94 -193).  
Import permits are issued pursuant to import allocations or other import authorizations in 
accordance with the Import Permit Regulations. The administration of import controls established 
under the EIPA is the responsibility of the Trade and Export Controls Bureau of Global Affairs Canada. 
Global Affairs Canada uses the Export Import Controls System (EICS) system to support the 
application, approval, and processing of import permits for products controlled through the Import 
Control List. Procedures for importing goods that require an import licen ce under the EIPA are good -
specific. Information on these procedures can be found on Global Affai rs Canada 's website. General 
requirements to apply for an import permit under the EIPA can be found here: 
https://www.international.gc.ca /controls -controles/about -a_propos/impor/permits -
licences.aspx?lang=eng . 
 
Global Affairs Canada 's annual report to Parliament on the administration of the EIPA can be found 
here: https://www.international.gc.ca/controls -controles/report -rapports/2017.aspx?lang=eng . WT/TPR/M/389/Add.1  
 
- 55 - 
 
   
Licensing procedures for imports pertaining to controlled drugs and substances, explosives, nuclear 
safety and controlled rough diamonds, wild animal and plant protection, animal health, fish 
inspection, food and drugs, oil and gas, the Canada Agricultural Products Act (fruit, vegetables, and 
cheeses), the Grower Requested Own Use (GROU) Program (Canadian -registered agricultural 
pesticides) and all other goods not controlled through the ICL, are operated under the authority of 
separate legislation administered by separate government departments.  
3.1.6.1 Anti -dumping and countervailing measures, paragraph 3.69, pages 74 -75 
Question  
With regard to the amendments to the legislation concerning circumvention, can Canada explain 
what the amendments to the legislation on anti -circumvention investigations were to determine 
whether goods are imported for the specific purpose of circ umventing existing anti -dumping or 
countervailing duties and whether anti -circumvention measures have been applied.  
Reply  
The Special Import Measures Act was amended to address situations where, after the imposition of 
anti-dumping or countervailing duties , foreign producers may attempt to circumvent duties by 
making slight modifications to, or changing the pattern of production of, exported goods such that 
the good no longer falls within the scope of goods to which duties apply.  
The amendments provide that  following the receipt of a complaint or self -initiation by the Canadian 
Border Services Agency (CBSA), the CBSA may conduct anti -circumvention investigations that would 
investigate allegations that anti -dumping and countervailing duties are being circumve nted and, 
where warranted, extend the scope of the duties to cover importations of goods that are 
circumventing existing duties. The full text of the amendments it is available in Canada 's WTO 
notification:  G/ADP/N/1/CAN/4/Suppl.2 –G/SCM/N/1/CAN/4/Suppl.2 –G/SG/N/1/CAN/3/Suppl.1.  
To date, no anti -circumvention investigations have been initiated by the CBSA.  
Paragraph 3.75, page 76  
Question  
In the framework of the changes to the investigation procedure for the application of anti -dumping 
and countervailing mea sures, what is the scope procedure for establishing whether a particular 
product falls within the scope of application of an anti -dumping and/or countervailing measure in 
force? What were the circumstances that led to these changes? What impact has it had on the 
development of new investigations?  
Reply  
Prior to the amendments implemented in 2018, Canada 's trade remedy laws were last reviewed in 
1996. Since then, significant changes occurred in the global economy and Canadian stakeholders 
raised concerns that improvements were required to enhance the effectiveness of Canada 's trade 
remedy system. In particular, concerns were raised regarding the need to adopt additional 
mechanisms to ensure that dumped and unfairly subsidized imports do not enter the Canadian 
market without the appropriate payment of anti -dumping or countervailing duties, given the growing 
problem of duty circumvention in global trade.  
In response to these concerns, and informed by public consultations, Canada introduced 
amendments  to the Special Import Measures Act to improve the effectiveness and transparency of 
Canada 's trade remedy system and better align Canada 's system with those of Canada 's major 
trading partners.  
Included in the amendments is the introduction of formalized s cope proceedings. When enforcing 
anti-dumping and countervailing duties, the Canadian Border Services Agency (CBSA) determines 
whether imported goods are within the scope of the duties on the basis of the product 's description WT/TPR/M/389/Add.1  
 
- 56 - 
 
  and the country of origin. Pr ior to the amendments, determinations made upon importation were 
not public, interested parties had no avenue to express views and advice provided by the CBSA was 
non-binding.  
The amendments to the Special Import Measures Act provide greater transparency a nd opportunities 
for interested parties to participate in this process in two ways:  
1. A new formal proceeding was created to allow interested parties to request a ruling from the CBSA 
as to whether a particular product is subject to anti -dumping and count ervailing duties. These rulings 
are public and binding on the CBSA with respect to future importations of the same product models.  
2. Second, interested parties have the right to appeal re -determinations by the CBSA on whether a 
product that has already b een imported is or is not within the scope of the duties.  
The full text of the amendments it is available in Canada 's WTO notification: 
G/ADP/N/1/CAN/4/Suppl.2 –G/SCM/N/1/CAN/4/Suppl.2 –G/SG/N/1/CAN/3/Suppl.1.  
 
To date, four scope proceedings have been initi ated by the CBSA.  
3.3.2 Standards and other technical requirements, 3.3.2.1 Standards, paragraph 3.148, 
page 96  
Question  
Accordingly, could Canada explain how the reliability of the quality system is ensured, taking into 
account that the same body performs  the functions of standardization and accreditation? Could 
Canada also elaborate on the process of accreditation of standardization bodies?  
Reply  
The Standards Council of Canada does not develop standards. It does however, accredit bodies to 
develop standa rds. These are called Standards Development Organizations (SDOs) and the 
accreditation programme  for SDOs is outlined in the Requirements & Guidance – Accreditation of 
Standards Development Organizations. To ensure the reliability of the quality system, th e 
accreditation programme  follows a clear Quality Management System. The Standard Operating 
Procedures and Policies detail a separation of management activities and functions between the 
accreditation decision and maintenance of accreditation from the poli cy-making functions of such 
activities. Embedded into the accreditation requirements for SDOs are the best practices contained 
in the World Trade Organization, Technical Barriers to Trade (WTO/TBT), Annex 3 Code of Good 
Practice for the Preparation, Adopti on and Application of Standards. This helps ensure that voluntary 
standards developed in Canada support the provisions of the TBT Agreement, including the principles 
of openness and transparency and avoiding duplication with relevant international or regio nal 
standards.  
3.3.2.2 Technical regulations, paragraph 3.161, page 98  
Question  
Could Canada provide a copy or link to the Cabinet Directive on Regulation and the most recent 
Policy on Regulatory Development?  
Reply  
Cabinet Directive on Regulation: https://www.canada.ca/en/treasury -board -
secretariat/services/fede ral-regulatory -management/guidelines -tools/cabinet -directive -
regulation.html . 
Paragraph 3.166, pages 99 -100 
Question  
Colombia is interested in learning more about Canada 's experience in revising existing regulations.  WT/TPR/M/389/Add.1  
 
- 57 - 
 
  Reply  
The Cabinet Directive on Regulation sets out the Government of Canada 's expectations and 
requirements in the development, management, and review of federal regulations. The Directive 
requires departments and agencies to undertake a regular review of their existing regulations in 
order to ensure that they continue to be appropriate and effective and achieve their intended policy 
objectives. The Directive also requires departments and agencies to publish their planned reviews 
and amendments to regulations on an annual basis in their Forward Regulatory Plans.  
The process to amend existing regulations follows the same regulatory life cycle and approach as 
the development of new regulations, including consultations and engagement with stakeholders, a 
Regulatory Impact Analysis, and pre -publication in the Canada Gazette, Part I.  
For more information (Cabinet Directive on Regulation): https://www.canada.ca/en/treasury -board -
secretariat/services/federal -regulatory -management/guidelines -tools/cabinet -directive -
regulation.html . 
Question  
Please explain the results so far, including the process implemented for the revisions and what 
change s are expected to be obtained with the implementation of the new policy established by the 
Cabinet Directive on Regulation and Policy on Regulatory Development that entered into force in 
September 2018.  
Reply  
The Cabinet Directive on Regulation sets out th e Government of Canada 's expectations and 
requirements in the development, management, and review of federal regulations, while the Policy 
on Regulatory Development outlines the requirements that federal regulators must meet in order to 
comply with the Dir ective as it relates to the process of developing regulations. Given that the 
regulatory life cycle to develop and implement new or amended regulations is typically longer than 
a year, it is still too premature to comment on the results, actual or expected , deriving from the new 
Directive and Policy.  
Paragraph 3.171, page 100  
Question  
Would Canada please tell us whether it has a coordination mechanism for dealing with TBT matters, 
and if so, how it works, and describe its experience in presenting specific c oncerns to the TBT 
Committee in relation to technical regulations of other Members.  
Reply  
The Technical Barriers and Regulation division of Global Affairs Canada is responsible for coordinating 
Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT) matters for Canada, including preparing for TBT meetings. 
Furthermore, this division serves as the WTO Enquiry Point for TBT and Sanitary and Phytosanitary 
(SPS) notifications.  
4 TRADE POLICIES BY SECTOR  
4.1 Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries, 4.1.1 Agriculture, 4.1.1.1 Intr oduction, paragraph 
4.1, page 137  
Question  
Is there a system through which the user can carry out the procedure related to the quotas in import 
operations? If there is no system, what is the procedure that users must carry out to have access 
to the quota?  WT/TPR/M/389/Add.1  
 
- 58 - 
 
  Reply  
All information regarding how an interested party may apply for tariff -rate quota (TRQ) allocation, 
including the formal application, is contained in the Notices to Importers associated with the 
respective TRQ. Notice to importers are published on Gl obal Affairs Canada 's website: 
https://www.international.gc.ca/controls -controles/notices_avis/exp/list_liste/index.aspx?lang=eng . 
Report by Canada – WT/TPR/G/389  
5 EXPORT DIVERSIFICATION AND TRADE PROMOTION  
5.5 Other Government of Canada Programmes and Strategies that Promote Exports  
Question  
Could Canada share more information on the strategies it is implementing to help SMEs promo te 
exports?  
Reply  
The main focus of the Strategy to support small and medium -sized (SME) exports will be in providing 
enhanced tools and services. Canada will expand the CanExport programme , increase the number 
of Canadian Technology Accelerators, and incr ease the number of Trade Commissioners across the 
globe to ensure there are more trade experts in place to support Canadian exporters. Canada will 
also promote the growth opportunities presented by Canada 's trade agreements.  
 
  WT/TPR/M/389/Add.1  
 
- 59 - 
 
  DOMINICAN REPUBLIC  
Report by the Secretariat – WT/TPR/S/389  
SUMMARY  
Paragraph 26, page 13   
Question  
Does Canada have an evaluation of the results of the SIF? Do you plan to implement another 
programme ? 
Reply  
As a new programme , the Strategic Innovation Fund has not yet been evaluated. There are no plans 
to launch another programme  at this stage.  
2 TRADE AND INVESTMENT REGIMES  
2.3 Trade Agreements and Arrangements, 2.3.2.2 Unilateral preferential regime, 
paragraph 2.26, page 35 
Question  
Canada 's CCCT regime derives from the Caribbean -Canada Trade Agreement (CARIBCAN), a 
programme  of economic and trade assistance dating back to 1986 and intended to benefit the 
countries of the Caribbean. It provides duty -free access to most products, except texti les, clothing 
and certain agricultural products. There have been no major changes to the CCCT regime during the 
period under review. Canada currently has a WTO waiver for the application of these tariff 
preferences. " Are there any plans to maintain that pr eference regime?  
Reply  
In order to maintain Caribbean -Canada Trade Agreement (CARIBCAN), Canada has to extend the 
WTO waiver periodically. The last extension was granted by the WTO in July 2015, extending the 
validity of the waiver until 31 December 2023.  
4 TRADE POLICIES BY SECTOR  
4.4.1 Financial services, 4.4.1.1 Overview, paragraph 4.170, page 184  
Question  
The legal and institutional framework of the financial sector has generally remained unchanged since 
the last review. The main federal laws governing financial institutions are the Banking Act, the 
Insurance Companies Act, and the Trust and Loan Companies Act. In accordance with their own 
sunset clauses, those laws must be renewed by Parliament every five years. Sunset clauses promote 
periodic review of  the federal financial system to ensure that it remains solid and technically sound. 
" The Dominican Republic would like to know Canada 's practical experience in applying "sunset 
clauses ". 
Reply  
The federal financial institutions statutes contain sunset provisions that require their renewal by 
Parliament every five years. These provisions encourage the periodic review of the federal financial 
sector framework to ensure it remains robust and technically sound.  
As part of these review exercises, the Department of Finance generally consults extensively with 
stakeholders, including from the industry, consumer groups, and provincial regulators, to get their 
views on the framework and emerging trends. The last review was conducted over 2016 and 2017 
and i nvolved the release of two consultation papers by the Department on which over 300 
submissions were received in total.  WT/TPR/M/389/Add.1  
 
- 60 - 
 
  Consultations papers can be found here:  https://www.fin.gc.ca/n16/16 -105-eng.as p 
https://www.fin.gc.ca/n17/17 -074-eng.asp  
 
Following the consultation phase of the review, Budget 2018 and Budget 2019 announced a series 
of targeted amendments developed by the Department, in consultation with federal financial sector 
agencies, in response to trends and emerging issues in the financial sector as well as comments and 
recommendations for stakeholders.  
  WT/TPR/M/389/Add.1  
 
- 61 - 
 
  ECUADOR  
Report by the Secretariat – WT/TPR/S/389  
2 TRADE AND INVESTMENT REGIMES  
2.3 Trade Agreements and Arrangements, 2.3.2.1 Reciprocal trade agreements, paragraph 
2.20, page 34  
Question  
According to page 34, paragraph 2.20, "Canada also actively proceeded to update and expand 
existing FTAs in order to moderni ze the provisions of some of them [...] According to Canada, these 
amended agreements have been updated to include various elements of inclusive trade, such as 
provisions on labour, the environment, trade and gender, SMEs, etc. " In this regard, could Canad a 
indicate to us whether there are additional variables or factors (economic or commercial) that 
determine whether an FTA is amended, beyond inclusion of the elements of inclusive trade? Is such 
an amendment considered as an expansion of the FTA in questio n or a new Agreement? Under what 
multilateral provisions are the negotiations and their respective notification conducted?  
Reply  
While inclusive trade is integral to Canada 's trade policy and is being negotiated in all of Canada 's 
new free trade agreements (FTA), Canada also updates its FTAs to better facilitate trade between 
modern economies. This includes updating trade agreements by adding provisions aimed at reducing 
technical barriers to trade, enhancing cooperation, increasing transparency i n regulatory matters 
and reducing red tape for business. Modernization is also conducted to include areas of trade not 
necessarily covered in older FTAs such as services, sanitary and phytosanitary regulations and 
government procurement. The updates to the  Canada -Chile FTA and the Canada -Israel FTA 
constitute a modernization to existing agreements. As negotiations are on existing text and 
provisions to be added to the original agreement, Canada considers this to be an expansion to the 
agreements and not a n ew agreement.  
Canada conducts the negotiations of its FTAs under the provisions of Article XXIV of the GATT 1994 
and Article V of the GATS. Canada submits its notifications according to the Transparency Mechanism 
for Regional Trade Agreements which is impl emented by The Committee on Regional Trade 
Agreements.  
2.3.3 Other agreements and arrangements, paragraph 2.29, page 35  
Question  
In regard to page 35, paragraph 2.29, with respect to commercial and economic cooperation 
agreements, and trade and investment cooperation agreements: Could Canada point out to us the 
differences that exist between the types of agreements mentioned above; are they linked only by 
their coverage of topics and/or their scope? Is recognition of the different levels of development of 
economies and differentiated treatment contemplated in some of them?  
Reply  
Trade and Investment Cooperation Arrangements (TICAs) and Trade and Economic Cooperation 
Arrangements (TECAs) were agreements entered into by Canada with partner countries in 
1995-1999 to support greater trade and economic cooperation. TICAs were aimed at the 
development of opportunities to strengthen economic cooperation with a focus on trade and 
investment between the Parties. TECAs were aimed at increasing trade and economic cooper ation 
between the Parties with a focus on trade in goods, but also for services and investments. Given the 
high-level and cooperative nature of such arrangements, differentiated treatment was not explicitly 
set out in the provisions, but rather the Parties ' interests were reflected in the arrangement 's 
objectives and action plans or joint work programmes . WT/TPR/M/389/Add.1  
 
- 62 - 
 
  2.4.1 Framework, paragraphs 2.32 -2.33, page 36  
Question  
According to page 36, paragraphs 2.32, 2.33, regarding the examination of foreign investments in 
the country: "All foreign nationals wishing to establish or acquire control of a Canadian business are 
required to submit a notification or request for examina tion to the competent authorities, unless an 
exemption applies. " In this respect, to what exemption does this refer, and based on what criteria 
would an examination not be carried out? What is the purpose of the "net benefit " assessment under 
Canada 's inve stment policy, and how is it related to the topic of national security? Is the outcome 
of the "net benefit " assessment linked to the possibility of benefiting from any kind of incentive?  
Reply  
The exemptions are detailed at section 10 of the Investment Canada Act. An investment would not 
be subject to a net benefit review, national security review and/or notification obligation in 
circumstances where a relevant statutory exemption applies.  
A "net benefit " assessment is an economic review of a proposed acquisition of control of a Canadian 
business based on the factors listed at section 20 of the Investment Canada Act, which include: 
impact on employment and economic activity; Canadian participation; effect on productivity; effect 
on competition;  compatibility with industrial, economic and cultural policies; and impact on Canada 's 
ability to compete in world markets. A "net benefit " assessment is a separate and distinct process 
from a national security review. As "net benefit " assessment outcomes must be based on the section 
20 factors, there is no linkage between an outcome and incentives of any sort.  
Paragraph 2.38, page 39  
Question  
According to page 39, paragraph 2.38, "The CETA will establish a permanent tribunal and an 
appellate body for the settlement of investment disputes and  contains provisions for a mediation 
mechanism to resolve investment disputes. " In this regard, how do the Bilateral Investment 
Agreements fit i nto this provision? Has Canada considered the possibility that this structure created 
to resolve disputes could replace international arbitration instances, external to the Parties to a trade 
agreement that includes the subject of investments? Will this pr ovision be included in new FTAs that 
Canada negotiates?  
Reply  
CETA provides for the establishment of a permanent tribunal as well as an appeal mechanism 
between Canada and the EU to hear any investment disputes that arise under CETA 's Chapter 8 
(Investment ). This investment dispute mechanism does not impact Canada 's existing bilateral 
investment treaties. Canada 's approach to establishing a similar bilateral mechanism in future FTAs 
will be considered on a case -by-case basis.  
3 TRADE POLICIES AND PRACTICES BY MEASURE  
3.1 Measures Directly Affecting Imports, 3.1.2 Rules of origin, paragraph 3.19, page 52  
Question  
According to page 52, paragraph 3.19: "Canada 's unilateral preferential regimes do not require any 
authority in the country of origin to v alidate certificates of origin with a seal or signature. " What 
actions or requirements are requested by Canada to avoid possible triangulations? Does this measure 
relate to the possibility of domestic demand for certain products used in other production or  
manufacturing processes for domestic consumption or export?  
Reply  
Canada removed many years ago the requirement for the Certificate of Origin to be certified by a 
designated body located in the beneficiary country, in order to lessen the administrative bu rden and WT/TPR/M/389/Add.1  
 
- 63 - 
 
  provide easier access to unilateral preferential tariff treatments for eligible products. With this 
change, Canada introduced an alternative to the Certificate of Origin, Form A; the Exporter 's 
Statement of Origin, which may be placed directly on the invoice.  
3.1.3 Tariffs, 3.1.3.3 Tariff quotas, paragraph 3.40, page 59  
Question  
According to page 59, paragraph 3.40, regarding the procedure for obtaining an import permit and 
allocation of quotas: The Secretariat 's report states that quotas for certain categories of agricultural 
products are determined on the basis of marketing campaigns, while others are set according to the 
calendar year. Could Canada indicate to us whether this difference in allocation could be related, in 
the first case, to o bjectives of stabilizing supply and demand in the domestic market for products 
subject to tariff quotas? How is the supply/demand of imported products analysed for the 
determination of quotas under marketing campaigns? How does this measure conform to Cana da's 
minimum access commitments?  
Reply  
Canada interprets, "marketing campaign " to refer to an allocation period that does not coincide with 
the calendar year (i.e. January to December) but another yearlong time period. For example, certain 
dairy tariff rat e quotas established under the WTO + CPTPP are administered on a marketing year 
basis from 1 August to 31 July. Canada 's decision to allocate tariff rate quotas (TRQ) in accordance 
with a marketing year instead of the calendar year changes the dates of the  application period for 
TRQ allocation only, not the quantity of TRQ allocated.  
Canada 's allocation and administration of a certain tariff -rate quota on a marketing year basis is 
determined by market access commitments negotiated at the WTO and in bilatera l free trade 
agreements. These commitments were negotiated in consultation with Canadian industry to ensure 
TRQ access coincided with sector production schedules.  
Canada 's administration of tariff -rate quotas on a marketing year basis is consistent with it s legal 
obligations, including its decision to allocate a quantity of TRQ equal to or exceeding its minimum 
access commitments agreed to at the WTO. Information on whether Canada allocates a particular 
TRQ on a marketing year basis is available on Global A ffairs Canada 's website and in the text of the 
agreement where Canada agreed to the TRQ.  
Paragraph 3.41, pages 59 -60 
Question  
According to pages 59 -60, paragraph 3.41: "Canada established specific bilateral quotas for cheese 
under certain bilateral trade agreements, such as the CETA with the European Union. In relation to 
its WTO cheese quota of 20,411 tonnes, Canada undertook, within the framework of the CETA, to 
transfer 800 tonnes of the part not reserved for the EU to the European Union 's reserve. Could 
Canada inform us under what normative conditions and criteria this additional quota was established, 
based on the overall WTO quota? In addition, how might a country that has recently sought to export 
a certain product subject to a tariff  quota to Canada benefit from the quota duties?  
Reply  
The adjustment to the EU reserve under Canada 's WTO cheese tariff rate quota (TRQ) is a transfer 
to maintain the relative shares of cheese TRQ quota between EU and non -EU WTO members due to 
enlargement of the EU with new members having joined since the original WTO quota was 
established. The size of the WTO cheese TRQ will remain at 20,411,866 kilograms and Canada will 
continue to administer this quota under the Export and Import Permits Act and in confo rmity with 
its WTO obligations. Canada engaged existing allocation holders in order to identify those that wish 
to transfer some, or all, of their allocation from the non -EU to the EU reserve of the WTO TRQ.  WT/TPR/M/389/Add.1  
 
- 64 - 
 
  Interested exporters seeking to export their pro duct to Canada should work with TRQ allocation 
holders in Canada in order to explore opportunities to export their product subject to the 
within -access rate of duty available through Canada 's tariff rate quota for cheese at the WTO.  
3.1.4 Other charges aff ecting imports, 3.1.4.1 Federal Goods and Services Tax (GST) and 
provincial sales taxes, paragraph 3.52, page 66  
Question  
According to page 66, paragraph 3.52: "In five provinces, the Federal Government collects (in 
addition to the GST and on behalf of the provinces) a provincial tax that has the same tax base as 
the GST; both taxes are integrated into the Harmonized Sales Tax (HST); the combined tax rate is 
13% in Ontario and 15% in New Brunswick, Newfoundland and Labrador, Nova Scotia and Prince 
Edward  Island. On the basis that the provincial tax has the same tax base as the GST and is levied 
by the Federal Government at the border at the same time as such duties and consumption taxes, 
could Canada explain to us, given the different percentages of the t ax in certain territories and its 
exemption in others, what measures it takes to bring the harmonized sales tax into line with the 
MFN principle in the case of imports of like products? Also, from the point of view that taxes collected 
at the border influe nce the cost of products domestically, could Canada tell us how such a 
harmonized tax, which has different levels and exemptions, would not affect the normal conditions 
of competition between domestically -produced and imported like products, and how would the 
principle of national treatment would be complied with?  
Reply  
The Harmonized Sales Tax (HST) is a value -added tax that applies to most property and services 
acquired for consumption in an HST province in Canada: i.e., in Ontario, Nova Scotia, New 
Brunswick, Prince Edward Island, or Newfoundland and Labrador. Under th e HST, the consumption 
of a property or service is generally considered to occur in the province that is the "destination " 
(rather than the origin) of a supply or importation. In addition, if a property or service is supplied or 
imported in a particular pr ovince in Canada and is subsequently brought into another province where 
a higher rate of HST applies, there may be a requirement to self -assess tax. This destination -based 
approach used under the HST is consistent with international best practices recomme nded by the 
Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD).  
The use of the destination principle facilitates competitive equity for domestic and foreign suppliers 
by ensuring both suppliers are subject to HST at the same rate. For instance, i f a vendor sells taxable 
goods to an individual resident in an HST province, the HST rate applicable in that province would 
generally apply regardless of where the vendor is located. Similarly, if taxable goods are sold outside 
Canada and then imported by an individual resident in an HST province, the HST would apply to the 
importation at the rate applicable in that province. The net result is that, for like products, the same 
rate of HST would apply to a supply of the products made in Canada and to an impo rtation of the 
products in Canada if the same province is the destination of the supply and the importation. In this 
way, the different HST rates in Canada do not give rise to most -favoured nation or national treatment 
issues.  
Paragraph 3.53, page 67  
Quest ion 
In accordance with page 67, paragraph 3.53, "The Export Distribution Centre Program (EDCP) 
generally allows eligible companies that do not manufacture or produce goods to purchase and 
import certain products without paying GST or HST. These companies m ust carry out exclusively 
commercial activities, obtain at least 90% of their income from exports and add limited value to the 
products in carrying out their activities. " Could Canada tell us how this measure complies with the 
prohibited subsidy provisions ? Multilateral provisions on prohibited subsidies do not speak of 
domestic production, but subsidies are prohibited when they are de jure or de facto contingent on 
export performance.  WT/TPR/M/389/Add.1  
 
- 65 - 
 
  Reply  
The Export Distribution Centre Program (EDCP) is intended to benef it export -oriented businesses 
that import goods and/or acquire goods in Canada, process them to add only limited value, such as 
by disassembling, reassembling or labelling, and then export them. The EDCP is not intended to 
benefit companies that manufactur e or produce new products in Canada that they then export.  
Under the programme , EDCP participants do not pay Goods and Services Tax (GST) or Harmonized 
Sales Tax (HST) on most imported goods or on domestic purchases of goods worth CAD 1,000 or 
more. The GST/HST is a value -added consumption tax that generally does not apply to export s and 
which is fully recoverable for businesses engaged exclusively in commercial activities. The EDCP thus 
improves cash flow for EDCP participants because they do not need to pay GST/HST up front, claim 
an input tax credit to recover the taxes on their G ST/HST return and then wait for their net tax 
refund to arrive.  
The programme  is administered by the Canada Revenue Agency (CRA) and is not part of a customs 
regime. Companies qualified to apply for the programme  complete the relevant form and submit it 
to the CRA.  
With respect to its status under the WTO Agreement on Subsidies and Countervailing Measures 
(ASCM), footnote 1 of the ASCM states that the exemption of an exported product from duties or 
taxes borne by the like product when destined for domestic consumption, or the remission of such 
duties or taxes in amounts not in excess of those which have accrued, shall not be deemed a subsidy. 
The EDCP does not exempt exported products from indirect taxes in excess of those levied in respect 
of the production  and distribution of like products when sold for domestic consumption. As such, it 
is deemed not to be a subsidy under the ASCM.  
Paragraph 3.54, page 67  
Question  
In accordance with page 67, paragraph 3.54, "In general, the tax rates applied to imports are the 
same as those applied to domestically produced goods, although lower (or zero) rates are imposed 
on domestic brewers and on wine made entirely from agricultural inputs grown in Canada. " How 
does this measure comply with national treatment provisions wh en we are talking about imported 
like products (we are not referring to directly competing or substitute products)? In addition, how 
does this measure comply with the prohibited subsidy provisions if, indirectly, there is a requirement 
to use domestic prod ucts to benefit from lower or zero tax rates?  
Reply  
Given the ongoing WTO dispute settlement process on elements of the alcohol tax regimes in 
Canada, it would be inappropriate to comment further at this time.  
3.1.4.4 Other charges, paragraph 3.57, page 71  
Question  
In accordance with page 71, paragraph 3.57, Ecuador is interested in learning how the carbon pricing 
system works. Therefore, could Canada inform us how these prices are determined, what event 
generates the collection of these prices and t o which products would they be applied?  
Reply  
The Pan -Canadian Approach to Pricing Carbon Pollution gives provinces and territories the flexibility 
to develop their own carbon pollution pricing systems as long as they meet minimum federal criteria, 
includi ng a minimum price of CAD 20 per tonne of carbon pollution in 2019, rising by CAD 10 per 
year until it reaches CAD 50 per tonne in 2022. The federal government also committed to 
implementing a federal carbon pollution pricing system in provinces and territ ories that requested it 
or did not have a carbon pollution pricing system that meets these criteria.  WT/TPR/M/389/Add.1  
 
- 66 - 
 
  Under the Greenhouse Gas Pollution Pricing Act, the federal carbon pollution pricing system has two 
parts:  
• a regulatory charge on fuel (fuel charge)  
• a trad ing system for large industry, known as the Output -Based Pricing System (OBPS)  
Output -Based Pricing System (OBPS)  
The OBPS is designed to put a price on carbon pollution from industry while maintaining their 
competitive position relative to international peers. The system creates a strong financial incentive 
for the least efficient facilities to reduce emissions per unit of output and for strong performers to 
continue to improve. Most carbon pollution pricing systems have a version of this ap proach to pricing 
industrial GHG emissions. The federal OBPS sets an emissions -intensity standard, or output -based 
standard (OBS), for each sector under the system. Facilities that emit less than their standard earn 
credits they can sell. Facilities with e missions above their standard have three options to comply:  
• Pay carbon pollution price ( CAD 20/t in 2019, rising to CAD 50/t in 2022);  
• Submit surplus credits purchased from facilities that beat their limit; and/or  
• Submit eligible offset credits.  
The Government carefully considered how to mitigate risks to competitiveness and carbon leakage 
in designing the system. Each sector 's proposed standard was developed based on an analysis of 
the risks to competitiveness for that sector.  
Fuel charge  
The fuel ch arge is generally paid by fuel producers and distributors. Fuel charge rates reflect a carbon 
pollution price of CAD 20 per tonne of carbon dioxide equivalent (CO2e) in 2019, rising by CAD 10 
per tonne annually to CAD 50 per tonne in 2022. The rates are ba sed on global warming potential 
factors and emission factors used by Environment and Climate Change Canada to report Canada 's 
emissions to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change. In 2019, the fuel charge 
rate for gasoline is 4.42 cents p er litre, the rate for diesel is 5.37 cents per litre and the rate for 
natural gas is 3.91 cents per cubic metre. Applying the fuel charge at higher rates over time will 
help to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and support clean growth, while keeping costs low for 
Canadians and Canadian businesses. It will send a signal to markets and provide an incentive to 
reduce energy use through conservation and efficiency measures.  
Proceeds  
The federal carbon pollution pricing system is not about raising revenues. It i s about recognizing 
that pollution has a cost, empowering Canadians, and encouraging cleaner growth and a more 
sustainable future. Returning proceeds from carbon pollution pricing helps with affordability while 
maintaining the incentive to pollute less. Ev ery time a consumer or business makes a purchasing 
decision, they are faced with a financial incentive to choose greener options, regardless of how the 
proceeds are rebated or returned. All direct proceeds from pricing carbon pollution under the federal 
system will be returned to the jurisdiction in which they were collected.  
Provincial and territorial governments that have committed to carbon pollution pricing by voluntarily 
adopting the federal system will receive these proceeds directly from the federal government and 
can decide on how to use them. For those provinces that do not have a carbon pollution pricing 
system that meets the federal requirements (Ontario, Saskatchewan, Manitoba, New Brunswick), 
the Government is returning the majority of proceeds (approximately 90%) from the fuel charge 
directly to households in those provinces through Climate Action Incentive Payments. With the 
Climate Action Incentive, most households will receive more money back than they pay in increased 
costs due to carbon pol lution pricing. Canada 's major banks, the Business Council of Canada, the 
Mining Association of Canada, the Canadian Gas Association, and major energy companies have 
signalled their support for carbon pricing in Canada.  WT/TPR/M/389/Add.1  
 
- 67 - 
 
  Next steps  
Draft regulations for the  output -based pricing system were published in December 2018. Final 
regulations are expected to be published in 2019. The government has committed to review carbon 
pollution pricing by 2022 to inform the path forward, with an interim report in 2020.  
3.1.6 Anti-dumping, countervailing, and safeguard measures, 3.1.6.1 Anti -dumping and 
countervailing measures, paragraph 3.66, page 73  
Question  
Could you indicate the coordination mechanism used in the adoption of measures applicable to both 
the CBSA and the CITT?  
Which organization is responsible for monitoring the corrective actions taken?  
Reply  
In Canada, trade remedy investigations are conducted through a bifurcated system by the Canadian 
Border Services Agency (CBSA) and the Canadian International Trade T ribunal (CITT). The CBSA is 
responsible for determining whether the subject goods have been dumped and/or subsidized, while 
the CITT determines whether the dumping and/or subsidizing has resulted in injury or threat of 
injury to the domestic industry. Deta ils on the procedural steps taken by the CBSA and the CITT in 
conducting a trade remedy investigation are outlined in paragraphs 3.66 –3.68 of the WTO 
Secretariat Report.  
The CBSA is responsible for compliance and enforcement of trade remedy measures.  
3.1.6 .2 Safeguards, paragraph 3.106, page 87  
Question  
What would be the regulatory and technical mechanism allowing for the exclusion of the application 
of a multilateral safeguard measure to certain imports originating in Mexico?  
Reply  
Some of Canada 's free trade agreements require that certain trading partners be given preferential 
treatment when imposing global safeguards. In the case of Mexico, the North American Free Trade 
Agreement (NAFTA) requires that imports from Mexico be excluded from a global safeguard 
measures unless those imports account for a substantial share of total imports and contribute 
importantly to the serious injury or threat of serious injury. Canada 's safeguard obligations under 
NAFTA are implemented in the Customs Tariff and the Canadian International Trade Tribunal Act.  
As imports of heavy plate and stainless steel wire from Mexico are not a substantial share of imports 
and are not contributing to serious injury or threat of serious injury, imports of these goods from 
Mexico are not subject to the definitive safeguards imposed by Canada on 13 May 2019.  
3.2 Measures Directly Affecting Exports, Export taxes, charges, and levies, 
paragraph  3.118, page 89  
Question  
According to page 89, paragraph 3.118. "Canadian -manufactured tobacco products for export are 
subject to a special duty, equivalent to the consumption tax applicable in the domestic market, in 
order to discourage the smuggling into Canada of non -stamped pr oducts. Certain brands that are 
not normally sold in Canada are exempt. This measure applies to manufacturers who export a 
maximum of 1.5% of their production. The special duty may be refunded if the manufacturer can 
prove that the exported goods have ente red a foreign market for consumption and have been 
recorded on that market. " Could Canada inform us how the special duty measure and its WT/TPR/M/389/Add.1  
 
- 68 - 
 
  reimbursement, when it is shown that the exported goods have entered a foreign market, 
discourages the reintroduction i nto Canada of smuggled unstamped goods? What would the 
disincentive measure be? How would providing for a special duty reimbursement to manufacturers 
who export up to 1.5% of their production be justified under the provisions of prohibited and export 
subsidies? 
Reply  
The special duty structure aims to reduce the incentive to smuggle Canadian -produced tobacco 
products back into Canada from export markets. As of 1 April 2019, the duty on exports of tobacco 
products up to 1.5% of a manufacturer 's annual production is CAD 24.38 per carton of 200 
cigarettes. The duty on exports of tobacco products over 1.5% of a manufacturer 's annual production 
is CAD 43.52 per carton of 200 cigarettes (i.e., the normal excise duty of CAD 24.38 plus the special 
duty on stamped tobacco products of CAD 19.14 per carton of 200 cigarettes). A refund of the duty 
is provided on exports of tobacco products not exceeding 1.5% of the exporting Canadian 
manufacturer 's annual production to avoid double taxation of these produc ts when they are entered 
for consumption into legitimate foreign markets. This rebate is provided to the foreign importer and 
domestic Canadian manufacturer upon proof of payment of foreign taxes.  
With respect to its status under the WTO Agreement on Subsi dies and Countervailing Measures 
(ASCM), footnote 1 of the ASCM states that the exemption of an exported product from duties or 
taxes borne by the like product when destined for domestic consumption, or the remission of such 
duties or taxes in amounts not in excess of those which have accrued, shall not be deemed a subsidy. 
This measure does not exempt exported products from indirect taxes in excess of those levied in 
respect of the production and distribution of like products when sold for domestic consump tion. As 
such, it is deemed not to be a subsidy under the ASCM.  
4 TRADE POLICIES BY SECTOR  
4.1. Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries, 4.1.1.2 Border measures, paragraph 4,11, 
page  141 
Question  
In accordance with page 141, paragraph 4.11, on the Export and I mport Permits Act, which may 
authorize the granting of additional access for the import of goods subject to tariff quotas: Could 
Canada indicate whether this provision could be used to expand the cheese quota to the European 
Union, thereby avoiding the use  of the 800 tonnes from Canada 's overall WTO quota (from the 
non-EU portion, paragraph 4.8, page 163)?  
Reply  
Under the Export and Import Permits Act, the Minister of Foreign Affairs may authorize that 
supplemental access be granted for importation of goods covered by a tariff -rate quota at their 
discretion. Global Affairs Canada has issued Noticed to Importers 850 which sets out the 
department 's policies and practices pertaining to the authorization of supplementary imports of dairy 
products. This notice provides for the authorization of supplementary imports under the Import for 
Re-Export Program, for the purposes of test marketing, and under extraordinary or unusual 
circumstances. The Minister allows supplementary imports where he/she j udges they are required 
to meet market need. The full text of the Notice can be found here:  
https://www.international.gc.ca /controls -controles/prod/agri/dairy -laitiers/notices -
avis/850.aspx?lang=eng#supp  
Canada 's adjustment to the EU reserve under its WTO cheese TRQ is not reflective of its policies 
pertaining to the authorization of supplemental imports.  WT/TPR/M/389/Add.1  
 
- 69 - 
 
  4.1.1.6 Commodities s ubject to supply management, 4.1.1.6.1 Institutional framework, 
paragraph 4.32, page 146  
Question  
Pursuant to page 146, paragraph 4.32, regarding regulation of the milk supply, could Canada provide 
information on how imported products are considered in the  determination of production quotas, 
pricing provisions, import controls, and coordinated research and marketing activities (pillars of the 
supply regulation system in Canada, as mentioned in the Secretariat 's Report)?  
Reply  
Imports of certain dairy products are one variable that is taken into account in the calculation of 
national milk production targets. Managing the supply of milk is complex due to a number of 
variables, such as the number of production units involved, the weather and other uncontr ollable 
factors that also affect production cycles. The Canadian Dairy Commission (CDC) calculates national 
milk production targets on behalf of the industry. This target is expressed in kilograms of butterfat 
and is constantly monitored and adjusted when necessary to reflect changes in demand and supply, 
to which imports are a factor. With respect to the pricing pillar, the Commissioners of the Canadian 
Dairy Commission continue to base support prices for butter on the following elements: the cost of 
produ ction study, input from various Canadian stakeholders, the processors ' margin and economic 
indicators such as the consumer price index.  
Report by Canada – WT/TPR/G/389  
3 TRADE POLICY DEVELOPMENTS 2015 -2019  
3.3.2 Modernized Free Trade Agreements, p aragraph  3.29, page 12  
Question s 
Could you tell us what the purpose and scope of the dispute settlement mechanism would be?  
Could you tell us what it would consist of and what parameters would be taken into account to select 
the members of the binational panel?  
Could you provide us with the rationale for anti -dumping and countervailing measures?  
Would such a procedure make it possible to deal with matters relating to safeguard measures?  
Reply  
When it comes to disagreements, the Canada -United States -Mexico Agreement (CUSMA) continues 
to offer parties legal avenues for recourse that are very similar to the North American Free Trade 
Agreement (NAFTA). This includes:  
• Preserving the use of binational panels to resolve disputes on anti -dumping and 
countervailing duty matters, which is critically important to preserving market access 
outcomes and defending the parties ' interests in trade remedy cases. Further information on 
the CUSMA outcomes on trade remedies and related dispute settlement can be fou nd here:  
https://international.gc.ca/trade -commerce/trade -agreements -accords -commerciaux/agr -
acc/cusma -aceum/dispute -differends.aspx?lang=eng . With respect to the formation of 
binational panels, please refer to Annex 10 -B.1 of the CUSMA text 
https://international.gc.ca/trade -commerce/assets/pdfs/agreements -accords/cusma -
aceum/r -cusma -10.pdf . 
• Preserving the NAFTA state -to-state dis pute settlement process, and to improve elements 
of this process including with respect transparency and expediency. It requires the parties 
to agree on a roster of 30 independent and highly qualified experts to facilitate the creation 
of panels. Further i nformation on the CUSMA state -to-state dispute settlement system can 
be found here: https://international.gc.ca/tra de-commerce/trade -agreements -accords -
commerciaux/agr -acc/cusma -aceum/state -etat.aspx?lang=eng  WT/TPR/M/389/Add.1  
 
- 70 - 
 
  • The CUSMA does not permit bilateral safeguards. Disputes regarding safeguards in CUSMA 
would not relate to whether any global safeguards comply with the requireme nts in 
Chapter  10 regarding application of such safeguards to CUSMA partners.  
4 OTHER KEY GOVERNMENT INITIATIVES  
4.1 Canadian Free Trade Agreement (CFTA), paragraph 4.2, page 16  
Question  
With respect to the procedures for determining whether a product fall s within the scope of an 
anti-dumping or countervailing measure, we have the following question . So far, which products 
have been identified through this procedure and how many products have been involved?  
Reply  
As of 1 June 2019, four scope proceedings have been initiated by the Canadian Border Services 
Agency (CBSA) with respect to the following products: seamless casing, oil country tubular goods, 
aluminum extrusions and fabricated industrial steel components. Further information on these 
proceedings is available on the CBSA 's website:  https://www.cbsa -asfc.gc.ca/sima -lmsi/sp -
pp/menu -eng.html  
4.8 Changes to Canada 's Trade Remedy Regime, paragraph 4.21, page 19  
Question  
What results have been obtained from the implementation of the above -mentioned amendments 
aimed at strengthening the system of trade measures? What have been the results stemming from 
trade unions ' involvement in investigation and research and what has be en their role?  
Reply  
Since the amendments came into force, four scope proceedings have been initiated by the CBSA. 
The results of these proceedings are available on the CBSA 's website:  https://www.cbsa -
asfc.gc.ca/sima -lmsi/sp -pp/menu -eng.html . 
As of 1 June 2019, no anti -circumvention investigations have been initiated.  
With respect to trade unions ' involvement, as of  1 June 2019, trade unions participated in two 
anti-dumping investigations, with respect to carbon steel welded pipe and corrosion -resistant steel 
sheet, and in one safeguard inquiry on seven steel products. Further information on the results of 
these inve stigations and trade unions ' participation, is available on the CITT website: 
http://www.citt -tcce.gc.ca  
  WT/TPR/M/389/Add.1  
 
- 71 - 
 
  EL SALVADOR  
Report by the Secretariat – WT/TPR/S/389  
3 TRADE POLICIES AND PRACTICES BY MEASURE  
3.3.4 Competition policy and price controls, 3.3.4.1 Main regulatory and institutional 
framework, paragraph 3.192, page 105  
Question  
Is the Competition Defense Tribunal an administrative entity or is it a specialized court that is part 
of Canada 's judiciary? Are  the decisions made by that court subject to appeal to higher courts? What 
action can the Competition Defense Tribunal take in the face of foreign judgements, laws and 
directives that affect Canada 's economic activity? And does Canada 's Competition Act pro vide for 
oversight of government aid?  
Reply  
The Competition Tribunal is an administrative tribunal and is not part of the judiciary.  However, the 
Tribunal carries out judicial functions.  The Tribunal is composed of both judicial members and 
non-judicial members.  All members of the Tribunal hear factual evidence and make determinations 
regarding that evidence.  In addition, the judicial members of the Tribunal also decide legal issues 
related to the proceedings.  Pursuant to section 13 of the Competition Tri bunal Act, decisions of the 
Tribunal may be appealed to the Federal Court of Appeal.  
The Tribunal has jurisdiction over foreign judgements, laws and directives pursuant to sections 82 
and 83 of the Competition Act.  The Competition Act does not specifically  provide for oversight of 
government aid, but section 2.1 of the Act provides that the Act applies to corporations that are 
acting as agents of the Canadian government, when those corporations are engaging in commercial 
activities that are in actual or pot ential competition with other persons.  
Paragraph 3.195, page 106  
Question  
Is there a legal basis for implementing the Immunity or Leniency Programs? What are the general 
conditions or requirements for seeking the protection of these Programmes ? 
Reply  
The C ompetition Bureau 's Immunity and Leniency Programs outline the policies of the Competition 
Bureau and Public Prosecution Service of Canada ("PPSC") (rather than laws). The Program mes are 
available at: https://www.competitionbureau.gc.ca/eic/site/cb -bc.nsf/eng/04391.html . 
The Programmes  are administered jointly by the Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP) and the 
Commissi oner of Competition (Commissioner). Under the Programmes , the Competition Bureau 
(Bureau), headed by the Commissioner, is responsible for investigating alleged wrongdoing and 
making recommendations to the Public Prosecution Service of Canada (PPSC) to gran t immunity and 
leniency. The PPSC, under the direction of the DPP, is responsible for the decision to enter into an 
immunity or plea agreement with an applicant in accordance with the principles set out in the Public 
Prosecution Service of Canada Deskbook.  These responsibilities are discharged by the Bureau and 
the PPSC, in mutual recognition of the other 's independence.  Please refer to the following link for 
more information on the Immunity Agreement as set out in the PPSC Deskbook: https://www.ppsc -
sppc.gc.ca/eng/pub/fpsd -sfpg/fps -sfp/tpd/p5/ch02.html#section_5  
(Source: https://www.competitionbureau.gc.ca/eic/site/cb -bc.nsf/eng/04391.html ) 
The eligibility requirements for the Immunity Program include:  
• The Bureau is unaware of an offence, and the applicant is the first to disclose all elements 
of the offence; or the Bur eau is aware of an offence, and the applicant is the first to come WT/TPR/M/389/Add.1  
 
- 72 - 
 
  forward before the Bureau gathers sufficient evidence to warrant a referral of the matter 
to the Director of Public Prosecutions.  
• An applicant has terminated its participation in the illeg al activity.  
• The applicant must not have coerced others to be party to the illegal activity.  
• The applicant must demonstrate that it was a party to the offence.  
• Throughout the course of the Bureau 's investigation and subsequent prosecution, the 
applicant mu st provide complete, timely and ongoing cooperation, at its own expense.  
The eligibility requirements for the Leniency Program include:  
• The applicant has terminated its participation in the cartel.  
• The applicant must demonstrate that it was a party to the offence.  
• The applicant must agree to plead guilty.  
• Throughout the course of the Bureau 's investigation and subsequent prosecution, the 
applicant must provide complete, timely and ongoing cooperation, at its own expense.  
The recommended fine for a Leniency applicant is informed by numerous variables, including 
aggravating and mitigating factors. These are outlined in Part XXIII of the Criminal Code and relevant 
sentencing case law.  
3.3.4.4 International cooperation, paragraph 3.209, page 109  
Question  
When the principle of positive comity is invoked, does the decision contemplate corrective measures 
for both markets? What authority recused itself from hearing the case to avoid duplication of 
proceedings?  
Reply  
The Nishikawa Rubber case was an applicatio n of the 2004 agreement on positive comity, between 
Canada and the United States (U.S.). Pursuant to Article IV.(2)(b) of that agreement, the Requesting 
State (in that case, Canada) may decide to defer or suspend its enforcement activities if it is satisfi ed 
that the adverse effects of the conduct on its important interests can be and are likely to be 
investigated and, as appropriate, eliminated or adequately remedied by the Requested State (in that 
case, the U.S.) . 
In the Nishikawa Rubber case, the conduct  primarily targeted American consumers and the fine 
imposed in the U.S. effectively I12addressed the adverse effects of the conduct in Canada (as well 
as in the U.S.).  As a result, the Commissioner of the Competition Bureau exercised his discretion to 
not pursue further enforcement action against Nishikawa Rubber Co., Ltd. in Canada for this conduct.  
See:https://www.canada.ca/en/competition -bureau/news/2016/07/unprecedented -cooperation -
with-us-antitrust -enforcement -authority -leads-to-major -cartel -crackdown.html  
for additional details.   
 
  WT/TPR/M/389/Add.1  
 
- 73 - 
 
  EUROPEAN UNION  
Report by the Secretariat – WT/TPR/S/389  
2 TRADE AND INVESTME NT REGIMES  
2.1 General Framework, paragraphs 2.3 -2.4 page 30  
Question  
Could Canada elaborate on the CFTA 's achievements regarding food safety and building codes?  
Reply  
The Canadian Free Trade Agreement (CFTA), which came into force in July 2017, established several 
processes and working groups, including the Regulatory Reconciliation and Cooperation Table (RCT). 
The RCT was established to address regulatory differences across jurisdiction s that act as a barrier 
to trade, investment or labour mobility within Canada. The RCT, comprised of officials from Canada 's 
federal, provincial and territorial governments, is making progress in addressing barriers, such as 
those in the food sector and bu ilding codes, and sector specific working groups have been tasked 
with developing reconciliation agreements in these areas. Two reconciliation agreements with 
respect to Organic Labelling for Aquaculture Products and Inspection Requirements for Produce hav e 
been completed and fully implemented. Through the Safe Food for Canadians Act and its regulations, 
the scope of products that may be labelled as organic was broadened to include aquaculture 
products, and requirements for quality inspections for blueberri es and grade inspections for apples 
and potatoes prior to transportation from one province to another were removed. Work is ongoing 
in other areas in the food sector and with respect to building codes. Additional information on the 
RCT and its work plan it ems can be found on the CFTA website https://www.cfta -alec.ca/ .  
Question  
The report summarises the main achievements of the Canadian Free Trade Agreement (CFTA) and 
states that a number of committees and working g roups were established to address remaining 
barriers, including the Alcoholic Beverages Working Group. Could Canada elaborate on the mandate 
and schedule of the working groups established to address the remaining barriers in labour mobility 
and in services  sectors, such as transportation rules and in occupational health and safety?  
Reply  
The Canadian Free Trade Agreement (CFTA) established several processes and working groups and 
maintained certain existing working groups that were created under the previou s Agreement on 
Internal Trade (AIT). The Mobility and Qualification Recognition Working Group (MQRWG), originally 
established under the AIT, supports the coordination, implementation and monitoring of Chapter 
Seven (Labour Mobility) of the CFTA, and leads efforts to reduce barriers to labour mobility within 
Canada. For more information on the MQRWG, please visit the Labour Mobility website : 
(www.workersmobility.ca ). Under the oversight of the CFTA Regulatory Rec onciliation and 
Cooperation Table (RCT), established to address regulatory differences across jurisdictions, Canada 's 
federal, provincial and territorial officials are working to address existing barriers in the areas of 
transportation, such as electronic logging devices and weights and dimensions, and occupational 
health and safety, by harmonising standards for safety equipment (e.g., first aid kits and personal 
flotation devices). For each identified barrier to trade, a working group is identified or esta blished to 
develop a reconciliation agreement that specifies timelines and federal, provincial and territorial 
actions that will be taken to align measures in these jurisdictions. The mandates and schedules of 
the working groups are developed and agreed to  by all participating members. Working groups 
report periodically on their progress to the RCT, which oversees the overall progress and proposes 
new items to be addressed. For more information on the RCT work plan and the status of these 
items please visit  the CFTA website : (www.cfta -alec.ca ). In January 2019, the federal -provincial -
territorial Council of Ministers Responsible for Transportation and Highway Safety agreed to establish 
the same weight limits for wide base single tires as dual tires within their respective jurisdictions, 
which w ill reduce costs and increase fuel efficiency. In January 2019, the federal -provincial -territorial 
Ministers Responsible for Labour endorsed the National Occupational Health and Safety 
Reconciliation Agreement. This agreement aims to harmonize several occu pational health and safety WT/TPR/M/389/Add.1  
 
- 74 - 
 
  standards, such as first aid kits, eye and face protection and personal flotation devices. Simplifying 
regulatory requirements will help organizations and businesses work more seamlessly across 
multiple jurisdictions, reducing co sts without compromising health and safety protections for 
workers.  
Question  
Could Canada elaborate on the composition of the Alcoholic Beverages Working Group and the 
expected scope, timelines and outcome of its work? Does the group also address issues re lated to 
so-called Liquor Control Authorities governing retail sale, importation as well as intra -Canadian trade 
(also mentioned in paragraph 3.218 of the report)?  
Reply  
The Alcoholic Beverages Working Group (ABWG), established in July 2017 under the Canadian Free 
Trade Agreement (CFTA), is comprised of representatives from the federal government and each 
provincial and territorial government, including trade policy, finance, alcohol policy, and liquor 
authority officials. Recommendations developed by the ABWG focus on ways to enhance trade in 
alcoholic beverages within Canada, while also balancing social responsibility and fiscal 
considerations, and ensuring compliance with Canada 's international trade obligations. Work is 
ongoing under this working gr oup, under the direction of the Committee of Internal Trade Ministers.  
Question  
Beyond implementing the CFTA, which other steps does Canada envision to further liberalise and 
strengthen inter -provincial trade?  
Reply  
In the 2018 Fall Economic Statement, the  Government of Canada reaffirmed its commitment to 
strengthen internal trade, identifying four specific areas: transportation requirements; food 
regulations and inspection rules; regulations in the construction sector, including national building 
codes; an d trade in alcohol.  
In November 2018, the Government of Canada announced a commitment to take action on: 
accelerating amendments to the federal Energy Efficiency Regulations for household appliances; 
clarifying labelling regulations for the food industry; modernizing meat inspection regulations; and 
standardizing what can be called "vodka " across Canada.  
In December 2018, Canada 's First Ministers (i.e., the Prime Minister of Canada and the Premier of 
each province and territory) agreed to specific actions: develop harmonized standards in the trucking 
sector; strengthen Canada 's agri -food sector, including clearer rules for organic products, and 
eliminating the duplication of food oversight and safety; and consult industry and consumers to 
develop wa ys to facilitate the sale of alcoholic beverages, and as a first step, Canada will consider 
amendments to the Importation of Intoxicating Liquors Act to remove certain federal requirements 
related to movement of alcohol within Canada.  
Further to Budget 201 9, the Government of Canada introduced proposed amendments to the 
Importation of Intoxicating Liquors Act on 9 April 2019, which would remove the federal requirement 
that alcohol moving from one province to another go through a provincial liquor authority.  
On 1 April 2019, the Government of Canada made available free online access to the National 
Building Code, the National Fire Code, the National Plumbing Code, and the National Energy Code 
for Buildings. Providing the construction industry with free codes,  approximately 99% of whose firms 
in Canada are small businesses, ensures that all municipalities can readily access and use the latest 
codes to provide a framework for safe and accessible buildings. International experience indicates 
that free codes for t he construction industry leads to gains in productivity and economic growth. For 
more information, please visit Codes Canada Publications website:  
https://nrc.canada.ca/en/certifications -evaluations -standards/codes -canada/codes -canada -publications . WT/TPR/M/389/Add.1  
 
- 75 - 
 
  Building on these actions, the Government of Canada will continue, in collaboration with the 
provincial and territorial governments, to strengthen  interprovincial trade.  
2.4 Investment Regime, 2.4.3 Restrictions, paragraph 2.45, page 40  
Question  
In Canada 's efforts to improve its investment climate and attractiveness to FDI, what steps are being 
taken to ensure that Provincial requirements, such as business registration, are transparent and 
easily understood by potential investors?  
Reply  
The investment attraction landscape in Canada involves many players and can be complex for 
potential investors. Invest in Canada (IIC), launched on 12 March 2018, will increase cooperation 
between provinces, territories and municipalities by providing comp anies with a one -stop-shop for 
investment in Canada thereby reducing complexity and administrative burden for investors. The IIC 
website is able to quickly match users with the federal and provincial/territorial programmes  and 
services to help them innovat e, create jobs and grow Canada 's economy.  
Budget 2019 also proposed measures across the government to minimize regulatory burden. These 
include plans to begin work announced in the 2018 Fall Economic Statement to introduce the Annual 
Modernization Bill and  to establish the External Advisory Committee on Regulatory Competitiveness. 
Additionally, Budget 2019 announced funding to implement regulatory road maps in three 
high-growth sectors, as well as funding for the Treasury Board Secretariat to support harmon ization 
of interprovincial and international regulations. The regulatory roadmaps will be implemented in the 
agri-food and aquaculture, health and bio -sciences, and transportation and infrastructure sectors.  
In 2016 -17, the Government of Canada finalized t he Service Strategy. This Strategy includes a 
commitment to create a single online window for all government services as well as targeted 
investments to modernize online services for Canadians, including: simplified online tax filing 
options; expanding the  online management of border taxes and duties; and a faster, more 
streamlined process for businesses to submit records and employment information. Since 2017 -18, 
the government has been working towards an "omni-channel " approach to service delivery, going 
beyond a single window to offer Government of Canada services to Canadians anywhere, anytime 
and on any device. To date, significant progress has been made on the foundational elements of this 
approach, which are highlighted in the 2018 -2022 Digital Operat ions Strategic Plan. For example, 
with the support of provincial, territorial, municipal and private sector partners, a pilot where a 
digital identity from another jurisdiction will be used to verify identity and grant access to federal 
services is being l aunched and could serve as a model for citizen services moving forward. 
Additionally, in order to make it easy for government departments to share their data with each 
other and the outside world in a modern, secure, and unified way, the federal government  is 
developing a Canadian Digital Exchange Platform (CDXP) that will form the foundation for real -time 
information sharing. According to the World Bank, Doing Business 2019 Report, Canada is the easiest 
place to start a business in the G20.  
2.4.4 Incentive s and promotion, paragraph 2.46, page 41  
Question  
The report refers to the creation of Invest in Canada, a departmental corporation that aims to 
increase Canada 's ability to attract and facilitate high -impact FDI. How does Canada assess the 
current and exp ected impact of the Invest in Canada initiative?  
Reply  
Canada is currently working to establish performance indicators against which the initiative will be 
measured.  WT/TPR/M/389/Add.1  
 
- 76 - 
 
  Question  
The report refers to the creation of Invest in Canada, a departmental corporation that aims to 
increase Canada 's ability to attract and facilitate high -impact FDI. Does Canada operate programmes 
to encourage FDI in small and medium -sized enterprises?  
Reply  
The Government is focused on helping small - and medium -sized enterpri ses (SMEs) export and 
grow. The Government 's Innovation and Skills Plan, introduced in Budget 2017, introduced a suite 
of initiatives to help Canadian innovators and entrepreneurs grow their companies. More information 
available at : https://www.ic.gc.ca/eic/site/062.nsf/eng/home . 
Question  
The report refers to the creation of Invest in Canada, a departmental corporation that aims to 
increase Canada 's ability to attract and facilitate high-impact FDI. Could Canada please provide 
details on specific measures, the functioning of the federal support and its complementarity with 
funding activities of provincial governments?  
Reply  
Invest in Canada is working collaboratively with provincial, territorial and municipal governments to 
identify the gaps and barriers that exist to foreign direct investment to ensure its efforts and services 
are complementary.  It works seamlessly across federal departments and with provincial, territorial 
and munici pal governments to provide best in class concierge services – acting as a business 
interlocutor between investor clients and our government partners – to accelerate new investment 
and reinvestment opportunities. By offering investors a single -window to hel p them navigate 
programmes  and identify the support they need, Invest in Canada will accelerate the decision making 
process for businesses, enabling them to bring job -creating investments to communities across our 
country.  
3 TRADE POLICIES AND PRACTICES BY MEASURE  
3.1 Measures Directly Affecting Imports , 3.1.1 Customs procedures, valuation, and 
requirements , paragraph 3.7, page 47  
Question  
According to the report, Canadian authorities noted Canada 's intention to decommission the 
pre-Arrival Revi ew System (PARS) and the Release on Minimum Documentation (RMD) system on 
1 April 2019. How has the replacement of the PARS and RMD by the Integrated Import Declaration 
(IID) been carried out?  
Reply  
Only the Other Government Departments (OGD) pre -Arrival R eview System (PARS) and OGD 
Release on Minimum Documentation (RMD) are currently scheduled for decommissioning. These 
service options allow for the release of goods regulated by three specific OGD programmes . The 
decommissioning date is currently scheduled  for October 2019. However, the Canadian Border 
Services Agency (CBSA) is exploring delaying the date to accommodate clients who may require 
additional time to complete the necessary system updates before fully transitioning to the Integrated 
Import Declar ation (IID). With respect to the decommissioning plan, the Secretariat Report contains 
the approach implemented by CBSA. There are no plans to decommission the PARS or RMD for 
non-regulated goods at this time.  WT/TPR/M/389/Add.1  
 
- 77 - 
 
  3.1.2 Rules of origin, paragraph 3.18, page 51  
Question  
The report states that "A separate rule, which applies to only a limited number of imported goods, 
exists for marking purposes. " Could Canada explain this separate rule, and to which imported goods 
it applies?  
Reply  
For the purposes of marking ap plicable goods imported from a NAFTA country, Canada applies its 
Determination of Country of Origin for the Purposes of Marking Goods (NAFTA Countries) regulations 
(see https://laws -lois.jus tice.gc.ca/PDF/SOR -94-23.pdf ). For the purposes of marking applicable 
goods imported from a non -NAFTA country, Canada applies its Determination of Country of Origin 
for the Purposes of Marking Goods (non -NAFTA Countries) regulations (see : https://laws -
lois.justice.gc.ca/PDF/SOR -94-16.pdf ). The imported goods that must be marked are specified in 
each regulation.  
3.1.3 Tariffs, 3.1.3.3 Tariff quotas, paragraphs 3.39 -3.41, pages 59 -60 
Question  
Can Canada confirm the EU 's understanding that it has launched a review of its import permits policy 
for agricultural products subject to tariff rate quotas? If confirmed, could Canada please clarify the 
scope, objectives, process and expected timing of that review and indicate whether similar reviews 
have been undertaken in the past, also presenting their timings and results?  
Reply  
Canada can confirm that it has launched a comprehensive review of its allocation and administration 
policies for tariff rate  quotas (TRQs) for dairy, poultry and egg products. The scope of this review 
will include TRQs covering all supply managed commodities negotiated under Canada 's existing Free 
Trade Agreements (FTAs) and potentially the Canada -United States -Mexico Agreement  (CUSMA). 
Through the negotiation of a number of new trade agreements, the Government of Canada has 
increased its TRQ commitments for supply managed commodities from the 20 TRQs established 
under the World Trade Organization in 1995 to 42 TRQs under admini stration today. The planned 
implementation of the Agreement would see this increase to 58 TRQs. To ensure continued efficiency 
and effectiveness, the Government of Canada is seeking stakeholder views on the allocation and 
administration of these TRQs. The objective of the consultations is to assist in providing 
evidence -based recommendations to guide ministerial decisions on longer -term TRQ -related 
allocation policies for products under supply management (dairy, poultry and eggs). As part of the 
review, the  Canadian government seeks to hear from all sectors of Canadian society and 
international stakeholders, including: the Canadian public, producers, manufacturers, processors, 
further processors, distributors, retailers and importers; relevant national, prov incial and territorial 
industry associations; small, medium and large enterprises, provincial and territorial governments; 
national, provincial, territorial and regional associations; trading partners; and any other interested 
stakeholders. The consultatio ns will be conducted by various means, including online consultations 
on the Global Affairs Canada website, targeted meetings with domestic stakeholders, and 
engagement with interested trading partners. The review will involve two sets of public consultati ons 
in 2019 and 2020, leading to the publication of long term allocation policies to take effect on 
1 January 2021. The first set of public consultations will be held from 10 May to 31 August . The 
second round of public consultations will be held in early 2020. Canada previously reviewed its import 
quota administration in the early 1990s, before Canada converted its quotas to TRQs in accordance 
with its Uruguay Round obligations under the WTO. The review resulted in an extensive 1992 report 
by the Canadian International Trade Tribunal. Trading partners are invited to provide formal 
submissions to : TRQConsultation.consultationCT@international.gc.ca . Further information can be 
found on t he Global Affairs Canada website: https://www.international.gc.ca/trade -
commerce/consultations/TRQ -CT/index.aspx?lang=eng . 
 WT/TPR/M/389/Add.1  
 
- 78 - 
 
  3.1.4 Other charges affectin g imports, 3.1.4.2 Federal excise duties and taxes , paragraph 
3.54, page 67  
Question  
How does Canada intend to meet its obligations under both Article III:2 of the GATT and CETA to 
ensure there is no further discrimination between domestic and imported products through its federal 
tax policy?  
Reply  
Given the ongoing WTO dispute settlement process on elements of the alcohol tax regimes in 
Canada, it would be inappropriate to comment further at this time.  
3.1.4.3 Provincial product -specific taxes,  paragraph 3.55, page 68 and Table 3.16, 
pages  69-70 
Question  
The general provincial product -specific tax regimes for alcoholic beverages are set out in Table  3.16. 
In CUSMA, Canada has undertaken (via side letter) to do away with discriminatory practices related 
to the sale of wines in grocery stores in the province of British Columbia. Recently, Canada reached 
a settlement with Australia on the part of the le gal proceedings with Australia in the WTO relating 
to these same measures. In Australia 's letter to the Chair of the WTO Panel of 12 April, Australia 
notified it has been accorded the same treatment as the USA in respect of measures that were 
identified in  Australia 's panel request WT/DS537/8. Will Canada apply this treatment on an erga 
omnes  basis, also to the benefit of EU exporters?  
Reply  
British Columbia is moving forward with changes to measures relating to the sale of wine in grocery 
stores that will meet Canada 's international trade obligations. Subject to Cabinet approval, these 
changes will be published prior to the agreed upon implementation date of 1 November 2019.  
Question  
The general provincial product -specific tax regimes for alcoholic beverages are set ou t in Table  3.16. 
In CUSMA, Canada has undertaken (via side letter) to do away with discriminatory practices related 
to the sale of wines in grocery stores in the province of British Columbia. Recently, Canada reached 
a settlement with Australia on the part  of the legal proceedings with Australia in the WTO relating 
to these same measures. In Australia 's letter to the Chair of the WTO Panel of 12 April, Australia 
notified it has been accorded the same treatment as the USA in respect of measures that were 
identified in Australia 's panel request WT/DS537/8. Has the federal government carried out an 
analysis of the impact of provincial level differences/restrictions on both Canada 's internal market 
and on the external trade?  
Reply  
The Alcoholic Beverages Working  Group (ABWG), established on 20 July 2017, comprised of 
representatives from the federal government and each provincial and territorial government, 
developed recommendations focused on ways to enhance trade in alcoholic beverages within 
Canada, while also  balancing social responsibility, fiscal considerations and ensuring their full 
compliance with Canada 's international trade obligations. Work remains ongoing under this working 
group.  
Question  
The general provincial product -specific tax regimes for alcoho lic beverages are set out in Table  3.16. 
In CUSMA, Canada has undertaken (via side letter) to do away with discriminatory practices related 
to the sale of wines in grocery stores in the province of British Columbia. Recently, Canada reached 
a settlement wi th Australia on the part of the legal proceedings with Australia in the WTO relating WT/TPR/M/389/Add.1  
 
- 79 - 
 
  to these same measures. In Australia 's letter to the Chair of the WTO Panel of 12 April, Australia 
notified it has been accorded the same treatment as the USA in respect o f measures that were 
identified in Australia 's panel request WT/DS537/8. Has the federal government undertaken an 
analysis of the potential impact of its recent announcement to remove federal restrictions on direct 
to consumer sales?  
Reply  
The Government o f Canada is committed to working with provinces and territories to improve trade 
in alcoholic beverages within Canada. Alcohol is an area of shared jurisdiction within Canada. 
Currently, the federal Importation of Intoxicating Liquors Act (IILA) requires t hat all imports of 
alcohol and alcohol moving from one province to another must be sold or consigned to a provincial 
liquor authority (with some exceptions). As announced in Budget 2019, the Government of Canada 
has introduced amendments to the IILA which will remove the federal requirement that alcohol 
moving from one province to another must be sold or consigned to a provincial liquor authority. 
Provinces and territories would continue to be able to regulate the sale and distribution of alcohol 
within the ir boundaries and in order to permit direct -to-consumer shipping of alcohol across Canada, 
changes would need to be made by the provinces and territories.  
3.1.6 Anti -dumping, countervailing, and safeguard measures, 3.1.6.1 Anti -dumping and 
countervailing m easures, paragraph 3.75, page 76  
Question  
The report states: "A scope ruling specifies whether the product in question falls within the product 
description of the applicable order, finding or undertaking, including whether the goods in question 
originate in a country named in the order, finding or undertaking. " What is the difference between 
a 'scope ruling ' and an advance ruling on classification and/or origin? What is the purpose of this 
distinction?  
Reply  
Scope proceedings are limited to deter mining whether certain goods are subject to anti -dumping 
and countervailing duties. Scope proceedings may be requested by an interested person (e.g., 
importers, exporters, domestic producers) or be self -initiated by the Canada Border Services Agency. 
Scope  rulings can be appealed to the Canadian International Trade Tribunal and then further to the 
Federal Court of Appeal.  
Advance rulings on tariff classification and/or origin are intended to provide certainty to importers, 
or their representative, as to how  goods are to be classified and the specific rules of origin. Advance 
rulings are subject to review and appeal under the Customs Act. These rulings do not determine 
whether certain goods are subject to anti -dumping or countervailing duties.  
Question  
The re port states: "A scope ruling specifies whether the product in question falls within the product 
description of the applicable order, finding or undertaking, including whether the goods in question 
originate in a country named in the order, finding or under taking. " Which rule of origin applies to 
determine whether the goods in question originate in a country named in the order, finding or 
undertaking?  
Reply  
The Special Import Measures Act does not speak to origin determinations for the purposes of trade 
remedy measures. In practice, the Canada Border Services Agency considers the country of origin 
of invoiced goods to be the country where the goods are grown, produced or manufactured.  WT/TPR/M/389/Add.1  
 
- 80 - 
 
  Paragraph 3.90, page 81  
Question  
The report points out that Canada 's longest -lasting CVD measure is the one on refined sugar from 
the EU which has been in place since 1995. Considering that the EU removed the sugar quota in 
September 2017, when will Canada stop these measures?  
Reply  
Under the Special Import Measures Act, a fi nding ordinarily expires at the end of five years, unless 
the Canadian International Trade Tribunal (CITT) initiates an expiry review. Expiry reviews are 
conducted by both the Canadian Border Services Agency (CBSA) and the CITT and consider whether 
the exp iry of a measure is likely to result in the continuation or resumption of dumping and/or 
subsidizing and whether the expiry is likely to result in injury to the domestic industry. The last 
expiry review concerning the measure on Refined Sugar from certain European Union countries took 
place in 2015. The order is set to expire on 30 October 2020 and a Notice of Expiry will be published 
no later than 28 August 2020. If the CITT makes a decision to commence an Expiry Review, a Notice 
of Expiry Review will be p ublished within 50 days of the date of expiry. Alternatively, at any time, 
the EU may request that the CITT conduct an interim review of the measure, to determine whether, 
as a result of new facts or changes in circumstances since the finding or order, it should be rescinded 
or continued, with or without amendment.  
3.3 Measures Affecting Production and Trade, 3.3.1 Incentives, 3.3.1.1 Incentives 
programmes, paragraph 3.130, page 92  
Question  
The report states that Canada does not have specific overarching legislation governing incentives 
and subsidies and that various federal agencies and provincial/territorial governments implement 
incentives programmes. Is there a subsidy control system at federal or state level that ensures that 
subsidies do not distort or threaten to distort competition? If so, how do the different agencies at 
different levels (federal, state, local) coordinate the procedure of control of granting subsidies?  
Reply  
There is no overarching subsidy control system in Canada. The various federal, provincial and 
territorial governments are responsible for ensuring that any subsidies provided comply with 
Canada 's international obligation and to assess their competition effects when relevant. The federal 
government has periodically pr ovided information sessions for officials from provincial and territorial 
governments to share information on the provisions of the Agreement on Subsidies and 
Countervailing Measures (ASCM). The federal government also engages in consultations with the 
provincial and territorial governments to ensure that sub -federal subsidy programmes  that meet the 
notification requirements under Article 25 of the ASCM are notified.  
3.3.3 Sanitary and phytosanitary requirements, paragraph 3.182, page 102  
Question  
The parag raph mentions the main features of the "Safe Food for Canadians Act (SFCA) and the Safe 
Food for Canadian Regulation (SFCR) which came into effect on 15 January 2019, representing the 
most important revision of food safety regulations in 25 years. " To what  extent have these new 
programmes (SFCA and SFCR) simplified and streamlined the import procedures?  
Reply  
The Safe Food for Canadians Act (SFCA) and the Safe Food for Canadian Regulations (SFCR) provide 
a regulatory foundation that will help streamline Canada 's food import procedures in the following 
ways:  WT/TPR/M/389/Add.1  
 
- 81 - 
 
  1. These regulations create a single set of core data elements required as part of an import 
declaration. Greater consistency in this information simplifies the import declaration.  
 
2. These regul ations support the use of electronic data transmission and automation of import 
admissibility decisions wherever possible. This will reduce the paper burden for importers and 
create a faster and more efficient import process.  
 
3. Enable Canada to apply a cons istent risk based inspection approach to all imported foods. This 
will support a more consistent import process, regardless of the type of food being imported.  
Paragraph 3.183, page 102  
Question  
The report states that at the sub -federal level, provincial/t erritorial regulations are enforced by 
provincial/territorial authorities. Could Canada please clarify the role of the provinces/territories in 
regulating food safety and animal and plant health? How is any provincial/territorial divergence from 
federal or  national regulation handled?  
Reply  
With respect to sanitary and phytosanitary (SPS) measures relating to international and 
inter-provincial trade of food, plants and animal health, the Canadian Food Inspection Agency and 
Health Canada are the competent authorities. Provinces and territories may put in place SPS 
measures only in respect to food, animal, or plants that are sold within their borders (i.e., 
intra-provincial trade).  
Provincial and territorial governments may have additional requirem ents for the intra -provincial 
production and sale of goods within their jurisdictions. The Government of Canada is not aware of 
any SPS measures adopted by sub -federal authorities that have an impact on international trade. In 
the event that a province or territory applies an SPS measure that may have a significant effect on 
international trade, Canada will notify to the World Trade Organization (WTO) in accordance with its 
transparency obligations in the WTO Agreement on the Application of Sanitary and Phy tosanitary 
Measures.  
Box 3.4, page 103  
Question  
Could Canada elaborate in detail on how this licensing requirement (for Canadian importers) 
facilitates imports and thus reduces the burdens/costs of foreign exporters to Canada?  
Reply  
Licensing helps the Government of Canada to:  
• better identify importers of food and the food safety risks in order to target inspections 
and more quickly release shipments with a good history of compliance; and  
• communicate important food safety information directly to food imp orters.  
Question  
As the implementation of the new programme has been effective since beginning of 2019, could 
Canada share its initial experiences with this licensing requirement and provide some examples how 
it has improved access to the Canadian market?  WT/TPR/M/389/Add.1  
 
- 82 - 
 
  Reply  
Overall, the implementation of licensing under the Safe Food for Canadians Regulations (SFCR) has 
gone well. Safe and compliant food continues to be imported into Canada from sources all over the 
world without disruption at the border. With S FCR, there is a consistent approach across all types of 
imported foods and a level playing field with domestic producers.  
Question  
Could Canada please elaborate on what type of equivalence they would allow regarding the 
recognition of foreign food inspecti on systems?  
Reply  
With the implementation of the Safe Food for Canadian Regulations (SFCR), Canada has an 
opportunity to use approaches to optimize its risk management activities for imports. Many of 
Canada 's trading partners have mature domestic food safe ty systems with public health outcomes 
that are broadly comparable to Canada 's system. Foreign Food Safety Systems Recognition includes 
recognition of design and operational performance of two countries ' national food control systems 
providing comparable p ublic health outcomes, legislative frameworks, implementation and oversight 
programmes , and monitoring of regulatory performance. The scope will generally include all 
elements of a domestic food safety control system and all, or most, food commodities.  
Other partners have commodity specific control programmes  and oversight which can provide 
confidence that Canadian requirements will be met. Information on recognition of foreign food safety 
systems can be found on the Canadian Food Inspection Agency 's website at the following link:  
http://www.inspection.gc.ca/food/imports/foreign -systems/eng/1526656892179/1526656892413 . 
 
Canada can leverage these sys tems, programmes  and oversight in its risk management framework 
for imports using approaches such as the recognition of foreign food safety systems and 
programmes . 
3.3.5 State trading, state -owned enterprises, and privatization, paragraph 3.218, 
page  111 
Question  
Reference is made to the 13 provincial and territorial Liquor Control Authorities engaged in retail 
sale, importation, and inter -provincial/territorial trade in beer, wine, spirits, and other alcoholic 
beverages. Certain Liquor Control Boards (Onta rio, Quebec) apply Cost of Service Differentials 
(COSD) to imported wines. These costs are based on audited costs for marketing, handling and 
distribution. It is our understanding that new audits are currently being carried out to update COSD 
rates. So far , the audit reports and methodologies followed to assess and allocate costs are not 
publicly available, making it impossible for third parties to evaluate the whether COSD rates applied 
to imported wines are justified. Will the Canadian government make the  methodology of the ongoing 
COSD audits related to imported wines available to the industry and trade authorities of affected 
third parties?  
Reply  
The Cost of Service Differentials (COSD) audit for both, the Société des alcools du Québec and the 
Liquor Con trol Board of Ontario, is made by an independent and internationally recognized audit firm 
and conducted in accordance with recognized accounting standards. The audits are conducted by a 
third-party which ensures the integrity of the methodology.  
3.3.6 Gov ernment Procurement, 3.3.6.1 Overview, paragraph 3.220, pages 111 -112 
Question  
What are the reasons for the strong decrease in the reported value of goods procurements between 
2016 and 2017? To what extent can it be explained by changes in the method of reporting?  WT/TPR/M/389/Add.1  
 
- 83 - 
 
  Reply  
Contractual figures fluctuate based on a department 's requirements and needs. Furthermore, major 
contracts signed at certain point of time might display a surge in the trends, as Canada reports the 
entire value of the contract in the year it was awarded. For example, in calendar year 2016 a major 
contract was awarded for fixed -wing search and rescue aircraft replacement, for approximately 
CAD 2.7 billion . 
3.3.6.4 WTO GPA and other agreements, 3.3.6.4.3 Comprehensive and Progressive 
Agreemen t for Trans -Pacific Partnership (CPTPP) , paragraphs 3.262 -3.264, 
pages  121-122 
Question  
Which impact does Canada expect on cross -border procurement contracts between Canada and 
other CPTPP parties, and between Canada and third countries?  
Reply  
Since the Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans -Pacific Partnership (CPTPP) has been 
in force for less than 5 months, Canada cannot speculate on the expected impact of the CPTPP on 
cross-border procurement contracts between Canada and other CPTPP Parties . 
3.3.7 Intellectual property rights, 3.3.7.3 Patents, paragraph 3.285, pages 127 -128, and 
paragraph 3.323, pages  134-135 
Question  
The report states that regarding "ISP liability, the IP chapter [of CUSMA] includes flexibilities that 
enable Canada to maint ain its "Notice and Notice " regime ". Can Canada explain these flexibilities 
further and elaborate on the need to introduce a supplementary "notice and take down " requirement 
with respect to the implementation of the CUSMA?  
Reply  
Annex 20 -A to the Canada -United States -Mexico Agreement (CUSMA) Intellectual Property Rights 
Chapter provides that a Party that, from the date of agreement in principle of the Agreement, 
continues to provide an Internet service provider (ISP) liability regime as provided in the Anne x, is 
not required to implement the Chapter 's ISP liability provisions dealing with takedown 
(Article  20.89(3)), notices and counter -notices (Article 20.89(4)), and eligibility for limitations 
(Article 20.89(6)).  
3.3.7.6 Geographical indications, paragraph  3.311, pages 132 -133 
Question  
The paragraph outlines the protection of Geographical Indications under Canadian trademark 
legislation. Could Canada explain in detail how its commitments to properly enforce labelling, 
including on GIs, will be applied and implemented by the Canadian Food Inspection Agency (CFIA)? 
Could Canada provide more information on how the recently increased funding for the CFIA will be 
used to address fraud/mislabelling and if any funds will be specifically earmarked for t he enforcement 
of GI rights?  
Reply  
Canada has fully implemented all of its international commitments on geographical indications (GIs), 
as well as its separate commitments with respect to labelling. In Canada, protected GIs are 
considered private rights, a nd as with other Intellectual Property (IP) rights, right holders can pursue 
alleged infringement through Canada 's judicial system. The Canadian Food Inspection Agency (CFIA) 
is not responsible for the enforcement of GI rights in Canada. Rather, the CFIA a dministers a 
regulatory framework that relates to food safety and consumer protection on false and misleading WT/TPR/M/389/Add.1  
 
- 84 - 
 
  claims with respect to origin. This pre -existing CFIA framework is under a separate regime with a 
distinct, yet complementary purpose. Budget 2019  announced that the CFIA will be receiving funding 
to enhance federal capacity to detect and take enforcement action against instances of food fraud.  
3.3.7.10 IP Enforcement, paragraph 3.330, page 136  
Question  
The paragraph states that customs officers hav e to share information relating to the detained goods 
with rights owners who have filed a request for assistance. Could Canada please explain how the 
sharing system works and which are the main novelties of the Combating Counterfeit Products Act 
which came  into force in January this year (mentioned in paragraph 3.304, page 131)?  
Reply  
To clarify an error in paragraph 3.304 of the Secretariat Report, the Combatting Counterfeit Products 
Act, which came into force in January of 2015 (not January 2019), signifi cantly strengthened 
Canada 's Intellectual Property (IP) enforcement regime by introducing criminal offences for 
trademark counterfeit activities, civil measures to help rights -holders enforce their IP rights and new 
border enforcement measures.  
The Request for Assistance programme  allows Canada Border Services Agency (CBSA) to temporarily 
detain suspected counterfeit and pirated goods at the border and contact rights -holders who have 
filed requests for assistance regarding these suspected counter feit or pirated shipments. CBSA will 
provide the rights -holders with information regarding the identity of the importer and details of the 
shipment that facilitates a civil action.  
Filing a request for assistance is easy and free. Eligible rights holders s imply need to complete and 
submit an application form available online. More information is available at: https://www.cbsa -
asfc.gc.ca/security -securite/ipr -dpi/app -dem-eng.html . 
Paragraph 3.334, page 136  
Question  
The report describes cooperation between The Royal Canadian Mounted Police (RCMP) and the 
Canada Border Services Agency (CBSA) on one side and the collaboration between the Canada/U.S. 
Integrated Border Enforceme nt Teams (IBETs) on the other side. Could Canada please provide more 
details about how these activities are carried out (on -line exchange of information, joint operations 
etc.) and which are the most recurrent IPR types enforced?  
Reply  
The Royal Canadian M ounted Police (RCMP) has the authority to investigate criminal offenses under 
the Copyright Act and trademark offences under the Criminal Code. The RCMP utilizes a prioritization 
process to ensure that major operational projects are focused on the highest priorities that pose the 
greatest threat to Canada 's political, economic, and social integrity. The RCMP and the Canadian 
Border Services Agency (CBSA) have a shared responsibility for securing the border. While the CBSA 
is responsible for border security and enforcement at Ports of Entry (POE), the RCMP is responsible 
for enforcement between POEs. The RCMP takes a layered approach to border security: to prevent, 
detect and disrupt the greatest threats using all available resources, including technology and  
intelligence. This includes working with both domestic and international partners in an effort to 
maintain the security and integrity of Canada 's border. In some regions of Canada, the RCMP has 
established Integrated Border Enforcement Teams (IBETs), stra tegically located at the Canada/U.S. 
border. The IBETs primary mandate is to focus on criminal activity between the ports; that is, 
identifying and investigating persons and organizations that are involved in criminal activities, and 
seizing goods used in connection with such activities that may threaten the economic integrity or 
national security of one or both countries.  
 WT/TPR/M/389/Add.1  
 
- 85 - 
 
  4 TRADE POLICIES BY SECTOR  
4.1.1 Agriculture, 4.1.1.3 Domestic programmes, paragraphs 4.13 -4.24, pages 141 -144 
Question  
Can Canada please explain in more detail how this support will be granted to the farm sector, i.e., 
which are the sectors concerned, which eligibility criteria apply and what is the possible period for 
disbursement (if possible,  per sector) of this support . 
Reply  
Canada designs and implements its federal agriculture programmes  in a way that ensures their 
consistency with Canada 's obligations under the WTO Agreement on Agriculture.  
The Canadian Agricultural Partnership (the Partnership) is a CAD 3 billion investment over five years 
(2018 -2023) by federal, provincial and territorial governments to strengthen the agriculture and 
agri-food sector. The manner in which support is granted under the Partnership differs for each 
federal government programme . The Partnership programmes  are generally available across the 
agriculture sector and include a robust suite of business risk management (BRM) programmes . 
Under the Partnership, business risk management programs help Canadian agriculture producers 
manage significant risks that threaten the viability of their farms and are beyond their capacity to 
manage. The business risk management suite is comprised of the AgriInves t, AgriInsurance, 
AgriRecovery, AgriRisk, and AgriStability programs, which are generally available to all agricultural 
producers. The following link provides general information on the BRM programs under the 
Partnership:  http://www.agr.gc.ca/eng/about -us/key -departmental -initiatives/canadia n-agricultural -
partnership/canadian -agricultural -partnership -business -risk-management -programs -effective -april-
2018/?id=1500475317828 . 
AgriInvest and AgriStability are whole -farm programs covering all commodities, unless specifically 
excluded in the respec tive programme  guidelines, which can be found here:  
AgriInvest Guidelines ( http://www.agr.gc.ca/eng/?id=1291828779399 ); Eligibility Criteria 
(http://www.agr.gc.ca/eng/?id=1291836203250 ) 
AgriStability Guidelines ( http://www.agr.gc.ca/eng/?id=1291990433266 ); Eligibility Criteria 
(http://www.agr.gc.ca/eng/?id=1292604126317 ). 
AgriInsurance provides insurance protection against natural perils. While insurance products can be 
established for any agricultural commodity, the commodities insured and specific insurance plans 
are designe d by the provinces to meet their industry needs, and thus vary by province. There are 
currently plans for both crop (e.g., grain and oilseed, fruit and vegetable, etc.) and livestock 
producers (e.g., forage, bees, etc.). Additional information on AgriInsur ance can be found here:  
http://www.agr.gc.ca/eng/?id=1284665357886 . 
AgriRecovery is a disaster -relief framework that allows federal and provincial territorial governments 
to work together to help producers with the extraordinary costs related to a disaster event. These 
initiatives vary from one year to the next, but initiatives may be designed for a disaster impacting 
any agricultural commodity. Additional information on AgriRecovery can be fo und here:  
http://www.agr.gc.ca/eng/?id=1387480598562  
Finally, AgriRisk initiatives provide support to develop new, industry -led and producer -paid risk 
management tools. Thus, AgriRisk funding does not flow directly to farmers. Additional information 
on AgriRisk can be found here:  http://www.agr.gc.ca/eng/progr ams-and-services/agririsk -
initiatives -administrative -capacity -building -stream/?id=1530816648717 . 
In addition to business risk management programs, other non -BRM programs focus on three key 
areas: (1) growing trade and expanding markets; (2) innovative and sustainable growth in the 
sector; and, (3) supporting diversity and a dynamic, evolving sector. These include AgriScience, 
AgriInnovate, AgriMarketing, AgriAssurance, AgriCompetitiveness and AgriDiversity program mes. 
Information on the eligibility criteria  of each programme  can be found here:  WT/TPR/M/389/Add.1  
 
- 86 - 
 
  http://www.agr.gc.ca/ eng/about -us/key -departmental -initiatives/canadian -agricultural -
partnership/canadian -agricultural -partnership -federal -activities -and-
programs/?id=1511361680577 . 
As agriculture is a shared jurisdiction between the federal and provincial -territorial governme nts, 
provincial and territorial governments have the responsibility for designing and delivering the 
Partnership 's Strategic Initiatives. Additional details on provincial and territorial cost -shared 
programming under the Partnership can be found by visitin g their respective websites:  
• Alberta : (https://cap.alberta.ca/CAP/ ) 
• British Columbia : (https://www2.gov.bc.ca/gov/content/industry/agriculture -
seafood/programs ) 
• Manitoba : (http://www.gov.mb.ca/agriculture/canadian -agricultural -partnership/ag -
action -manitoba -program/ ) 
• New Brunswick : 
http:// www2.gnb.ca/content/gnb/en/departments/10/agriculture/content/agriculture_pr
ograms.html ) 
• Newfoundland and Labrador : (https://www.faa.gov.nl.ca/programs/cap/index.html ). 
• Nova Scotia : (https://novascotia.ca/canadian -agricultural -partnership/ ) 
• Ontario : (http://www.omafra.gov.on.ca/english/cap/index.htm ) 
• Prince Edward Island : (https://www.princeedwardisland.ca/en/information/agriculture -
and-fisheries/canadian -agricultural -partnership -2018-2023). 
• Quebec (in French only) : (http://www.mapaq.gouv.qc.ca/fr/Grands -
dossiers/pca/Pages/PartenariatCanAg.aspx ) 
• Saskatchewan : (https://www.saskatchewan.ca/business/agriculture -natural -resources -
and-industry/agribusiness -farmers -and-ranchers/canadian -agricultural -partnership -cap). 
• Northwest Territories : (https://www.iti.gov.nt.ca/en/services/canadian -agricultural -
partnership ) 
• Nunavut : (https://www.iti.gov.nt.ca/en/services/canadian -agricultural -partnership ) 
• Yukon : (http://www.emr.gov.yk.ca/agriculture/canadian -agricultural -partnership.html ). 
4.1.1.6 Commodities subject to supply management, 4.1.1.6.2 Milk and dairy, paragraph 
4.36 and Table 4.6, pages 147 -148 
Question  
Could Canada please elaborate in what regard the dairy sector is less protected than ten years ago?  
Reply  
This question is likely referring to the increase in market access commitments made by Canada in 
free trade agreements such as the Comprehensive Economic and Trade Agreement (CETA) and the 
Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans -Pacific Partnership (CPTPP).  WT/TPR/M/389/Add.1  
 
- 87 - 
 
  Table 4.6, pages 147 -148 
Question  
Could Canada explain these discrepancies in growth and which economic factors caused this 
development, including the increase in exports du ring a period with reduced prices on the world 
market?  
Reply  
Canada is a very small player on the world dairy market. Canada 's exports of dairy products fluctuate 
in volume and value year -over-year. It is the business decision of a Canadian dairy processor  or 
traders to either sell dairy products on the domestic market, or to export. It is also the business 
decision of foreign importers to select the products they wish to import and their suppliers of choice. 
International and domestic supply and demand con ditions therefore are the most important factors.  
Paragraph 4.39, pages 148 -149 
Question  
Could Canada confirm the EU understanding that milk prices are no longer linked to dairy market 
elements?  
Reply  
Milk prices for classes 1 to 4 are adjusted annually using a mathematical formula based on the cost 
of producing milk (as calculated/commissioned by the Canadian Dairy Commission) and on the 
Consumer Price Index (as published by Statistics Canada).  
Paragraph 4.41, page 149  
Question  
Could Canada expl ain how prices for Milk Class 7 are calculated and, if possible, indicate the latest 
price fixed, including the indicators and level of prices used in this calculation?  
Reply  
The prices under milk class 7 for butterfat, protein and other solids are determi ned based on world 
prices and are calculated on a monthly basis. The prices for milk class 7 are available on the website: 
www.milkingredients.ca . 
Question  
Does Canada agree that its milk class system, although allegedly a private mechanism, could only 
exist by virtue of a milk quota system imposed by the government of Canada and the Provinces; 
and that the price levels on production within Milk Class 7 are only possible due to the higher prices 
paid for  other milk classes to the farmers?  
Reply  
Milk component prices are based on the end -use of the component and milk classes reflect this by 
having different classes for different dairy products. The milk class system is not related to the milk 
quota system.  
Follow -up question  
From Canada 's reply, we understand that the quota system is not needed for fixing the prices for 
the different milk classes. If this is the case, why is Canada maintaining the quota system which 
puts a significant restriction on farmers ? WT/TPR/M/389/Add.1  
 
- 88 - 
 
  Reply  
Canada reminds Members that in accordance with paragraph A of the Trade Policy Review 
Mechanism, the intent of the review process is not to impose new policy commitments on other 
Members. The milk quota system ensures milk production levels meet anticipated domestic demand 
so that efficient producers have the opportunity to obtain a fair return for their labour and 
investment; and that consumers have access to a continuous and adequate supply of high -quality 
dairy products.  
Question  
Could Can ada please elaborate on their position that Milk Class 7 is not a subsidy and not in breach 
of Article 20 of the Nairobi Decision (circumvention of abolishing export subsidies)?  
Reply  
The usage of milk class 7 is not contingent upon export. Goods produced under milk class 7, or any 
milk class other than milk class 5(d), can be sold by any eligible processor on the domestic or export 
markets, and do not require export permits. It is the business decision of the processor to either sell 
these products on the domestic market, or to export them. As such, milk class 7 does not meet the 
definition of an export subsidy.  
4.3 Manufacturing, 4.3.2 Automotive industry, paragraph 4.158, page 180  
Question  
The report mentions that the Automotive Innovation Fund (AIF) was consolidated into the Strategic 
Innovation Fund (SIF) which supports innovation activities across all industrial sectors, including the 
automotive sector. While the SIF supports innovation across all sectors, it still relies on the legacy 
programmes for au tomotive and aerospace. Does Canada plan to move away from this sectoral 
aspect and the legacy schemes?  
Reply  
The legacy programs mentioned in the question are no longer accepting applications as the Strategic 
Innovation Fund (SIF) has replaced this progra mming.  
4.4 Services, 4.4.3 Transport, 4.4.3.2 Maritime transport, paragraphs 4.255, 4.257 and 
4.261, pages 202 -203 
Question  
Can Canada provide more details on the content of Bill C -69 and related measures, in particular on 
its possible impact on non-Canadian operators in Canadian navigable waters and on dredging 
activities?  
Reply  
If enacted, the Canadian Navigable Waters Act would apply to Canadian and non -Canadian operators 
in the same manner and would not impact trade. The proposed legislation 's focus is on: restoring 
lost protections for the public right to navigate on all navigable waters in Canada; restoring lost 
protections for the public right to navigate on all navigable waters in Canada; allowing good projects 
to move forward; and providin g opportunities for Indigenous peoples to partner with the Government 
of Canada in the administration of protections and safeguards. With respect to dredging activities, 
dredging is a work that is subject to the existing legislation and would continue to b e regulated 
under the proposed Canadian Navigable Waters Act.  Under the existing Minor Works Order, which 
would remain in effect should the Canadian Navigable Waters Act pass into law, certain dredging 
activities are considered to be a 'minor work '. Minor works do not require an approval from Transport 
Canada. Works that do not meet the requirements of the Minor Works and Waters Order and are 
proposed to occur on navigable water listed in the Schedule of the Act, would continue to be required 
to apply for a n approval (as is the case under the existing legislation). Under the Canadian Navigable WT/TPR/M/389/Add.1  
 
- 89 - 
 
  Waters Act, owners of works on navigable waters not listed in the Schedule of the Act would have 
the choice to either: a) apply to Transport Canada for an approval, or  b) provide a public notice and 
deposit information in the form and manner specified by the Minister of Transport, and work to 
resolve any navigation -related concerns raised by the public.  
4.4.3.2.1 Legal framework and developments, paragraph 4.259, page 2 03 
Question  
Can Canada please provide more information on the provisions of its future legislation on pilotage, 
and in particular on any possible measures affecting the fair and non -discriminatory provision of 
pilotage services?  
Reply  
The proposed amendmen ts to the Pilotage Act do not affect the fair and non -discriminatory provision 
of pilotage services. To further advance the objectives of the Oceans Protection Plan, proposed 
amendments to the Act aim to enhance the safety, efficiency, and transparency of Canada 's marine 
pilotage system by:  
• Establishing a clear purpose and principles in the Act;  
• Transferring responsibility for making regulations from the Pilotage Authorities to the 
Governor in Council on recommendation of the Minister of Transport in order to establish 
a consistent, national pilotage regulatory framework;  
• Transferring responsibility for issuing licences and pilotage certificates from the Pilotage 
Authorities to the Minister of Transport;  
• Transferring the oversight and enforcement respo nsibilities from the Pilotage Authorities 
to Transport Canada, and allowing the use of administrative monetary penalties;  
• Providing the Minister of Transport with the authority to issue interim and exemption 
orders, and direction to pilots and pilot corpor ations under urgent circumstances;  
• Making the service contracts between pilot corporations and the Pilotage Authorities 
publicly available;  
• Requiring arbitrators in final offer selection processes between pilot corporations and the 
Pilotage Authorities to consider the purpose and principles of the Act;  
• Allowing Pilotage Authorities to set fees directly, instead of through regulation, subject to 
conditions of transparency and a clear objection process;  
• Prohibiting pilots, or users of pilotage services from being on Pilotage Authorities ' boards 
of directors; and  
• Completing various technical changes that modernize the legislation.  
Report by Canada – WT/TPR/G/389  
2 ECONOMIC ENVIRONMENT  
2.1 Economic Overview, paragraph 2.4, page 4  
Question  
Canada states that the "strength of Canada 's economy is fuelling growth in federal revenues, 
allowing the Government to respond to international developments (e.g. the recent United States 
tax reform), while keeping the debt -to-GDP ratio on a downward track and p rotecting the long -term 
fiscal sustainability of Canada 's economy. " The government has introduced several temporary WT/TPR/M/389/Add.1  
 
- 90 - 
 
  measures in order to respond to competitiveness pressures from U.S. corporate tax reform. Is the 
government considering more comprehensive (and permanent) tax reforms that would materially 
shift the economy 's competitiveness over the longer term?  
Reply  
Canada 's competitiveness depends on a number of factors, not only taxa tion. With respect to the 
tax system, Canada is competitive by international standards.  
As noted, the 2018 Fall Economic Statement took action to encourage business investment in Canada 
through the introduction of : 
• the accelerated investment incentive, whi ch will allow businesses of all sizes and in all 
sectors of the economy to write off a larger share of the cost of newly acquired assets in 
the year the investment is made; and  
• 100-per-cent write -offs in respect of the full cost of machinery and equipment used for 
manufacturing or processing of goods, and the full cost of specified clean technology.  
Canada 's overall tax rate on new business investment as measured by the Marginal Effective Tax 
Rate (METR) is the lowest among the G7 and below the Organisation  for Economic Co -operation and 
Development (OECD) average. Measures introduced in the Fall Economic Statement ensure that 
Canada 's METR will remain significantly below that of the United States. In 2019, Canada 's METR is 
now 13.8% compared to a METR of 18. 4% in the United States. In addition, the federal government 
reduced the small business rate from 10.5% in 2017 to 9% in 2019, resulting in the lowest average 
income tax rate for small business in the G7 and fourth lowest among members of the OECD. The 
Government is committed to ensuring that Canada continues to innovate in light of international 
developments, such as U.S. tax reform. Because the full effect of U.S. tax reform will only be 
determined over time, going forward the Government will continue to assess the impacts of the U.S. 
tax changes on the Canadian economy and the integrity of the Canadian tax system.  
3 TRADE POLICY DEVELOPMENTS 2015 -2019  
3.3 Bilateral and Regional Free Trade Agreements, 3.3.2 Modernized Free Trade 
Agreements, paragraph 3.29, page 12  
Question  
What are the impacts, both short - and longer -term, on the Canadian auto industry stemming from 
the 2.6 million unit export quota introduced under CUSMA? What does Canada estimate to be the 
wider policy consequence of instit uting an export quota within a major trading relationship?  
Reply  
Under the Canada -United States -Mexico Agreement (CUSMA), automobile and auto parts trade will 
continue to be duty -free and quota -free. Separately, the Canada -U.S. 232 autos side letter 
guaran tees an exemption from measures under Section 232 of the U.S. Trade Expansion Act of 
1962, for 2.6 million Canadian automobiles annually, as well as US D 32.4 billion worth of auto parts 
annually. It will only take effect should the United States apply Sect ion 232 measures on Canadian 
automotive products. Canada has repeatedly stated that the use of Section 232 measures on imports 
of goods from Canada is entirely unjustified. Canada would not support any determination that finds 
national security linkages wi th the auto sector, and certainly not any finding that Canada poses a 
national security risk. Canada has retained its rights under the WTO agreement to challenge the 
United States on Section 232 measures and will continue to have the ability to take retali atory 
measures of equivalent commercial effect in response to Section 232 measures that fall outside the 
scope of this exemption.  WT/TPR/M/389/Add.1  
 
- 91 - 
 
  Question  
The report outlines main features of CUSMA; it states that "in some cases, the rules of origin for 
originating goods have been strengthened, in particular for autos – where the regional value content 
levels were increased from 62.5% to 75% ". Is the Export Diversification Strategy affected by the 
non-market economy clause (Article 32.10)?  
Reply  
No. Article 32.10 of the Ca nada-United States -Mexico Agreement (CUSMA) includes special 
transparency disciplines regarding Free Trade Agreements (FTAs) negotiations with certain 
countries. Given that Canada 's Export Diversification Strategy does not seek to increase export 
diversifi cation through the negotiation of new FTAs, but rather to support Canadian companies in 
exporting to new markets, it is not impacted by CUSMA Article 32.10. Canada 's Export Diversification 
Strategy aims to assist Canadian businesses maximize their growth b y capitalizing on more and 
diverse economic opportunities abroad. The Strategy supports export growth and diversification by 
accelerating targeted investments in transportation infrastructure that links Canada to global 
markets, providing Canadian business es with new resources and tools to implement effective export 
strategies, and enhancing trade support services for Canadian exporters.  
Question  
The report outlines main features of CUSMA; it states that "in some cases, the rules of origin for 
originating goods have been strengthened, in particular for autos – where the regional value content 
levels were increased from 62.5% to 75% ". Could Canada elaborate on any other elements amended 
in the rules of origin for cars in CUSMA and explain how the new rules of origin for cars would be 
applied with regard to market access commitments in CUSMA?  
Reply  
Under the Canada -United States -Mexico Agreeme nt (CUSMA), for an automobile to qualify as 
originating, 5 requirements must be fulfilled. These requirements are set out in an appendix entitled 
"Provisions Related to the Product -Specific Rules of Origin for Automotive Goods ". The 5 
requirements are as f ollows: 75% Regional Value Content (RVC) (phased in over 3 years); 75% RVC 
for core parts (engine, transmission, body and chassis, axle, suspension system, steering system, 
lithium -ion batteries used in the production of an automobile) (phased in over 3 ye ars); 70% of the 
steel purchased by the automaker must qualify as originating; 70% of the aluminium purchased by 
the automaker must qualify as originating and; 40% of the content in the automobile (45% for a 
light truck) must qualify under the Labour Value  Content (LVC) provision which requires that the 
workers directly responsible for the content earn at least US D 16/hour (phased in over 3 years).  
4 OTHER KEY GOVERNMENT INITIATIVES  
4.3 Cabinet Directive on Regulation, paragraph 4.23, page 17  
Question  
Accor ding to the Canadian authorities, new barriers to trade are to be avoided during the 
development of new regulations. However, the description in the WTO Secretariat report about the 
impact assessment of regulatory proposals (page 99, paragraph 3.164) does not mention that 
international trade effects have to be considered. Could Canada elaborate on the specific procedure 
to assess the effect regulatory proposals might have on international trade?  
Reply  
The Cabinet Directive on Regulation sets out the Governm ent of Canada 's expectations and 
requirements in the development, management, and review of federal regulations. The Directive 
requires departments and agencies to conduct a Regulatory Impact Analysis (RIA) on all regulatory 
proposals. As part of the RIA, departments and agencies are to examine the regulatory systems of 
relevant jurisdictions, such as those of domestic partners or key trading partners, particularly those 
with whom Canada has a coordinated regulatory cooperation arrangement, to identify pote ntial areas 
for alignment or cooperation. Departments and agencies must also consider international trade WT/TPR/M/389/Add.1  
 
- 92 - 
 
  impacts and ensure that Canada 's international commitments are met when carrying out their 
regulatory activities. Departments and agencies must provid e a statement on domestic and 
international coordination, including trade impacts, in their Regulatory Impact Analysis Statement. 
Finally, the Directive requires departments and agencies to consult for a minimum of 70 days on 
proposals for new and amended technical regulations that may have a significant effect on 
international trade, including with trading partners that may be affected. This is in addition to early 
consultations during the development of a regulatory proposal.  
  WT/TPR/M/389/Add.1  
 
- 93 - 
 
  HONG KONG, CHINA  
Report by the Secretariat – WT/TPR/S/389  
2 TRADE AND INVESTMENT REGIMES  
2.2 Trade Policy Formulation and Objectives, paragraph 2.7, page 31  
Question  
Please provide more information on what concrete measures would be taken to engage emerging 
markets, especi ally in the Asia -Pacific region. What are the priority markets identified by Canada?  
Reply  
When Canada engages with other markets in free trade agreement (FTA) negotiations, including 
emerging markets in the Asia -Pacific region, Canada seeks ambitious and comprehensive outcomes 
which include strong rules and market access, as well as inclusive trade elements that promote 
transparency, labour rights, and environment protection. Canada also seeks to promote small and 
medium -sized enterprises, and the inclusio n of women and indigenous peoples. In order to support 
engagement with developing countries, including emerging markets, Canada has established two 
capacity building programmes: the Expert Deployment Mechanism for Trade and Development 
(EDM) and the Canadi an Trade and Investment Facility for Development (CTIF). The EDM is designed 
to reduce poverty by deploying Canadian and international technical experts to assist Official 
Development Aid (ODA) -eligible developing countries negotiate, implement, adapt to, and benefit 
from their trade and investment agreements with Canada. The CTIF is designed to support trade 
and investment policy reforms that promote inclusive and sustainable growth in developing countries 
in the Asia -Pacific region specifically. Regarding  priority markets in the Asia -Pacific region, Canada 
is keen to support expansion of the Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans -Pacific 
Partnership (CPTPP) with countries that can meet the high level of ambition in the agreement. 
Canada is also engaged with exploratory FTA discussions with ASEAN.  
Paragraphs 2.10 -2.11, page 31  
Question  
Canada acknowledges that trade can affect men and women differently as workers, business owners, 
and as members of society. Canada is working to reduce barriers to the participation of women in 
international trade, including by conducting wide -reaching analysis to better understand gender -
related effects of trade. Please share with us findings/analyses on barriers to the participation of 
women in international trade and gender -related effects of trade. What actions will be taken to 
reduce such barriers in Canada?  
Reply  
Domestically, based on the most recent Labour Force Survey released by Statistics Canada, the 
employment rate of women in Canada was 79.9 %, the unemployment rate was 4.8 % and the 
participation rate was 83.9 % for women in the core working ages of 25 to 54 years of age. Among 
majority female -owned small and medium -sized enterprises (SMEs) in which ownership of women 
is at least 51%), 11.2% export. I n addition, women -owned businesses grow more slowly than those 
owned by men, have more difficulty accessing financing and are less likely to export. After extensive 
consultations, it was found that administrative obstacles exist for Canadian women -owned SM Es 
inside and outside of Canada. These barriers include border obstacles, logistical obstacles, market 
knowledge issues, intellectual property issues, lack of financing/inadequate cash -flow, and financial 
risks. Female -owned SMEs are smaller on average com pared to their non -female -owned 
counterparts. Firm size can have an impact on the capacity to export, for example influencing the 
capacity to meet demand. In order to reduce these barriers, Canada 's Budget 2018 announced the 
Women Entrepreneurship Strategy , to help women grow their businesses through expertise, access 
to financing, and talent. An additional measure actively reducing barriers to trade for women is the 
Business Women in Trade (BWIT) Program, the only national programme  that provides targeted 
products and services to help women entrepreneurs internationalize, by assisting export -ready and WT/TPR/M/389/Add.1  
 
- 94 - 
 
  export active businesses that are at least 51 % owned and/or controlled by women to help achieve 
their potential in international markets.  
2.4 Investment Regim e, 2.4.4 Incentives and promotion, paragraph 2.49, page 41  
Question  
Please provide more information on the details of financial support provided.  What was the reason 
for not continuing the pilot programme?  Did Canada conduct any review or assessment on the pilot 
programme?  If so, please provide information on the findings.  
Reply  
The pilot had a budget of CAD 5 million over five years (2013 2014 / 2017 -2018). Despite all effort 
in the delivery of the pilot, the pillar had a very low uptake. The first year of the launch, only three  
applications were received and approved for a total funding of CAD 145,563. While the FTZ -MP was 
undersubscribed, a financial reallocation of the FTZ -MP budget was disbursed between 2 pillars 
(Invest Canada -Community Initiatives (ICCI) and Global Opportunities for Associations (GOA)) to 
mitigate lapses and related risks t o the overall programme . Given the low programme  funding 
uptake, collection of performance data for intermediate and ultimate outcome results was not 
pursued. An assessment of the pilot revealed that uptake was due to the similarity of existing pillar 
i.e. ICCI and the prerequisite of designation of FTZ points by Federal Regional Development Agencies 
in order to apply for FTZ -MP funding.  
3 TRADE POLICIES AND PRACTICES BY MEASURE  
3.1 Measures Directly Affecting Imports, 3.1.1 Customs procedures, valuation, a nd 
requirements, paragraph 3.7, page 47  
Question  
For the Single Window Initiative (SWI) rolled out during the review period, there were nine 
participating government departments and agencies, representing 38 government programmes as 
at November 2018. What is the coverage (in terms of percentage of participating government 
departments and government programmes) of the SWI? Please advise whether there will be future 
enhancement of the SWI and whether Canada intends to cover all government agencies handling 
import documents in the long run. If so, please provide details of the enhancement plan.  
Reply  
The Single Window Initiative (SWI) has on boarded 100% all 9 Participating Government 
Departments and Agencies (PGAs) representing 38 programs. There are currently  no immediate 
plans to have new PGA programs onboard. However, that being said, there may be future 
enhancements to the Integrated Import Declaration as the SWI is an evergreen initiative based on 
programme  requirements by each PGA.  
3.1.6 Anti -dumping, cou ntervailing, and safeguard measures, 3.1.6.1 Anti -dumping and 
countervailing measures, paragraphs 3.89 -3.90, page 81  
Question  
There were 83 definitive AD and 28 CVD measures in place as of 31 December 2018, compared to 
53 AD and 17 CVD measures reported in the last Review for December 2014. There has been a 
rather significant increase of AD/CVD measures. Please advise the reasons for such an increase.  
Reply  
The trade remedy investigations in question were initiated on the basis of properly docume nted 
complaints from the domestic industry demonstrating evidence that dumped and/or subsidized 
goods were causing them injury. The increase in trade remedy investigations in Canada in 
2015-2018 is limited primarily to a narrow range of products that may b e affected by underlying WT/TPR/M/389/Add.1  
 
- 95 - 
 
  issues of global concern (e.g. global steel production overcapacity). Trade remedies investigations 
are legitimate tools to address situations where unfair trading practices of foreign firms and 
governments are causing or threateni ng to cause injury to domestic industry. Canada notes that its 
experience in trade remedy investigations in 2015 -18 is consistent with global trends over this 
period.  
3.1.6.2 Safeguards, paragraph 106, page 87  
Question  
Canada implemented global safeguard m easures on certain steel products since October 2018. Prior 
to that, Canada 's last safeguard inquiry took place more than 10 years ago, specifically in 2005. We 
note that Canada has also taken steps to strengthen its trade remedy system. Please advise if i t is 
Canada 's policy to increasingly and extensively use AD/ CVD and safeguard measures to achieve its 
trade objectives. How would Canada ensure that such tools and measures are not abused to become 
protectionist measures in disguise?  
Reply  
Trade remedies investigations are legitimate tools to address situations where unfair trading 
practices of foreign firms and governments are causing or threatening to cause injury to domestic 
industry. Canada notes that its experience with trade remedy actions i n 2015 -18 are consistent with 
global trends over this period and reflects underlying issues of global concern.  
Anti-dumping and countervailing duty investigations are conducted by the Canadian Border Services 
Agency (CBSA) and the Canadian International Tr ade Tribunal (CITT) in an independent, impartial 
and transparent manner pursuant to the Special Import Measures Act, which implements Canada 's 
obligations under the WTO Anti -dumping Agreement and the Agreement on Subsidies and 
Countervailing Measures.  
In the case of Canada 's provisional safeguards on seven steel products, the provisional measures 
were implemented with due regard to Canada 's obligations under the Agreement on Safeguards. 
Concurrent with the imposition of the provisional safeguards, Canada re ferred the matter to the CITT 
for inquiry in order to obtain the CITT 's independent advice on whether final safeguards are 
warranted. The CITT 's inquiry was conducted in an independent and transparent manner, consistent 
with Canada 's obligations under the Agreement on Safeguards.  
3.3.7 Intellectual property rights, 3.3.7.5 Trademarks, paragraph 3.307, page 132  
Question  
Canada has completed the legislative and regulatory work necessary to accede to, among others, 
the Protocol Relating to the Madrid Agreement  Concerning the International Registration of Marks 
("Madrid Protocol "). Please advise the target implementation date for the Madrid Protocol.  
Reply  
The Madrid Protocol will enter into force in Canada on 17 June 2019.  
4 TRADE POLICIES BY SECTOR  
4.4 Services, 4.4.1 Financial services, 4.4.1.1 Overview, paragraph 4.176, page 185  
Question  
Clearing and settlement systems (also known as Financial Market Infrastructures, or FMIs) that have 
the potential to pose systemic risk or payments system risk are sub ject to a closer oversight by the 
Bank of Canada 's Payment Clearing and Settlement Act. They are required to, among others, observe 
applicable risk -management standards. What are the criteria to assess whether a FMI would "have 
the potential to pose system  risk or payments system risk "? How does Canada set the "applicable 
risk-management standards "? WT/TPR/M/389/Add.1  
 
- 96 - 
 
  Reply  
The Payments and Clearing Settlements Act (PCSA) provides the Bank of Canada with two main 
oversight responsibilities, including designating FMIs that hav e the potential to pose systemic risk 
or payment system risk, and overseeing designated FMIs to ensure they are adequately controlling 
systemic risk or payments system risk.  
The Bank 's assessment of systemic risk considers three factors: (i) the size of tr ansactions cleared 
or settled by the FMI; (ii) the degree to which the FMI plays a critical role in supporting Canadian 
financial markets and the Canadian economy; and (iii) the size of obligations that Canadian 
participants can incur through participation  in the FMI.  
For prominent payment systems that could pose payment system risks, there are five criteria for 
assessment: (i) value and volume of transactions; (ii) availability of substitutes; (iii) time criticality 
of payments; (iv) centrality; and (v) in terdependence. Details on the criteria can be found here: 
https://www.bankofcanada.ca/core -functions/financial -system/oversight -designated -clearing -
settlement -systems/guideline -related -oversight -activities/ . 
 
The Bank of Canada adopted the Principles for Financial Market Infrastructures (PFMIs) into its risk -
management standards for designated s ystemically important FMIs (systemic FMIs) in 2012. The 
designated systemic FMI have been expected to observe all the principles since 31 December 2016.  
The Bank has developed supplementary guidance in coordination with the Canadian Securities 
Administrat ors to provide additional context and clarity on certain aspects of these standards in the 
Canadian context. This supplementary guidance is intended to support implementation of the PFMI. 
It does not modify or replace any element of the Principles.  
The sup plementary guidance can be found here: https://www.bankofcanada.ca/core -
functions/financial -system/bank -canada -risk-management -standards -systemic -fmis/. 
4.4.1.2 Banking services, 4.4.1.2.1 Commercial banks, paragraph 4.187, pages 187 -188 
Question  
Restrictions on private ownership as well as listing of voting shares are imposed on banks in Canada 
depending on whether the bank is categorised as small, medium or large (based on the amount of 
equity capitalisation). It is noted that the Laurentian Bank  of Canada and Canadian Western Bank 
are deemed to be "large" despite not meeting the capitalisation threshold of a large bank. The 
Minister of Finance has the discretion to categorise each of them as a small or medium bank. What 
are the considerations for  deeming the two banks as "large" despite they did not meet the 
capitalisation threshold? Is there a mechanism in place to review the status/ categorization?  How 
does Canada ensure that such considerations are not arbitrary to prevent private and/or foreig n 
capital participations of Canadian banks?  
Reply  
Canada has a size -based ownership regime reflecting the risks of an institution 's failure on depositors 
and the wider economy. The Bank Act was amended in 2001 to introduce revisions to the ownership 
regime . Under these amendments, three small and medium -size Schedule I banks that were widely -
held as of 2001 (that had equity less than five billion dollars at the time) are deemed to be 'large' 
banks (with equity of twelve billion dollars or more) and remain s ubject to the widely -held 
requirement.  
However, under the Act these banks (Laurentian Bank of Canada, National Bank Financial, and 
Canadian Western Bank) can seek re -categorization by the Minister to no longer be subject to the 
widely -held requirement. Spe cifically, the Minister can specify that the above "deemed " provision no 
longer applies to a bank taking into consideration a number of factors, such as whether the proposed 
transaction fosters opportunities for the bank to grow and better serve its custom ers. None of these 
banks have sought re -categorization.  WT/TPR/M/389/Add.1  
 
- 97 - 
 
  In Canada, federal financial institutions, including banks, operate under a non -discriminatory 
ownership regime. Both domestic and foreign investors have the same rights to own federal financial 
institutions.  
4.4.1.2.3 Insurance services, paragraph 4.205, page 191  
Question  
There are certain restrictions on insurers at the provincial level. For instance, Alberta -incorporated 
insurers are limited from holding a substantial interest (greater than 10%) in an unincorporated 
body or a corporate body, unless it is a prescribed entity (currently, there are no prescribed entities).  
What other restrictions on insurers are imposed at provincial level? Why such restrictions are 
necessary?  
Reply  
Section 421 of the Alberta Insurance Act provides that provincial insurance companies can have 
substantial investments in unincorporated or a corporate body as long as these unincorporated or 
corporate body holdings are "prescribed entities ". 
• Section 421(3) of the Ins urance Act lists all the body corporates that a provincial insurance 
company can have as a substantial investment in.  
 
− Includes a bank, a loan and trust corporation incorporated under an Act of Canada or a 
province or territory, an extra-provincial insurer or insurer formed by or under an Act of 
Canada, a foreign financial institution with ministerial approval, and a prescribed body 
corporate.  
 
• Section 421(3)(e) defines what a prescribed body corporate is and requires reference to 
section 15 of the Provincial Companies Regulation.  
 
− It generally includes body corporates that are within the financial services area, lending, 
leasing, information technology, investment counselling, mutual fund corporation, portfolio 
management corporation , a real property brokerage corporation, a real property 
corporation, securities dealer, insurance agency corporation, body corporate whose 
activities are to the provision of management services related to the insurance company, 
or a financial advisory ser vices corporation.  
 
• The restrictions are necessary to meet sections 110 and 111 of the Insurance Act.  
 
− Insurance companies should engage in carrying business that they are familiar with and/or 
include activities that is reasonably ancillary to the business of insurance.  
o Another reason for the restriction is because a lot of the non -prescribed entities ar e not 
regulated and can operate in an unsound manner that may imperil the provincial insurer 's 
investments. This limits the ability of a regulated provincial insurance company to engage 
in investing in companies that can be carrying on business in an unsou nd manner or that 
may incur large contingent liabilities. The contingent liabilities may be an obligation of the 
shareholders aka provincial insurance companies.  
Question  
What are the requirements for an Alberta -incorporated insurer to become a "prescribed  entity "? Can 
an insurer self -initiate an application to become a prescribed entity?  
Reply  
Please refer to previous question for the answer.  WT/TPR/M/389/Add.1  
 
- 98 - 
 
  4.4.3 Transport, 4.4.3.2 Maritime transport, paragraphs 4.250 and 4.257, pages 201 -202 
Question  
Canadian vessels dominate domestic trade, carrying approximately 98% of domestic tonnage, as 
per the protections of the Coasting Trade Act. There has been some liberalisation of targeted 
domestic maritime services under the Act to implement the Canada -EU Comprehens ive Economic 
and Trade Agreement as well as the Transportation Modernization Act. During the review period, the 
Transportation Modernization Act, 2018 made important changes in the maritime sector, so as to 
improve supply -chain efficiency and the competiti veness of Canadian ports as gateways to North 
America. With respect to coasting trade, effective 10 December 2018, pursuant to the Coasting 
Trade Act, all ships (regardless of flag or ownership) are now allowed to reposition their owned or 
leased empty con tainers between locations in Canada on a non -revenue basis without a coasting 
trade licence. This is expected to reduce trade costs and address the current shortage of available 
containers for export. Please advise if there are other liberalisation measure s for maritime transport 
services apart from coasting trade that are offered to non -EU WTO Members.  
Reply  
Canada has taken targeted liberalization in the domestic marine transport sector, though it has not 
bound this liberalization in any trade agreement o utside the Comprehensive Economic and Trade 
Agreement (CETA). While Canada has a mainly open international maritime transport services 
sector, including the access to and use of ports, this openness is subject to the GATS Annex on 
Negotiations on Maritime Transport Services. Canada does not maintain cargo sharing agreements 
or cargo preferences practices.  
4.4.3.2.1 Legal framework and developments, paragraph 4.254, page 202  
Question  
Canadian non -duty paid vessels and foreign vessels will be granted licences  to conduct commercial 
marine activities in Canada 's coastal waters only when no Canadian vessel is suitable or available. 
According to the Canadian Transportation Agency, between 75 and 88 licences were issued per year 
between 2015 and 2018. Among the lic ences approved by Canada, how many of them are granted 
to foreign vessels? What is the valid period for each licence?  
Reply  
The Coasting Trade Act provides a process to temporarily import a foreign or non -duty paid vessel 
under licence when a suitable Cana dian-registered duty paid vessel is not available. The majority of 
coasting trading licen ce applications are for foreign vessels; 78 coastal trading licenses were granted 
to foreign vessels in 2015, 94 were granted in 2016, 68 were granted in 2017, and 88 were granted 
in 2018. Transport Canada does not issue the licences; that is the responsibility of Public Safety 
Canada/Canadian Border Services Agency. A coasting trade licence can be valid for up to one year. 
However, each applicant specifies the period o f time for which they are applying for the licence. 
Some licen ce applications may be for several weeks, and others may be for several months, or for 
an entire year. The period of time will depend on the activity being undertaken by the vessel.  
Question  
Canadian non -duty paid vessels and foreign vessels will be granted licences to conduct commercial 
marine activities in Canada 's coastal waters only when no Canadian vessel is suitable or available. 
According to the Canadian Transportation Agency, between 7 5 and 88 licences were issued per year 
between 2015 and 2018. How many foreign vessels applications were rejected between 2015 and 
2018 and what were the reasons for the rejections?  
Reply  
Applications for a coasting trade licence are sent to the Canadian T ransportation Agency, which 
assesses whether a suitable Canadian ship is available to undertake the activity described in the 
application. As part of this process, it will post a Notice to Canadian shippers to see whether any WT/TPR/M/389/Add.1  
 
- 99 - 
 
  Canadian vessels wish to conte st the application. If no offer of a Canadian ship is received by the 
deadline specified in the Notice, the Agency considers the application to be uncontested and issues 
a determination that there is no suitable Canadian ship available. When applications a re contested, 
the Agency is required to make a determination on the pleadings of parties as to whether operators 
of Canadian -registered ships have a suitable ship available to perform the activity described in the 
application, and, in the case of passenger  ships, whether an identical or similar adequate marine 
service is offered. The Agency assesses whether the Canadian vessel being proposed for the activity 
is suitable to undertake the activity and available when the activity needs to be undertaken. The 
Agency weighs the submissions made and the evidence filed by the parties to assess whether the 
applicant has met its burden of proof, or responsibility, to prove that a suitable Canadian ship is not 
available to perform the activity, and, in the case of pass enger services, there is not an identical or 
similar adequate marine service available from any person operating one or more Canadian -
registered ships. The Agency will make its determination on a balance of probabilities assessment 
of the merits of the evi dence submitted, meaning that the applicant must prove that its position is 
more likely than not.  
In fiscal year 2015 -2016, the Agency received 86 applications, of which one was contested by a 
Canadian shipper. The Agency ruled for the applicant. In fiscal  year 2016 -2017, the Agency received 
117 applications, of which five were contested. In these five cases, the Agency ruled for the Canadian 
shipper. In fiscal year 2017 -2018, the Agency received 132 applications, of which 22 were contested. 
Of these contes ted applications, the Agency ruled for the applicant in 20 cases, and in two cases 
ruled for the Canadian shipper. In fiscal year 2018 -2019, the Agency received 99 applications, of 
which three were contested. In these three cases, the Agency ruled for the applicant.  
Report by Canada – WT/TPR/G/389  
3 TRADE POLICY DEVELOPMENTS 2015 -2019  
3.1 Multilateral Trade Policy, 3.1.3 Ongoing WTO Negotiations and Initiatives, paragraph 
3.13 (b), page 8  
Question  
On fisheries subsidies negotiations, Canada is supportive o f the work programme that has been 
established for the first half of 2019, as it is in line with the United Nations ' Sustainable Development 
Goal 14.6, where all UN member States, including Canada, committed to prohibit certain forms of 
fisheries subsidies  that contribute to overcapacity and overfishing; eliminate subsidies that 
contribute to illegal, unreported and unregulated fishing; and refrain from introducing new such 
subsidies. Canada welcomes the Chair 's strategy to shift to bilateral and open-ended consultations 
and expects that it will act as a further catalyst for advancing negotiations in order to achieve a 
comprehensive and effective agreement in 2019. What is Canada 's overall ambition and focus in the 
on-going fisheries subsidies nego tiations?  
Reply  
Canada is highly supportive of the negotiations on fisheries subsidies and wants to achieve a 
comprehensive and effective agreement in 2019, to deliver on UN Sustainable Development Goal 
14.6. To that end, Canada 's priority is to achieve me aningful disciplines on subsidies for illegal, 
unregulated and unreported (IUU) fishing and subsidies to fishing of overfished stocks as well as to 
strengthen the transparency of fisheries subsidies programs. Canada remains open to considering 
other discip lines and welcomes the introduction of new ideas and approaches to the disciplines by 
different Members in recent months.  
5 EXPORT DIVERSIFICATION AND TRADE PROMOTION  
5.1 Export Diversification Strategy, paragraph 5.2, page 20  
Question  
Canada 's Export Dive rsification Strategy announced in November 2018 aims to support an increase 
in Canada 's overseas exports by 50% by 2025, particularly in sectors and markets with identified 
high growth potential. What sectors/ markets have been identified? Please provide m ore information.  WT/TPR/M/389/Add.1  
 
- 100 - 
 
  Reply  
Canada 's Export Diversification Strategy is about creating opportunities for Canadian firms of all 
sizes and types to reach new markets of their choosing and providing new and faster means to move 
products and services across borders , particularly into markets where Canada has preferred market 
access through trade agreements.  
  WT/TPR/M/389/Add.1  
 
- 101 - 
 
  ICELAND  
Report by Canada – WT/TPR/G/389  
3 TRADE POLICY DEVELOPMENTS 2015 -2019  
3.1 Multilateral Trade Policy, 3.1.3 Ongoing WTO Negotiations and Initiatives – Advancing 
women 's empowerment, paragraph 3.14, page 9 and  
6 INCLUSIVE TRADE  
6.2 Advancing an Inclusive Approach in Trade Agreements, 6.2.3 Trade and Gender, 
paragraphs 6.6.21, pages 25 -26 
Question  
What is the participation of women in the eco nomy in Canada, and particularly in external trade?  
Reply  
Based on the most recent Labour Force Survey released by Statistics Canada, the employment rate 
of women in Canada was 79.9 %, the unemployment rate was 4.8 % and the participation rate was 
83.9% for women in the core working ages of 25 to 54 years of age.  
For more detailed information please visit the Labour Force Survey webpage 
(http://www23.statcan.gc.ca/imdb/p2SV. pl?Function=getSurvey&SDDS=3701 ). Among majority 
female -owned SMEs (SMEs in which ownership of women is at least 51%), 11.2% export. In 
contrast, 12.2% majority male -owned SMEs export and 10.5% of SMEs owned in equal partnerships 
export.  
Question  
Have particular barriers that limit women 's participation in trade been identified?  
Reply  
Women -owned businesses tend to be smaller and grow more slowly than those owned by men, have 
more difficulty accessing financing, and are less likely to export. Most Canad ian exporters did not 
face major obstacles to exporting. No more than 8 % of exporting small and medium -sized 
enterprises (SMEs) considered any single issue (e.g. administrative, border, logistical, market 
knowledge, intellectual property and financial issu es) to be a major obstacle to selling abroad. 
However, after extensive consultations, it was found that administrative obstacles exist for Canadian 
women -owned SMEs inside and outside of Canada. These barriers include border obstacles, logistical 
obstacles , market knowledge issues, intellectual property issues, lack of financing/inadequate cash -
flow, and financial risks. Additional factors have a limiting effect on the amount that Canadian 
women -owned SMEs export. Other obstacles include lack of access to m entoring and trade networks, 
as well as global value chains. Moreover, in Canada, the prevalence of women in service industries 
(such as health) is likely to contribute to their low export propensity. Like industry, firm size also 
contributes to the underr epresentation of female SME exporters. Female -owned SMEs are smaller 
on average compared to their non -female -owned counterparts. Firm size can have an impact on the 
capacity to export, for example influencing the capacity to meet demand.  
Question  
Have meas ures to address such barriers or encourage women 's participation in trade and to promote 
women 's entrepreneurship been adopted, or are such measures being developed?  
Reply  
The Government of Canada is committed to advancing gender equality at home and abroa d. For 
example, Canada has sought to include more gender considerations in Canada 's free trade 
agreements (FTAs).  One of the most recent examples is the inclusion of a Trade and Gender chapter 
in the modernized Canada -Chile Free Trade Agreement. The chapte r acknowledges the importance 
of incorporating a gender perspective into economic and trade issues to ensure that economic growth WT/TPR/M/389/Add.1  
 
- 102 - 
 
  benefits everyone.  It also provides a framework for Canada and Chile to undertake cooperation 
activities on issues related to trade and gender; and it establishes a bilateral Committee to oversee 
these cooperation activities.  The recently modernized Canada -Israel FTA also contains a dedicated 
Trade and Gender chapter in line with the one in the Canada -Chile FTA. In the Comprehens ive and 
Progressive Agreement for Trans -Pacific Partnership (CPTPP) member States have introduced a new 
preamble that reaffirms the importance of promoting inclusive values, including gender equality. 
Canada will continue its emphasis on incorporating gend er provisions in future FTAs. Also, on 
5 March 2019, Canada, New Zealand and Chile hosted a half -day Capacity Building Workshop on 
Women and Trade on the margins of APEC meetings in Santiago, Chile. The objective of this 
workshop was to enhance knowledge o n women and trade and to provide the information necessary 
for government officials to build their capacity to be able to implement programs and policies that 
enhance women 's economic empowerment and participation in international trade.  
Question  
Are there any best practices that Canada can share with the WTO membership as regards women 's 
economic empowerment and trade? For example, are there particular lessons to be drawn from 
Canada 's experience so far of efforts of analysing the gender -related effec ts of trade, including 
expanding, for the first time, the impact assessment process with respect to FTA negotiations with 
Mercosur, to include labour and gender issues, as is mentioned in chapter 2.10 of the Secretariat 's 
report (WT/TPR/S/389)?  
Reply  
The G overnment of Canada has made gender equality and the empowerment of women and girls 
one of its top priorities and has demonstrated this by engaging a broad range of public -private 
stakeholders across the country, including women and women -owned enterprises . In terms of 
Canada 's free trade agreements (FTAs), Canada seeks gender responsive and inclusive provisions 
across its FTAs, including dedicated trade and gender chapters as well as provisions in other key 
chapters including investment, government procure ment, and labour. Canada 's 2018 Budget made 
extensive use of Gender -based Analysis Plus (GBA+) and implemented gender budgeting techniques 
in order to build a strong economy that works for everyone. By using this tool, Canada is able to 
implement evidence -based policy decisions that benefit all Canadians. It is too early to have 
conclusive findings but applying GBA+ helps identify the effects (direct and indirect, positive and 
negative) and opportunities of trade on various groups in society, including thos e underrepresented 
in trade. This allows for the identification of gender -responsive and inclusive trade provisions which 
can be applied across the full trade agreement. In addition to an environmental assessment, Canada 
is for the first time committing to  expanding, in the context of Mercosur negotiations, the impact 
assessment process to include, for example, labour and gender. Canada committed to conduct 
comprehensive ex ante and ex poste GBA+ analyses, and an expanded economic assessment using 
a labour market module that will assess the effects of the potential FTA on the Canadian labour 
market. The Government of Canada is committed to ensuring that a Canada -Mercosur trade 
agreement will include provisions aimed at sharing the benefits of trade among all , including women, 
youth, Indigenous people, small and medium -sized enterprises and the middle class. As part of its 
commitment to transparency, the government consulted with a broad range of Canadians, including 
representatives of industry and business or ganizations, Indigenous groups, labour unions, civil 
society groups, environmental groups and Crown corporations, as they share their views on 
strengthening trade relations with Mercosur countries.  
Question  
Are the effects of trade policy on women and men measured and monitored, and if so how?  
Reply  
Canada uses its Gender -based Analysis Plus (GBA+) for trade policies, programs and initiatives. 
GBA+ is the analytic tool used by Canada to help mainstream gender equality in our domestic and 
international p olicies, programs, initiatives, organisations and activities. A GBA is a binary gender 
analysis focused on the differential impact on men and women of programs, policies and services. 
Whereas, a GBA+ includes the examination of other intersecting identity factors such as Indigenous 
heritage, age, race, ethnicity, sexual orientation, ability, education, language, geography, culture, WT/TPR/M/389/Add.1  
 
- 103 - 
 
  socio-economic status, newcomer or immigrant status, and religion, given that men and women are 
not a homogenous group. Canada has developed new tools, resources, and processes to guide GBA+ 
analysis of FTA chapters. Exchanging information on collecting gender -disaggregated data and 
conducting GBA are two of the cooperation activities that were specifically sought by Canada, and 
now identified in the new Canada -Chile FTA and Canada -Israel FTA Trade and Gender chapters as 
well as the Canada -EU Comprehensive and Economic Trade Agreement (CETA) Trade and Gender 
Recommendation.  
Question  
What has been the experience of Canada in negotiating specific trade and gender chapters in 
Canada 's preferential trade agreements?  
Reply  
To date, it has been a positive experience to seek trade and gender chapters in free trade 
agreements (FTAs). Other countries are also seeking the inclusion of such chapters in their FTAs, 
showing that the time is ripe for such a change. One of the most recent examples is the inclusion of 
a Trade and Gender chapter in the modernized Canada -Chile Free Trade Agreement. The chapter 
acknowledges the importance of inc orporating a gender perspective into economic and trade issues 
to ensure that economic growth benefits everyone.  It also provides a framework for Canada and 
Chile to undertake cooperation activities on issues related to trade and gender; and it establishes  a 
bilateral Committee to oversee these cooperation activities.  The recently modernized Canada -Israel 
FTA also contains a dedicated Trade and Gender chapter in line with the one in the Canada -Chile 
FTA. In September 2018, at the first Comprehensive Economi c and Trade Agreement (CETA) Joint 
Committee, Canada and the EU adopted a Trade and Gender recommendation which seeks to 
recognize the importance of making trade policies more gender -responsive to ensure that the 
benefits of CETA reach everyone. In additio n, the Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for 
Trans -Pacific Partnership (CPTPP) member States have introduced a new preamble that reaffirms 
the importance of promoting inclusive values, including gender equality. Canada will continue its 
emphasis on i ncorporating gender provisions in future FTAs. For example, Canada is seeking the 
inclusion of a Trade and Gender chapter in its negotiations with the Pacific Alliance and Mercosur.  
Question  
The Canadian report mentions that domestically more Canadians are  being consulted on trade policy 
through broader consultation and transparency. What has the experience of Canada been, in this 
regard and has it affected negotiated outcomes?  
Reply  
The Government of Canada is advancing an inclusive approach to trade as pa rt of its overall Trade 
Diversification Strategy. The development and implementation of Canada 's Inclusive Approach to 
Trade reflects a desire to build on past and recent successes (such as Canada -EU CETA), while 
recognizing that there is scope to do thing s even better in the future. For example, stakeholder 
debriefs occur after each round at the Chief Negotiator level, on cross -country conference calls, and 
through questions responded to in writing. In 2018, the Government of Canada undertook formal 
consul tations on how to modernize its Foreign Investment Promotion and Protection Agreement 
model to make its investment agreements more inclusive, employing an innovative civic engagement 
platform called PlaceSpeak, which generated over 350 submissions from Can adians. The Canadian 
Minister of International Trade Diversification also held roundtables with stakeholders in the fall of 
2018. Beginning in September 2017, Global Affairs Canada established a regular and ongoing 
dialogue with Indigenous peoples through a dedicated trade -focussed Indigenous Working Group 
(IWG). The Working Group is comprised of National Indigenous Organizations, Modern Treaty 
partners, Indigenous groups and business associations, and certain legal and policy experts. This 
group meets befo re and after negotiation rounds, discussing a broad extent of issues including but 
not limited to specific FTA negotiations. The collaborative efforts of this group have been important 
in the development and advancement of Indigenous -related provisions in Canada 's trade and 
investment agreements. The IWG continues to meet regularly and provided valuable insight to guide 
officials during Canada -United States -Mexico Agreement (CUSMA) negotiations and the ongoing 
Pacific Alliance and Mercosur free trade agreem ent (FTA) negotiations. The Government of Canada WT/TPR/M/389/Add.1  
 
- 104 - 
 
  initiated public consultations in February 2017 to solicit the views of Canadians on the modernization 
of the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA). The consultations were part of the 
government 's wide r engagement with provinces and territories, businesses, business associations, 
civil society, Indigenous groups, women entrepreneurs, academics and youth. In total, the 
Government of Canada directly engaged with 1,245 stakeholders, through 1,019 interacti ons, and 
received 47,089 submissions from Canadians on NAFTA modernization. Advancement of trade 
negotiations and agreements in Canada are informed by these consultations.  
 
 
  
  
  WT/TPR/M/389/Add.1  
 
- 105 - 
 
  INDIA  
Report by the Secretariat – WT/TPR/S/389  
SUMMARY  
Paragraph 1, page 9 
Question  
According to the secretariat Report, it has been stated that the Canadian Economy is characterised 
by moderate gap growth, low inflation, a relatively stable federal government debt to GDP ratio, and 
a declining current account deficit. Can the government of Canada enumerate the reasons for the 
same?  
Reply  
Over the 2015 -2018 period, real GDP growth in Canada was moderate, on average, reflecting a 
period of relative weakness over 2015 and 2016 followed by stronger growth thereafte r. During the 
first two years of this period, growth was restrained by lower crude oil prices, which dampened 
growth in corporate profits, real investment and hiring in the oil and gas sector. Over the latter half 
of the period, the economy drew strength f rom stimulative and sustainable fiscal policy and 
accommodative monetary policy, as well as from a modest recovery in commodity prices.  
Paragraph 2, page 9 
Question  
What measures did the government of Canada take to ensure that the Canadian economy responses 
to stimulative monetary and fiscal policies?  
Reply  
At the heart of Canada 's monetary policy framework is the inflation -control target, which the Bank 
of Canada and the Government of Canada jointly adopted in 1991 and which has since been 
renewed several times —the latest being in October 2016 for another five years. The target for 
inflation is 2 %, the midpoint of a target range of 1 to 3 %. The Bank of Canada carries out monetary 
policy mainly by changing its policy rate (i.e.: the target for the ov ernight rate). Monetary policy 
provides important stimulus during economic downturns and is a tool to temper inflation during 
periods of strong growth.  
The Canadian economy underwent a period of complex adjustment, in the wake of the sharp decline 
in oil p rices over the 2014 -2016 period. The Bank of Canada 's energy price index fell by roughly 
70% from a peak in the second quarter of 2014 to a trough in the first quarter of 2016. This sharp 
decline in oil prices slowed down the Canadian economy and put downw ard on inflation: real GDP 
decreased in each of the first two quarters of 2015, and again in the second quarter of 2016; the 
level of economic slack increased; and inflation dipped slightly under 1 % in the second quarter of 
2015. In response to the oil pri ce shock, the Bank of Canada provided additional monetary stimulus, 
aimed at supporting economic activity and at helping the Canadian economy adjust to the large 
commodity price shock. More specifically, the Bank lowered its policy rate twice in 2015, in J anuary 
and in July, to 0.5 % from 1 %. 
Federal government fiscal policy has also provided an important underpinning to economic growth 
since 2015. Measures taken to support growth have included:  
• A middle class tax cut for over 9 million Canadians .  
• The tax-free Canada Child Benefit. With the Canada Child Benefit, 9 out of 10 families 
receive more help than they did under previous child benefit programs . 
 WT/TPR/M/389/Add.1  
 
- 106 - 
 
  The Investing in Canada Plan, which provided CAD 14.4 billion for short -term investments to upgrade 
and repair existing infrastructure. In Budget 2017, the Government outlined the second phase of its 
plan, including a commitment to invest an additional CAD 81.2 billion in long -term funding for public 
transit, green infrastructure, social infrastructure, a nd infrastructure that supports trade and 
transportation, and rural and northern communities. In total, the Government is investing more than 
CAD 180 billion over 12 years to build infrastructure in communities across the country.  
Paragraph 4, page 9 
Quest ion 
Can the government of Canada provide the measures it has taken for the underwent small provincial 
government operational deficits and federal government deficits?  
Reply  
The Government continues to manage deficits carefully. The federal deficit is expec ted to decline 
from 0.9% of GDP in 2019 -20 to 0.4% of GDP in 2023 -24. The federal debt -to-GDP ratio is projected 
to decline throughout the forecast horizon to reach 28.6% in 2023 -24. The fiscal situations of 
provinces are fully under their control. The Fed eral government does not comment on the fiscal 
positions of other levels of government in Canada.  
Paragraph 5, page 9  
Question  
What are the measures undertaken by the Canadian Government besides stronger services exports 
in the year 2016 and stronger goods exports in the year 2017 to ensure that the current account 
deficit trends down?  
Reply  
Canada does not target its balance of payments balances (goods, services, current account, financial 
account, etc.). However, the Government of Canada has  focussed efforts on diversifying Canada 's 
trade and investment opportunities. With the Trade Diversification Strategy, the Government of 
Canada intends to broaden Canadian exports by achieving 50% more overseas (non -U.S.) exports 
by 2025. Trade diversific ation is about securing more opportunities for Canadian exporters and 
investors to compete and succeed in thriving and fast growing global markets and sectors. The 
Government of Canada is working to secure access to more markets and mobilizing first -time 
exporters. Various export supports, and services are available. For example, the government of 
Canada has tripled the CanExport programme  from CAD 10 million to CAD 30 million. CanExport is 
a programme  that provides direct financial assistance to small and medium -sized enterprises (SMEs) 
registered in Canada to help them develop new export opportunities and markets, especially in 
high-growth emerging markets. Finally, ongoing trade negotiations are being held with the Pacific 
Alliance and Mercosur.  
Paragraph  7, page 9  
Question  
What percentage of Canada 's external trade imports is from or with countries which Canada is in the 
process of negotiating FTAs and PTAs?  
Reply  
Canada is negotiating FTA/PTAs with 2 regions that make up 8.1% of Canada 's total merchandis e 
imports (Pacific Alliance: 6.9%, Mercosur: 1.2%), However Canada already has FTAs with each 
member countries of the Pacific Alliance. If these countries are not included in the total, then 
Canada 's new FTA/PTA negotiations would account for 1.2% of Canad a's total merchandise imports.  WT/TPR/M/389/Add.1  
 
- 107 - 
 
  Paragraph 8, page 10  
Question  
Can the government of Canada explain the reasons for replacing Canada 's long standing agreement 
AIT with CFTA?  
Reply  
In December 2014, Canada 's federal, provincial and territorial governments agreed to modernize 
the Agreement on Internal Trade (AIT) and create a more comprehensive set of rules for trade within 
Canada, consistent with Canada 's international trade agreements. The original AIT, which came into 
force in 1995, used a positive list approach, covering only 10 specific sectors. By modernizing the 
AIT and using a negative list approach, federal, provincial and territorial governments agreed to 
expand the coverage of the Agreement to apply automatically to almost all areas of economic activity 
in Canada, with any exceptions clearly identified. The CFTA introduced important advancements to 
Canada 's internal trade framework that have enhanced the flow of goods and services, investment 
and labour mobility, eliminated technical barriers to trade, greatly expanded procurement coverage, 
and promoted regulatory cooperation within Canada. For more information on the CFTA, please visit 
the CFTA website : https://www.cfta -alec.ca/ . 
Question  
Does the Canadian Free Trade Agreement (CFTA) have provisions relating to Investment and 
Protection?  
Reply  
The Canadian Free Trade Agreement (CFTA) includes obligations on investment (Part C of Chapter 
Three) that apply to all CFTA Parties (i.e., Canada 's fede ral, provincial and territorial governments). 
These obligations aim to facilitate investment within Canada, ensure non -discriminatory treatment 
of investments and remove barriers to investment in Canada. In the event of a dispute, including 
with respect to  the CFTA investment obligations, a Party may rely on the Agreement 's dispute 
resolution process, which allows a Party to resolve disputes in a conciliatory, cooperative and 
harmonious manner. The Agreement provides for progressive steps in its dispute avo idance and 
resolution processes under Chapter Ten (Dispute Resolution).  
Paragraph 9, page 10  
Question  
Is Canada planning on signing and ratifying the Cross Border Trade Facilitation Agreement?  
Reply  
Canada ratified the WTO Trade Facilitation Agreement on 16 December 2016.  
Paragraph 10, page 10  
Question  
What are the measures that the government of Canada is taking to promote FDI attractiveness?  
Reply  
In the spring of 2017, Parliament passed legislation to establish the Invest in Canada Agency, which 
will help bring together all levels of government to provide seamless service to help global investors 
navigate Canada 's investment landscape thereby reducing complexity and administrative burden for 
foreign investors. Invest in Canada works closely with Global  Affairs Canada 's Trade Commissioner 
Service (TCS) to support foreign investors to establish or expand their operations in Canada and WT/TPR/M/389/Add.1  
 
- 108 - 
 
  leverage the TCS ' expertise. The Government also provided funding to Global Affairs Canada to 
increase the trade commissio ner capacity to promote Canada as an investment destination in 
strategic markets around the world.  
Question  
What were the amendments made to the Investment Canada Act, 1985 lately?  
Reply  
Please see paragraphs 2.34 and 2.35 of the Secretariat Report, where these amendments are 
described.  
Paragraph 13, pages 10 -11 
Question  
Does Canada apply non preferential rules of origin?  
Reply  
Yes. Canada applies a number of non -preferential rules of origin for different purposes. For example, 
Canada has Most -Favoured -Nation Tariff Rules of Origin for determining tariff treatment for a good 
entering Canada on an MFN basis (see https://laws -lois.justice.gc.ca/PDF/SOR -98-33.pdf ) 
Paragraph 15, page 11  
Question  
Can the government of Canada provide a detailed list of the imports control regime which is  being 
followed by the Canadian Aut horities?  
Reply  
Each year, Canada submits a notification to the WTO providing detailed information on all Canadian 
import licensing regimes and the legislative instruments under which they operate. The notification 
provides an outline of each regime, the p urpose and coverage of licensing, and procedural 
requirements. Canada 's most recent notification to the WTO is G/LIC/N/3/CAN/17, dated 1 October 
2018. All of Canada 's import licensing notifications to the WTO can be accessed on the WTO website 
here: 
https://docs.wto.org/dol2fe/Pages/FE_Search/FE_S_S006.aspx?MetaCollection=WTO&SymbolList=
G%2fLIC%2fN%2f3%2fCAN*&Serial=&IssuingDateFrom=&IssuingDateTo=&CATTITLE=&Concerne
dCountryList=&OtherCountryList=&SubjectList=&TypeList=&FullTextHash=37 1857150&ProductList
=&BodyList=&OrganizationList=&ArticleList=&Contents=&CollectionList=&RestrictionTypeName=&
PostingDateFrom=&PostingDateTo=&DerestrictionDateFrom=&DerestrictionDateTo=&ReferenceLis
t=&Language=ENGLISH&SearchPage=FE_S_S001&ActiveTabIndex=0&l anguageUIChanged=true  
In addition, Canada imposes import prohibitions on cultural properties illegally exported from a 
country with which Canada has entered into a cultural property agreement. Please see the 'Foreign 
Cultural Property ' section of the Cultural Property Export and Import Act on Canada 's Justice Laws 
Website here : https://laws -lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/acts/c -51/page -5.html#h -139048  
Paragr aph 16, page 11  
Question  
According to the secretariat report as provided, Canada 's trade remedies legislation was modified 
during the period under review. What were the reasons for which such amendments were sought?  WT/TPR/M/389/Add.1  
 
- 109 - 
 
  Reply  
Prior to the amendments implemente d in 2018, Canada 's trade remedy laws were last reviewed in 
1996. Since then, significant changes occurred in the global economy and Canadian stakeholders 
raised concerns that improvements were required to enhance the effectiveness of Canada 's trade 
remedy  system. In particular, concerns were raised regarding the need to adopt additional 
mechanisms to ensure that dumped and unfairly subsidized imports do not enter the Canadian 
market without the appropriate payment of anti -dumping or countervailing duties, given the growing 
problem of duty circumvention in global trade. In response to these concerns, and informed by public 
consultations, Canada introduced amendments to the Special Import Measures Act to improve the 
effectiveness and transparency of Canada 's trade remedy system and better align Canada 's system 
with those of Canada 's major trading partners.  
Paragraph 21, page 12  
Question  
What are the measures that the Canadian government is taking to strengthen the effectiveness of 
the Intellectual Property strategy launched in the year 2018?  
Reply  
The Government of Canada is investing CAD 85.3 million over five years to help Canadian 
businesses, creators, entrepreneurs and innovators understand, protect and access intellectual 
property (IP) through a comprehensive IP Strategy. As part of the IP Strategy, the Government will 
be making sure that Canadian businesses, creators, entrepreneurs and innovators have access to 
the best possible IP resources through IP awareness, education and advice; strategic  IP tools for 
growth; and IP legislation. Taken together, these measures will help Canadian innovators maximize 
the value of their creations and enhance further innovation.  
Paragraph 24, page 13  
Question  
Canada remains a net exporter of fish and fish produ cts. There have been amendments that are 
proposed to the fisheries act to ensure the long term sustainability of marine resources. What is the 
current status of the same?  
Reply  
As of 3 June 2019, Bill C -68, An Act to amend the Fisheries Act and other Acts in consequence, is 
still before the Senate. Approval of the bill by Royal Assent is expected prior to the rising of 
Parliament for summer break.  
1 ECONOMIC ENVIRONMENT  
1.2 Recent Economic Developments, page 17  
Question  
Canada experienced a strong expansion  that started in the second half of the year 2016 and the 
year 2017 as the economy responded to stimulative monetary and fiscal policies. It is mentioned 
that the growth continued but at a slower rate. Would Canada explain the reasons of the same?  
Reply  
The Canadian economy slowed in 2018 and in early 2019 due to a combination of factors, among 
them:  WT/TPR/M/389/Add.1  
 
- 110 - 
 
  • After a period of brisk economic growth, the economy slowed to a more sustainable pace 
as some of the monetary stimulus in place was being steadily removed.  
− The Canadian economy expanded strongly during the second half of 2016 and in 2017. 
During that period, growth of real GDP largely exceeded that of the economy 's 
potential output, leading to a rapid absorption of economic slack. As a result, economic 
activi ty has been operating close to capacity in the second half of 2017 and during 
most of 2018. With this improvement in economic conditions, the Bank of Canada 
started in mid -2017 to steadily raise the target rate by 25 basis points at a time, to its 
current level at 1.75%, where it has been since October 2018.  
− Higher interest rates increased the cost of new borrowing and of servicing outstanding 
debt of Canadian households. Given higher overall debt levels, household spending is 
estimated to have been more se nsitive to changes in interest changes than in previous 
cycles.  
− In sum, economic activity slowed to a more sustainable pace, averaging about 
potential output growth (estimated at 1.8%) from the third quarter of 2017 to the 
third quarter of 2018.  
• Business i nvestment and exports have been weighed down by the effects of trade tensions 
and increased trade policy uncertainty, as well as developments in the oil and gas sector.  
o After having gradually rebounded from their trough reached early in 2016, global oil 
prices declined again in the fourth quarter of 2018. Tighter transportation bottlenecks that 
constrain the capacity to export oil, and rising oil inventories further depressed prices of 
Canadian oil produced in western provinces. Moreover, the Alberta gove rnment announced 
production curtailments for 2019.  
− These factors contributed to a significant slowing of the economy in the fourth quarter 
of 2018, through their impact on business investments and exports, and are expected 
to have also dampened growth in t he first quarter of 2019.  
• Provincial and municipal housing market policies, tighter mortgage finance guidelines and 
higher mortgage rates had a dampening effect on housing activity.  
− Some provinces (mainly Ontario and British Columbia) and some large munici palities 
(mainly Vancouver and Toronto) enacted policies aimed at slowing the rapid pace of 
house price growth. Starting in the fall of 2016, federal authorities tightened the 
criteria for mortgage qualification with the aim of improving the quality of new  
mortgage lending.  
− These measures, along with higher interest rates, have worked together to slow down 
household credit growth, housing activity and house price growth. They have at the 
same time reduced vulnerabilities associated with elevated household i ndebtedness.  
Paragraph 1.9, page 18  
Question  
Increasing competitiveness in the job sector still remains a challenge for Canada. How does the 
Canadian Government propose to overcome the same?  
Reply  
The Government of Canada has undertaken multiple initiatives to improve competitiveness and 
productivity performance, including measures to promote knowledge and skills training, improve 
trade access and business competitiveness. In Budget 2019 alone, measures undertaken to enhance 
business competitivene ss included : increased support for growing, innovative, small and 
medium -sized businesses as they scale up; access to refundable Scientific Research and 
Experimental Development tax credits; measures to support aboriginal business and entrepreneurs; 
significant funding to improve access for Canadian businesses to expedited, predictable access to WT/TPR/M/389/Add.1  
 
- 111 - 
 
  top global talent; measures and funding to support the activities of the Clean Resource Innovation 
Network, a consortium made up of companies of all sizes, innovat ors, not -for-profits, and academic 
institutions working together to accelerate the development and adoption of innovative oil and gas 
technologies and processes that seek to lower the industry 's environmental impacts; and, plans to 
modernize regulatory fra meworks in high -growth sectors (agri -food and aquaculture; health and 
biosciences; transportation and infrastructure).  
1.2.2 Fiscal policy and debt, paragraph 1.12, page 19  
Question  
During the period of review, a counter cyclical fiscal policy was launched  for economic stabilisation 
purposes. What are the measures that the government of Canada is taking so as to ensure the 
success of this fiscal policy?  
Reply  
In Budget 2016, the Government published information related to the expected economic impacts 
of its counter -cyclical budget measures (see Annex 2: Economic Impacts of Budget Measures: 
https://www.budget.gc.ca/2016/docs/plan/anx2 -en.html ). The implementation progress for these 
measures  and their estimated economic impacts was then reported on in subsequent fall updates 
and in Budget 2019. Please see:  
• Fall Economic Statement 2016 (Chapter 1, Early Progress for Canada 's Middle Class): 
https://www.budget.gc.ca/fes -eea/2016/docs/statement -enonce/chap01 -en.html . 
• Fall Economic Statement 2018 (Chapter 2, Results for Canadians): 
https://www.budget.gc.ca/fes -eea/2018/docs/statement -enonce/chap02 -en.html . 
• Budget 2019 (Investing in Canada Plan: An Update, Chapter 2, Part 1): 
https://www.budget.gc.ca/2019/docs/plan/chap -02-en.html . 
1.2.4 Balance of Payments, paragraph 1.26, page 22  
Question  
What are the measures that the government of Canada is taking to ensure that the current account 
deficit surplus which turned lately into a  persistent deficit is normalised?  
Reply  
Canada does not target its balance of payments balances (goods, services, current account, financial 
account, etc.). However, the Government of Canada has focussed efforts on diversifying Canada 's 
trade and investment opportunities. With the Trade Diversification Strategy, the Government of 
Canada intends to broaden Canadian exports by achieving 50% more overseas (non -U.S.) exports 
by 2025. Trade diversification is about securing more opportunities for Canadi an exporters and 
investors to compete and succeed in thriving and fast growing global markets and sectors. The 
Government of Canada is working to secure access to more markets and mobilizing first -time 
exporters. Various export supports, and services are a vailable. For example, the government of 
Canada has tripled the CanExport programme  from CAD 10 million to CAD 30 million. CanExport is 
a programme  that provides direct financial assistance to small and medium -sized enterprises (SMEs) 
registered in Canada to help them develop new export opportunities and markets, especially in 
high-growth emerging markets. Finally, ongoing trade negotiations are being discussed with the 
following trading blocs: the Pacific Alliance and Mercosur.  
Paragraph 1.27, page 23  
Ques tion 
Canada 's services balance deficit remained stable throughout the review period. What are the 
essential measures that are being taken to ensure that the same or better level is maintained?  WT/TPR/M/389/Add.1  
 
- 112 - 
 
  Reply  
Canada does not target its balance of payments balances (goods, services, current account, financial 
account, etc.). However, along with the Trade Diversification Strategy, the Government of Canada 
continues to commit to supporting services in free trade agreements, in order to provide Canadian 
service s companies with greater market access transparency and predictability. The chapters that 
refer to trade in services in Canadian FTAs include: Cross -Border Trade in Services, 
Telecommunications, Financial Services, Temporary Entry for Business Persons, and  Electronic 
Commerce. Additionally, Canada is launching a new enhanced education strategy aimed at attracting 
and retaining more international students. This initiative should help raise Canadian services exports 
and enable the country to maintain or impro ve on its services balance.  
1.3 Developments in Trade and Investment, 1.3.3 Trends and patterns in foreign direct 
investment, paragraph 1.35, page 27  
Question  
The Canada government has been actively promoting trade in services both at the WTO and through 
number of FTAs; foreign investment promotion and protection agreements. Would Canada shed 
some light on what are the upcoming Investment Promotion and protection agreements that 
Government of Canada is currently negotiating into?  
Reply  
Information on Canada 's current and ongoing FIPA negotiations can be found on the following 
website: https://www.international.gc.ca/trade -commerce/trade -agreements -accords -
commerciaux/agr -acc/index.aspx?lang=eng . 
2 TRADE AND INVES TMENT REGIMES  
2.2 Trade Policy Formulation and Objectives, paragraph 2.7, page 31  
Question  
Over the course of the review period, the Canadian government set out a number of specific trade 
related objectives to advance in trade priorities. What are the meas ures that the government of 
Canada is taking to ensure that these objectives are met?  
Reply  
The Government of Canada 's trade priorities are set out in the mandate letters of several federal 
ministers, including the Minister of International Trade Diversifi cation, the Minister of Foreign Affairs, 
the Minister of Small Business and Export Promotion, the Minister of Innovation, Science, and 
Economic Development, and the Minister of Agriculture and Agri -food. The Government of Canada 's 
Ministerial Mandate Lette rs are publicly available through the following website: 
https://pm.gc.ca/eng/mandate -letters  
The mandates are in various stages of implementation, and include the following trade related 
objectives:  
• Develop and implement the trade diversification strategy for the benefit of the middle class 
and small businesses seeking export opportunities.  
• Maintain constructive relations and deepen trade and commerce with the United States.  
• Implement and expand Canada 's Free Trade Agreements globally.  
• Ensure that our global engagements are maximizing relationship and partnership 
opportunities for Canadian businesses and workers.  WT/TPR/M/389/Add.1  
 
- 113 - 
 
  • Position Canada as a top destination for global investment and promote its eco nomic 
brand.  
• Engage with emerging markets, especially in the Asia -Pacific region.  
• Promote Canadian agricultural interests during trade negotiations.  
• Improve support to companies looking to export and help communities looking to attract 
investments. Redu ce administrative burden for investors and companies associated with 
international trade.  
• Advance Canada 's inclusive trade agenda.  
For each of Government of Canada 's commitments, an anticipated result statement has been 
defined, as well concrete milestones and targets to achieve. In an effort to foster transparency and 
accountability, the Government of Canada tracks and reports publicly on progress in implementing 
of all its commitments including those related to international trade. Progress upda tes in 
implementing the Ministerial Mandate Letter Commitments are accessible online at:  
https://www.canada.ca/en/privy -council/campaigns/mandate -tracke r-results -canadians.html . 
In addition, the responsible Ministers regularly attend "Stock Take " Meetings with the Prime Minister, 
as well as meetings of the Agenda, Results and Communications Cabinet Committee, where they 
present the results of the various initiatives undertaken in support of the Government 's international 
trade commitments and discuss opportunities in fully meeting these commitments.  
Paragraph 2.8, page 31  
Question  
Diversifying trade is essential to Canada 's continued economic prosperity and competitiveness. 
Canada has recently unveiled the New Export Diversification Strategy, with the goal of increasing 
overseas exports by 50% by the year 2025. How does Canada propose to achieve this objective?  
Reply  
Encouraging Canadian busine sses of all sizes and sectors to enter international markets is a national 
priority for Canada. Canada 's Export Diversification Strategy aims to maximize domestic growth, by 
capitalizing on economic opportunities abroad. The Strategy includes enhanced tool s and services 
to help Canadians connect with new customers abroad, as well as initiatives to promote the growth 
opportunities presented by Canada 's trade agreements.  
Paragraph 2.9, page 31  
Question  
According to the secretariat report, Canada is pursuing a n inclusive approach to trade that seeks to 
ensure that more Canadians can take advantage of opportunities that flow from trade and 
investment. What are the benefits that are offered for the non -residents of Canada?  
Reply  
Canada 's inclusive approach to tra de includes the participation of underrepresented groups in 
international trade. Newcomers are an underrepresented group in Canada, and as such it is of utmost 
importance to ensure that they can also take advantage of opportunities that flow from trade and  
investment. The promotion of increased economic ties between diaspora communities in Canada and 
their country of origin or historical affiliation may have a mutual economic benefit for both nations. 
Furthermore, educational initiatives to bring internatio nal students to Canada are critical in ensuring 
that Canada continues to nurture an innovative economy.  WT/TPR/M/389/Add.1  
 
- 114 - 
 
  Paragraph 2.10, page 31  
Question  
Canada has numerous amounts of FTAs and is also aiming at the promotion and protection of 
Investment. Does the Canadian  government in its agreement follow an asset based definition of 
investment or an enterprise based definition?  
Reply  
Canada 's investment agreements follow more of an asset -based definition of investment but are 
linked to the activities of an enterprise. Canada 's approach to defining investment captures the full 
range of investment activities and business -related assets, while at the same time providing 
governments and investors with certainty on the scope of coverage of investment under an 
investment agreement.  
2.3 Trade Agreements and Arrangements, 2.3.2 Regional and preferential agreements, 
paragraph 2.16, page 32  
Question  
In the year 2015, Canada experienced falling unilateral preferential imports. What are the measures 
that the Canadian gov ernment is taking to stabilise the same?  
Reply  
On 1 January 2015, 72 higher -income and export -competitive countries were graduated from 
Canada 's General Preferential Tariff (GPT) regime to ensure that the programme  is appropriately 
aligned with the global economic landscape and targets benefits to countries most in need of this 
type of assistance.  
See http://canadagazette.gc.ca/rp -pr/p2/2013/2013 -10-09/html/sor -dors161-eng.php  for more 
information.)  
2.3.2.1 Reciprocal trade agreements, paragraph 2.17, page 32  
Question  
According to the secretariat report, the CPTPP agreement will have a number of trading partners 
where more than one reciprocal or unilateral agreement will apply. In case of a dispute between two 
agreements, which one will prevail over the other?  
Reply  
The Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans -Pacific Partnership (CPTPP) provides a 
mechanism to address potential overlaps with respect to other bilateral or regional agreements and 
the World Trade Organization Agreement (Article 1.2). As such, the CPTPP will co -exist with all of 
Canada 's free trade agreements. Businesses will have the choice of whether to use the CPTPP or 
another free trade agreement, depending on whichever applies more favourably to their 
circumstances.  
Paragraph 2.19, pages 33 -34 
Question  
According to the secretariat report, the CPTPP for the remaining signatories will enter into force 
60 days after they have notified of the completion of their ratification procedures. Can the 
government of Canada provide the current status of the said signatories?  WT/TPR/M/389/Add.1  
 
- 115 - 
 
  Reply  
The Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans -Pacific Partnership (CPTPP) entered into 
force for Aus tralia, Canada, Japan, Mexico, New Zealand, and Singapore on 30 December 2018, and 
for Viet  Nam on 14 January 2019. As of 4 June, four signatories had not yet ratified the Agreement 
(Chile, Brunei, Malaysia, and Peru). For these remaining signatories, the CPTPP will enter into force 
60 days after that country ratifies the Agreement.  
Question  
Does the CPTPP include chapter commitments on Intellectual Property Rights as well?  
Reply  
Yes, the Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans -Pacific Partnership  (CPTPP) includes 
a chapter on intellectual property. Please refer to paragraph 3.284 of the Secretariat Report where 
it outlines the CPTPP commitments in the intellectual property chapter.  
Question  
Does the CPTPP agreement within its framework provide the  definitions of side letters?  
Reply  
During Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans -Pacific Partnership (CPTPP) 
negotiations, CPTPP Parties were able to address several important concerns through bilateral side 
letters. Although not part of the Ag reement itself, the side letters represent commitments between 
individual Parties with respect to very specific issues. The side letter agreements signed bilaterally 
between CPTPP members are important to read in conjunction with the overarching text of th e 
Agreement.  
Paragraph 2.20, page 34  
Question  
During the review period, Canada was active in updating and expanding the existing FTA 's. Do the 
amended FTA(s) contain a separate chapter on Intellectual Property Rights?  
Reply  
Yes. The modernized Canada -Israel Free Trade Agreement (CIFTA) includes a new chapter on 
intellectual property (IP), and IP obligations under the Canada -United States -Mexico Agreement 
(CUSMA) are noted in the Secretariat 's report (paragraph 3.285).  
Paragraph 2.21, page 34  
Question  
According to the secretariat report, as in February 2019, CUSMA parties were working towards to 
advance their domestic procedures towards ratification and implementation of the same. What is 
the current status of the same and what is the estimated da te for ratification?  
Reply  
Since the signature of the Canada -United States -Mexico Agreement (CUSMA) on 30 November 2018, 
the Parties ' efforts have focused on domestic ratification procedures. Each country will notify the 
other Parties of the completion of their domestic ratification procedures. Once all three Parties have 
provided their notifications, the Agreement would enter into force on the first day of the third month 
following the last notification.  WT/TPR/M/389/Add.1  
 
- 116 - 
 
  2.3.3 Other agreements and arrangements, paragraph 2.27, page 35  
Question  
Canada also maintains certain other preferential tariffs, as implemented through its Customs Tariff, 
for certain products from Australia and New Zealand. These preferences emanate from the Canada 
Australia Trade Agreement (CANATA) that was established in 1960 and further amended in 1973; 
and the Trade Agreement Between Canada and New Zealand of 1932, respectively. As at 2018, 
there were 333 preferential tariff lines, 31 for Australia and 338 for Ne w Zealand in Canada 's tariff 
schedule. These Agreements have not been notified to the WTO. Canada is requested to explain as 
to why it considers non -notification of its preferential trade agreements? While the requirement as 
per the Annex 3d (Reporting) re quires members to do so as per the Art. 24 of the WTO Agreement. 
Two of these preferential trade agreements pre -dates the WTO agreement itself and continues to be 
in operation even to date.  Therefore, it is also a breach of the requirement of Annex 3d - "In order 
to achieve the fullest possible degree of transparency, each Member shall regularly report to the 
TPRB…… " Canada is requested to provide clarification on why these two preferential trade 
agreements were not reported to CRT of the WTO for almost mor e than two decades.  
Reply  
The agreements with Australia and New Zealand remain in force. Both agreements have resulted in 
preferential treatment on a limited number of goods traded between the respective parties. The 
preferential rules of origin under the agreements with Australia and New Zealand were notified on 
22 June 1995. Please see G/RO/N/1/Add.1.  
2.4 Investment Regime, paragraph 2.30, page 35  
Question  
Canada continued to attract FDI from abroad and increased outward Canadian Direct Investment. 
What a re the measures that the Canadian government are taking to ensure that the said direct 
investment is maintained?  
Reply  
Invest in Canada will continue to raise the level of collaboration with federal, provincial, territorial, 
municipal and industry partners to develop a proactive, strategic and coordinated whole of 
government approach to foreign direct investment attraction. In 2019 -20, Invest in Canada will 
scale-up and scale -out, expanding its presence into regional offices across the country. By o ffering 
decentralized support the Agency will be better able to meet the needs of investors looking to 
capitalize on the unique market benefits that exist across provinces, territories and municipalities 
and work more closely with partners. Invest in Canad a's regional presence will also put a greater 
focus on providing world -class aftercare, retention and reinvestment services, with the aim of turning 
initial investments into expanded investments.  
2.4.1 Framework, paragraph 2.32, page 36  
Question  
ICA has re cently been amended to liberalise the net benefit review threshold and add national 
security review transparency. What are the advantages that the Canadian government will avail of 
the same?  
Reply  
Recognizing that foreign investment creates well -paying job s and opportunities for Canadians, the 
threshold for review for WTO private sector investors under the Investment Canada Act was raised 
to CAD 1 billion in 2017, two years earlier than the planned date in 2019, and increases with changes 
to nominal GDP ann ually.  This reform, along with an increase to the net benefit threshold for trade 
agreement investors to over CAD 1.5 billion, has signalled Canada 's openness to FDI.  This openness, WT/TPR/M/389/Add.1  
 
- 117 - 
 
  when combined with the enhanced national security transparency that provid es added certainty to 
investors, has helped to build an investment environment that is beneficial to the Canadian economy.  
Question  
ICA requires that all the non -Canadians that wish to establish or acquire control of a Canadian 
business either file a notif ication or an application for review to the relevant authorities, unless an 
exemption applies. Does this provision apply to the Non Resident Canadian Citizens too?  
Reply  
The Investment Canada Act does not apply to Canadian citizens, regardless of their res idency status.  
Paragraph 2.37, pages 37 -38 
Question  
Can the Canadian government explain the reasons for the decline of notifications and review 
applications for the year 2015 -16? 
Reply  
Please note that Canada has worked with the WTO Secretariat to correct the report for 2015 -16 
figures, as these were recently revised retroactively. In 2015 -16, the number of applications 
remained the same as the previous year, while the number of notifications declined modestly. Given 
that the drop is modest and that  investment numbers under the ICA have increased since, it may 
be difficult to isolate the reasons for the precise numbers of investments in any given year, which 
do not appear to be indicative of a trend.  
Question  
Canada has 37 FIPA 's in order to promote or protect the investments of investors of 1 party in the 
territory of the other. What are the measures which the government of Canada is taking to ensure 
that there exist no discrepancies in maintaining the same?  
Reply  
The Foreign Investment Promotion and  Protection Agreement (FIPA) is an international treaty 
providing reciprocal binding obligations on host governments regarding their treatment of foreign 
investors and investments. Canada 's FIPAs since the NAFTA (1994) set out the same range of 
obligations  that host governments guarantee, such as with respect to non -discriminatory treatment, 
expropriation, transfer of funds, transparency, customary international law minimum standard of 
treatment, performance requirements and investor -state dispute settlemen t. Canada 's FIPAs 
negotiated prior to 1994 are not as comprehensive in their obligations or their elaboration of the 
investor -state dispute settlement mechanism.  
Question  
Can the government of Canada explain the reasons for the termination of Canada Ecuador FTA?  
Reply  
In May 2017, Ecuador notified Canada of its withdrawal from the 1997 Foreign Investment Promotion 
and Protection Agreement (FIPA). This termination became effective on 19 May 2018.  
Question  
What are the measures that the government of Ca nada is taking to ensure that the aim of 
consultations, which were to ensure that the views of the Canadians and stake holders on how FIPA WT/TPR/M/389/Add.1  
 
- 118 - 
 
  could better support SME and Indigenous groups and advance other objectives such as gender 
equality, are constantly m et? 
Reply  
Canada 's Foreign Investment Promotion and Protection Agreement (FIPA) consultations, launched 
in August 2018, sought ideas on how to update the treaty to reflect the innovations of Canada 's 
large Free Trade Agreements (FTAs), while also seeking i nput on incorporating provisions to ensure 
that all Canadians, including women, Indigenous peoples and small and medium -sized enterprise 
owners, benefit more from Canada 's investment agreements. The results of these consultations are 
currently being used t o inform the development of Canada 's new FIPA model text.  
Paragraph 2.38, page 39  
Question  
Does the current agreement on FTA 's focusing on investment, contain the definition from both asset 
and enterprise based perspective?  
Reply  
Canada 's investment agreements follow more of an asset -based definition of investment but are 
linked to the activities of an enterprise. Canada 's approach to defining investment captures the full 
range of investment activities and business -related assets, while at the same time providing 
governments and investors with certainty on the scope of coverage of investment under an 
investment agreement.  
2.4.2 Policy, paragraph 2.39, page 39  
Question  
The government has worked to create an open, rules based investment regime  that facilitates FDI 
in Canada. Does this apply to cross border investment as well?  
Reply  
The Government of Canada is open to Foreign Direct Investment (FDI), inclusive of cross -border 
investment.  
Paragraph 2.40, page 39  
Question  
What are the other areas that the government of Canada has been working on so as to ensure that 
the transparency of the system is further improved?  
Reply  
Canada has continued to focus on outreach to investors and to Canadian businesses with the aim of 
better informing them o f the legal process and potential outcomes, and to emphasize the importance 
of early engagement with the Canadian government on investment proposals. The annual mandatory 
reporting on the administration of the national security review provisions is include d in the 
Investment Canada Act Annual Report, and continued transparency on the process will be key to 
reducing market uncertainty for Canadian business and investors.  WT/TPR/M/389/Add.1  
 
- 119 - 
 
  2.4.3 Restrictions, paragraph 2.44, page 40  
Question  
According to the secretariat report , the Canadian economy is open to foreign investment and the 
government of Canada has taken further steps to remove burdens for investors. What are the steps 
that the government of Canada is taking so as to ensure that the burden is removed for Investors?  
Reply  
The Invest in Canada Agency, launched on 12 March 2018, increases cooperation between provinces, 
territories and municipalities to bolster investment promotion by providing companies with a one -
stop-shop for investment in Canada, thereby reducing com plexity and administrative burden for 
investors. The new Global Skills Strategy, launched in June 2017, makes it easier for companies that 
are making large investments in Canada to bring in highly -skilled global talent. Canadian companies 
have access to an  expedited review process lasting no more than a combined 20 business days from 
end to end, including reviews conducted by Employment and Social Development Canada and 
Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Canada. Canada has worked closely with the United States, 
as part of the Canada -US Regulatory Cooperation Council to facilitate greater alignment of regulatory 
systems where appropriate. The Government has taken efforts to eliminate barriers to trade between 
provinces and territories through greater harmo nization of rules and regulatory requirements where 
appropriate. For example, at the 7 December 2018, First Ministers ' Meeting (with leaders of the 
provinces and territories), First Ministers agreed to accelerate work to address domestic barriers to 
trade that increase business costs and impose needless burdens on Canadian businesses.  
Paragraph 2.45, page 40  
Question  
What are the measures that the government of Canada has undertaken to improve its overall 
investment climate and attractiveness to FDI?  
Reply  
Making Canada a top destination for global investment remains a core government priority and the 
Government of Canada has recently taken several steps to improve Canada 's investment climate 
and implemented several measures to increase Canada 's abilit y to attract and facilitate high -impact 
foreign direct investment and the jobs that come with it.  
In the spring of 2017, Parliament passed legislation to establish the Invest in Canada Agency, which 
will help bring together all levels of government to prov ide seamless service to help global investors 
navigate Canada 's investment landscape, thereby reducing complexity and administrative burden 
for foreign investors. Invest in Canada works closely with Global Affairs Canada 's Trade 
Commissioner Service (TCS) to support foreign investors to establish or expand their operations in 
Canada and leverage increased TCS expertise. The Government also provided funding to Global 
Affairs Canada to increase the TCS capacity to promote Canada as an investment destination i n 
strategic markets around the world. The Canadian TCS continues its role in helping companies 
penetrate foreign markets by promoting Canada 's economic, trade, and investment interests. It 
operates over 160 trade offices in Canada and around the world offe ring a global network that 
provides market intelligence and related business services.  
In the 2018 Fall Economic Statement, the government proposed three immediate changes to 
Canada 's tax system, in order to enhance business confidence in Canada: 1) allowi ng businesses to 
immediately write off the full cost of machinery and equipment used for the manufacturing or 
processing of goods; 2) allowing businesses to immediately write off the full cost of specified clean 
energy equipment to spur new investments and  the adoption of advanced clean technologies in the 
Canadian economy; and 3) introducing the Accelerated Investment Incentive, an accelerated capital 
cost allowance for businesses of all sizes, across all sectors of the economy, that are making capital 
investments.  WT/TPR/M/389/Add.1  
 
- 120 - 
 
  The Global Skills Strategy, launched in June 2017, makes it easier for companies that are making 
large investments in Canada to bring in highly -skilled global talent. Companies now have access to 
an expedited review process lasting no more than a  combined 20 business days from end to end, 
including reviews conducted by Employment and Social Development Canada and Immigration, 
Refugees and Citizenship Canada.  
Changes to the Investment Canada Act that took effect on 22 June 2017, now provide greater  
transparency of the guidelines used for national security reviews and  increase the threshold for 
review under the Act to transactions of CAD 1 billion or greater for WTO private sector investors, 
representing a significant increase over the CAD 800 millio n threshold.  
2.4.4 Incentives and promotion , paragraph 2.46, page 41  
Question  
What are the measures that the Canadian government is taking to promote the project "Invest In 
Canada "? 
Reply  
Invest in Canada will promote Canada as a top destination for global investment by communicating 
a clear and compelling value proposition to foreign investors around the world.  To ensure that 
investors around the world understand Canada 's value proposition and see it as a smart global 
investment destination, Invest i n Canada will focus on building Canada 's international brand 
recognition through proactive marketing and promotion.  In 2019 -20, the Foreign Direct Investment 
(FDI) brand will be rolled -out along with a sustained and agile international marketing campaign 
that supports the Agency 's efforts to boost Canada 's international profile as a competitive business 
location and partner of choice. Business to business marketing and promotion will be a primary 
focus. The Agency will continue to optimize its brand identit y and pursue collaborative promotional 
opportunities with its Canadian government partners.  
Paragraph 2.48, page 41  
Question  
What are the various levels at which Invest Canada Community Initiative is operational?  
Reply  
Formerly known as the Invest Canada – Community Initiatives program , the CanExport – Community 
Investments contribution program  provides matching funds for initiatives related to Foreign Direct 
Investment (FDI) training, FDI strategic planning and analysis , FDI tools and material development, 
and lead generation. Successful applicants range in size from small communities to larger investment 
promotion agencies responsible for numerous communities.  
Paragraph 2.49, page 41  
Question  
The foreign trade zone mark eting programme  was a pilot programme  designed to market Canada 's 
foreign trade zone advantage and attract FDI. Was this FTZ -MP a project based programme  or is 
going to be renewed again?  
Reply  
The FTZ -MP was a 5 -year pilot. Due to low uptake and following an internal performance assessment, 
it was permanently sunset at the end of the prescribed period.  WT/TPR/M/389/Add.1  
 
- 121 - 
 
  Paragraph 2.50, pages 41 -42 
Question  
Can other WTO members avail the advantage of Invest in Canada or is it specific to Canadian 
Residents?  
Reply  
All WTO members can take advantage of Invest in Canada services.  
3 TRADE POLICIES AND PRACTICES BY MEASURE  
3.1 Measures Directly Affecting Imports, 3.1.2 Rules of origin, paragraph 3.18, 
pages  51-52 
Question  
Canada calculates the value of the non -originating mater ials on the basis of the ex -works price. 
Would the government of Canada explain the need for having an ex works price and if the same can 
be substituted for free on board value?  
Reply  
Article 4.7 of the Canada -United States -Mexico Agreement (CUSMA) (Furthe r Adjustments to the 
Value of Materials) allows for the deduction of the cost of transporting the material to the place of 
production, provided that documentary evidence in support of the deduction is available. Such 
deductions were not permitted in the or iginal NAFTA. The International Commercial Term (Incoterm) 
"Free on Board " (FOB) means a value that includes costs incurred in transporting a material from 
the place of production to the port of shipment. As such the F.O.B. value for a material is not the 
same as its ex -works value and cannot be substituted.  
Paragraph 3.25, page 54  
Question  
Under Rules of Origin CETA, do plant and plant products harvested, picked or gathered after being 
grown there, constitutes to be wholly obtained or produced?  
Reply  
Article 4, paragraph (b) specifies that "vegetables, plants, and plant products harvested or gathered 
there " are wholly obtained.  
Question  
Under CETA, does scrap and waste derived from manufacturing or processing operations or from 
consumption in the party  and fit only for disposal or for the recovery of purposes, parts or raw 
materials, or for recycling purposes, constitute to be wholly obtained?  
Reply  
The Comprehensive Economic and Trade Agreement (CETA) does not include a provision under which 
waste and scrap derived from manufacturing is deemed wholly obtained. CETA Article 4 includes the 
following: l. raw materials recovered from used products collected there, provided that these 
products are fit only for such recovery; m. components recovered from used  products collected 
there, provided that these products are fit only for such recovery, when the component is: i. 
incorporated into another product; or ii. further produced resulting in a product with a performance 
and life expectancy equivalent or similar  to those of a new product of the same type.  WT/TPR/M/389/Add.1  
 
- 122 - 
 
  3.1.3 Tariffs, 3.1.3.2 Tariff Structure, paragraph 3.36, page 56  
Question  
Does CETA, in its ROO chapter contain a reference to neutral elements or indirect materials?  
Reply  
Yes. This issue is addressed in the Comprehensive Economic and Trade Agreement (CETA) Article  13 
– Neutral elements.  
3.2 Measures Directly Affecting Exports, 3.2.5 Export finance, insurance, and 
guarantees, pages 91 -92 
Question  
Export Development Canada is allowed to access Consolidated Revenue Fund if the market 
conditions warrant. In the last 3 years, whether EDC accessed CRF and if so, how much is the value 
financing through this mechanism?  
Reply  
EDC has not disbursed out of the Consolidated Revenue Fund (CRF) for any Corporate Account loans 
in the last 3 years. Only Canada Account loans have been processed through the CRF.  
Question  
EDC has two types of transactions which are Corporate Account and Canada Account. We understand 
that the Canada Account transactions under section 23 of the Export Development Act are 
appropriated through CRF. In the last 3 years how much value of such appropriation done to support 
Canada Account transactions and especially a break up for funding the borrowers in high risk 
markets?  
Reply  
Disbursements under Canada Account in the last 3 years are below:  
31 March 2018: No disbursements  
31 March 2017: No disbursements  
31 March 2016: Pakistan - CAD 16,103,336.43  
Question  
Under Canada Account transactions, how much is the non -performing loans (both in terms of 
percentage share and absolute value) in the last three years, and how much loans are written off?  
Reply  
 2016 -16 2016 -17 2017 -18 
Non-performing loans  1,272,446,659.75   1,163,398,711.41   161,024,684.15  
Total loan portfolio  3,242,290,060.80   3,020,644,106.35   1,656,996,447.84  
% of portfolio  39.25%     38.51%      9.72%  
Write -offs - - 2,595,974,536.49  
 
Question  
As per the annual report of EDC, the EDC retained CAD 3 million each year (in the year 2016 and 
2017) from Canada Account as compensation for administration and recoveries. Of these, how much 
is related to compensation for interest loss or non -recoveries?  WT/TPR/M/389/Add.1  
 
- 123 - 
 
  Reply  
None. These amounts are withheld purely as a re covery for EDC 's contributions to the administrative 
activities required in managing Canada Account. As the loans are disbursed through the 
Government 's Consolidated Revenue Fund (CRF), EDC does not incur any loss as a result. All interest 
losses and non -recoveries are thus directly borne by the Government of Canada.  
Question  
Government of Canada had established FinDev Canada (a DFI) in the year 2018, as a wholly owned 
subsidiary of EDC. The objective of FinDev is to support private enterprises in other developing 
countries, especially in Latin American and Sub Saharan African Region. How the risks associated 
with such lending is proposed to be mitigated?  
Reply  
FinDev Canada operates on commercial principles necessitating a strong internal foundatio n from 
which the organization can deliver on its strategic goals. As such, FinDev Canada employs rigorous 
risk management, agile operational processes and procedures, and sustainability protocols that align 
with best practices of the private sector. It is critical for a Financial Institution, particularly when 
operating in developing economies, to rely on solid risk management practices. FinDev Canada has 
built a comprehensive Enterprise Risk Management Framework that informs its decisions across all 
areas of risk. The framework and its policies and charters it comprises reflect the particular nature 
of the business and ensure that FinDev Canada adequately identifies and manages its risks while 
maximizing its development impact, in accordance with its mandat e. The framework is based on the 
principle of three lines of defence  (3LD), consistent with industry best practice and its parent 
company 's approach to risk management. FinDev Canada 's risk identification process distinguishes 
risks across three key groups  – strategic, financial and operational, which are regularly monitored 
and assessed.  
Question  
Exports, Canadian Direct Investment Abroad and Domestic Business facilitated by the EDC are taken 
as parameters for measuring Canadian Benefits. How does EDC quan tify these (support to exports, 
investment abroad and domestic business)? Whether total export of the entity financed by EDC is 
taken or it is proportionate to the volume of financing?  
Reply  
The exports, Canadian direct investment abroad, and domestic busi ness facilitated by EDC in 2018 
are estimated to have sustained CAD 67 billion in Canadian GDP, similar to 2017. 1 The contribution 
to the Canadian economy in 2018 represented 3.6% of Canada 's total GDP, a slight decline from 
3.8% in 2017. This means that for every CAD 1 in income earned in Canada during 2018, nearly 
4 cents were attributable to EDC 's trade and investment facilitation. The amount of financing does 
not have to be directly propo rtionate to the total of exports.  
Question  
EDC's contribution to national GDP and employment creation through its support towards exports, 
domestic business and direct investment abroad are also taken as other parameters to measure its 
performance. How doe s EDC measure its contribution to GDP and employment generation? Whether 
all jobs created by an entity supported by EDC are taken or the number of jobs proportionate to the 
volume of financing by the EDC?  
Reply  
The amount of financing does not have to be d irectly proportionate to the number of jobs created. 
EDC measures its contribution to Canada 's prosperity through the economic benefits generated by 
the exports and investment it supports. See above response to question 106 for more details.  WT/TPR/M/389/Add.1  
 
- 124 - 
 
  3.3 Measures A ffecting Production and Trade, 3.3.7 Intellectual property rights, 3.3.7.1 
Overview, paragraph 3.273, page 123  
Question  
Whether the Canadian Government has made an assessment of the relationship between the R&D, 
IP and patent filing. If yes, kindly provide details of the same.  
Reply  
The Canadian Government has not assessed the specific relationship between research and 
development (R&D), intellectual property (IP) and patent filing.  
Paragraph 3.274, page 124  
Question  
The Canada governments Intellectu al Property Office 's (CIPO) new five year strategy for the year 
2017-2022 call for the Canadian businesses and innovators to have the support they need to grow. 
What are the measures Canada government is taking to ensure furtherance of the same?  
Reply  
In Budget 2017, the Government launched the Innovation and Skills Plan —an ambitious effort to 
make Canada a world -leading centre for innovation. Over the last two years, the Government 
announced new measures to continue building on its Innovation and Skills Pl an, making Canada 's 
innovation programs easier to access and to use, and expanding support for Canadian companies 
that want to scale up and take their innovations to markets around the world. This included the 
creation of a new intellectual property (IP) s trategy in 2018 to help Canadian companies better 
protect and access ideas to grow and succeed. Over the next five years, the Government of Canada 
will be making sure that Canadian businesses, creators, entrepreneurs and innovators have access 
to the best possible IP resources through IP awareness, education and advice; strategic IP tools for 
growth; and IP legislation. The Canadian Intellectual Property Office (CIPO) is an essential player in 
the innovation ecosystem, both in Canada and in the world. The G overnment of Canada 's goal of 
making our country a global centre of innovation is central to CIPO 's vision outlined in its 2017 -2022 
Business Strategy. '' 
Paragraph 3.275, page 124  
Question  
As a part of the IP strategy, the CIPU will launch a suite of programs to help improve IP literacy 
among the Canadians. Has there a fund been allocated for such an initiative?  
Reply  
In April 2018, the Government of Canada launched its national intellectual property (IP) Strategy. 
Chief among its goals is to enhance t he understanding of IP among Canadian businesses, creators, 
entrepreneurs and innovators, enabling them to better recognize the value of IP and build IP into 
their business and growth strategies.  
The Canadian Intellectual Property Office 's (CIPO) IP Awaren ess and Education Program is a key 
component of the IP Strategy.  
In 2018 -2019, the programme  expanded its offerings and tailored products to meet the needs of 
small and medium -sized enterprises (SMEs) in key growth sectors and underrepresented groups, to 
assist them in their understanding and acquisition of IP. Now in its full maturity, CIPO 's IP Awareness 
and Education Program consists of the following three pillars: IP for Business, IP Academy and IP 
Hub. WT/TPR/M/389/Add.1  
 
- 125 - 
 
  As part of Canada 's comprehensive IP strategy, the  Government of Canada will be conducting an IP 
awareness and use survey to identify how Canadians understand and use IP, including groups that 
have traditionally been less likely to use IP, such as women and Indigenous entrepreneurs. The 
results of the sur vey will help CIPO and the Government of Canada better meet the needs of these 
groups.  
The IP awareness and education programme  is funded through CIPO 's revolving funds. However, as 
part of the Government of Canada 's comprehensive IP strategy, Canada is in vesting CAD 85.3 million 
over five years to help Canadian businesses, creators, entrepreneurs and innovators understand, 
protect and access intellectual property (IP) through various initiatives. This includes initiatives that 
support building an understan ding of IP among Canadians, such as a new team of IP experts 
(CAD 17.5 million /5 years).  
Question  
According to the secretariat report, the IP strategy supports training for federal employees who deals 
with IP government. Can Canadian lawyers also avail the benefit of such training?  
Reply  
The programme  is focused exclusively on government employees.  
Paragraph 3.276, page 124  
Question  
Has Canada come out with guidelines for granting IP protection to the inventions pertaining to 
artificial intelligenc e (AI) and block chain?  
Reply  
Canada has not published explicit practice guidance for granting intellectual property (IP) protection 
to inventions pertaining to artificial intelligence (AI) or block chain. In respect of patents it is 
generally understood t hat these technologies would fall under the current computer -implemented 
inventions practice.  
Question  
How many such patent applications were filed in 2016 and 2017?  
Reply  
The Canadian Intellectual Property Office (CIPO) is actively monitoring developments in areas of 
emerging technology and how intellectual property (IP) offices are responding to them. In respect 
of patents, currently, there is not an internationally agreed definition of what constitutes a patent 
application that pertains to ar tificial intelligence and block chain and therefore the data requested is 
not readily available.  
Question  
What are the common challenges being faced by the authorities while assessing these patent 
applications for grant of patent?  
Reply  
When a patent appli cation relates to emerging technologies there can be increased difficulty in 
searching and examining the application. In respect of assessing these applications the terminology 
and patent classification schema are not mature and developing a robust search strategy can be 
more difficult and more time -consuming in comparison to searching mature technologies. The 
volume of applicable prior art is also generally low and more difficult to uncover.  WT/TPR/M/389/Add.1  
 
- 126 - 
 
  3.3.7.2 General institutional and regulatory framework, paragraph  3.278, page 126  
Question  
Does the Canadian Intellectual Property office (CIPO) have any legislation in force for the benefit of 
farmers?  
Reply  
The Canadian Intellectual Property Office (CIPO) is responsible for administering Canada 's 
intellectual property  rights as it pertains to patents (Patent Act, Patent Rules); trademarks (Trade -
marks Act, Amendments to the Trade -marks Act, Trade -marks Regulations, Olympic and Paralympic 
Marks Act, Olympic and Paralympic Marks Regulation); copyright (Copyright Act, Cop yright 
Regulation); industrial designs (Industrial Design Act, Industrial Design Regulations); and integrated 
circuit topographies (Integrated Circuit Topography Act, Integrated Circuit Topography Regulations). 
These legislations outline the application re quirements and specifications of any inventions to be 
filed by the inventor.  
CIPO does not administer any legislation specifically for the benefit of farmers.  
Question  
What are the measures that the government of Canada is taking so as to ensure that the C IPO's 
mandate to deliver high quality and timely IP services to customers and to increase the awareness 
of IP is achieved?  
Reply  
The Government of Canada is pursuing an ambitious digital agenda to transform service delivery to 
Canadians. In line with this vision, the Canadian Intellectual Property Office (CIPO) is implementing 
a service strategy to modernize our service delivery and to provide a consistently excellent service 
experience.  
Emphasis is being placed on better understanding CIPO 's client 's needs to inform service design and 
providing services that are e -enabled, timely and accessible.  
CIPO engages in business improvement services to support its business lines on meeting the needs 
of clients and stakeholders, engaging and empowering employees , and optimizing all activities to 
meet performance targets in providing intellectual property (IP) rights. This includes establishing 
and overseeing timeliness of performance standards, optimizing core processes, improving cost 
efficiency, improving quali ty of IP rights and delivering timely IP decisions.  
Having instituted a strong client focus and a process for continual improvement, CIPO 's Patent 
Branch was certified as being ISO compliant as of June 2017. This achievement positions Canada 
among the worl d leaders in the delivery of quality patent rights. Building on this success, CIPO has 
begun implementing an organization -wide quality management system for the Trademarks Branch 
and the Copyright and Industrial Designs Branch.  
CIPO has been diligently mov ing ahead to implement five international treaties: the Madrid Protocol, 
the Singapore Treaty, the Nice Agreement, the Patent Law Treaty and the Hague Agreement. Joining 
these IP treaties will support Canadian businesses looking to enter or expand their pr esence in 
international markets by providing them with a faster, simpler and more cost -effective way to 
acquire IP rights in multiple countries.  
Paragraph 3.280, page 126  
Question  
Is Canada a signatory to the Lisbon agreement?  WT/TPR/M/389/Add.1  
 
- 127 - 
 
  Reply  
Canada is not a signato ry to the Lisbon Agreement.  
Paragraph 3.285, pages 127 -128 
Question  
In case of infringement, under CUSMA, will the infringement be penalised under CUSMA or any other 
criminal law being in force, will be applied?  
Reply  
As in any free trade agreement, obligations, including those related to intellectual property 
infringement, are implemented through domestic legislation and operationalised through the 
domestic legal frameworks of each Party 's territory.  
Question  
In case of an infringement with respect to trade secrets, will the same be dealt under CUSMA or the 
government of Canada plans to implement a separate legislation relating to trade secrets?  
Reply  
As in any free trade agreement, obligations, including those related to tr ade secrets infringement, 
are implemented through domestic legislation and operationalised through the domestic legal 
frameworks of each Party 's territory.  
Question  
On whom does the burden of proof lie to prove or disprove that the infringement of trade se crets 
has occurred or not occurred?  
Reply  
In civil proceedings alleging trade secret infringement, the burden of proof is on the person or entity 
alleging the infringement, while the onus to prove criminal charges rests with the prosecution.  
Paragraph 3.286, page 128  
Question  
How does the government of Canada propose to combat the selling of counterfeit products over the 
Internet?  
Reply  
Canada has a robust and technology neutral legal framework with a full range of civil remedies 
enabling righ ts holders to effectively combat the selling of counterfeit products over the Internet. 
Criminal remedies are also in place to tackle counterfeit products sold online on a commercial scale 
or that pose health or safety risks.  
Additionally, Canada is proud to have put in place PROJECT CHARGEBACK, an initiative that Canada 
that is having significant success in disrupting the sale of counterfeit goods over the Internet and 
entering channels of commerce in Canada. PROJECT CHARGEBACK is administered by the Canad ian 
Anti-Fraud Centre (CAFC) which is overseen by the Royal Canadian Mounted Police.  
The crux of the initiative revolves around the worldwide zero tolerance counterfeit policy adopted by 
Credit Card Companies, like VISA. This policy requires Credit Card Is suing Banks to refund its 
Cardholders/victims who have unintentionally purchased and received counterfeit or pirated WT/TPR/M/389/Add.1  
 
- 128 - 
 
  merchandise to process a chargeback against the Seller if the Cardholder/victim can provide 
confirmation that the goods they received are n ot authentic. Once the product is confirmed to be 
inauthentic, the Credit Card Issuing Bank refunds 100% of the original charge to the 
Cardholder/victim. The initiative relies on close collaboration between Consumers, Law Enforcement, 
Credit Card Companies , Right holders and Banks.  
In terms of the general process, consumers file a complaint with their bank or the CAFC, providing 
information on their purchase. CAFC then confirms, typically with the help of Rights Holders, that 
the goods are not authentic, an d the information is relayed to the Card Holder 's Bank to assess, 
which then initiates a chargeback to the Seller 's merchant account. The programme  has been very 
successful in refunding customers and shutting down the merchant accounts of counterfeiters.  
Question  
Kindly provide information on the incentives given by the Canadian Government to its enterprises 
and institutions for promoting and encouraging technology transfer as mandated under Article 66.2 
of the TRIPS Agreement (technology transfer to LDCs) . 
Reply  
Pursuant to Article 66.2 of the TRIPS Agreement, Canada provides incentives to enterprises and 
institutions in its territory for the purpose of promoting and encouraging technology transfer to least -
developed country Members in order to enable them  to create a sound and viable technological base. 
These incentives are outlined in detail in Canada 's most recent annual report to the WTO Secretariat, 
which was submitted in October 2018 under document symbol IP/C/W/646/Add.4.  
3.3.7.3 Patents, paragraph 3 .289, pages 128 -129 
Question  
According to the secretariat report, Canadian patent regime is already compliant with many aspects 
of the PLT; however, to ratify the PLT, some changes are required to the Patent Act, for example, 
with respect to filing date requirements, claiming date priority, assignment, and representation . By 
when is the government of Canada planning on making the necessary amendments so needed?  
Reply  
The Budget Implementation Act II (Bill C -43), which introduced certain amendments t o the Patent 
Act to implement the Patent Law Treaty (PLT), received Royal Assent on 12 December 2014. The 
PLT-related amendments to the Patent Act introduced in Bill C -43 are not yet in force; they will come 
into force on a day that will be timed with fort hcoming new Patent Rules. The coming -into-force date 
of the new Patent Rules remains to be established. Canada previously provided an estimate that the 
new Patent Rules and relevant amendments to the Act may come into force in the fall of 2019.  
Paragraph 3 .290, page 129  
Question  
One of the proposed amendments to the patent law regime requires that once such changes are 
implemented, applicants will no longer be required to pay a filing fee for the purposes of establishing 
a filing date, and will be allowed, for the purposes of establishing a filing date, to submit their 
application in a language other than English or French, or to substitute a reference to another 
previously -filed application for part of their application. Wouldn 't such a relaxation cause overburden 
of frivolous patent filings?  
Reply  
Canada is not aware of an established link between the Patent Law Treaty (PLT) filing requirements 
and an increase in the number of applications that are abandoned soon after filing.  WT/TPR/M/389/Add.1  
 
- 129 - 
 
  Question  
Patents are granted for inventions or products /processes which possess something novel. Does the 
Canadian patent law provide for patentability of DNA recombinant technology?  
Reply  
DNA recombinant technology is patentable in Canada.  
Question  
Can a patent once register ed or granted be refused registration or can be cancelled and what is the 
procedure for the same?  
Reply  
Granted patents can be challenged through an ex parte  re-examination procedure before the Patent 
Office or through impeachment proceedings before the Federal Court of Canada.  
Question  
Does Canada provide compulsory licensing? And if yes, did Canada receive any applications for 
compulsory licenses which have been rejected? If yes, then how many and who were the domestic 
and foreign applicants respectively in this regard?  
Reply  
The Canadian Patent Act and the Competition Act provide for the possibility of authorized use of 
patented inventions in limited circums tances. These include: use by government (s.19), 
manufacturing for export under Canada 's Access to Medicine Regime (CAMR) and abuse of patent 
rights (s.65).  
Since the implementation of TRIPS, the following applications received in Canada alleging abuse of 
patent rights have been refused:  
Applicant  Filed  
Torpharm Inc. (domestic)  27 July 1998  
Brantford Chemicals Inc. (domestic)  17 September 1998  
Torpharm Inc. (domestic)  11 November 1998  
Brantford Chemicals Inc. (domestic)  18 May 1999  
Torpharm Inc. (domestic)  23 December 1999  
Mylan Pharmaceuticals ULC (Mylan Canada)  24 March 2015  
 
Paragraph 3.292, page 129  
Question  
The CETA contained new commitments on IP and pharmaceutical patents that introduced changes 
to existing Canadian law to allow for additional (sui generis) protection for eligible pharmaceutical 
patents. What is the term of protection for these pharmaceutical patents?  
Reply  
Under the Comprehensive Economic and Trade Agreement (CETA), Canada agreed to provide up to 
two years of sui gen eris protection for eligible pharmaceutical products following expiry of the 
applicable patent.  WT/TPR/M/389/Add.1  
 
- 130 - 
 
  Question  
What is the average time taken for the grant of a Patent by the Canadian Intellectual Property Office 
(CIPO)? What is the average time taken by the Can adian Regulatory bodies for granting of marketing 
approvals to a patented medicine?  
Reply  
As of April 2019, the average patent pendency from the date examination of the patent application 
is requested to the date the patent is granted is 31.60 months (2.63  years). Investments in reducing 
patent pendency in Canada have resulted in precipitous declines over the past several years. In 
fiscal year 2011/2012 the average patent pendency was 48.8 months (4.07 years).  
Health Canada is responsible for granting marke t approval for drugs in Canada. The approval takes 
the form of a Notice of Compliance. Data is not collected on which approved drugs are patented. 
However, Health Canada tracks the approval time for drugs containing new active substances. Many 
of these wou ld be considered a new drug and would typically be patented. In the 2018 -2019 fiscal 
year, the average time taken to approve these new drugs for human use was 345 days.  
In addition, comparative studies of new drug approvals are conducted by the Centre for Innovation 
in Regulatory Science and are available at the following link: http://www.cirsci.org/wp -
content/uploads/2018/05/CIRS -RD-Briefing -67-04052018_ FINAL.pdf . 
3.3.7.5 Trademarks, paragraph 3.305, pages 131 -132 
Question  
If registration for a Trademark is refused, a provision for appeal against the same decision lies before 
the Trademark Review and Adjudication Board and a second appeal lies against the decision of the 
Trademark Review and Adjudication Board, which is made before the court. We would request the 
authorities of Canada to shed some light on the issue that which competent court has the required 
jurisdiction to entertain the said a ppeal.  
Reply  
There is no "Trademark Review and Adjudication Board " in Canada, but rather a "Trademark 
Opposition Board ". The Board acts on behalf of the Registrar with respect to two types of 
proceedings, namely opposition and cancellation proceedings. Appeal of all decisions of the 
Registrar, including those taken on its behalf by the Board, lies to the Federal Court of Canada. A 
decision of the Federal Court may be appealed to the Federal Court of Appeal and subsequently to 
the Supreme Cou rt of Canada. The Supreme Court of Canada is the highest court of appeal in 
Canada.  
3.3.7.6 Geographical Indications, paragraph 3.311, pages 132 -133 
Question  
What is the time frame for which a geographical indication can be registered, and can it be renewe d 
over a period of time?  
Reply  
The Canadian Intellectual Property Office (CIPO) will issue receipt of request within 20 business days 
under normal circumstances upon receipt of a paper request including the fee. This process can be 
delayed for a number of reasons, such as if CIPO requires additional information to complete its 
review. Renewal of protected GIs in Canada is not required.  WT/TPR/M/389/Add.1  
 
- 131 - 
 
  3.3.7.9 Copyright, paragraph 3.321, page 134  
Question  
What is the scope of protection granted to Indian works in Canada as the term of protection of works 
in India is 60 years? Since, there is a difference in the requirements for protection of software 
imposed by the respective laws in the two countries, how will Canada extend protection to software 
registered in Ind ia? As works by the Indian Film Industries are well enjoyed in Canada, what level 
of protection are the Indian Cinematograph Films entitled to in Canada? Could Canada elaborate 
what are the steps initiated by Canada to augment the IPR applications filings in Canada in large 
number. Was there any subsidy or specific government scheme/help especially for the domestic 
applicant of Canada for utility model?  
Reply  
Generally, copyright protection in Canada for original literary, dramatic, musical, and artistic wo rks 
lasts for the life of the author plus 50 years, (this includes the protection of dramatic films). Under 
Canada 's Copyright Act, computer programs are protected as literary works. Consistent with multi -
lateral international copyright treaties (e.g., Ber ne Convention) Canada extends its general term of 
copyright protection to nationals of other corresponding treaty countries, including India.  
Canada does not within its intellectual property rights (IPR) regime provide for the protection or 
registration of  utility models. The Government of Canada does not directly subsidize IPR filings but 
certain fees for obtaining and maintaining a patent are reduced for small businesses and universities.  
Question  
Are computer tables and computer databases protected under the Copyright Regime in Canada?  
Reply  
Canada provides copyright protection for compilations of data. This protection applies to the work 
resulting from the selection or arrangement of the data.  
Question  
Is Registration voluntary or a mandat ory requirement for copyright protection under the Canadian 
statute? What is the remedy in case of infringement of copyright? Is only the right of passing off 
available to the copyright holder or can he too approach the court of law without being registere d 
as a copyright holder?  
Reply  
Registration is not a mandatory requirement for copyright protection in Canada. There are several 
equitable and monetary remedies available to copyright holders in Canada including injunctions and 
statutory damages. Normally,  all remedies are available without the copyright owner having 
registered their copyright. However, in the case of a defendant in an infringement action who was 
not aware and had no reasonable ground for suspecting that copyright subsisted in the work or o ther 
subject -matter in question, remedies are limited to injunctions unless the copyright has been 
registered. Note, as well, that registration also protects the interests of copyright assignees and 
licensees against claims of subsequent assignees and lice nsees.  
Question  
Does the Copyright Regime in Canada have the provision of fair dealing or fair use with respect to 
literary works? If yes, what is the percentage of fair dealing or fair use which is allowed under the 
Copyright Regime?  WT/TPR/M/389/Add.1  
 
- 132 - 
 
  Reply  
Canadian copyri ght includes a general fair dealing provision that functions as an exception to 
copyright infringement for uses related to parody, satire, review, criticism, private study, education, 
news reporting and research. This exception applies to works and other s ubject -matter generally, 
and there is no statutorily prescribed percentage that constitutes fair dealing. Rather, the fairness 
of the dealing is assessed as a defence to infringement on a case -by-case basis, with the amount of 
the dealing being one of six factors that are taken into consideration by courts.  
Paragraph 3.323, pages 134 -135 
Question  
Kindly provide more information about, "notice and notice " regime, including its enforcement and 
information on how many times it has been invoked so far. Kindly also furnish information on 
whether this regime has been successful in reducing the cases of online copyright infringement.  
Reply  
Notice and Notice is a regime set out in Canada 's Copyright Act that requires Internet 
intermediaries —such as Internet Service Providers (ISPs) —to forward on notices from copyright 
owners to Internet subscribers, alerting them that their Internet accounts have been l inked to 
alleged infringing activities, such as the illegal downloading of movies. When a copyright owner 
thinks that an Internet user might be infringing their copyright, they can send a notice of alleged 
infringement to the user 's ISP. Notice and Notice requires that the ISP forward (e.g. via email) the 
notice of alleged infringement to the user and then inform the copyright owner once this has been 
done.  
 
A copyright owner may decide to launch legal proceedings. Such proceedings may be launched 
regardle ss of whether the copyright owner has sent a notice under the regime. A court would then 
determine whether copyright infringement has in fact occurred. Under the Notice and Notice regime, 
ISPs must retain records of the identity of the subscribers who have  been forwarded notices for a 
period of six months, or longer (up to one year) in cases where a copyright owner decides to take 
legal action. If ordered to do so by a court, the ISP would release subscriber information to the 
copyright owner as part of a c opyright infringement lawsuit.  
Canada 's Notice and Notice regime codifies a pre -existing voluntary industry practice and was 
implemented as part of a larger copyright reform package in 2012 that included new rights and 
protections for rights holders in the  digital environment, and new remedies that targeted those who 
"enable " copyright infringement online. The volume of notices being sent under the regime is 
substantial. Rogers Communications, a major ISP in Canada, estimated in 2018 that Canadian ISPs 
were receiving over a million notices each month. A public opinion research initiative commissioned 
by the Government of Canada the same year indicated that 10% of Canadians who had consumed 
content online in the previous 3 months had once received a notice. I n terms of the effectiveness of 
the regime, the public opinion research showed that the notice had an impact on many recipients, 
either leading to increased awareness of copyright infringement (38%), taking steps to increase 
security of the home network an d ensure only those authorized could use it (27%), having discussion 
in their household about the alleged infringement (27%) or more directly stopping 
downloading/streaming from illegal sites (24%). (see Rogers ' testimony before a parliamentary 
committee i n 2011 (at 1115 -1120):  https://www.ourcommons.ca/DocumentViewer/en/40 -
3/CC32/meeting -19/evidence ) 
Canada has seen a number of copyright enforcement success stories in  recent years that speak to 
the effectiveness of the new "enabler " remedy. For example, in October 2015, six member 
companies of the Motion Picture Association of America obtained a court order in Canada, relying in 
part on the enabler remedy, to shut down  a BitTorrent site that was the primary source of illegal 
movie content on "Popcorn Time ". In June 2016, in the context of on -going litigation and relying in 
part on the "enabler " remedy, Bell, Rogers, and Vidéotron were able to obtain an injunction agains t 
providers of pre -loaded android boxes that are used to access pirated content – in March 2017, 
Canada 's Federal Court of Appeal upheld the injunction. Then, in July 2016, relying in part on the 
"enabler " remedy, a consortium of music labels, including So ny, Warner, and Universal, settled its WT/TPR/M/389/Add.1  
 
- 133 - 
 
  litigation against "IsoHunt " by obtaining a court "consent " order finding that the Internet service 
was liable for CAD 55 million in damages and CAD 10 million in punitive, exemplary, and aggravated 
damages.  
3.3.7.10 IP Enforcement, paragraph 3.330, page 136  
Question  
Whether Canadian border measures are applied to the goods in transit (not meant for the Canadian 
market)? If so, please provide information on seizures carried out on goods in transit in the years 
2017 and 2018.  
Reply  
Canada provides ex -officio authority in respect of suspected counterfeit and pirated goods upon 
import and export. Canadian border officials have the authority to stop and detain in -transit goods 
where they pose a threat to health, safety a nd security, such as contraband and illicit drugs. 
Additional information including related statistics can be found under Section 3.3.7.10 
(IP Enforcement) of the Secretariat Report.  
Question  
Do border measures apply to intellectual property rights other t han copyright and trademarks? If 
so, please provide details of such seizures for the year 2017 and 2018.  
Reply  
Border measures also apply to geographical indications.  
4 TRADE POLICIES BY SECTOR  
4.4 Services, 4.4.1.1 Overview, paragraph 4.171, page 184  
Ques tion 
Over 2016 and 2017, as part of its regular review of the federal framework, Finance Canada 
undertook a broad consultations process with stakeholders. Overall, stakeholders indicated that the 
federal framework is functioning well, but recommended targe ted amendments to ensure that it 
remains up to date with trends and emerging issues, including technological innovation and changes 
in the business models of financial institutions. Canada is requested to inform what are the changes 
required in the busines s models of financial institutions, as recommended by the stakeholders?  
Reply  
As part of consultations undertaken during the latest review, stakeholders noted that the sector is 
adapting to an evolving business environment, both at home and abroad and reco mmended a 
number of measures to ensure the framework can keep pace with changes in the business models 
of financial institutions. These include, for example, providing additional flexibility for life insurance 
companies to invest in infrastructure, providi ng greater flexibility for federally regulated financial 
institutions to undertake and leverage fintech activities, and maintaining high standards to ensure 
effective governance of financial institutions.  
Paragraph 4.173, page 184  
Question  
A second phase of measures introduced a number of targeted amendments in response to specific 
issues identified during the consultation process. This included establishing thresholds below which 
financial institutions can acquire a substantial investment o f certain entities without having to seek 
approval by the Superintendent of Financial Institutions. Canada is requested to provide the details WT/TPR/M/389/Add.1  
 
- 134 - 
 
  of thresholds below which financial institutions can acquire a substantial investment of certain 
entities without  having to seek approval by the Superintendent of Financial Institutions.  
Reply  
The federal financial institutions statutes allow financial institutions to acquire a substantial 
investment (e.g., more than 10% of the voting shares) in certain "permitted en tities". Subject to 
limited exceptions, financial institutions need to obtain the approval from the Superintendent of 
Financial Institutions before making substantial investments in certain categories of permitted 
entities, including entities engaged in fi nancial intermediation activities that create exposure to 
material market or credit risks, without involving broader policy considerations. This seeks to ensure 
that the substantial investment in the entity does not raise prudential concerns for the acquir ing 
financial institution. Prior to the recent amendments, the requirement to seek Superintendent 
approval did not take into account the materiality of the investment relative to the size of the 
acquiring financial institution. The amendments generally cre ated an exception from the requirement 
to obtain Superintendent approval for investments that are 'not material ' to the financial institution 
in the sense that the value of the investment is below a materiality threshold (equal to a fixed 
percentage of the  financial institution 's consolidated assets).  
Paragraph 4.178, pages 185 -186 
Question  
Financial services companies operating in Canada can benefit from various incentives available at 
the federal level and in some provinces and territories. Are these incentives available at the federal 
and provincial level and available only to domestic companies or to all companies - including foreign 
financial companies? Is there any discrimination in terms of eligibility and implementation of these 
incentives for fo reign companies as compared to the domestic companies? What are the incentives 
for Fintech companies?  
Reply  
The Canadian federal tax system provides a number of incentives to businesses that undertake 
specific activities or incur certain types of expenses.  These incentives are often available to all 
businesses, including foreign -owned businesses. For example, the Scientific Research and 
Experimental Development (SR&ED) tax incentive programme  provides broad -based support for all 
types of R&D performed in ev ery industrial sector in Canada.  
While there are no federal tax incentives specifically geared towards financial services firms, this 
sector has access to a number of tax incentives available to all businesses, such as SR&ED and the 
Accelerated Investment Incentive. More details on these and other federal tax incentives can be 
found on the Canada Revenue Agency website.  
We would note that certain tax incentives targeting small businesses have a domestic ownership 
requirement that determines eligibility, for  policy and administrative reasons. Because of their size, 
financial service companies operating in Canada, whether domestic or foreign -controlled, would 
typically not have access to these enhanced measures.  
In terms of non -tax incentives, domestic and for eign small and medium -sized enterprises (SMEs) 
and entrepreneurs can search the Innovation Canada digital platform for business 
(http://innovation.canada.ca/ ) to identify a variety of available federal, provinci al and territorial 
support programs. It is important to note that given the focus on information to support SMEs; this 
does not represent a comprehensive list. Such a comprehensive directory does not exist. Any 
restrictions for foreign vs. domestic compani es would likely be indicated on the programme 's 
websites, which can be accessed through the platform 's "Get the details " links. Most programs and 
services are sector -agnostic and are not directly targeted to specific sectors.  
Incentives for financial services companies in Quebec are available to domestic and foreign 
companies without discrimination. These incentives are not  specific to fintech companies.  
There are no incentives (tax or non -tax) at the federal level specifically targeted at fintech firms.  WT/TPR/M/389/Add.1  
 
- 135 - 
 
  4.4.1.2 Banking services, 4.4.1.2.1 Commercial banks, paragraph 4.182, page 186  
Question  
In Canada, banks can only incorpo rate at the federal level under the Bank Act. A foreign bank may 
operate through a subsidiary, a branch, or a representative office. The processes for incorporating 
a bank, or a subsidiary of a foreign bank, or establishing a foreign bank branch are simila r. They 
involve filing an application with the OSFI, with extensive information about the applicants and their 
plans for future conduct and the development of the business of the bank. Incorporation is subject 
to the approval of the Minister of Finance, an d the issuance of an Order to Commence and Carry on 
Business by the OSFI. Is the approval of the Minister of Finance on a case -by-case basis? What are 
the conditions on which the approval will depend? Are there any numerical quotas on such approvals 
given to banks by the Minister of Finance?  
Reply  
A competitive financial services sector has been a longstanding policy priority for the Government. 
The Government recognizes that Canadians benefit when financial service providers compete 
vigorously as this impr oves price, service, and product selection. A cornerstone of Canada 's strong 
and vibrant financial sector is the participation of a wide variety of financial institutions, large and 
small, domestic and foreign.  
Canada maintains a liberal, non -discriminator y, and transparent framework that welcomes foreign 
participation through flexible options to enter the Canadian market by establishing a subsidiary on 
equal footing with domestic firms or  branching if a foreign financial institution 's business plan 
contemplates a more targeted range of services. Federal financial institutions, including banks and 
insurance companies, operate under a non -discriminatory ownership regime. Both domestic and 
foreign investors have the same rights to own federal financial institutions.  
The Office of the Superintendent of Financial Institutions administers the application process for 
transactions requiring regulatory approval under the Bank Act and makes a recommendation to the 
Minister of Finance when transactions require M inisterial approval. The assessment of each 
application will depend on the specific facts and circumstances.  
The Bank Act stipulates that, before issuing letters patent to incorporate a bank, the Minister shall 
take into account all matters that the Minist er considers relevant to the application, including but 
not limited to the nature and sufficiency of the financial resources of the applicant as a source of 
continuing financial support for the bank, the soundness and feasibility of the bank 's business pla ns, 
and the business record and experience of the applicant.  
There are no quotas on the number of banks in Canada. In addition, there are no quotas on the 
number of non -bank financial institutions at either the federal or provincial and territorial level. As 
at end -2018, the Canadian banking sector comprised 35 domestic banks, 21 foreign -bank 
subsidiaries, 28 full service foreign -bank branches, 4 foreign -bank lending branches, and 23 foreign -
bank representative offices.  
Paragraph 4 -185, page 187  
Question  
Subsidiaries of foreign banks are incorporated under the Bank Act and are subject to the same 
regulatory and prudential requirements as domestic banks. Full -service and lending branches of 
foreign banks are subject to lighter regulatory and prudential requir ements but are subject to 
commensurate restrictions on the type of operations they can carry out. Canada is requested to 
inform the details of lighter regulatory and prudential requirements applicable to Full -service and 
lending branches of foreign banks?  
Reply  
From a general perspective, the Office of the Superintendent of Financial Institution 's (OSFI) 
supervisory approach is risk -based to reflect the nature, size, complexity and risk profile of an WT/TPR/M/389/Add.1  
 
- 136 - 
 
  institution. OSFI recognizes the importance of allowing f inancial institutions to compete and take 
reasonable risks, and it holds boards and senior management ultimately responsible for the viability 
of their institutions. In terms of specific requirements for Foreign Bank Branches (FBBs) operating 
in Canada, th e Guide to Foreign Bank Branching sets out the various prudential, regulatory and 
legislative criteria and information requirements relative to applications for the establishment, and 
commencement of business, of a FBB. FBBs are limited in terms of the typ es of deposits they can 
accept as liabilities as outlined in our guide to Foreign Bank Branching. From a more specific 
perspective, some regulatory capital requirements differ.  
FBBs are also subject to less stringent capital requirements when compared to a n incorporated bank 
in Canada. A lending branch is required to maintain assets on deposit equal to CAD 100,000. A full -
service branch is required to maintain assets on deposit equal to CAD 5 million or 5% of the liabilities 
of the Authorized Foreign Bank i n respect of its business in Canada, whichever is greater. OSFI 
expects a full -service branch to maintain a buffer above this amount to take into account the 
projected fluctuations in the FBB 's liabilities. The assets held on deposit must be of a type appr oved 
by the Superintendent and must be kept with a Canadian financial institution approved by the 
Superintendent. The Superintendent may also require an Authorized Foreign Bank to maintain 
additional assets as necessary to protect depositors and creditors.  Please refer to OSFI Guideline A -
10 Capital Equivalency Deposit for more information. Information is available here: http://www.osfi -
bsif.gc.ca/Eng/fi -if/rg-ro/gdn -ort/gl -ld/Pages/a10fbb.aspx . 
FBB's are also not subject to our liquidity adequacy requirements (LAR) guideline, while in corporated 
banks are indeed subject OSFI 's LAR guideline. Information is available here:  http://www.osfi -
bsif.gc.ca/Eng/fi -if/rg-ro/gdn -ort/gl -ld/Pages/LAR_index. aspx. 
Paragraph 4.189, page 188  
Question  
Domestic systemically important banks (D -SIBs) are subject to heightened regulatory requirements, 
including a 1% surcharge on their CET1. Canada is requested to inform which are the Domestic 
systemically important b anks (D -SIBs)? What are the criteria by which a bank can be declared as 
Domestic systemically important banks (D -SIBs)?  
Reply  
The six designated Domestic systemically important banks (D -SIBs) are the Bank of Montreal, Bank 
of Nova Scotia, Canadian Imperial Bank of Commerce, National Bank of Canada, Royal Bank of 
Canada and Toronto -Dominion Bank.  
Office of the Superintendent of Financial Institution 's (OSFI) assessment of domestic systemic 
importance for Canadian banks considers a range of indicators such as asset size, intra -financial 
claims and liabilities, and their roles in domestic financial markets and in financial infrastructures.  
See chapter 1 of CAR Guideline:  http://www.osfi -bsif.gc.ca/Eng/fi -if/rg-ro/gdn -ort/gl -
ld/Pages/CAR18_chpt1.aspx . 
4.4.2 Telecommunications, paragraph 4.221, page 194  
Question  
Recent developments in the telecommunications subsector include preparation for the gradual  
deployment of the 5G standard across Canada. Canada is requested to inform the progress towards 
the deployment of the 5G standard across Canada and by which time 5G is expected to be launched 
in Canada?  
Reply  
The Government of Canada responds to industry needs and creates the conditions to help private 
sector service providers thrive in their efforts to deliver the latest, high -quality services, including 
the deployment of 5G systems. Supporting the development of 5G networks is an important part of WT/TPR/M/389/Add.1  
 
- 137 - 
 
  the Go vernment of Canada 's telecommunication strategy. Canada 's 5G preparations are on pace 
with international markets and global technology developments.  
The Government is currently working on the release of spectrum bands that are expected to support 
the deployment of 5G services. In April 2019, Canada successfully concluded its auction of the 600 
MHz band, which a number of providers have already indicated will form part of their 5G network 
deployment. Information on the Government 's plans to support the development of next -generation 
telecommunications services can be found in the Spectrum Outlook 2018 to 2022, at:  
https://www.ic.gc.ca/eic/site/smt -gst.nsf/eng/sf11403.html . 
4.4.2.1  Framework, paragraph 4.228, page 196  
Question  
Canada also has in place seven Mutual Recognition Agreements (MRAs) for the telecommunications 
sector. These arrangements allow for the mutual acceptance of conformity assessment results of 
telecommunications equipment. Canada is requested to inform the conditions to sign MRA with 
Canada? Is the opportunity to sign such MRA available to other countries also?  
Reply  
Canada always welcomes negotiations related to Mutual Recognition Arrangements (MRA) for 
Conformit y Assessment of Telecommunication Equipment, which cover issues such as ensuring that 
the radio frequency emissions from the equipment are within prescribed limits and the equipment 
does not degrade the performance of the network to which it is connected. Canada has been using 
the APEC TEL MRA framework for the majority of its Mutual Recognition Arrangements for Conformity 
Assessment of Telecommunication Equipment, which is available at the following link:  
http://publications.apec.org/ -/media/APEC/Publications/1998/5/Mutual -Recognition -Arrangement -
for-Conformity -Assessment -of-Telecommunications -Equipment/98_tel_apecmra.pdf .  
As a starting point, we would suggest that India consult the articles of the APEC TEL MRA framework 
and evaluate the feasibility of having similar articles that could, potentially, be included in an 
arrangement.  
4.4.4 Tourism, 4.4.4.2 Legal and regulatory framework, paragraph 4.271, page 205  
Question  
Provincial and territorial governments also play an active role in the development and promotion of 
tourism at the sub -national level in every part of th e country. Canada is requested to inform the 
subsidies available to tourism sector at the federal, provincial and territorial governments level? Are 
these subsidies available to foreign companies also?  
Reply  
While the federal government does not provide su bsidies to the tourism sector, there are funding 
programs to which tourism organizations and businesses may apply on a per project basis. In 
particular, the federal government recently launched the Canadian Experiences Fund (CEF), which 
supports the creati on and enhancement of tourism services, facilities and experiences. 
Foreign -owned companies registered and carrying out operations in Canada may apply for funding 
under the CEF. Other Government of Canada programs provide funding that could also support 
tourism indirectly.  
Newfoundland and Labrador, Nova Scotia, Ontario, Quebec, Saskatchewan, Yukon, North West 
Territories, Prince Edward Island and Nunavut have indicated that they have funding programs 
dedicated to supporting the promotion of the tourism sec tor. These tourism funding programs are 
available to all organizations and businesses registered and operating in their respective jurisdiction, 
including foreign companies. For their part, New Brunswick, British Columbia and Alberta have 
indicated that th ey do not provide subsidies to the tourism sector. Manitoba has indicated that it has 
general programs for which tourism -related companies may be eligible; however, these are not 
specific to the tourism sector.  WT/TPR/M/389/Add.1  
 
- 138 - 
 
  4.4.4.3 Policy actions, paragraph 4.274, page  205 
Question  
Canada made improved market access commitments in the tourism sector in recent preferential 
trade agreements (e.g. through CETA and CPTPP). Canada is requested to inform the improvements 
made in commitments in the tourism sector in recent preferential trade agreements (e.g. through 
CETA and CPTPP)?  
Reply  
Canada has taken improved commitments by lifting the following requirements in its recent 
preferential trade agreements (i.e. CETA and CPTPP):  Mode 4 - Sale of alcoholic beverages (CPC 
641-643): Citizenship (only CETA) and residency requirement in Manitoba;  Mode 3 - Purchase of 
recreational property (CPC 641 -643): Requirement for non -residents to pay a 20% land transfer tax 
in Ontario; and  Mode 3 - Travel agencies (CPC 7471): Re quirement to have at least one of the 
partners in a partnership or one of the directors of a corporation to be ordinarily resident in the 
province in British Columbia. Removing these requirements was part of a negotiated outcome. 
Canada considers that any improvement in the domestic regime is expected to improve services 
trade.  
4.4.5 E -commerce, paragraph 4.276, page 206  
Question  
Retail e -commerce sales, from both store and non -store retailers, rose 14.7% from 2017 to 
CAD 18.0 billion in 2018. The e-commerce market is, however, likely much larger, as this figure 
does not include the on -line purchases made by consumers from retailers located outside of Canada. 
On-line purchases of goods by consumers from foreign -located retailers are embedded in Stat istics 
Canada 's goods import data series. In 2015, the value of all postal imports, which includes imports 
of on-line purchases, was estimated to be CAD 1.8 billion. Canada is requested to inform about the 
mechanism and method it applies to capture e -comme rce trade data? What is the FDI policy 
pertaining to e -commerce in Canada?  
Reply  
The Secretariat Report references retail electronic commerce (e -commerce) statistics when reporting 
on Canada 's e-commerce trade. These statistics are based on Statistics Canada 's Monthly Retail 
Trade Survey (MRTS), which measures online retail sales by Canadian -based retailers at the national 
level. These figures include the electronic sales of 'pure-play' Internet retailers as well as 'brick and 
mortar ' retaile rs. The MRTS measure of online retail sales is an estimate of the sales made online 
by Canadian retailers, whether to domestic or foreign consumers. On -line purchases of goods by 
Canadian consumers from foreign located retailers are embedded in Statistics Canada 's goods import 
data series. The purchase of digital products/services by Canadian consumers from foreign retailers 
is not fully captured within Statistics Canada 's service imports data. Statistics Canada has identified 
this as an area for future dev elopment.  
Canada 's foreign investment policy does not differentiate e -commerce from other economic 
activities, given that many different sectors and industries engage in e -commerce. Foreign 
investment, whether in an online platform or 'brick and mortar ' business, is covered by the 
Investment Canada Act (ICA), as well as applicable bilateral Foreign Investment Promotion and 
Protection Agreements (FIPAs) and Free Trade Agreements (FTAs) that have provisions or dedicated 
chapters on investment. Conditions or r estrictions may also apply for specific sectors, such as 
broadcasting, or cultural activities, which may affect e -commerce -related investments.  WT/TPR/M/389/Add.1  
 
- 139 - 
 
  Report by Canada – WT/TPR/G/389  
3 TRADE POLICY DEVELOPMENTS 2015 -2019  
3.5.5 The Food and Agriculture Organizatio n of the United Nations (FAO) and the Inter -
American Institute for Cooperation on Agriculture (IICA), page 15  
Question  
Canada provides contributions to the FAO and to the IICA to fund projects that help developing 
countries adopt science -based approaches t o regulate agri -food trade and for building countries ' 
capacities to adopt and comply with standards agreed to at the WTO. Canada continues to advocate 
that these institutions help countries comply with WTO standards and build their capacities to be 
strong er participants in WTO discussions. What are the exact steps taken by Canada, can it provide 
the details on how it regulates agri -food trade?  
Reply  
Canada 's sanitary and phytosanitary (SPS) regulatory system safeguards the health of Canadians 
and Canada 's plant and animal resource base while facilitating market access for food, plants, and 
animals.  
Canada bases its SPS measures on scientific principles and relevant international standards, 
guidelines, and recommendations of international standard s etting bodies. The Canadian Food 
Inspection Agency sets measures for plant and animal health, as well as, develops and delivers 
inspection services for food safety, plant and animal health. Health Canada sets measures and 
conducts risk assessment for food safety, registers pesticides and determines maximum residue 
limits, and evaluates safety of veterinary drugs used in food producing animals.  
Agriculture and Agri -Food Canada improves and maintains market access for agriculture and agri -
food products and pr omotes an innovative, competitive, and resilient agriculture and agri -food 
sector. Global Affairs Canada improves and maintains market access for Canadian businesses.  
Question  
What is the nature of capacity -building activities which Canada undertakes with IICA and FAO, can 
the list be provided?  
Reply  
For Canada and agri -food trade the importance of the Food and Agriculture Organisation (FAO) lies 
in its normative work and standard setting functions. The FAO houses the Codex Alimentarius 
Commission (Codex) a nd the International Plant Protection Convention (IPPC). Canada provides 
voluntary contributions to the FAO to support the provision of scientific advice to Codex and to the 
IPPC to enable these organisations to develop impartial analysis and guidance on s cience -based 
approaches to regulating agri -food commodities and to build developing countries ' capacities to 
benefit from these science -based approaches.  
The Inter -American Institute for Cooperation on Agriculture (IICA) is a specialized agency of the 
Organization of American States (OAS) with 34 member States in the Americas providing technical 
assistance and delivery of development projects in an IICA member state and support for 
"hemispheric " goals concerning agriculture. Canada has provided voluntary co ntributions to IICA to 
support technical projects on standards for food safety, and regulatory practices related to 
biotechnology, to combat animal pests and disease, use new tools like electronic phytosanitary 
certificates (ePhytos) to facilitate trade, a dapt and use biotechnologies, and meet standards on 
pesticide residues.  
In 2018, Canada provided voluntary funding to 16 separate FAO projects. Two of these projects 
concerned agri -food trade:  
• Supporting the joint FAO/WHO scientific advice programme : the J oint FAO/WHO Meeting 
on Pesticide Residues (JMPR), the Joint FAO/WHO Expert Meetings on Microbiological Risk WT/TPR/M/389/Add.1  
 
- 140 - 
 
  Assessment (JEMRA), and the Joint FAO/WHO Expert Meetings on Nutrition (JEMNU). This 
funding allowed these bodies to provide additional scientific advice to the Codex 
Alimentarius Commission on pesticides, microbiological risks in food, and nutrition.  
• Risk-based Genetically Modified (GM) food safety assessment and management: FAO GM 
Foods Platform community meeting. This initiative brought together a  wide number of 
countries to share information on their assessments of genetically modified foods and 
feeds based on guidance provided by the Codex Alimentarius.  
In addition, in 2018 Canada provided voluntary funding to the IICA to fund two projects relate d to 
agri-food trade:  
• Workshop to increase sanitary and phytosanitary (SPS) risk assessment capacities of 
countries in the Americas (zoning and compartmentalization following outbreak of an 
animal disease). This initiative convened countries from the Caribbean, Latin America, and 
North America to share technical approaches to contain and combat outbreaks of animal 
disease such as Highly Pathogenic Avian Influenza.  
• ePhyto: workshop to support the understanding and challenges towards the 
implementation o f an electronic system for the provision of phytosanitary certificates. 
Common approaches to share phytosanitary certificates electronically will help all 
countries facilitate agri -food trade.  
Lists of capacity building activities including those with FAO and IICA are reported to WTO SPS 
Committee on an annual basis. Most recent capacity building activities were reported in 
G/SPS/GEN/1651 for calendar year 2017.  
Furthermore, additional information about capacity -building initiatives supported by Canada and 
implemented by the FAO could be found on the following website:  
https://w05.international.gc.ca/projectbrowser -banqueprojets/  
Question  
Does the Canadian 's undertake stakehold er consultations with trading interest countries? If yes, 
Canada is requested to provide details on any one such processes and procedures undertaken by it 
for consultations.  
Reply  
Canada has not undertaken consultations with stakeholders in other countries  concerning agri -food 
trade projects with the FAO and IICA.  
Question  
Are all the agro -chemical, active substances and heavy metals for which it notifies domestic 
deviations in terms of maximum residual limits - notified to the WTO 's SPS or TBT committees?  
Reply  
Consultation on all proposed Canadian pesticide maximum residue limits (MRLs), to replace or be 
added to the MRLs already established, is conducted via the Proposed Maximum Residue Limit 
(PMRL) public consultation document. A summary of the data used to support the proposed MRLs 
can be found either in the Appendix of the PMRL documents or in the Proposed Registration Decision 
(PRD) consultation documents, both of which are published on the Government of Canada 's website.  
To comply with Canada 's international trade obligations, consultation on the proposed MRLs is also 
conducted internationally by notifying the World Trade Organization, as coordinated by Canada 's 
Notification Authority and Enquiry Point.  
Similarly, Canada notifies all proposed modif ications to maximum limits for heavy metals to the 
World Trade Organization as per our international transparency obligations.  WT/TPR/M/389/Add.1  
 
- 141 - 
 
  Question  
Can the maximum residual limits (MRLs) fixed by Canada, based on the "risk assessment " dossier 
carried out by Canadian s cientists may be made available to the public through a website or provided 
on a restricted platform with access to WTO members?  
Reply  
All data which forms the basis of the proposed pesticide maximum residue limits (PMRLs) is captured 
in the Appendix 1 of the PMRL public consultation documents or in the Proposed Registration Decision 
(PRD) public consultation documents, which may be accessed via the Government of Canada 
website.  
World Trade Organization Notifications put forward by Canada provide a link to the published PMRL 
documents where the supporting data is summarized or where a link to the accompanying PRD is 
provided.  
In the case of maximum levels for heavy metals, a summary of the scientific risk assessment is 
provided in a public consultation docum ent, which is provided via a link in the WTO Notification, and 
which also may be accessed via the Government of Canada website.  
Question  
Are the food safety measures undertaken by Canada with a view to accommodate the commercial 
interests of the WTO 's Memb ership?  
Reply  
The rights and obligations of the World Trade Organization (WTO) are the cornerstone of Canada 's 
international trade policy. Canada supports and advocates for a transparent and predictable trading 
environment. As per the rights and obligation s under the WTO Agreement on the Application of 
Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures, Canada takes sanitary and phytosanitary measures necessary 
for the protection of human, animal or plant life or health, that are based on scientific principles; 
are no mor e trade restrictive than necessary; and are not applied in a manner which would constitute 
a disguised restriction on trade.  
4 OTHER KEY GOVERNMENT INITIATIVES  
4.6 Sanitary and Phytosanitary Initiatives, pages 18 -19 
Questions  
Canada has undertaken significant changes during the review period to modernize its approach to 
the protection of human, animal, plant life and health. In this context, Canada is also modernizing 
its approach to maintain a robust approach to human, animal, and plant health and consumer 
protection, moving towards a more preventive and systems -based approach, which will allow 
regulated parties to more readily adapt to emerging risks and global and scientific trends. Canada 
is aiming to be more client focused, investing in digital tools, to make accessing information easier 
by offering industry electronic services and information to comply with regulations, while still 
upholding strong sanitary and phytosanitary measures. Canada is requested clarify Table 1, which 
indicat es the changes in active substances for the period 2013 to 2019, through channels like 
proposals/amendments/adoption in heavy metal, maximum residual limits and food additives.  
A. Can Canada clarify as on the WTO compliance of all the domestic food safety mea sures 
adopted ; are they SPS Agreement compliant?  
 
B. As the application of MFN applied tariff beyond the bound rates is considered restrictive and 
violative of WTO rules. Likewise, the non -tariff measures (TBT and SPS) are considered to 
be 'restrictive ' if found to be beyond the internationally set standard.  In this context, India 
would seek the Canadian to answer the following questions.  
  WT/TPR/M/389/Add.1  
 
- 142 - 
 
  C. Canada has altered the maximum residual limits for 201 active chemical 
substances/ingredients and the use of two heavy metals.  
 
• Heavy metals like arsenic and lead in bever ages and fruit juice, fruit nectar, ready -to-serve 
beverages, and water in sealed containers. The agricultural products like cherries, ginseng 
roots, honey, hops (dried), milk & milk fat, sorghum, bananas, sweet corn kernels, tuberous, 
corm vegetables, whe at and animal products. The exporters of these products from India 
could be faced with stricter norms if these measures are not as per the SPS Agreement.  
 
• Are these notifications of adoption/amendment revising the MRLs based on preventive and 
systems -based approach?  
 
I. Were these changes made under the 286 notifications, from 2013 to 2019?  
II. Why this should not be considered to the use of the precautionary principle, if yes it could 
be only of temporary nature and should be subject to review withi n a reasonable period - as 
per Art icle 5.7 of SPS agreement.  
If Canada complies with regulations, while still upholding strong sanitary and phytosanitary measure, 
therefore, Canada is requested to provide the food safety -related 'risk assessment dossiers ' based 
on which deviation in 201 active chemical substances and the two heavy metals discussed above.  
Reply  
Response to A:  
All proposed Canadian pesticide maximum residue limits (MRLs), whether new or to replace already 
established MRLs, are set only after an extensive review of scientific information and a thorough risk 
assessment confirms that there are no health concerns to any segment of the Canadian population, 
when all possible food sources are eaten every day, over a lifetime. This is consistent with the 
framework upon which the SPS Agreement is based. Similarly, all proposed modifications to food 
additives and maximum levels for heavy metals are only made following a thorough scientific safety 
assessment and appropriate engagement with international s takeholders, via the established WTO 
notification process.  
Response to B and C:  
All proposed Canadian pesticide MRLs, whether new or to replace already established MRLs, are set 
only after an extensive review of scientific information and a thorough risk a ssessment confirms that 
there are no health concerns to any segment of the Canadian population. Similarly, all proposed 
modifications to maximum levels for heavy metals are only made following a thorough scientific 
safety assessment.  
In those cases where s everal Proposed Maximum Residue Limit (PMRLs) for pesticides for the same 
active ingredient are published on Health Canada 's website, these PMRLs were to consult on 
proposed MRLs for new crops/crop groups. In those cases where the MRLs were proposed to replace 
currently established MRLs, these were clearly identified in the footnotes to Table 1 of the PMRL 
public consultation documents, with the supporting data captured in Appendix 1. The same applies 
for all pesticide active ingredients list ed in Tables 1 and 2 of India 's comments/questions.  
In each PMRL document the international situation and trade implications are addressed, including 
differences, if any, with Codex MRLs. Proposed Canadian MRLs may vary from those adopted by 
Codex for a nu mber of reasons, including differences in pesticide use patterns and the locations of 
the crop field trials included as part of the residue chemistry data. Moreover, Codex establishes 
chemical/commodity MRLs based upon supporting residue trial data which r eflect the different use 
patterns that are registered/approved in various member countries, to reflect specific needs in terms 
of the nature/scope of pests and varying pest pressures. Therefore, Codex MRLs are set at levels 
high enough to accommodate the u se pattern generating the highest residues in the supporting 
trials.  WT/TPR/M/389/Add.1  
 
- 143 - 
 
  All data which form the basis of the proposed Canadian pesticide MRLs are captured in the 
Appendix  1 of the PMRL consultation documents or in the Proposed Registration Decision 
consultati on documents.  
To comply with Canada 's international trade obligations, consultation on the proposed MRLs is also 
conducted internationally by notifying the World Trade Organization, as coordinated by Canada 's 
Notification Authority and Enquiry Point.  
Similarly, Canada notifies all proposed modifications to maximum limits for heavy metals to the 
World Trade Organization as per our international transparency obligations.  
Questions  
Canada has undertaken significant changes during the review period to mode rnize its approach to 
the protection of human, animal, plant life and health. In this context, Canada is also modernizing 
its approach to maintain a robust approach to human, animal, and plant health and consumer 
protection, moving towards a more preventiv e and systems -based approach, which will allow 
regulated parties to more readily adapt to emerging risks and global and scientific trends. Canada 
is aiming to be more client focused, investing in digital tools, to make accessing information easier 
by offer ing industry electronic services and information to comply with regulations, while still 
upholding strong sanitary and phytosanitary measures. The regulations of food safety concerns have 
become more pronounced for industrial countries with higher per -capita income and higher 
technological capacities. However, frequent changes in the mandatory regulations have resulted in 
multiple concerns for agricultural trading countries. Various studies indicate that the tariff equivalent 
impact of the regulation is pri marily depended on the nature of mandatory requirement (stringency) 
- it has an additional per -unit cost to the tune of 5% to 15%. The repeated changes can also lead 
to asymmetry in information for the small exporters thus resulting in refusal and rejectio ns of goods.  
A. Given the background, Canada is requested to provide an explanation for repeated 
modifications of the MRLs for single active ingredient.  
 
B. India requests the necessity of the repeated modifications made in 75 active ingredients.  
  
a. Are all these mandatory MRL amendments as per internationally harmonised standards 
(Codex, IPPC or OIA)?  
 
b. Can the Canadian provide the details of the deviation from international standards? In 
how many of these cases did Canada use the following route 1) scientifi c evidence; 
2) use scientific evidence of other members; 3) use of the domestic risk assessment 
dossier (other country), etc.  
 
c. If the risk assessment dossier is used, the transparency requirement would mandate its 
public availability.  
India on behalf of it s agricultural exporters ' would request Canada to provide answers to the 
questions mentioned above.  
Reply  
All proposed Canadian pesticide maximum residue limits (MRLs), whether new or to replace already 
established MRLs, are set only after an extensive rev iew of scientific information and a thorough risk 
assessment confirms that there are no health concerns to any segment of the Canadian population.  
In those cases where several Proposed Maximum Residue Limit (PMRLs), for the same active 
ingredient, are publ ished on Health Canada 's website (for example, for abamectin, 9 PMRLs have 
been published since 2009), these PMRLs were to consult on proposed MRLs for new crops/crop 
groups. In those cases where the MRLs were proposed to replace currently established MRLs  (for 
example to replace individual MRLs with crop group MRLs, in turn encompassing a greater number 
of minor crops), these were clearly identified in the footnotes to Table 1 of the PMRL public 
consultation documents, with the supporting data captured in Appendix 1. The same applies for all 
pesticide active ingredients listed in Tables 1 and 2 of India 's comments/questions.  WT/TPR/M/389/Add.1  
 
- 144 - 
 
  In each PMRL document the international situation and trade implications are addressed, including 
differences, if any, with Codex MRLs . Proposed Canadian MRLs may vary from those adopted by 
Codex for a number of reasons, including differences in pesticide use patterns and the locations of 
the crop field trials included as part of the residue chemistry data. Moreover, Codex establishes 
chemical/commodity MRLs based upon supporting residue trial data which reflect the different use 
patterns that are registered/approved in various member countries, to reflect specific needs in terms 
of the nature/scope of pests and varying pest pressures. Th erefore, Codex MRLs are set at levels 
high enough to accommodate the use pattern generating the highest residues in the supporting 
trials.  
As noted in previous responses, all data which form the basis of the proposed Canadian pesticide 
MRLs are captured in  the Appendix 1 of the PMRL consultation documents or in the Proposed 
Registration Decision consultation documents.  
General Questions  - TPR 2015  
In the previous TPR of Canada in the year 2015, a satisfactory answer was not received; therefore, 
the government of Canada is requested to comment on the enabling clause, which constitutes the 
legal basis for GSP/GPT schemes. This clause envisages that such preferences have to be granted 
via generalised and non -discriminative way. Linking the benefits, to non-trade issues such as labour 
or environment standards, induces elimination of discrimination. Would Canada explain the 
justification for linking GPT scheme to non -trade issues?  
Reply  
Canada 's two unilateral preferential tariff regimes, the Least Develop ed Country Tariff (LDCT) and 
the General Preferential Tariff (GPT), are consistent with the Enabling Clause. The LDCT is extended 
to countries that are included on the UN 's list of Least Developed Countries. The GPT is extended to 
developing countries. On 1 January 2015, Canada graduated countries from its GPT programme  if 
they met one of the following objective, trade -based criteria:  
1. countries classified for two consecutive years as high income or upper -middle income 
economies according to the latest World Bank income classifications; or  
2. countries that have a 1% or greater share of world exports for two consecutive years, 
according to  the latest World Trade Organization statistics.  
Non-trade issues such as labour or environment standards were not considered in this review.  
See http://canadagaze tte.gc.ca/rp -pr/p2/2013/2013 -10-09/html/sor -dors161 -eng.php  for more 
details.  
  WT/TPR/M/389/Add.1  
 
- 145 - 
 
  INDONESIA  
Report by the Secretariat – WT/TPR/S/389  
2 TRADE AND INVESTMENT REGIMES  
2.2 Trade Policy Formulation and Objectives, paragraph 2.9, page 31  
Question  
Canada is pursuing an inclusive approach to trade that seeks to ensure that more Canadians can 
take advantage of the opportunities that flow from trade and investment. This approach is informed 
by ongoing dialogue with a broad range of Canadians, to align trade poli cy priorities with the interests 
of all Canadians. In its trade agreements, Canada is building on past achievements by improving 
labour and environmental protectors, and pursuing new chapters, focused on cooperation and 
information -sharing, designed to imp rove the capacity and conditions of underrepresented groups, 
in particular women, owners of SMEs and Indigenous peoples, to access and benefit from the 
opportunities created by trade agreements. In general, how does the Canadian government define 
SME (smal l and medium -sized enterprises)? What factors or criteria does a business needs to meet 
to be categorized as SME? Is the size of a business ' asset and / or yearly profit among these factors/ 
criteria?  
Reply  
There is no clear consensus across the Government  of Canada on the definition of an SME.  
However, Statistics Canada often defines an SME as a business establishment with 1 –499 paid 
employees, more specifically:  
• A small business has 1 to 99 paid employees.  
• A medium -sized business has 100 to 499 paid employees.  
• A large business has 500 or more paid employees.  
Source: Statistics Canada, Survey on Financing and Growth of Small and Medium Enterprises, 2018 
data (released 2018): https:// www.ic.gc.ca/eic/site/061.nsf/eng/03087.html  
2.3.2.2 Unilateral preferential regime, paragraph 2.23, page 34  
Question  
Canada continues to have three main regimes providing unilateral preferences to developing and 
least-developing countries: the GPT, the Le ast Developed Country Tariff (LDCT), and the 
Commonwealth Caribbean  Country Tariff (CCCT). The three regimes are implemented through the 
Customs Tariff. There were no significant changes to the programmes since the last Review, except 
for some rules of ori gin amendments to the LDCT. As at January 2019, 119 countries or territories 
were benefitting from one or more regime. Is the reason for Canada to give a country or territory a 
unilateral preferential treatment strictly based on whether or not a country or  territory is listed under 
the GPT, LDCT, and CCCT regime? Would there be a possibility to consider granting preferential 
treatment based on other factors apart from these three mentioned regimes? Including by taking 
into consideration that under Indonesia  is categorized as developing country member under WTO 
covered agreements, including under Article 9 of the WTO Agreement on Safeguards?  
Reply  
Canada has three regimes that provide preferential tariff treatment to developing countries:  
1. The General Preferential Tariff (GPT), extended to developing countries;  
 WT/TPR/M/389/Add.1  
 
- 146 - 
 
  2. The Least Developed Country Tariff (LDCT), extended to countries listed on the United Nations ' 
list of least developed countries; and,  
 
3. The Commonwealth Caribbean Countries Tariff (CCCT), extend ed to Commonwealth 
Caribbean countries.  
The GPT and LDCT are consistent with the Enabling Clause, while Canada has a WTO waiver that 
covers the CCCT. Under the Enabling Clause, each preference -granting country has the ability to 
extend preferences to the c ountries it considers to be developing countries. On 1 January 2015, 
Canada applied objective economic criteria to graduate 72 higher -income and export -competitive 
countries from the GPT regime. This ensured that countries at similar levels of development were 
extended similar levels of preferential access to the Canadian market and refocussed the GPT regime 
on the countries most in need of this type of assistance.  
Paragraph 2.24, page 34  
Question  
Canada 's GPT (General Preferential Tariff) is its long-standing programme to help promote 
industrialization of developing countries through offering autonomous and non -reciprocal tariff 
preferences, modelled on UNCTAD 's Generalized System of Preferences (GSP). It has been 
implemented through approximately  ten-year cycles, through the Customs Tariff, with the last 
renewal commencing in July 2014. On 1 January 2015, Canada modernized the GPT by graduating 
72 higher -income or trade -competitive countries or territories. The GPT provides duty -free treatment 
to more than 80% of tariff lines, with exceptions mainly in the agricultural, apparel and footwear 
sectors. What is the empirical basis or factor behind categorizing Indonesia as no longer a developing 
country?  
Reply  
Canada graduated countries from its Genera l Preferential Tariff (GPT) programme  on 1 January  2015 
if they met one of the following criteria:  
1. countries classified for two consecutive years as high income or upper -middle income 
economies according to World Bank income classifications; or  
 
2. countries that had a 1% or greater share of world exports for two consecutive years, according 
to the World Trade Organization statistics.  
(See http://canadagazette.gc.ca/rp -pr/p2/2013/2013 -10-09/html/sor -dors161 -eng.php ). 
Indonesia met the second criterion as it had a share of world exports that was 1% or greater, 
according to WTO statistics.  
3 TRADE POLICIES AND PRACTICES BY MEASURE  
3.1 Measures  Directly Affecting Imports, 3.1.6.2 Safeguards  
Question  
As you might be aware, safeguard measures will not be applied to import from developing countries 
with share of import less than 3%. While on the other hand, Canada does not consider Indonesia as 
developing country. Hence, should the Canadian Tribunal decide to apply safeguard measures in the 
future, this condition will more likely harm Indonesia 's export products. Please explain the reason 
behind as to why Indonesia is not regarded as  developing country?  
Reply  
The final safeguard measure imposed on two steel products, effective 13 May 2019, do not apply to 
products originating in developing country members of the WTO benefiting from the General 
Preferential Tariff in Canada under the C ustoms Tariff. As Indonesia does not benefit from the WT/TPR/M/389/Add.1  
 
- 147 - 
 
  General Preferential Tariff under the Customs Tariff, Indonesia is not considered a developing 
country for the purposes of the final safeguard measure.  
3.2 Measures Directly Affecting Exports, 3.2.2 Export taxes, charges, and levies , 
Paragraph 3.118, page 89  
Question  
Please provide evidence and scientific research – issued or done by a credible and internationally 
recognized institution – explaining that the ban on the sale of cigarettes was tak en based on 
situations or conditions in which the Canadian public health is worsening because of smoking alone? " 
Reply  
The sale of cigarettes is not prohibited in Canada. The Tobacco and Vaping Products Act (TVPA) was 
enacted on 23 May 2018, to regulate th e manufacture, sale, labelling and promotion of tobacco 
products and vaping products sold in Canada. The purpose of the TVPA with respect to tobacco 
products is to provide a legal framework to respond to a national public health problem of substantial 
and pressing concern - tobacco use - and in particular to:  
• protect the health of Canadians in light of conclusive evidence implicating tobacco use in 
the incidence of numerous debilitating and fatal diseases;  
• protect young persons and others from inducements t o use tobacco products and the 
consequent dependence on them;  
• protect the health of young persons by restricting access to tobacco products;  
• prevent the public from being deceived or misled with respect to the health hazards of 
using tobacco products; and  
• enhance public awareness of the health hazards of using tobacco products.  
Tobacco use is the leading preventable cause of premature death and disease in Canada. It plays a 
role in causing over 40 diseases and other serious health outcomes, including cancer , respiratory 
ailments and heart disease, leading to immeasurable suffering for thousands of Canadians, as well 
as their friends and family. In 2012 alone, 45,000 Canadians died from smoking -related diseases. 
Tobacco use also adds a huge burden to the heal th care system. The health and economic costs 
associated with tobacco use in Canada were estimated to total CAD 16.2 billion in 2012, with direct 
health care costs of CAD 6.5 billion. Health Canada acknowledges the findings on the costs and 
harms of tobacc o use of:  
• the Conference Board of Canada (The Costs of Tobacco Use in Canada, 2012 - 
https://www.conferenceboard.ca/temp/353b1f52 -36e8-4e6a-90d1-
adcdd3b50fdb/9185_Costs -Tobacco -Use_RPT.pdf ); 
• the Canadian Centre for Substance Use (Canadian Substance Use Costs and Harms - 
https://www.ccsa.ca/Resource%20Library/CSUCH -Canadian -Substance -Use-Costs -Harms -
Report -2018-en.pdf ); 
• the Bloomberg Philanthropies (Task Force o n Fiscal Policy for Health - 
https://www.bloomberg.org/program/public -health/task -force-fiscal-policy -
health/#overview ). 
3.2.4 Export support and  promotion, paragraph 3.127, page 90  and Table 3.19, page 91  
Question  
Please provide further information on the current status of implementation of the Going Global 
Innovation (GGI) Programme? How successful is the GGI Programme?  WT/TPR/M/389/Add.1  
 
- 148 - 
 
  Reply  
The programme  finances costs associated with establishing new research and development (R&D) 
partnerships with targeted foreign partners, funding up to 75% of eligible costs to a maximum of 
CAD 75,000 for any approved contribution or grant. The Going Global In novation (GGI) programme 
has approved 288 projects since 2016/17 worth just over CAD 3.7 million in funding. Results of the 
approved projects include: 134 partnership agreements signed from projects completed between 
2016/17 and 2018/19 for a value in exce ss of CAD 51 million in R&D collaboration.  
Question  
The TCS organizes sector -specific, targeted trade missions to priority markets, and helps... , 
comprising four programme lines, i.e. CanExport, Global Opportunities for Associations (GOA), the 
Going Global Innovation (CGI) Initiative, and the Invest Canada -Community Initiatives (ICCI). The 
CanExport programme  provides direct financial assistance t o businesses registered in Canada to help 
them develop new international opportunities and markets. With reference to the relevant provisions 
of the SCM (i.e. Subsidies and Countervailing Measures Agreement, not "Supply Chain Management " 
as understood by t he Canadian delegation in our advanced written questions), please elaborate on 
how the Canadian government perceives such a subsidy as non -trade -distorting?  
Reply  
The CanExport programme  provides limited funding to small and medium -sized enterprises for 
activities such as market research and travel to trade fairs in order to develop new export markets. 
Given the pre -export focus of the programme , the support provided is non -trade distorti ng. 
4 TRADE POLICIES BY SECTOR  
4.3 Manufacturing, 4.3.4 Steel, paragraph  4.168, page 183   
Question  
The authorities are of the view that restrictions on global steel trade raise the risk of substantial 
trade diversion of foreign steel products into Canada. On 25 October 2018, the Government of 
Canada imposed provisional safeguard measures on seven categories of steel products, in response 
to an increase in imports that caused, or threatened to cause, serious injury to domestic producers. 
The provisional safe guards are in the form of TRQs whereby a 25% surtax applies to imports of 
subject goods that exceed a specified quantity threshold based on historical import volumes. The 
provisional safeguards will be in place for 200 days, pending an inquiry by the CITT into whether 
longer -lasting safeguards are necessary. Please elaborate on these provisional safeguards? After 
200 days following the imposition of the provisional safeguards on 25 October 2018, were the 
safeguards retained or implemented in a longer -lastin g manner? If so, for how much longer would 
the safeguards be in place? Is the tariff -rate subject to amendment as well?  
Reply  
Canada imposed 200 -day provisional global safeguard measures on 25 October 2018 on imports of 
seven streel products. Concurrently, the Canadian International Trade Tribunal (CITT) initiated a 
global safeguard investigation on imports of these products, to determine if final safeguards are 
warranted.  
The CITT issued its report and recommendations to the Government of Cana da on 3 April 2019. The 
CITT found that heavy plate and stainless steel wire from the subject countries is being imported in 
such quantities and under such conditions as to be a principal cause of a threat of serious injury to 
the domestic industry and rec ommended a remedy in the form of a tariff rate quota. The CITT found 
that imports of the other steel products under investigation have not increase in such quantities and 
under such conditions as to be a principal cause of a threat of serious injury to the  domestic industry.  
As recommended by the CITT, Canada imposed final global safeguard measures in the form of a 
tariff-rate quota on imports of heavy plate and stainless steel wire, effective 13 May. The final 
safeguards will be in place for a period of 3 -years, minus the 200 -day period during which the 
provisional measures applied. More information can be found in Canada 's notification to the WT/TPR/M/389/Add.1  
 
- 149 - 
 
  Committee on Safeguards (G/SG/N/8/CAN/3/Suppl.1; G/SG/N/10/CAN/1; 
G/SG/N/11/CAN/1/Suppl.1) . 
Question  
Could you plea se elaborate in detail about the CanExport programme , especially on its relevance to 
provisions in the Supply Chain Management?  
Reply  
Launched in January 2016, CanExport provides direct financial assistance to small and medium -sized 
businesses (SMEs) regis tered in Canada to help them develop new international opportunities and 
markets, especially high -growth emerging markets. Delivered by the Trade Commissioner Service 
(TCS) of Global Affairs Canada, in partnership with the National Research Council Industr ial Research 
Assistance Program (NRC -IRAP), CanExport provides financial support for a wide range of 
international marketing activities.  
For more information on CanExport, please visit our CanExport programme  website:  
https://www.international.gc.ca/trade -commerce/funding -finance ment/canexport/index.aspx?lang=eng . 
4 TRADE POLICIES BY SECTOR  
4.1 Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries, 4.1.1 Agriculture, 4.1.1.3 Domestic programmes, 
paragraph 4.14, pages 141 -142 
Question  
Could you clarify the relevance between the AgriMarketing programme  and the provisions in the 
Agreement of Agriculture?  
Reply  
Under Canada 's new national agricultural policy framework, the Canadian Agricultural Partnership, 
there is no change to the classification of AgriMarketing which was notified as Green Box in 
G/AG/N/CAN/114.  
As noted in G/AG/N/CAN/114, AgriMarketing supports efforts to expend and diversify markets, 
including promotional and market development activities.  
4.1.1.4 Export measures, paragraph 4.25, page 144  
Question  
Canada 's Uruguay Round export subsidy commitments originally covered 11 product categories. 
However, in compliance with the Nairobi Ministerial Decision on Export Competition, Canada formally 
eliminated export subsidy for wheat, coarse grains, oilseeds, vegetable oils, oilcakes,  and vegetables 
as of 19 December 2015. Moreover, lower volume limits for products on which export subsidies may 
continue to be applied (butter, skim milk powder, cheese, and other dairy products) came into effect 
on 1 January 2016. The remaining export su bsidies are to be eliminated by the end of 2020 as per 
footnote 4 of the Ministerial Decisions. With respect to Canada 's commitment to eliminate the 
remaining subsidies – on butter, skim milk powder, cheese, and other dairy products – by the end 
of 2020, w hat is the progress towards the realization of this commitment? How have the changes in 
production activities and commercial practices towards the realization of this commitment affect 
export – of butter, skim milk powder, cheese, and other dairy products – as we approach the year 
2020?  
Reply  
Canada has implemented the Nairobi Decision and will eliminate its export subsidies by the end of 
2020. Canada 's new modified export subsidy schedule was submitted to the WTO on 11 December 
2017.  WT/TPR/M/389/Add.1  
 
- 150 - 
 
  Dairy ingredients and products manufacturers, and further food processors have been made aware 
of the requirements of the Nairobi Decision and will adjust their business practices accordingly. 
However, Canada is not privy to the details of these private sector r elated business decisions. There 
have also been some shifts in the use of export subsidies on a product -by-product basis in 
anticipation of the elimination of the remaining export subsidies by the end of 2020. For example, 
Canada ceased using export subsid ies for skim milk powder in 2017.  
General Question  
The Canadian tobacco market and industry is highly regulated. During the period of this review, the 
Canadian government had been working on an ambitious tobacco plain packaging set of regulations 
that is e xpected to kick in by the year 2020. Additionally, Canadian provincial jurisdictions have 
started to implement a ban on menthol tobacco products – on top of the already -effective ban on 
flavoured tobacco products. In addition, at least for Indonesia, this ban entails a prohibition against 
our clove cigarettes. How effective are these prohibitions in changing consumer behaviour (to stop 
smoking); and in reducing the Canadian tobacco industry 's tactics to circumvent restriction on 
menthol? And compare the suc cess to their negative effect in enlarging the black market for 
cigarettes in Canada?  
Reply  
As a signatory to the Framework Convention on Tobacco Control (FCTC), Canada strives to meet its 
treaty obligations by developing measures that strengthen tobacco control efforts across the 
country. For instance, FCTC guidelines on articles 9 and 10 addres s the use of flavouring agents 
which help make tobacco products more attractive. Guidelines on Article 11 provide 
recommendations on developing effective packaging and labelling measures. As stated in the 
Foreword to the FCTC Guidelines for implementation,  the Guidelines aim "to reflect and promote the 
best practices and standards that governments would benefit from in the treaty implementation 
process ". They represent the consolidated views of Parties to the FCTC "on different aspects of 
implementation, th eir experiences and achievements and the challenges faced ". 
With respect to the black market for cigarettes, Canada has in place measures to counter contraband 
in tobacco products in Canada including funding for policing and border services initiatives at the 
national level. The Canadian tobacco industry has claimed that contraband levels will increase as a 
result of Plain and Standardized Appearance (PSA) measures. Such claims were also made in 2009, 
when Canada first introduced a schedule to restrict flav ours in cigarettes, little cigars and blunt 
wraps, and again in 2011, when Canada increased the size of its health warnings on cigarettes and 
little cigars to 75 % of the package. In both these cases, contraband tobacco levels did not increase 
after the ne w requirements came into force. Academic research on Canada 's contraband market 
suggests that contraband tobacco levels have decreased in recent years. Additionally, between 2010 
and 2016, sales of legal cigarettes have been declining at a very slow rate, along with the decline in 
smoking prevalence. This does not suggest that contraband tobacco is increasing its share of total 
cigarette consumption.  
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 WT/TPR/M/389/Add.1  
 
- 151 - 
 
  JAPAN  
Report by the Secretariat – WT/TPR/S/389  
2 TRADE AND INVESTMENT REGIMES  
2.4 Investment Regime, 2.4.1 Framework, paragraph 2.35, page 37  
Question  
According to the paragraph, Guidelines on the National Security Review of Investments was issued 
in 2016, and a 'non-exhaustive ' list of factors was set out, which will be considered by the 
Government during the assessment of national security risk. Please explain the reasons the list of 
factors was 'non-exhaustive ' with regard to the possibility that assessment standards become 
arbitrary. Also, please explain the situation of 3 years of practicing the Guideline (such as the number 
of investment rejected etc.).  
Reply  
The Guidelines are intended to provide investors with greater transparency, including with respect 
to factors that ma y give rise to a national security order.  The list of factors, however, are non -
exhaustive as the Guidelines cannot override the statute, which permits the Governor in Council to 
make an order with respect to an investment where such measures are advisable  to protect national 
security.  The statute does not define national security and orders are only issued pursuant to a 
transparent and procedurally fair review process. Orders and decisions are subject to judicial review 
under the Federal Courts Act. With r espect to practice of the past three years, please refer to the 
Investment Canada Act Annual Report:  (http://www.ic.gc.ca/eic/site/ica -lic.nsf/eng/h_lk81126.html ). 
3 TRADE POLICIES  AND PRACTICES BY MEASURES  
3.1 Measures Directly Affecting Imports, 3.1.4 Other charges affecting imports, 3.1.4.2 
Federal excise duties and taxes, paragraph 3.54, page 67 and  
3.3 Measures Affecting Production and Trade, 3.3.5 State trading, state -owned 
enterprises, and privatization, paragraph 3.218, page 111  
Question  
As mentioned in the secretariat report, alcohol is only sold by Provincial Liquor Control Authorities, 
and lower rates (or zero) apply to domestic brewers and to wine made entirely from Cana dian-grown 
agricultural input. Japan considers these measures are inconsistent with WTO agreement such as 
GATT article III (1),(2),(4), XVII(1) and XXIV(12), which will lead to the trade distorting measures. 
Therefore, Japan would like to know Canadian vie ws on the integrity of each article. Moreover, we 
noticed that Canada agreed with Australia and NZ in the side letter of CPTPP about non -
discriminatory cost applied to imported wine and distilled spirits and agreed with U.S. in the side 
letter of USMCA about the elimination of the measures by the Canadian province of British Columbia 
(BC) governing the sale of wine in grocery stores. Japan would like to know whether these measures 
apply to products of third countries as MFN t reatment.  
Reply  
British Columbia is moving forward with changes to measures relating to the sale of wine in grocery 
stores that will meet international trade obligations by 1 November 2019, as committed to in the 
Canada – United States – Mexico Agreement ( CUSMA) side letter.  
Mark-ups on beer do vary, but based on the brewer 's annual global production, not on origin, and 
the mark -ups are applied on a non -discriminatory basis.  
Mark-ups on all wine that enters the provincially -owned liquor distribution system are the same 
regardless of annual production volume of the producer or origin and are applied on a non -
discriminatory basis.  WT/TPR/M/389/Add.1  
 
- 152 - 
 
  Follow -up question  
Japan would like to know Canada 's view/answer on our previous question , whether it 's consistent 
with GATT Article III(1),(2),(4), XVII(1) and XXIV(12).  
Reply  
Given the ongoing WTO dispute settlement process on elements of the alcohol tax regimes in 
Canada, it would be inappropriate to comment further at this time.  
Follow -up question  
Japan was informed by some importers that, in some occasion, distilled alcohol mark -up rate was 
applied on Japanese Sake (categorized under wine) instead of mark -up rate for wine. While 
according to Canada 's response, mark -ups are applied in a non -discriminatory manner, however, 
there is another discrimination between domestic and imported alcoholic beverages. For example, 
different schedule of Excise and Duty are applied for domestic and imported (including the U.S.) 
products on the LCBO 's price calculator for wine: http://www.doingbusinesswithlcbo.com/tro/Forms -
Documents/Documents/Documents.shtml . Please provide the price calculators of all Provincial and 
Territorial liquor boards.  
Reply 
While there is no price calculator available for each provincial and territorial liquor board, the relevant 
information can be found on their websites.  
Table 3.16, pages 69 -70 
Follow -up question  
Japan understands Canada 's response to the U.S. ' question 6 on Paragraph Table 3.16. Please 
explain the details of "based off auditing mechanism ". 
Reply  
Under certain FTAs, Canada is periodically required to undertake an audit of the cost of service 
differential. Also, it further requires that it be com pleted by an independent recognized audit firm.  
The audit is then conducted in accordance with recognized accounting standards and will seek to 
identify those costs that are associated to the importation, transportation, handling, warehousing 
and marketing  of foreign products and that are incremental. The integrity of the methodology is 
ensured by the fact that the audits are conducted by this third -party.  
Follow -up question  
Are terms and conditions of the Liquor Board consistent with GATT Article 17 (1(b)) ? For example, 
Japan believes that the following 4 conditions/rules (1), (2), (3) and (4) are beyond commercial 
considerations and function as import barriers using the monopolistic status of Liquor Board in 
practice. Please explain these four conditions/r ules, considering Article 24(12) of the GATT as well.  
(1)  Minimum price offer obligation: The Supplier shall not sell any product(s) ordered to the LCBO 
at a price (exclusive of taxes, duties and freight) which is higher than the price at which the produc t, 
in the same quantity, is being sold by the Supplier to another government liquor board or 
government liquor purchasing body in Canada; nor shall it sell any product(s) to the LCBO upon 
terms and conditions respecting sale or delivery which are less adva ntageous than those offered to 
any other government liquor boards or government liquor purchasing bodies in Canada; nor shall it 
in any other way discriminate against the LCBO with respect to the sale of the product(s) ordered 
or any portion thereof.  
 WT/TPR/M/389/Add.1  
 
- 153 - 
 
  Should the Supplier breach this provision, it shall pay to the LCBO on demand an amount equal to 
the difference between any amount(s) paid by the LCBO to acquire the product(s) which is in excess 
of the amount(s) paid by any other government liquor board or go vernment purchasing body in 
Canada to acquire such product(s).   
http://www.doingbusinesswithlcbo.com/archive/tro/TermsAndC ondition/Purchase%20Order%20 -
Beverage%20Alcohol_Oct2015.pdf  
(2)  Agent of Record: The LCBO permits a Supplier to appoint only one Agent to represent a specific 
product or product line. This appointed Agent is referred to as the "Agent of Record " and represents 
that product in all its package sizes, forms (e.g. bottles, cans, etc.) and the entire brand line for the 
product across all LCBO sales channels. http://www.doingbusinesswithlcbo.com/tro/Forms -
Documents/ pmpp/files/assets/basic -html/page8.html  
3)  Importer has to find the final customer in advance for the private import: LCBO Private Order 
Form: This form must be fully completed and signed by the Customer or an authorized signing officer 
of the Customer (f or example, the authorized signing officer of a Society or Club, or the head of a 
Diplomatic Institution or other person authorized to sign on its behalf). 
http://www.doingbusinesswithlcbo.com/tro/downloads/Private -
Ordering/Private%20Ordering%20Guidelines.pdf . Importer cannot enter the Consignment 
programme  without the result of the private import. LCBO Consignment Program Guidelines 
http://www.doingbusinesswithlcbo.com/tro/Services/Private -Ordering/index.shtml  
(4) Minimum case order: Is there a minimum case order? The LCBO has a minimum order 
requirement of one case. There will, however, be instances where a supplier may require a higher 
minimum case order. Please be aware the LCBO has no control over a supplier 's minimum order 
requirements. https://www.lcbo.com/content/lcbo/en/corporate -pages/about/aboutourbusiness/private -
ordering.html  
Reply  
The four Liquor Control Board of Ontario (LCBO) requirements identified by Japan apply equally to 
both domestic and imported products and agents regardless of origin (Ontario, other Canadian 
provinces or other countries) and do not act as a barrier to imports. Furthermore, the four 
requirements identified are in line with customary business practice and are in accordance with 
purely commercial considerations, including price, inventory management and marketability.  
3.3.7 Intellectual Property Rights, 3.3.7.2 General institutional and regulatory framework, 
paragraph 3.281, page 127  
Question  
According to the report by the Secretariat, Madrid Protocol, Singapore Treaty, Nice Agreement and 
Patent Law Treaty are not entered into force for Canada. Could you provide us with the expected 
timeline for those treaties, in particular, Madrid Protocol and/ or Singapore Treaty in relation to 
para.2(a) and (c) of Article 18.7 of the CPTPP, to be effective?  
Reply  
Canada deposited its instruments of accession to the Madrid Protocol, Nice Agreement, and the 
Singapore Treaty with WIPO on 18 March 2019, and the Agr eements will enter into force in Canada 
on 17 June 2019. It is expected that Canada will implement the Patent Law Treaty (PLT) in the fall 
2019 with ratification of the PLT soon afterwards.  
Paragraph 3.283, page 127  
Question  
If a plaintiff company (patent owner) loses in NOC litigation, the plaintiff company has to compensate 
without limitation for losses defendant companies (generic companies) suffered during the period 
that they were kept off the market as a result of an unsuccessful or discontinued proce eding. Is it WT/TPR/M/389/Add.1  
 
- 154 - 
 
  inconsistent with CETA 's aiming of strengthening IPR enforcement, because patentees are jointly 
and severally liable for any damages?  
Reply  
Canada 's Patented Medicines (Notice of Compliance) Regulations are fully consistent with the 
Comprehensive Economic Trade Agreement (CETA) obligations in this issue area, which are focused 
on appeal rights for litigants.  
Paragraph 3.285, page 127 -128 
Question  
According to the report by the Secretariat, Canada has a 2.5 year transition period to meet the 
obligation of "life of the author plus 70 years " protection for copyright and related rights. Could 
Canada provide the approximate schedule for the amendment of  its domestic law to meet this 
obligation?  
Reply  
Canada 's 2.5 year transition period on the term of protection for works of authorship ( "life of the 
author plus 70 years ") begins upon entry into force of the Agreement, meaning that Canada will 
have 2.5 yea rs from the entry into force of the Canada -United States -Mexico Agreement (CUSMA) 
to implement this commitment.  
3.3.7.3 Patents, paragraph 3.292, page 129  
Question  
Is the limitation of patent term restoration (exception for "manufacture for export ", restri ctive time 
limits and eligibility criteria) inconsistent with the fundamental purpose of restoring a portion of the 
patent term lost due to the marketing approval process?  
Reply  
The conditions and limitations placed upon a Canadian Certificate of Supplemen tary Protection (CSP) 
are consistent with the purpose of recognizing and partly compensating for time spent in research 
and obtaining Canadian marketing approval.  
4 TRADE POLICES BY SECTOR  
4.4 Services, 4.4.3 Transport, 4.4.3.2 Maritime transport, paragrap h 4.262, page 203 
Question  
According to the paragraph, domestic maritime services are allowed to be operated by EU entities 
as a result of CETA. Did the liberalization increase in the freight transportation volume or traffic 
volume of EU vessels? If that i s the case, please provide detailed information on how much the 
volume increased.  
Reply  
Under the Comprehensive Economic and Trade Agreement (CETA), EU vessels are permitted to 
conduct feeder services between Halifax and Montreal, to undertake some dredging services, and to 
reposition empty containers on a non -revenue basis. (Of note, as a result of certain provisions in 
the Transportation Modernization Act, as of 10 December 2017, all foreign vessels are permitted to 
reposition owned, empty containe rs on a non -revenue basis.) Since the CETA provisions took effect 
in September 2017, there has not been a significant increase in EU vessel activity as a result of 
these provisions.  WT/TPR/M/389/Add.1  
 
- 155 - 
 
  4.4.4 Tourism, paragraph 4.274, page 205  
Question  
Canada made improved mar ket access commitments in the tourism sector in recent preferential 
trade agreements (e.g. through CETA and CPTPP). Canada is requested to inform the improvements 
made in commitments in the tourism sector in recent preferential trade agreements (e.g. throu gh 
CETA and CPTPP)?  
Reply  
Canada has taken improved commitments by lifting the following requirements in its recent 
preferential trade agreements (i.e. CETA and CPTPP):  Mode 4 - Sale of alcoholic beverages (CPC 
641-643): Citizenship (only CETA) and resid ency requirement in Manitoba;  Mode 3 - Purchase of 
recreational property (CPC 641 -643): Requirement for non -residents to pay a 20% land transfer tax 
in Ontario; and  Mode 3 - Travel agencies (CPC 7471): Requirement to have at least one of the 
partners i n a partnership or one of the directors of a corporation to be ordinarily resident in the 
province in British Columbia. Removing these requirements was part of a negotiated outcome. 
Canada considers that any improvement in the domestic regime is expected t o improve services 
trade.  
 
  WT/TPR/M/389/Add.1  
 
- 156 - 
 
  KOREA, REPUBLIC OF  
Report by the Secretariat – WT/TPR/S/389  
3 TRADE POLICIES AND PRACTICES BY MEASURE  
3.1 Measures Directly Affecting Imports, 3.1.6 Anti -dumping, countervailing, and 
safeguard measures, 3.1.6.1 Anti -dumping and countervailing measures, paragraph 3.86, 
page 80  
Question  
CBSA made its final determination on 22 January 2019 with regards to alleged injurious dumping of 
certain corrosion -resistant steel sheet from China, Chinese Taipei, India and South Korea, based on 
procedural flaws when it rejected POSCO 's submitted data, which should have been used to 
determine the appropriate level of ant i-dumping rate, but instead imposed the maximum rate under 
the "all other exporter 's rate 40% " category. This may constitute a violation of the WTO Agreement 
(GATT Article VI 1994) and Special Import Measures Act (SIMA) of Canada.  
Reply  
Anti-dumping and co untervailing duty investigations are conducted by the Canadian Border Services 
Agency (CBSA) and the Canadian International Trade Tribunal (CITT) in an independent, impartial 
and transparent manner, with due regard to WTO rules and obligations under the An ti-dumping 
Agreement and the Agreement on Subsidies and Countervailing Measures.  
Report by Canada – WT/TPR/G/389  
4 OTHER KEY GOVERNMENT INITIATIVES  
4.8 Changes to Canada 's Trade Remedy Regime, paragraph 4.20, page 19  
Question  
In 2018, the Canadian federal government introduced the Normal Value Review as part of the 
re-determination process, which, unlike previously, gives the CBSA considerable authority and 
discretion to target specific companies for a Normal Value Review without transparency on its 
selection process of exporters, conditions that would trigger the review and clarity on the review 
procedure itself. Since 2018, Korean companies, HUSTEEL CO.LTD and HYUNDAI, have been targets 
of the Normal Value Review, which, under the current state of a ffairs, may constitute a violation of 
the WTO Agreement.  
Previously, in the course of final determination, CBSA determined the normal value of the product 
and applied anti -dumping tariffs on the difference in amount of the normal value and export price, 
which took effect on the date of the final determination on a prospective basis. However, under the 
new Normal Value Review process, if exporters do not notify CBSA of changes in market conditions, 
CBSA has the authority to apply tariffs on a retroactive bas is and such significant modification in its 
process requires prior notification to the WTO (Article 18).  
Furthermore, subjectivity and lack of clarity on what would constitute as changes in market 
conditions that exporters need to foresee in order to provi de notification to CBSA, imposes significant 
and relentless burden on the exporters, not to mention CBSA 's discretionary authority in this regard.  
Reply  
The Canadian Border Services Agency (CBSA) began conducting normal value review proceedings 
in June 201 8. Normal value reviews are procedurally similar to re -investigations but are conducted 
with respect to a single exporter rather than all exporters. The CBSA applies these new 
administrative proceedings where circumstances warrant their use, including the following:  
• Where a significant volume of imports are sold by a single exporter and there is no need 
to conduct a re -investigation for all exporters;  WT/TPR/M/389/Add.1  
 
- 157 - 
 
  • Where there are new models and they are limited to a particular exporter or limited 
number of exporters;  
• Where there are a limited number of new exporters in the market who have requested to 
be part of the next re -investigation;  
• Where there are factors impacting export prices that are limited to a particular exporter 
or a limited number of exporters; and,  
• Where  representations are made in respect of a particular exporter or the issue raised 
impacts a limited number of exporters.  
Question  
Since 2016, Canada has taken steps to modernize its trade remedy legislation, the Special Import 
Measures Act. Changes include the introduction of two new proceedings administered by the Canada 
Border Services Agency: 1) scope proceedings, to determine if imported goods fall under the scope 
of an anti -dumping or countervailing measure; and, 2) anti -circumvention investigat ions, to extend 
anti-dumping and countervailing measures to additional products that are circumventing measures 
that are in force.  
The WTO Panel Report of DS482 (Canada -Welded Pipe) found that SIMA itself was contrary to the 
WTO Anti -dumping Agreement beca use it did not provide for the termination of an investigation in 
respect of an exporter with an insignificant margin of dumping. The Government of Canada 
acknowledged this point by amending the SIMA in June 2017 to bring Canadian anti -dumping laws 
into co mpliance with the findings of DS482.  
However, exporters who have been found with insignificant margin of dumping before the SIMA 
amendments continue to be subject to antidumping measures until now. This seems to be a breach 
of WTO obligations under Article  5.8 of the Anti -dumping Agreement.  
Reply  
On 25 January 2017, the Dispute Settlement Body (DSB) adopted recommendations and rulings in 
the dispute Canada – Anti-dumping Measures on Imports of Certain Carbon Steel Welded Pipe from 
the Separate Customs Terri tory of Taiwan, Penghu, Kinmen and Matsu (DS482). Canada informed 
the DSB in February 2017 that it intended to implement the DSB 's recommendations and rulings in 
this dispute.  
Subsequently, the Government of Canada amended the Special Import Measures Act (SIMA) in 
respect of exporters found to have a de minimis margin of dumping. As well, the Canada Border 
Services Agency and the Canadian International Trade Tribunal initiated reviews of their 
determinations and findings, pursuant to a request  by the Minister of Finance under section 76.1 of 
SIMA. This resulted in the termination of anti -dumping measures on two Chinese Taipei exporters 
found to have a de minimis margin of dumping.  
On 12 January 2018, Canada notified the DSB that following the l egislative amendments and 
amendments to the measure at issue, Canada considers that it has fully implemented the DSB 's 
recommendations and rulings in DS482.  
With respect to other exporters who were subject to trade remedy measures that pre -dated 
amendments  to SIMA, any review of such measures would similarly need to be undertaken pursuant 
to a request by the Minister of Finance under Section 76.1 of SIMA.  
General question  
The federal government decided to follow the Canadian International Trade Tribunal 's 
recommendation to impose final safeguards on 2 of the 7 steel product categories and the 
international community recognizes Canada for upholding international rules -based trade. However, 
the government did announce an intensive 30 –day consultation with d omestic industries in order to 
determine what further protections are required on the remaining 5 categories and did provide CBSA WT/TPR/M/389/Add.1  
 
- 158 - 
 
  the capacity to conduct export price determinations with greater flexibility. Any trade restrictions 
under WTO must continue t o abide by international rules and such protection measures, intended to 
protect the domestics industry, must not be taken as a mean to maximize tariff rates on exporters, 
which would undermine the fairness of the process. More clarity and explanations are  needed from 
the Canadian government on its plan to strengthen trade restrictions.  
Reply  
The findings and recommendations of the government -industry working group will be reviewed and 
further announcements will be made in due course. Any action taken as a result of the working group 
will be taken with due consideration for WTO rules and obligations.  
 
  WT/TPR/M/389/Add.1  
 
- 159 - 
 
  MALAYSIA  
Report by the Secretariat – WT/TPR/S/389  
3 TRADE POLICIES AND PRACTICES BY MEASURE  
3.3 Measures Affecting Production and Trade, 3.3.4 Competition p olicy and price controls, 
3.3.4.4 International cooperation, paragraph 3.206, pages 108 -109 
Question  
What is defined by "cooperation instruments "? What are the activities carried out under them?  
Reply  
Cooperation instruments are formal mechanisms to facilitate cooperation and coordination in 
cross-border enforcement matters and policy work. These instruments can take the form of binding 
state-to-state agreements or non -binding memoranda of understanding (MOU) or cooperation 
arrangements between compet ition authorities. Cooperation instruments provide a framework under 
which relationships and trust can be built and strengthened amongst competition authorities. There 
are many types of activities that can be carried out under the framework of cooperation instruments 
including cooperation on enforcement matters, sharing of technical expertise and training, and 
working together on advocacy and policy research. With respect to enforcement matters, such 
cooperation will occur on a spectrum and can range from i nformal to formal cooperation. Informally, 
we exchange public information, theories of harm and procedural information such as the timing of 
investigative steps, and we conduct meetings and staff exchanges. In contrast, formal cooperation 
can include mutua l legal assistance and the sharing of documents, data and confidential information.  
Question  
For countries which have no "cooperation instruments " with Canada, is there any history of 
cooperation with any of these countries, particularly in the health care  sector including medicines?  
Reply  
The Competition Bureau is still able to cooperate with countries with whom we do not have a 
cooperation instrument. In these situations, the Competition Bureau will seek assurances on the 
protection of confidential inform ation prior to sharing. For example, where confidential information 
is shared, outside of Mutual Legal Assistance Treaties, we often obtain waivers from the parties. Our 
Information Bulletin on the Communication of Confidential Information Under the Compet ition Act 
sets out sets out the approach of the Commissioner and the Bureau with respect to the 
communication of confidential information obtained in the course of the administration or 
enforcement of the Act and can be found here: https://www.competitionbureau.gc.ca/eic/site/cb -
bc.nsf/eng/03597.html  
In addition, for those countries where the Competition Bureau has no formal cooperation instrument 
but the nation(s) are OEC D members, Competition Bureau officials use the 2014 Recommendation 
of the OECD Council concerning International Co -operation on Competition Investigations and 
Proceedings. This recommendation provides helpful guidance, including on when circumstances 
justify notifications of competition investigations and proceedings and on the exchange of 
information in competition investigations or proceedings (including the use of confidentiality waivers, 
exchanging confidential information through "information gateways "). The OECD 's recommendation 
can be found here: www.oecd.org/daf/competition .  
Lastly, our cooperation on competition policy can be seen in the work we do at international fora 
such as the International Competition Network and the OECD. Through these fora and meetings, we 
share valuable best practices, build relationships and provide assistance to newer agencies 
developing their competition policies. For example, as part of its work at the O ECD, in November 
2018, the Competition Bureau provided a submission to the OECD Competition Committee on 
Excessive Pricing in Pharmaceuticals. Our submission highlights the fact that The Competition Act 
does not contain a prohibition against excessive pric ing. Consequently, the Bureau 's advocacy and 
enforcement work focuses on protecting the competitive process rather than enforcing a particular WT/TPR/M/389/Add.1  
 
- 160 - 
 
  market outcome. This approach ensures that the Bureau is not required to engage in price regulation, 
which is at odds with traditional Canadian competition law principles. The submission can be found 
here: https://www.competitionbureau.gc.ca/eic/site/cb -bc.nsf/eng/04426.html .  
Coope ration among authorities is critical to finding common approaches to tackle global 
anti-competitive conduct. Through the various tools we have in place, we can continually reap the 
benefits of working together with our global partners.  
3.3.4.5 Price controls, paragraphs 3.210 -3.211, page 109  
Question  
Could Canada define and elaborate on the term 'patent pertains '? How is a drug determined to be 
under the jurisdiction of the Board? For drugs with multiple patents, when are de -classified as 
patented medicines and removed from the jurisdiction? What are the challenges and achievements 
experienced?  
Reply  
The phrase "invention pertains to a medicine " is defined in s. 79 of the Patent Act as follows:  
(2) For the purposes of subsection (1) and se ctions 80 to 101, an invention pertains to a medicine 
if the invention is intended or capable of being used for medicine or for the preparation or production 
of medicine.  
A full analysis of the issue of whether a patent pertains to a medicine was given by the Federal Court 
of Appeal in ICN Pharmaceuticals Inc. v. Canada (Staff of the Patented Medicine Prices Review Board) 
(C.A.) (1997) 1 F.C. 32 (ICN), where the Court set out a three -part test to determine whether the 
PMPRB has jurisdiction over patents per taining to a medicine:  
• the PMPRB must determine that a party is a patentee of an invention;  
• the patentee 's invention must pertain to the medicine:  
(a) the pharmaceutical end product in question, must qualify as a medicine – the term "medicine " 
must be interpreted broadly, not narrowly;  
(b) there must be a rational connection or nexus between the invention described in the patent 
and the pharmaceutical end product, that is between the invention described in the patent 
and the medicine:  
 
i. one does not  have to, and ought not to, go beyond the face of a patent to establish the 
required nexus;  
ii. the nexus can be one of the "merest slender threads ". 
 
(c) the invention must be intended or capable of being used for medicine or for the preparation 
or production of medicine;  
(d) there is no requirement that the invention described in the patent actually be used for the 
medicine or for the preparation or production of the medicine; and  
the patentee must be selling the medicine in any market in Canada.  
The application of the second branch of the test, and in particular sub tests (b) and (c) under this 
branch, often involves issues of interpretation based on the facts of the specific situation.  
Medicines with multiple patents remain under the jurisdiction of the PMPRB until the expiry of the 
last-to-expire patent.  
Question  
Could Canada share the dynamics amongst PMPRB, Competition Bureau and other federal and 
provincial regulators in controlling the price of medicines?  WT/TPR/M/389/Add.1  
 
- 161 - 
 
  Reply  
PMPRB and the Bureau have separate mandates and the Bureau is not a price regulator. The Bureau 
administers and enforces the Competition Act. The Bureau targets conduct that contravenes the 
provisions of the Act and that may have the effect of increasing pharmaceutical prices.  Howe ver, as 
set out in the Bureau 's Intellectual Property Enforcement Guidelines (IPEGS), the Bureau will leave 
the determination of royalty rates to negotiations between parties or the courts. Absent a clear 
breach of a licensing commitment (e.g., demanding a  royalty exceeding an ex ante  commitment), 
the Bureau will not take enforcement action against a patentee solely based on the magnitude of 
the royalty that it charges.  
The Bureau has been active in investigating potential anticompetitive conduct in the pha rmaceutical 
industry including an inquiry into alleged anti -competitive conduct by Alcon Canada Inc, and Janssen 
as well as an investigation into alleged practices of Celgene, Pfizer, and Sanofi. The Competition 
Bureau published position statements with re spect to those inquiries/investigation which can be 
found here: https://www.competitionbureau.gc.ca/eic/site/cb -bc.nsf/eng/h_00173.html  
In Canada, the provinces do not regulate the prices of medicines, although they do set the 
reimbursement rates for provincial pharmaceutical insurance plans (where such plans are available).  
At the Federal level, the PMPRB oversees the ceiling (maximum) price of all patented medicines. 
Under the Patent Act, all patentees of patented medicines are required to file price information with 
the PMPRB twice a year during the life of the patent. The PMPRB reviews this price information and, 
following a public hearing, can issue legally binding orders directing the patentee to lower the 
maximum price of the medicine to a "non-excessive " ceiling level. The patentee can then charge 
whatever price it wants up to the ordered ceiling price. In order to assist patentees with pricing, the 
PMPRB also publishes non -binding and non -enforceable pricing Guidelines. The PMPRB also has a 
reporting man date and publishes a series of reports on pharmaceutical pricing trends in Canada to 
provide useful data to policy makers. The most recent PMPRB annual report can be found at : 
http:// www.pmprb -cepmb.gc.ca/en/reporting/annual -reports . The PMPRB in an independent quasi -
judicial tribunal and operates at arm 's length from Health Canada, the provinces, patentees, and 
other stakeholders. Orders of the PMPRB are reviewable in Federal Court.  
3.3.7 Intellectual property rights, 3.3.7.3 Patents, paragraph 3.292, page 129  
Question  
Appreciate if Canada could share what is the basis of refusal (if any) for the issuance of Certificate 
of Supplementary Protection (CSP)? Is the Drug Regulatory Authorit y (i.e. Health Canada) or the 
Patent Office responsible for the issuance of CSP?  
Reply  
The regulatory authority responsible for the issuance of Certificates of Supplementary Protection 
(CSPs) is Health Canada. Detailed information regarding Canada 's Certificates of Supplementary 
Protection can be found online in the "Guidance Document " on Certificates of Supplementary 
Protection on Health Canada 's website : (https://www.canada.ca/en/health -canada/services/drugs -
health -products/drug -products/applications -submissions/guidance -documents/r egister -
certificates/certificate -supplementary -protection -regulations.html  
3.3.7.10 IP Enforcement, paragraph 3.334, page 136  
Question  
Paragraph 3.334 states that the RCMP and the CBSA have a shared responsibility for securing the 
border. Their efforts are  complemented by the Canada/U.S. Integrated Border Enforcement Teams 
(IBETs), located along the length of the Canada/United States border. The RCMP 's Customs and 
Excise Program is geared towards enforcing laws within Canada and along the Canada/United Stat es 
border with respect to: the international movement of goods; the illicit manufacture, distribution or 
possession of contraband products; the illicit traffic of critical high technology and strategic goods, 
such as chemical, biological, radiological and nuclear components, and their delivery systems; and WT/TPR/M/389/Add.1  
 
- 162 - 
 
  regulations that impose permit controls on the international movement of commodities. Malaysia 
seeks clarification if Canada has imposed any licen ce/permit requirements under their country 
legislation and  guidelines: i. to import/export human remains, human tissues (including control 
blood and blood components; cell, tissue and organs; donor semen) , microorganisms and 
pathogenic substances (including the toxin), and biological goods. (ii) If Canada impose s such 
requirements, we seek details of the relevant government agency issuing this licen ce/permit. Are 
there any fees imposed on the issuance of licen ce/permits issued by this agency?  
Reply  
Please note that Canada has worked with the WTO Secretariat to correct the Secretariat Report as 
paragraph 3.334 should have read as follows: "The Royal Canadian Mounted Police (RCMP) has the 
authority to investigate criminal offenses under the Copyright A ct and trademark offences under the 
Criminal Code. The RCMP utilizes a prioritization process to ensure that major operational projects 
are focused on the highest priorities that pose the greatest threat to Canada 's political, economic, 
and social integrit y. The RCMP and the CBSA have a shared responsibility for securing the border. 
While the CBSA is responsible for border security and enforcement at Ports of Entry (POE), the RCMP 
is responsible for enforcement between POEs. The RCMP takes a layered approac h to border security: 
to prevent, detect and disrupt the greatest threats using all available resources, including technology 
and intelligence. This includes working with both domestic and international partners in an effort to 
maintain the security and in tegrity of Canada 's border. In some regions of Canada, the RCMP has 
established Integrated Border Enforcement Teams (IBETs), strategically located at the Canada/U.S. 
border. The IBETs primary mandate is to focus on criminal activity between the ports; that  is, 
identifying and investigating persons and organizations that are involved in criminal activities, and 
seizing goods used in connection with such activities that may threaten the economic integrity or 
national security of one or both countries. " 
The RC MP does not impose requirements related to import/export licensing or permits.  
Report by Canada – WT/TPR/G/389  
4 OTHER KEY GOVERNMENT INITIATIVES  
4.2 Intellectual Property (IP), paragraphs 4.8 -4.9, page 17  
Question  
Could Canada please share with us the relevant document/reference related to the establishment of 
minimum requirements for patent demand letters. Under what conditions are any actions taken on 
the patent demand letters? How will the patent demand letters be assessed for validity?  
Reply  
Sections 76.2 and 76.3 of the Patent Act address minimum requirements for demand letters. A 
person who receives a written demand that does not comply with the prescribed requirements, and 
any person who is aggrieved as a result of the receipt by another pe rson of such a written demand, 
may bring a proceeding in the Federal Court. The prescribed requirements will be established in 
forthcoming regulations. If an action is brought, the Federal Court will assess the letter against these 
requirements.  
Question  
Could Canada elaborate on the supplementary protection for patents and share what are the 
commitments in ensuring a balance between innovation and timely access to affordable drugs, as 
mentioned in the response in 2015 to Brazil and Hong Kong, China?  
Reply  
Information regarding Canada 's Certificate of Supplementary Protection (CSP) system can be found 
in paragraph 3.292 of the Secretariat Report.  WT/TPR/M/389/Add.1  
 
- 163 - 
 
  Further to the Secretariat Report, additional detailed information regarding Canada 's CSP system 
can be found online in the "Guidance Document " on Certificates of Supplementary Protection on 
Health Canada 's website : (https://www.canada.ca/en/health -canada/services/drugs -health -
products/drug -products/applications -submissions/guidance -documents/register -certificates/certifica te-
supplementary -protection -regulations.html ), and in the Regulatory Impact Analysis Statement 
(http://www.gazette.gc.ca/rp -pr/p1/2017/2017 -07-15/html/reg16 -eng.html ). 
 
 
  WT/TPR/M/389/Add.1  
 
- 164 - 
 
  MEXICO  
Report by the Secretariat – WT/TPR/S/389  
1 ECONOMIC ENVIRONMENT  
1.1 Main Features of the Economy, paragraph 1.15, pages 19 -20 
Question  
Can Canada explain what Gender -based Analysis Plus is?  
Reply  
Gender -based Analysis Plus (GBA+) is an analytical process used to assess how diverse groups of 
women, men and non -binary people may experience policies, programs and initiatives. A GBA is a 
binary gender analysis focused on the differential impact on men and women of programs, policies 
and services. The "plus" in GBA+ acknowledges that GBA goes beyond biological (sex) and 
socio-cultural (gender) differences. We all have multiple identity factors that intersect to make us 
who we are; GBA+ also considers man y other identity factors, like Indigenous heritage, age, race, 
ethnicity, sexual orientation, ability, education, language, geography, culture, socio -economic 
status, newcomer or immigrant status, and religion, given that men and women are not a 
homogenous  group. For more information please visit the "What is GBA+? " webpage developed by 
Women and Gender Equality Canada: https://cfc -swc.gc.ca/gba -acs/index -en.html  
GBA+ is the analytic tool used by C anada to help mainstream gender equality in our domestic and 
international policies, including trade policies. Canada has developed new tools, resources, and 
processes to guide the comprehensive GBA+ analysis of free trade agreement (FTA) chapters both 
during and after the completion of trade negotiations.  
2 TRADE AND INVESTMENT REGIMES  
2.4 Investment Regime, 2.4.1 Framework, paragraph 2.37, pages 37 -38 
Question  
Could Canada share the results of its 2018 consultations regarding its efforts to develop a more 
progressive and inclusive FIPA model?  
Reply  
Canada launched a public consultation process in August 2018 toward a modernized and inclusive 
model FIPA. The consultations sought ideas on how to update the treaty to reflect the innovations 
of Canada 's large Free Trade Agreements, while also seeking input on incorporating provisions to 
ensure that all Canadians, including women, Indigenous peoples and small and medium -sized 
enterprise owners, benefit more from Canada 's investment agreements. Res ults of the consultations 
will be published in due course.  
3 TRADE POLICIES AND PRACTICES BY MEASURE  
3.1 Measures Directly Affecting Imports , 3.1.1 Customs procedures, valuation, and 
requirements , paragraph 3.4, page 44  
Question  
When does Canada intend to complete implementation of the eManifest Advance Commercial 
Information programme  with respect to importers?  
Reply  
The Canadian Border Services Agency (CBSA) has determined that Advanced Trade Data (ATD) from 
importers as part of the eManifest project will not be implemented.  WT/TPR/M/389/Add.1  
 
- 165 - 
 
  3.1.1.1 Trade facilitation, paragraph 3.13, page 50  
Question  
How many border trade advisory committees does Canada currently have? What are their functions? 
How do they coordinate with one other to comply with Article 23.2 of the Trade Facilitation 
Agreement?  
Reply  
Article 23.2 of the WTO Trade Facilitation Agreement (TFA) requires Members to establish and/or 
maintain a national committee on trade facilitation or to designate an existing mechanism to facilitate 
both domestic  coordination and implementation of the provisions of the TFA. The Government of 
Canada uses well -functioning interdepartmental networks already in place to undertake the 
necessary strategic planning and to coordinate trade facilitation domestically, both between Global 
Affairs Canada, the Canada Border Services Agency (CBSA) and other departments and agencies 
responsible for the application of import, export and transit requirements at the border, as well as 
existing mechanisms for consultations with stake holders. These mechanisms include the Border 
Commercial Consultative Committees (BCCCs), which provide officials and commercial stakeholders 
with a forum to discuss border -related policies and programs, as well as technical and operational 
issues that gove rn and affect Canada 's trade. For additional information on the BCCCs and their 
functions, please consult the following CBSA webpage: https://www.cbsa -asfc.gc.ca/age ncy-
agence/consult/bccc -ccacf/menu -eng.html . 
3.1.2 Rules of origin, paragraph 3.22, pages 53 -54 
Question  
It is noted that there was a change in the way Departments publish their contracts on the 
Government 's Open Portal, since, previously, information was independently verified before being 
published in the Procurement Activities Report. Could Canada explain the reason for this change and 
how it has affected the veracity of the available information?  
Reply  
Prior to 2017, federal departments submitted their raw contracting data directly to Public Services 
and Procurement Canada (PSPC), who subsequently validated the data before providing a summary 
of the data to Treasury Board Secretariat (TBS) to report on the Government of Canada 's 
procureme nt activity for the year. This report published online by TBS, called the Purchasing Activity 
Report (PAR), captured a summary of contracts above and below CAD 25,000. Beginning in 2017, 
the raw contracting data under the PAR was amalgamated with the Gover nment of Canada 's 
Proactive Disclosure of Contract data, which requires departments to proactively publish their 
contracting activities over CAD 10,000 and aggregated data on contracting activities below 
CAD 10,000 directly on the Open Government Portal, a  public website. This change was made to 
enhance transparency, accountability and openness of contracting data for the Canadian public.  
As the amalgamation places the validation process directly on departments, rather than PSPC, the 
integrity of the data u ploaded to the Portal is subject to each department 's internal data validation 
process. To improve data integrity as per the Guidelines on the Proactive Disclosure of Contracts, 
TBS recently introduced a new reporting template for departments to disclose t heir contracting data 
above CAD 25,000. 
3.1.4.2 Federal excise duties and taxes, paragraph 3.54, page 67  
Question  
Could the Government of Canada confirm whether the tax rates applied to beer and wine imports 
are higher than those applied to beer and wine from Canada? If so, could you comment on the 
compatibility of applying different tax rates for imported versus domestic products in the light of 
GATT Article III?  WT/TPR/M/389/Add.1  
 
- 166 - 
 
  Reply  
Given the ongoing WTO dispute settlement process on elements of the alcohol tax re gimes in 
Canada, it would be inappropriate to comment further at this time.  
3.1.6 Anti -dumping, countervailing, and safeguard measures, 3.1.6.1 Anti -dumping and 
countervailing measures, paragraph 3.74, page 76  
Question  
Since these provisions have only rece ntly been published, could Canada explain what circumstances 
could justify the initiation of a duty exemption review for circumvention?  
Reply  
Exporters of goods to which a circumvention finding applies may request that the Canadian Border 
Services Agency ( CBSA) determine whether their goods may be exempt from the extension of duties 
resulting from an anti -circumvention investigation. As per subsection 75.6(1) of the Special Import 
Measures Act, an exporter may make such a request if the exporter can establi sh that they were not 
notified of the initiation of the anti -circumvention investigation or requested to provide information 
during it, and that they are not associated with any exporter who was given notice of the 
investigation. The CBSA will consider the  information provided in the request to determine if an 
exemption review is warranted.  
Subsection 57.21(1) of the Special Import Measures Regulations provide what information must be 
included in an exporter 's request for exemption:  
a. the name and address of the exporter, along with a list of associated persons;  
b. confirmation, along with evidence in support, that the goods for which the request for 
exemption is made have been sold or consigned to an importer in Canada;  
c. a detailed description of the g oods;  
d. if applicable, the name and address of each producer of parts or components and, if 
known, the name and address of each person that uses those parts or components;  
e. if applicable, the name and address of any exporter or producer of parts or components 
used to assemble or complete the goods;  
f. if applicable, the name and address of any exporter or producer of like goods that were 
slightly modified;  
g. an indication of the applicable Canadian International Trade Tribunal (CITT) amending 
order; and  
h. a justification for the request . 
Paragraph 3.81, page 78  
Question  
Could Canada explain what type of circumstances might qualify as a "special market situation "? 
Could Canada indicate what factors it considers or what methodology it applies to determine the 
existence of a special market situation?  
Reply  
Subsection 16(2)(c) of the Special Import Measures Act (SIMA) provides that the Canadian Border 
Services Agency (CBSA) may determine normal values using an alternative methodology in 
situations where domestic prices in the exporting country are distorted due to a particular market 
situation. As per subsection 16(2.1), a particular market situation may be found to exist in respect 
of any goods of a particular exporter or of a particular country, as appropriate.  
In determining whether paragraph 16(2)(c) of SIMA is applicable, the CBSA will consider whether 
there are any circumstances in the market affecting the sales of like goods for use in the country of 
export, such that a proper comparison is not possible. In these cases, the CBSA will publish the 
factors examined in making this determination in the Statement of Reasons.  WT/TPR/M/389/Add.1  
 
- 167 - 
 
  3.3 Measures Affecting Production and Trade, 3.3.3 Sanitary and phytosanitary 
requirements, Box 3.4, page 103  
Question  
Box 3.4. Safe Food for Canadians Act and Regulations pursuant thereto; Recognition of foreign 
systems: Which foreign systems have been recognized by Canada and which are in the process of 
being recognized?  
Reply  
The countries that the Canadian Food Inspection Agency (CFIA) r ecognize as having a food safety 
system that provides the same level of protection as Canada 's regulatory system can be found here:  
http://inspection.gc .ca/food/imports/specific -countries/eng/1526656633984/1526656634249 .  
 
This list is updated as the CFIA approves new systems.  
3.3.6 Government procurement, 3.3.6.2 Legal, institutional and policy framework, 
paragraph 3.233, page 115  
Question  
Could Canada e laborate on what improvements were made to the policies set out in the Integrity 
Regime, as well as in the guidelines for "reparation agreements "? 
Reply  
In March 2018, the Government of Canada announced its intention to enhance the Integrity Regime 
by: 
• introducing greater flexibility in debarment decisions, including the exercise of discretion 
in establishing the supplier 's periods of ineligibility to contract with the Government of 
Canada;  
• increasing the number of triggers that can lead to ineligibility (e.g. inclusion of additional 
criminal offences that could lead to a debarment); and  
• expanding the scope of business ethics covered under the Integrity Regime into key areas, 
such as combatting human trafficking, and the protection of the env ironment.  
Proposed changes to implement the enhancements are being studied and analysed. The Remediation 
Agreement (RA) regime was enacted through the creation of a new Part (Part XXII.1) of the Criminal 
Code by way of Bill C -74, the Budget Implementation Act, 2018, No. 1, which received Royal Assent 
on 21 June 2018 and came into force on 19 September 2018.  
An RA is a tool available for use by prosecutorial authorities – at their discretion, in the public interest 
and in appropriate circumstances – to addre ss corporate criminal wrongdoing. It is an agreement, 
between an organization accused of committing a listed offence and a prosecutor, to stay any 
proceedings related to that offence, if the organization complies with the terms of the agreement.  
To be elig ible for a RA, the accused must be an organization other than a public body (e.g., a 
government department), a trade union or a municipality. A RA can only be used for listed economic 
crime offences, such as fraud or bribery. It cannot be used for offences  that have caused death or 
serious bodily harm or that have injured national defence or national security. Similarly, a RA cannot 
be used for an offence committed on the direction of, or on behalf of, a criminal organization or 
terrorist group. Prosecutors  must consider a number of factors when deciding whether they should 
negotiate a RA with an organization, such as whether the organization has previous convictions, 
sanctions or settlements for similar offences in Canada or elsewhere. Further information o n 
remediation agreement guidelines can be found in PART XXII.1 of the Criminal Code: https://laws -
lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/acts/c -46/page -181.html#docCont  WT/TPR/M/389/Add.1  
 
- 168 - 
 
  3.3.7 Intellec tual property rights, 3.3.7.1 Overview, paragraph 3.274, page 124  
Question  
Are the benefits of the Intellectual Property Strategy also applicable to foreign individuals and 
corporations? Please provide more detail on the powers that the independent body responsible for 
supervising patent and trademark agents will have.  
Reply  
The Canadian Intellectual Property Office (CIPO) hosts the intellectual property (IP) Awareness and 
Education Program, which is a key component of the IP Strategy. In  2018-2019, the programme  
expanded its offerings and tailored products to meet the needs of small and medium -sized 
enterprises (SMEs) in key growth sectors and underrepresented groups, to assist them in their 
understanding and acquisition of IP. Now in its  full maturity, CIPO 's IP Awareness and Education 
Program consists of the following three pillars: IP for Business, IP Academy and IP Hub. For example, 
the IP Hub is an ever -growing digital platform for the IP community to exchange useful tools and 
resourc es from around the world. Innovators and businesses can navigate through the four stages 
of an IP journey: learning about IP, creating it, protecting it and growing one 's business. With over 
300 links available, the platform serves as an important resource  for the innovation ecosystem, as 
it connects businesses and innovators with partners and services in the marketplace.  
 
The College of Patent Agents and Trademarks Agents is established as an independent body with 
the responsibility for regulating the IP agent profession in the public interest. The authorities granted 
to the College include, the administration of an agent licensing system, the ability to conduct 
investigations into complaints of agent misconduct or incompetence and the authority to adjudic ate 
those complaints. Additionally, the College will have the power to set annual fees to be paid by agent 
licensees and to develop continuing professional development requirements. For more information, 
the legislation establishing the College is availabl e at: https://laws -lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/acts/C -
33.7/FullText.html  
Paragraph 3.275, page 124  
Question  
Will the patent collective be organized by the government or is it just a mechanism to facilitate the 
exchange of information between companies?  
Reply  
As a key part of Canada 's intellectual property (IP) Strategy, the Patent Collective is a 4 -year pilot 
project designed to assist participating small and medium -sized enterprises (SMEs) with their patent 
and other IP needs. The Government has solicited proposals for services to be provided by the patent 
collective. Those proposals are currently being evaluated. Detailed information on the patent 
collective is available at: https://www.ic.gc.ca/eic/site/135.nsf/eng/00001.html  
3.3.7.2 General institutional and regulatory framework, paragraph 3.279, page 126  
Question  
Is ISED or CIPO empowered to establish sanctions fo r infringements of intellectual property rights?  
Reply  
No. Canada 's intellectual property laws include civil enforcement remedies (and criminal penalties, 
in the case of the Crown) that may be sought in federal and provincial courts, with some overlapping 
jurisdiction and some exclusive jurisdiction.  WT/TPR/M/389/Add.1  
 
- 169 - 
 
  Paragraph 3.285, pages 127 -128 
Question  
What requirements do the competent authorities in Canada have to meet in order to initiate ex 
officio measures in respect of goods suspected of being counterf eit trademark or pirated goods? 
What are the time limits and other particularities of ex officio procedures compared to those initiated 
at the request of the owner of the intellectual property rights or another party affected by 
counterfeiting or piracy?  
Reply 
The Request for Assistance programme  allows Canada Border Services Agency (CBSA) to temporarily 
detain suspected counterfeit and pirated goods at the border and contact rights -holders who have 
filed requests for assistance regarding these suspected co unterfeit or pirated shipments. CBSA will 
provide the rights -holders with information regarding the identity of the importer and details of the 
shipment that facilitates a civil action. The civil action itself is always initiated by the owner of the 
intellectual property right.  
The practical requirements of the programme  are outlined in a detailed Memorandum of the Canada 
Border Services Agency: https://www.cbsa -asfc.gc.ca/publications/dm -md/d19/d19 -4-3-eng.html . 
Notably, a copy of a document filed with a court commencing proceedings must be provided by the 
rights holder to the Agency within (10) working days – or, if the copies or goods are peris hable, 
within (5) five days – or the suspected shipment will be released.  
3.3.7.3, Patents, paragraph 3.289, pages 128 -129 
Question  
Is Canada 's protection of European Union geographical indications the same as its protection of 
geographical indications for other WTO members?  
Reply  
The level of geographical indication (GI) protection established under the Comprehensive Economic 
and Trade Agreement (CETA) has been implemented under Canada 's Trade -marks Act to apply to 
all GIs protected under Ca nada's expanded domestic GI regime.  
3.3.7.5 Trademarks, paragraph 3.308, page 132  
Question  
Which authority is competent to determine exceptions for parallel imports?  
Reply  
The Canadian judiciary is the competent authority to make orders in respect of parallel imports.  
3.3.7.9 Copyright, paragraph 3.328, page 135  
Question  
Can the quasi -judicial administrative tribunal, in addition to establishing royalties, resolve disputes 
concerning royalties?  
Reply  
In addition to establishing tariff royalty rates, th e Copyright Board of Canada can arbitrate disputes 
between parties concerning licen ce royalty rates on a case -by-case basis.  WT/TPR/M/389/Add.1  
 
- 170 - 
 
  3.3.7.10 IP Enforcement, paragraph 3.330, page 136  
Question  
What is the coordination mechanism between customs and intellectual pro perty authorities for 
border enforcement? Can the customs authority detain suspicious goods without the competent 
intellectual property authority being involved?  
Reply  
Canada provides ex -officio authority to Canada Border Services Agency (CBSA) officers to detain 
suspected counterfeit and pirated goods upon import and export. CBSA officers have the authority 
to stop, search for and detain in -transit goods where they pose a threat to health, safety and 
security, such as contraband and illicit drug s. 
Canada maintains The Request for Assistance programme  which allows the CBSA to temporarily 
detain suspected counterfeit and pirated goods at the border and contact rights -holders who have 
filed requests for assistance regarding these suspected counterfe it or pirated shipments. CBSA will 
provide the rights -holders with information regarding the identity of the importer and details of the 
shipment that facilitates a civil action.  
To submit a Request for Assistance (RFA) application, you must be a legitimat e Canadian rights 
holder/owner. Trademarks and geographical indications must be registered with the Canadian 
Intellectual Property Office (CIPO). It is recommended that copyright also be registered with CIPO.  
Filing a request for assistance is easy and fre e. Eligible rights holders simply need to complete and 
submit an application form available online.  
More information is available at: https://www.cbsa -asfc.gc.ca/securi ty-securite/ipr -dpi/app -dem-
eng.html . 
4 TRADE POLICIES BY SECTOR  
4.1 Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries, 4.1.1 Agriculture, 4.1.1.2 Border measures, 
paragraph 4. 8, page 141  
Question  
Could the Government of Canada provide further information on the transfer to the EU of 800 tonnes 
of cheese from the part not reserved for the EU and the reasons for this adjustment?   
Reply  
The transfer of 800,000 kilograms under Canada 's 20,411,866 kilograms WTO tariff rate quota (TRQ) 
for cheese to the European Union (EU) was finalized as of 31 December 2017. The adjustment to 
the EU reserve under Canada 's WTO cheese TRQ is a shift to maintain the relative shares of cheese 
TRQ quota bet ween EU and non -EU WTO members due to EU enlargement. This process was 
facilitated in consultation with allocation holders under the WTO cheese TRQ. Canada will continue 
to administer its WTO TRQ for cheese under Canada 's Export and Imports Permits Act in conformity 
with its WTO obligations.  
4.2 Mining and Energy, 4.2.3 Trade policy developments, p aragraph 4.111, pages 169 -170 
Question  
How does Canada national content and technology transfer policies work in the energy sector and 
does Canada ensure that the se measures are compatible with agreements on Trade -Related Aspects 
of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS) and on Trade Related Investment Measures (TRIMs)?  WT/TPR/M/389/Add.1  
 
- 171 - 
 
  Reply  
Canada is committed to the international rules based order and supports the international in stitutions 
and mechanisms that exist to ensure non -discriminatory trade and investment relationships 
including on national content and technology transfer. National content and technology transfer 
policies are not common place in Canada 's energy sector which is based on free, market driven trade 
and investment.  
With respect to Canada 's technology transfer policies in the energy sector, there are two relevant 
Government of Canada policies concerning intellectual property that is created either by p ublic 
servants or through federal government procurement contracts:  
• Public Servants Inventions Act, which outlines the duties of every public servant who 
makes an invention; and,  
• Policy on Title to Intellectual Property Arising Under Crown Procurement Cont racts, the 
objective of which is to enhance Canada 's economic growth by increasing 
commercialization of Intellectual Property.  
As in all sectors, Canada ensures that it is compliant with its international treaty obligations when 
enacting law and policy in  this area, including with respect to the WTO Agreement on Trade -Related 
Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS) and on Trade -Related Investment Measures (TRIMS).  
Report by Canada – WT/TPR/G/389  
3 TRADE POLICY DEVELOPMENTS 2015 -2019  
3.3 Bilateral a nd Regional Free Trade Agreements, 3.3.1 New Trade Agreements, 
Canada -Ukraine Free Trade Agreement (CUFTA), paragraph 3.26, page 12  
Question  
What do you consider to be the most ambitious provisions included in the new chapter on Technical 
Barriers to Trade (in CUFTA)? Are references to specific sectors included?  
Reply  
The Canada -Chile Free Trade Agreement (CCFTA), the modernized Canada -Israel Free Trade 
Agreement (CIFTA) and the Canada -Ukraine Free Trade Agreement (CUFTA) all contain provisions 
that go  beyond the WTO Technical Barriers to Trade Agreement. All three have such obligations 
addressing transparency, conformity assessment and cooperation. In addition, the CCFTA and CIFTA 
have such provisions covering technical regulations, the CCFTA and the a nd the CUFTA have ones 
pertaining to the use international standards while the CIFTA and CUFTA have ones that create 
contact points. Regarding references to specific sectors, all three Agreements have annexes covering 
ice wine and the CCFTA also has one th at addresses the organics sector.  
3.3.2 Modernized Free Trade Agreements, paragraph 3.30, page 12  
Question  
What kind of mechanisms is intended to be used to promote regulatory cooperation (between CUSMA 
parties)?  
Reply  
Canada has formal mechanisms with bot h of its CUSMA partners to promote regulatory cooperation. 
In February 2018, Canada signed a Memorandum of Understanding with Mexico to "explore 
opportunities to advance regulatory cooperation and regulatory alignment " and a work plan to 
implement the MOU was signed in June 2018. Also, in June 2018, Canada signed a MOU with the 
United States to implement the Regulatory Cooperation Council. The new CUSMA chapter on good WT/TPR/M/389/Add.1  
 
- 172 - 
 
  regulatory practices encourages parties to work together to ensure transparent, predictab le and 
aligned regulatory systems that foster stronger trade relations and protect citizens. The new chapter 
also recognizes voluntary regulatory cooperation as an important good regulatory practice to 
facilitate trade and investment among CUSMA partners. Notably, this chapter creates a trilateral 
committee to share expertise and information about approaches to regulatory cooperation and 
provide an annual report on its activities. The good regulatory practices chapter encourages parties 
to:  
• engage regulato ry authorities in mutually beneficial regulatory cooperation activities with 
relevant counterparts of one or more of the other Parties in appropriate circumstances;  
• continue the valuable work of bilateral and trilateral cooperation fora;  
• exchange of techni cal or scientific information or data, including coordinating research 
agendas, to reduce duplicative research;  
• explore possible common approaches to the evaluation and mitigation of risks or hazards, 
including those potentially posed by the use of emergin g technologies;  
• exchange information on regulations that each Party is developing to maximize the 
opportunity for common approaches;  
• co-funding of research in support of regulations and implementation tools of joint interest;  
• consider relevant scientific or technical guidance documents developed through 
international collaborative initiatives;  
• consider common approaches to the display of product or consumer information;  
• consider the development of compatible platforms or formats for industry sub mission of 
product information for regulatory review;  
• coordinate the implementation of regulations and sharing compliance information, 
including, as appropriate by entering into confidentiality agreements; and,  
• exchange information, as appropriate, concern ing any planned or ongoing 
post-implementation review or evaluation of regulations in effect affecting trade or 
investment.  
Canada -Chile Free Trade Agreement (CCFTA), paragraph 3.32, page 12  
Question  
What do you consider to be the most ambitious provisions  included in the new chapter on Technical 
Barriers to Trade (in CCFTA)? Are references to specific sectors included?  
Reply  
The Canada -Chile Free Trade Agreement (CCFTA), the modernized Canada -Israel Free Trade 
Agreement (CIFTA) and the Canada -Ukraine Free Trade Agreement (CUFTA) all contain provisions 
that go beyond the WTO Technical Barriers to Trade Agreement. All three have such obligations 
addressing transparency, conformity assessment and cooperation. In addition, the CCFTA and CIFTA 
have such provisio ns covering technical regulations, the CCFTA and the and the CUFTA have ones 
pertaining to the use international standards while the CIFTA and CUFTA have ones that create 
contact points. Regarding references to specific sectors, all three Agreements have a nnexes covering 
ice wine and the CCFTA also has one that addresses the organics sector.  WT/TPR/M/389/Add.1  
 
- 173 - 
 
  Question  
What do you consider to be the most ambitious provisions included in the new chapter on Technical 
Barriers to Trade (in CIFTA)? Are references to specific sect ors included?  
Reply  
The Canada -Chile Free Trade Agreement (CCFTA), the modernized Canada -Israel Free Trade 
Agreement (CIFTA) and the Canada -Ukraine Free Trade Agreement (CUFTA) all contain provisions 
that go beyond the WTO Technical Barriers to Trade Agree ment. All three have such obligations 
addressing transparency, conformity assessment and cooperation. In addition, the CCFTA and CIFTA 
have such provisions covering technical regulations, the CCFTA and the and the CUFTA have ones 
pertaining to the use inte rnational standards while the CIFTA and CUFTA have ones that create 
contact points. Regarding references to specific sectors, all three Agreements have annexes covering 
ice wine and the CCFTA also has one that addresses the organics sector.  
3.3.3 Ongoing N egotiations, Canada -Pacific Alliance, paragraph 3.35, page 13  
Question  
Could Canada provide information on whether it intends to include chapters on government 
procurement, e -commerce, trade in services, environment, labour issues, indigenous peoples, 
intellectual property, state -owned enterprises and trade facilitation in the free trade agreement it 
negotiates with MERCOSUR countries?  
Reply  
Prior to the launch of the negotiations, Canada and MERCOSUR agreed on an outline of issues for 
negotiat ion that includes government procurement, e -commerce, trade in services, environment, 
labour issues, intellectual property, public and private market participants (i.e. state -owned 
enterprises) and trade facilitation. The discussion on trade and Indigenous  peoples was added at a 
later stage. Although the negotiations are ongoing and at an early stage, both Canada and 
MERCOSUR are committed to advancing and concluding negotiations toward a comprehensive, 
ambitious and inclusive free trade agreement as quickl y as possible.  
3.4 Other Bilateral Initiatives, page 13  
Question  
Could Canada explain what type of provisions are contained in its nine bilateral (treaty value) 
agreements and its various (non -treaty) memorandums of understanding on innovation and science 
and technology, as well as the joint committees?  
Reply  
Since 1965, the Government of Canada has entered into sixteen international science, technology, 
and innovation agreements and arrangements : (https://www.tradecommissioner.gc.ca/innovators -
innovateurs/agreements -ententes.aspx?lang=eng ). These formal relationships seek to focus 
bilateral engagement and promotion of research and development (R&D) c ollaboration opportunities 
on specific priority sectors and cross -cutting themes of interest to Canada and the specific partner 
country. The majority of these arrangements promote ongoing dialogue and outreach among 
Canadian and international partners thro ugh established science and technology joint committees 
with a view to develop, enhance and promote targeted collaboration involving pure research, R&D, 
and commercialization.  WT/TPR/M/389/Add.1  
 
- 174 - 
 
  4 OTHER KEY GOVERNMENT INITIATIVES  
4.2 Intellectual Property (IP), paragraph 4.11, page 17  
Question  
Is there any product that is excluded from protection as a geographical indication? Do the indications 
for wines and spirits have the same level of protection as agricultural and food products?  
Reply  
Canada 's geographical i ndications (GI) regime covers categories of agricultural products and foods, 
wines, and spirits. All of these categories of goods are afforded the same level of protection.  
Question  
How does the exclusion of claims for damages from the copyright "notice an d warning " regime 
protect consumers?  
Reply  
Soon after the Notice and Notice regime entered into force in January 2015, controversy arose over 
the practice of some copyright owners (or their agents) of including settlement demands within their 
notices. The practice could lead to abuses, given that consumers may be pressured into disclosing 
their personal information and making settlement payments even in situations where they have not 
engaged in any acts that violate copyright laws.  
In 2018, Canada 's Copyrig ht Act was amended to clarify that a notice of claimed infringement that 
contains an offer to settle, or a request or demand for payment or for personal information, or a 
reference to any such offer, request or demand, in relation to the claimed infringeme nt, does not 
comply with the regime.  
Question  
What was the reasoning behind making the right to legal remedies conditional on the trademark 
having been used for 3 years after registration?  
Reply  
To prevent the abusive use of the trademark regime, such as applying for registration with the sole 
intention of seeking remuneration from the legitimate owner of the trademark, new grounds of 
opposition and invalidity for bad faith registration were created and use will be required to enforce 
a trademark within th e first three years after registration.  
Use was, and continues to be, the foundation of Canadian trademark law and paramount for the 
enforcement of trademark rights in Canada and other common law jurisdictions. This amendment 
ensures that registered tradem ark owners use their trademarks in the Canadian marketplace before 
attempting to enforce their registered rights in court.  
After three years, an interested person may commence a summary cancellation proceeding (under 
Section 45 of the Trade -Marks Act) to h ave a trademark expunged from the register if the owner is 
unable to show that the mark has been used in Canada in the three years before the commencement 
of the proceeding.  
Question  
Were the updates to the instruments aimed at promoting the Intellectual P roperty Strategy modified 
in accordance with other international instruments and, if so, what are those instruments?  WT/TPR/M/389/Add.1  
 
- 175 - 
 
  Reply  
Canada 's Intellectual Property Strategy (IP Strategy) and the obligations undertaken in Canada 's 
free trade agreements are complement ary. The legislative amendments under Canada 's IP Strategy 
do not affect the implementation or administration of Canada 's free trade agreements, including 
those agreements with chapters on intellectual property.  
4.6 Sanitary and Phytosanitary Initiatives, paragraph 4.17, page 18  
Question  
Could Canada share more details on the functioning of its comparative risk model? How does it use 
data from public and external sources to establish risk profiles for food establishments?  
Reply  
The Comparative Risk Model (CRM) is an analytical tool which uses data from government sources 
(e.g. the Canadian Food Inspection Agency (CFIA), Statistics Canada, Public Health Agency of 
Canada), scientific literature, and industry associations, to assess risks to food safety , animal health, 
and plant health. The model allows direct comparison of risks associated with food safety, animal 
and plant health and combines this information with the cost of risk -mitigating activities conducted 
by the CFIA to provide intelligence for the development of risk profiles that support decision -making 
in the Agency. For example, CRM intelligence is being used by CFIA 's senior management for greater 
precision in the way programs are designed, prioritize oversight activities and allocate resour ces to 
manage food safety, plant health, and animal health risks. The Establishment -based Risk 
Assessment (ERA) Model is designed to assess the food safety risks of food establishments. More 
information is available at the following site: http://www.inspection.gc.ca/about -the-cfia/strategic -
priorities/era -for-food/eng/1551995065897/1551995066162 . 
5 EXPORT DIVERSIFICATION AND TRADE PROMOTION  
5.1 Export Diversification Strategy, paragraph 5.3, page 20  
Question  
Could Canada share details of the last two elements of the Export Diversification Strategy?  
Reply  
Canada 's Export Diversification Strategy will allow t he Trade Commissioner Service (TCS) to 
reinforce programs and services that have proven effective for Canadian businesses. Canada will be 
expanding the successful CanExport programme , increasing the number of Canadian Technology 
Accelerators, increasing th e number of Trade Commissioners in Canada and abroad to ensure there 
are more experts in place supporting Canadian exporters, and updating TCS tools such as a modern 
web presence, and new client relationship management software.  
5.2 Trade Commissioner Serv ice, paragraph 5.7, page 21  
Question  
Could Canada describe the intensive plan that companies follow within the Canadian Technology 
Accelerator?  
Reply  
Each plan is tailored specifically to the individual company based on their sector, market opportunity, 
and particular need. For example, a company may require validation of their technology in a global 
market, coaching and support to become successful in raising capital, advice and time in market to 
understand a market and drive sales, help wit h hiring talent or connections to strategic partners.  
 WT/TPR/M/389/Add.1  
 
- 176 - 
 
  NEW ZEALAND  
Report by the Secretariat – WT/TPR/S/389  
4 TRADE POLICIES BY SECTOR  
4.1 Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries, 4.1.1.5 Evolution of support and protection, 
paragraph 4.2 8, page 145  
Question  
The Secretariat 's report states at paragraph 4.28 that continued market price support for milk sits 
at 9.5% of the value of production – a support level equivalent to CA D 576 million. What plans does 
Canada have to reduce this level of support?  
Reply  
Canada reminds Members that in accordance with paragraph A of the Trade Policy Review Mechanism 
the intent of the review process is not to impose new policy commitments on other Members. The 
ability to maintain a market price support for milk is an importa nt tool in the pricing pillar of Canada 's 
supply management system and a measure that all Members agreed to as part of accepting Canada 's 
schedule of commitments.  
Paragraph 4.30, page 145  
Question  
We ask Canada what its intentions are to reform its dairy support to better align the level of support 
given to the dairy industry with the level of support given to other industries?  
Reply  
Canada reminds Members that in accordance with paragraph A of the Trade Policy Review Mechanism 
the intent of the revi ew process is not to impose new policy commitments on other Members. 
Canada 's ability to provide support to its dairy industry is an important piece of Canada 's supply 
management system and a measure that all Members agreed to as part of accepting Canada 's 
schedule of commitments.  
4.1.1.6 Commodities subject to supply management, 4.1.1.6. 2 Milk and dairy, 
paragraph  4.41, page 149  
Question  
Can Canada provide the timeframe for when the Agreement will enter into force?  
Reply  
Since the signature of the Canada -United States -Mexico Agreement (CUSMA) on 30 November 2018, 
the Parties ' efforts have focused on domestic ratification procedures. Each country will notify the 
other Parties of the completion of their domestic ratification  procedures. Once all three Parties have 
provided their notifications, CUSMA would enter into force on the first day of the third month 
following the last notification.  
Question  
If the Agreement does not enter into force will milk Class 6 (in Ontario) and Class 7 (nationally) 
remain in effect?  WT/TPR/M/389/Add.1  
 
- 177 - 
 
  Reply  
The Agreement maintains stability for Canada 's entire economy and further strengthens reliable 
trading relationships with Canada 's closest neighbours. Since the signature of the Agreement on 
30 November 2018, th e Parties ' efforts have focused on domestic ratification procedures. The 
Government of Canada is currently working with Canadian industry and provincial governments to 
comply with the terms of the Agreement, which includes the elimination of milk classes 6  and 7 by 
industry and provincial governments. Canada is currently taking the necessary steps to ensure that 
Agreement 's dairy provisions are fully implemented within the timelines  specified in the agreement. 
Until the Agreement enters into force, the North American Free Trade Agreement remains in force.  
Question  
If the Agreement does enter into force, does Canada intend to introduce another milk class to replace 
the eliminated Class 6 (in Ontario) and Class 7 (nationally)?  
Reply  
The Government of Canad a is working with provincial governments and industry to ensure 
compliance with the terms of the Agreement. Authority for the marketing of dairy products belongs 
to provincial milk marketing boards or other provincial agencies. The Government of Canada doe s 
not introduce milk classes.  
Provincial governments and industry are currently working to finalize changes related to milk class 
pricing in line with Canada 's obligations under the Agreement.  
4.1.2 Forestry, page 153  
Question  
With regard to forestry poli cies, Canadian federal and provincial governments impose export 
restrictions on logs and wood residues produced in British Colombia, requiring the use or 
manufacturing in the province and a surplus test for exports. Furthermore, a fee in lieu of 
manufactur e imposed in British Colombia could constitute de facto export tax. NZ would like to know 
Canada 's progress on actions (since the 2015 TPR) to ensure that the effect of these measures does 
not constitute a restriction on the exports of logs and wood residu als that is inconsistent with Article 
11 and Paragraph 12 of Article 24 of GATT.  
Reply  
As a point of clarification, the Canadian federal government no longer requires an export permit for, 
nor does it have, any form of export authorization process in place with respect to wood residuals 
for any jurisdiction in Canada – including British Columbia. In British Columbia, approvals processes 
for logs and/or residuals do not restrict exports as the vast majority of fibre subject to a surplus 
evaluation is de emed eligible for export.  
4.2.4 Taxation, paragraph 4.116, pages 170 -171 
Question  
New Zealand commends Canada 's efforts to phase out inefficient fossil fuel subsidies and reduce 
GHG emissions. Given the benefits of fossil fuel subsidy reform and developmen t of renewable 
energy, is Canada considering further measures beyond the oilsands projects of 2015 and 2016 and 
additional allowances to ensure the uptake of renewable energy?  WT/TPR/M/389/Add.1  
 
- 178 - 
 
  Reply  
With respect to the adoption of additional measures to ensure the uptake of renewable energy, it 
should be noted that Canada is currently a world leader in the production and use of energy from 
renewable energy sources. Renewable energy currently provides about 17% of Canada 's total 
primary energy supply, and 66% of the country 's electricity. In 2016, Canada placed 1st in the G7 
and 2nd in the G20 in terms of the share of renewables in its total electricity generation.  
The Government of Canada has made significant investments to support the transition to a clean 
growth an d low -carbon economy. This includes funding programs that are specific to renewable 
power, as well as programs to support research, development, demonstration, adoption and export 
of clean technologies, which in many cases include renewable energy. Example s include:  
• An Emerging Renewable Power Program that provides up to CAD 200 million to expand 
the portfolio of commercially viable renewable energy sources available to provinces and 
territories as they work to reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions from the ir electricity 
sectors.  
• CAD 2.3 billion t o support clean technology research, development, demonstration and 
adoption, as well as scaling -up clean technology businesses, including:  
- CAD 1.4 billion for equity financing, growth capital and project financing for 
promising clean technology firms;  
- CAD 400 million to support the development and demonstration of pre -commercial 
clean technologies;  
- CAD 155 million to support clean growth in the natural resource sectors; and  
• CAD 21.9 billion in green infras tructure, including CAD 822 million for clean energy 
infrastructure across five streams: smart grids, renewables, reducing diesel in remote 
communities, electric vehicle infrastructure, and energy efficient buildings.  
Notably, the 2018 Fall Economic Statem ent includes a 100% accelerated capital cost allowance for 
clean energy equipment including equipment for clean energy development as well as for energy 
efficiency. Additional information on the Government 's clean technology programs can be found 
here: http://www.ic.gc.ca/eic/site/099.nsf/eng/home . 
Question  
Section 4.2.4, paragraph 4.116 states that "Reforms are currently under way to phase out inefficient 
fossil fuel subsidies and reduce GHG emi ssions. In particular, accelerated capital cost allowances 
(ACCAs) for tangible assets and Canadian Exploration Expense (CEE) treatment for intangible assets 
were phased out in oil sands projects as of 2015 and 2016, respectively, although allowances were 
introduced for other areas of the energy sector, such as for clean energy and LNG. " How does Canada 
intend to rationalise any inefficient fossil -fuel subsidies that encourage wasteful consumption in line 
with the United Nations ' Sustainable Development Goa l 12(c) and the G20 commitment so as to 
avoid disadvantaging renewable energy uptake?  
Reply  
Canada remains on track to fulfil its commitment to phase out or rationalize inefficient fossil fuel 
subsidies by 2025. Significant actions have already been taken to support the commitment; in 
particular, some tax measures providing preferential tax treatment to the fossil fuel sector have 
been phased out or rationalized. Canada is currently evaluating federal non -tax measures to identify 
any that might be considere d inefficient fossil fuel subsidies in the context of our G20 commitment. 
To ensure Canada is on the right path and to inform work going forward, the federal government 
launched consultations on the approach to non -tax measures with Canadians and subject -matter 
experts.  
To support Canada 's efforts to fulfil its G20 commitment, Canada recently committed to undergo a 
peer review of inefficient fossil fuel subsidies under the G20 process in partnership with Argentina. 
This voluntary process will allow Canada to share its experience and benefit from other countries ' WT/TPR/M/389/Add.1  
 
- 179 - 
 
  experience as well as improve knowledge on fossil fuel subsidies. The Government has also 
committed to reduce Canada 's greenhouse gas emissions by 30 % relative to 2005 levels by 2030 
as part of the Paris Climate Change Agreement. The Pan -Canadian Framework on Clean Growth and 
Climate Change is the Government 's plan – in collaboration with provincial and territorial 
governments, Indigenous leaders and businesses – to reduce emissions, grow the economy, and 
build resilience to climate change. The Framework includes a pan -Canadian approach to pricing 
carbon pollution, as well as other measures to reduce emissions across the economy, support clean 
growth and help Canadians adapt to the impacts of c limate change.   
For more information on pricing pollution, you may also visit the Government 's website at : 
www.canada.ca/en/serv ices/environment/weather/climatechange/climate -action/pricing -carbon -
pollution.html . 
Report by Canada – WT/TPR/G/389  
3 TRADE POLICY DEVELOPMENTS 2015 -2019  
3.1 Multilateral Trade Policy, 3.1.2 WTO Modernization, paragraph 3.10, page 7  
Question  
New Zealand commends Canada for its leadership role in bringing together the "Ottawa Group ". 
What were Canada 's objectives in establishing the Ottawa Group, and how does it assess progress 
towards these?  
Reply  
Canada 's objectives in establishing a small gr oup on WTO reform were about WTO modernization, 
as the organization is 25 years old, and is in urgent need of attention.  
The small group is meant to be discussion starter forum, as well as a catalyst to prompt meaningful 
reform and the basis for it. Since the Ottawa Group first met in October 2018, momentum continues 
to build around the need for WTO reform. Officials are developing ideas on how the deliberative 
function of the WTO could be enhanced and strengthened. In January 2019, the Group launched a 
process, open to all WTO members, to improve the functioning of WTO committees. Four initial 
bodies were identified for review and each review is led by a volunteer country: Brazil leads the 
review of the Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures Committee; Singapo re that of the Technical 
Barriers to Trade Committee; Switzerland that of the Rules of Origin Committee; and Australia that 
of the Council for Trade in Services.  
Canada is keen to enrich exchanges with additional ideas and new perspectives. Going forward, we 
will continue to seek to sustain momentum on reform efforts within the group as well as continue to 
endeavour to complement other efforts to reform the WTO. Ottawa Group members will continue 
their work in the first four WTO bodies to enhance the WTO 's deliberative function. The group hopes 
that similar efforts will begin in other bodies in the coming months. Canada believes there is broad 
agreement among the WTO membership that the WTO plays a key role in regulating international 
commerce and that it mu st be safeguarded. Importantly, the purpose of the deliberative function 
initiative is to have a conversation among WTO members on the future direction of an important 
aspect of the Organization 's functions and it will ultimately be up to the WTO membershi p to decide 
how best to advance this work.  
3.1.3 Ongoing WTO Negotiations and Initiatives, paragraph 3.1.3 (b), page 8  
Question  
Paragraph 3.13 of Canada 's report states that "On fisheries subsidies negotiations, Canada is 
supportive of the work programme t hat has been established for the first half of 2019, as it is in line 
with the United Nations ' Sustainable Development Goal 14.6, where all UN member States, including 
Canada, committed to prohibit certain forms of fisheries subsidies that contribute to ov ercapacity 
and overfishing; eliminate subsidies that contribute to illegal, unreported and unregulated fishing; 
and refrain from introducing new such subsidies. " New Zealand commends Canada for its 
commitment to ensure full elimination of Illegal, Unreport ed and Unregulated (IUU) fishing, and WT/TPR/M/389/Add.1  
 
- 180 - 
 
  welcomes Canada 's support for a successful agreement on Fisheries Subsidies in the WTO. How does 
Canada ensure that its fisheries subsidies do not support or encourage IUU fishing?  
Reply  
Canada uses various monitoring, control and surveillance (MCS) tools to ensure the sustainable use 
of fisheries resources and prevent illegal, unreported and unregulated (IUU) fishing. Canada works 
collaboratively with regional fisheries management organizations (RFMOs) to co llect, exchange and 
disseminate information on IUU fishing. As well, Canada 's domestic measures set out requirements 
and information relating to vessel management and fishing activities, as well as remedial actions to 
address fisheries violations. Canada a lso works with other countries on joint fisheries patrols by way 
of aerial surveillance and at -sea patrols. Compliance is further incentivized by ensuring government 
financial support programs can only be granted to those applicants in good standing.  
Quest ion 
What measures or reform plans does Canada have to ensure that its subsidies do not contribute to 
overfishing? How does Canada ensure that its fisheries subsidies do not affect overfished stocks?  
Reply  
Canada has measures in place to support the conserv ation and sustainable use of marine resources. 
Specifically, Canada applies its Precautionary Approach Policy, as part of its Sustainable Fisheries 
Framework, to manage its key fish stocks. The policy requires that Canada puts harvest control rules 
and man agement measures in place to promote the growth of stocks and maintain them at levels 
that can support sustainable fisheries, while avoiding overfishing. Further, it requires rebuilding 
plans aimed at growing stocks that have declined below a biological th reshold. Licence conditions, 
fishery monitoring and enforcement programs all help to ensure that fisheries participants adhere 
to the measures established under the Precautionary Approach Policy. These measures help to 
ensure government financial support p rograms do not contribute to overfishing or negatively affect 
overfished stocks.  
6 INCLUSIVE TRADE  
Paragraphs 6.1 -6.2, page 23  
Question  
The Canadian Government 's report states that Canada is advancing new provisions and chapters in 
its FTAs designed to imp rove the capacity of and conditions for underrepresented groups, in 
particular women, owners of SMEs and Indigenous peoples, to access and benefit from the 
opportunities created by trade agreements. New Zealand supports advancing an inclusive approach 
in trade agreements, working alongside Canada and Chile within the Inclusive Trade Action Group. 
What work is Canada undertaking with like -minded partners to build on past achievements and 
include Indigenous Peoples, Women and SMEs in future FTA?  
Reply  
Canada 's inclusive approach to trade aims to prioritize inclusive content in free trade agreements 
(FTAs) by building on Canada 's past and recent achievements. This approach is shared with partners 
such as Chile and New Zealand, as demonstrated by progress made b y the Inclusive Trade Action 
Group (ITAG). An inclusive approach to trade seeks to include new gender responsive and inclusivity 
provisions in 'traditional ' chapters, such as Government Procurement Investment, and Services 
Trade in order to make these chap ters more inclusive. This approach also looks to include new 
inclusive chapters focused on cooperation and information sharing designed to improve the capacity 
and conditions for underrepresented groups to better access and benefit from the opportunities 
created by FTAs, with a focus on women, SMEs and Indigenous peoples. Examples of initiatives listed 
in the Trade and Gender Chapter in the modernized Canada -Chile and Canada -Israel FTAs are the 
establishment of Trade and Gender Committees that will oversee cooperation activities and share 
experiences in designing programs to advance women 's participation in national and international 
economies. At the first Compressive Economic and Trade Agreement (CETA) Joint Committee, 
Canada and the EU adopted a Trade and  Gender Recommendation which seeks to recognize the WT/TPR/M/389/Add.1  
 
- 181 - 
 
  importance of making trade policies more gender -responsive to ensure that the benefits of CETA 
reach everyone. In addition to a chapter on Trade and Gender, Canada is seeking to include chapters 
on SMEs a nd Trade and Indigenous peoples in its ongoing FTA negotiations with Pacific Alliance and 
Mercosur.  
  WT/TPR/M/389/Add.1  
 
- 182 - 
 
  NORWAY  
Report by the Secretariat – WT/TPR/S/389  
2 TRADE AND INVESTMENT REGIMES  
2.2 Trade Policy Formulation and Objectives, paragraphs 2.10-2.11, page 31  
Question  
Norway would like to commend Canada 's major effort in emphasizing gender equality in general and 
in particular in trade. Paragraphs 2.10 and 2.11 in the report by the Secretariat describe a 
many -faceted way to work on gender iss ues, such as impact assessment (IA), Gender Based Analysis 
Plus (GBA+), trade and gender chapters, specific provision, the Joint Recommendation under the 
FTA with the EU etc. These methods inspire us, as well as other members, in our effort to implement 
measures related to gender. Despite many good examples, it is fair to say that there is still a way 
to go before gender is mainstreamed in trade agreements. Given the experience you have up to 
now, could Canada share particular obstacles or challenges that e xist when it comes to gaining 
support on including gender equality in trade?  
Reply  
Canada continues to face a number of obstacles and challenges in gaining support on advancing 
gender equality in trade with some FTA partners. For example, one challenge is the belief that the 
integration of gender equality into a free trade agreement (FTA) is a social issue and not relevant to 
an FTA. Another barrier is the belief that there is no trade and gender nexus. The belief that FTAs 
and trade are gender neutral is a lso a challenge. A lack of adequate gender disaggregated data and 
capacity to interpret gender -based analysis plus (GBA+) in a trade policy context (e.g. indirect 
employment effects, supply chains effects, consumer data by gender) makes it difficult to imp lement 
gender -based policies. Another obstacle is the view that the application of GBA+ is a zero sum game, 
and that men will lose if women receive equitable access. Another difficulty is that proving and 
measuring positive gender outcomes from GBA+ of tra de policy and gender responsive trade is 
difficult. Another obstacle is ensuring that inclusive trade is not seen as an opportunity to advance 
special and differential treatment requests or protectionist measures. In addition, certain 
stakeholders feel tha t if an inclusive trade chapter is not applicable under dispute settlement, then 
that chapter lacks credibility and substance.   
Report by Canada – WT/TPR/G/389  
3 TRADE POLICY DEVELOPMENTS 2015 -2019  
3.1.3 Ongoing WTO Negotiations and Initiatives, paragraph  3.13, page 8, 3.3.1 New Trade 
Agreements, paragraphs 3.23 -3.25, page 11  
Question  
Regarding paragraph 3.13 in the report by Canada, as well as referencing paragraph 3.23 -3.25: 
Canada is an important fisheries nation and we value highly our good bilateral relationship regarding 
fisheries issues. Canada is also an active participant in the WTO fisheries subsidies negotiations. We 
note that the CPTPP agreement entered into force for Canada in March 2018, which means that 
Canada has had over a year t o implement that agreement 's obligations regarding fisheries subsidies, 
although we note that there is a three -year transition period. We ask Canada to elaborate on what 
measures they have or will put in place to enforce the CPTPP prohibition of "subsidies  for fishing that 
negatively affect fish stocks that are in an overfished condition ". 
Reply  
While the CPTPP was signed on 8 March 2018, it entered into force for the first six countries to ratify 
the agreement – Australia, Canada, Japan, Mexico, New Zealan d, and Singapore – on 30 December 
2018, and for Viet  Nam on 14 January 2019. Prior to Canada ratifying the Comprehensive and 
Progressive Agreement for Trans -Pacific Partnership (CPTPP), Canada ensured that its fisheries 
measures, as implemented and enforce d pursuant to Canada 's Fisheries Act and other related laws, 
regulations, policy and programs, conformed to our CPTPP obligations.  WT/TPR/M/389/Add.1  
 
- 183 - 
 
  PHILIPPINES  
Report by the Secretariat – WT/TPR/S/389  
1 ECONOMIC ENVIRONMENT  
1.1 Main Features of the Economy, paragraph 1.5, page 17  
Question  
With its strong links to the U .S. economy, what is Canada 's strategy to avoid any negative effects 
from the trade war between the United States and China?  
Reply  
The U.S. and China are Canada 's important trading partners and we are monitoring the U.S. -China 
trade tension closely. Canada encourages both sides to reach a solution that helps to maintain a 
sound international rule -based system. Recognizing that trade and open markets are vital for 
economic prosperity, Canada has m ade trade diversification a policy priority. Trade diversification 
means diversifying with other trading partners, encouraging Canadian exporters to diversify their 
products into other markets, and attracting foreign investment in Canada. In the Government  of 
Canada 's Fall Economic Statement 2018, the Canadian Government launched an Export 
Diversification Strategy, which will focus on three key components: investing in infrastructure to 
support trade, providing Canadian businesses with resources to execute their export plans and 
enhancing trade services for Canadian exporters. Canada has also made a renewed effort to support 
for the multilateral trading system as a policy priority, recognising that clear, predictable rules are 
essential for global trade. Dev eloping trade relationships with a diverse set of partners and ensuring 
that Canadian firms of all sizes and sectors are fully capitalizing on international opportunities are 
top priorities for Canada, including with the U.S., Canada 's largest trading part ner. Additionally, the 
CPTPP and CETA are key tools that will help Canada to diversify our market.   
1.2 Recent Economic Developments, 1.2.1 Real sector, paragraph 1.10, pages 18 -19 
Question  
How would Canada address the negative effects of "competition stemming from government 
borrowing and growing private and public debt "? 
Reply  
The Government of Canada carefully manages deficits to minimize government borrowing. Canada 's 
debt level relative to the size of its market or economy (i.e. debt -to-GDP) is forecasted to decline 
steadily, suggesting lower funding pressure relative to its market. Market commentators are 
currently expecting rates in Canada to remain on hold or even decrease. Wh ile in theory there can 
be competition for funding, demand for Government of Canada securities continues to be good and 
somewhat distinct from private borrowers. They are treated as separate markets.  
1.3.3 Trends and patterns in foreign direct investment, paragraph 1.35, page 27  
Question  
What factors or variable might have influenced Canada 's FDI outflows growing at thrice the pace of 
FDI inflows?  
Reply  
The stock of Canadian Direct Investment Abroad (CDIA) rose by 23.5% to CAD 1,043.8 billion in 
2015, the l argest increase since 2008 (CDIA increased by 5.9% in 2016 and 5.6% in 2017). The 
growth in the value of Foreign Direct Investment (FDI) in Canada was more subdued in 2015 (up 
5.1% to CAD 782.9 billion) and mainly reflected investment flows over the year. As a result, Canada 's 
net direct investment position with the rest of the world more than doubled to CAD 260.9 billion in 
2015.  WT/TPR/M/389/Add.1  
 
- 184 - 
 
  The extraordinary growth in the stock of CDIA in 2015 largely reflected the impact of a weaker 
Canadian dollar against the U.S. dollar (19%), the British pound sterling (13%) and the euro (7%). 
As the value of Canadian direct investment abroad is denominated in foreign currency and converted 
to Canadian dollars at the end of each period, when the Canadian dollar is depreciatin g in value, the 
restatement of the value of direct investment abroad in Canadian dollars increases the recorded 
value.  
2 TRADE AND INVESTMENT REGIMES  
2.1 General Framework, paragraph 2.3, page 30  
Question  
The Philippines would welcome information concernin g CFTA 's impact, if any, on the harmonization 
of recognition of credentials by various Canadian provinces and territories.  
Reply  
The Canadian Free Trade Agreement (CFTA) aims to reduce barriers to trade, investment, and 
worker mobility within Canada. Chapt er Seven of the CFTA sets out the commitments related to 
labour mobility in Canada for regulated occupations. In Canada, most occupations are regulated by 
the provinces and territories, each of which is a signatory to the CFTA. The fundamental purpose of 
Chapter Seven is to provide labour mobility throughout Canada in regulated occupations through 
certificate -to-certificate recognition by regulatory authorities without any requirement for any 
material additional training, experience, examinations, or assess ments. In particular, Chapter Seven 
states that any worker certified for an occupation by a regulatory authority of a jurisdiction shall, 
upon application, be certified for that occupation by all other jurisdictions that regulate that 
occupation.  
In additi on to certificate -to-certificate recognition, Parties also agree to take steps to reconcile 
differences in occupational standards, and adopt occupational standards based on common 
interprovincial standards to the extent possible and where practical (Articl e 706). Overall, there is a 
high level of consistency in occupational standards and scopes of practices in a majority of cases 
across Canada. Out of all the regulated occupations, there are only 14 exceptions to certificate -to-
certificate recognition. Exce ptions, for the most part, are based on public safety considerations due, 
for example, to different scopes of practice in the occupation among jurisdictions. See also 
http://www.workersmobility.ca/  
The CFTA al so established the Regulatory Reconciliation and Cooperation Table (RCT) to address 
regulatory differences across jurisdictions that act as a barrier to trade, investment or labour mobility 
within Canada. The RCT also oversees the CFTA 's regulatory coopera tion process through which 
Canada 's federal, provincial and territorial governments can cooperate to avoid the creation of 
barriers in new and emerging sectors. For more information on the RCT and its work plan items can 
be found on the CFTA website ( https://www.cfta -alec.ca/ ). 
Question  
Please provide details on the "more widespread and in -depth changes " brought about by the new 
Canadian Free Trade Agreement (CFTA)?  
Reply  
The Canadian Free Trade Agreement (CFTA) entered into force on 1 July 2017, and aims to reduce 
barriers to trade, investment, and worker mobility within Canada.  
The CFTA introduced impor tant advancements to Canada 's internal trade framework that have 
enhanced the flow of goods and services, investment and labour mobility, eliminated technical 
barriers to trade, greatly expanded procurement coverage, and promoted regulatory cooperation 
within Canada. The CFTA takes a negative list approach, and upon entry into force the rules applied 
automatically to all economic activity unless excluded from the Agreement. The CFTA also better 
aligns Canada 's domestic trade commitments with those in its in ternational agreements.  
 WT/TPR/M/389/Add.1  
 
- 185 - 
 
  In addition, the CFTA established several processes and working groups, including the Regulatory 
Reconciliation and Cooperation Table (RCT). The RCT was established to address regulatory 
differences across jurisdictions; Canada 's federal, provincial and territorial officials are working to 
address existing barriers in the areas of transportation, such as electronic logging devices and 
weights and dimensions, and occupational health and safety, by harmonising standards for safety 
equipment (e.g., first aid kits and personal flotation devices). For more information on the RCT work 
plan please visit the CFTA website: https://www.cfta -alec.ca/regulatory -reconciliation -cooperation/  
2.2 Trade Policy Formulation and Objectives, paragraph 2.8, page 31  
Question  
Are there specific export growth targets for a particular region, trading bloc, or country? If so, what 
are the targets for Asia and the Pacific, ASEAN, or the Philippines by 2025?  
Reply  
Canada 's Export Diversification Strategy aims to support an increase in Canada 's overseas exports 
by 50% by 2025, by supporting Canadian firms of all sizes and types to reach new markets, 
particularly into those whe re Canada has market access agreements. Targets are not set for specific 
regions or countries.  
2.3 Trade Agreements and Arrangements, 2.3.2 Regional and preferential agreements, 
2.3.2.1 Reciprocal trade agreements, paragraph 2.19, pages 33 -34 
Question  
Please provide information on whether these binding chapter commitments in new areas like 
environment and labour contain measures that could hinder trade with third party based on 
environmental, labour, or other justifications. If so, how does Can ada ensure that its implementation 
would always be consistent with the WTO rule under the "chapeau " of article XX (on environment) 
and WTO 's Annex on Movement of Natural Persons Supplying Services under the Agreement (on 
labour)?  
Reply  
Generally, Canada is  aware that bilateral and regional free trade agreements can have an effect on 
the trade flows of goods and services of third parties. The mitigation of these impacts is a reason 
why Canada has long supported the multilateral trading system. With respect t o the enforceable 
environment and labour provisions of our free trade agreements, Canada is not aware of any 
anticipated impacts on third parties. These provisions are consistent with our WTO obligations.  
Question  
How will CPTPP 's progressive and modern provisions on labour affect migration flow from countries 
that are not signatories to the CPTPP?  
Reply  
The labour chapters of free trade agreements to which Canada is a Party do not address the 
movement of natural persons. Moreover, the labour chapt ers of free trade agreements to which 
Canada is a Party ensure that migrant workers are provided with the same labour protections as 
nationals.  WT/TPR/M/389/Add.1  
 
- 186 - 
 
  2.3.2.2 Unilateral preferential regime, paragraph 2.24, page 34  
Question  
The Philippines would like to know how the GPT is contributing to Canada 's trade diversification 
programme . How does Canada view its implementation in terms of enhancing trade volumes to and 
from countries enjoying preferential tariffs? What factors have contributed to its success (or failure)?  
Reply  
The General Preferential Tariff (GPT) is a unilateral preferential tariff treatment extended by Canada 
to imports from developing countries. As such, it does not contribute to Canada 's export 
diversification strategy nor does it enhance trade volumes from Canada to developing countries. The 
GPT provides an incentive to increase imports from developing countries by extending duty -free or 
reduced tariff rates for a wide range of goods (approximately 80% of tariff items).  
Question  
Are there plans to review the GPT and make revisions in its provision to reflect recent and important 
development especially with respect to Canada 's newly signed multilateral FTAs? If, so, please 
provide details on possible changes with regard to product groups and tarif fs – MFN duty -free, 
dutiable lines, duty free, and reduced rate – among others.  
Reply  
Canada is not currently contemplating revisions to its General Preferential Tariff (GPT) regime. Any 
future review undertaken by Canada would involve a consultation perio d during which any interested 
stakeholders (domestic and foreign) would be invited to make submissions. It should also be noted 
that Canada does not currently graduate countries from GPT eligibility when they become free trade 
partners.  
3 TRADE POLICIES AN D PRACTICES BY MEASURE  
3.1 Measures Directly Affecting Imports, 3.1.3 Tariffs, 3.1.3.1 Overview, paragraph 3.32, 
page 55  
Question  
Can Canada briefly describe the procedures involved in amending tariff? Does Canada have specific 
laws with provisions on the process of tariff modification? If so, what are these laws?  
Reply  
Canada 's tariff rates are established by Parliament and enacted through Canadian law under the 
Customs Tariff and can be changed by a legislative or regulatory amendment, depending on the 
nature of the change being implemented.  
Most applied rate changes require legislative amendments (e.g., in the context of federal Budget 
measures or free trade agreement (FTA) implementation). In such cases, amendments are typically 
implemented through Bud get or FTA implementing legislation, which are subject to the Canada 's 
regular legislative process. More details on the legislative process can be found at: 
https://www.ourcommons.ca/About/Compendium/LegislativeProcess/c_g_legislativeprocess -e.htm . 
The Customs Tariff also contains legislative authorities to amend tariff rates through regulatory 
amendments, in specified circumstances. For example, secti on 82 of the Customs Tariff permits the 
Government to reduce tariff rates on manufacturing inputs via a regulatory amendment. Such a 
regulatory process generally entails public consultations and approval by Cabinet, followed by a 
Governor in Council decisi on, on the recommendation of the Minister of Finance. If such a change is 
approved, it is published in the Canada Gazette and the Canada Border Services Agency administers 
the changes and issues a Customs Notice to importers.  WT/TPR/M/389/Add.1  
 
- 187 - 
 
  3.1.3.2 Tariff Structure, para graph 3.33, pages 55 -56 
Question  
Can Canada explain why it grants MFN tariff treatment to all its trading partner, except the 
Democratic Republic of Korea? How does Canada treat products originating from the Democratic 
Republic of Korea and intended for export to Canada?  
Reply  
The Democratic Republic of Korea is not a WTO member or observer and is not entitled to most -
favoured -nation (MFN) tariff treatment under Canadian law.  
The General Tariff of 35 % applies to products from the Democratic Republic of Korea. Where 
Canada 's MFN rate for a given product exceeds 35 %, the MFN rate applies to imports of that good.  
3.1.3.3 Tariff quotas, paragraph 3.39, page 59  
Question  
What specific parameters are used in identifying/classifying produc ts to be included in Canada 's 
Import Control List?  
Reply  
Under the Export and Import Permits Act, the Governor in Council may add a good to the Import 
Control List for the following purposes:  
• to ensure, in accordance with the needs of Canada, the best possible supply and 
distribution of an article that is scarce in world markets or in Canada or is subject to 
governmental controls in the countries of origin or to allocation by intergovernmental 
arrangement;  
• to restrict, for the purpose of supporting any action taken under the Farm Products 
Marketing Agencies Act, the importation in any form of a like article to one produced or 
marketed in Canada the quantities of which are fixed or determined under that Act;  
• to restrict the importation of arms, ammunition , implements or munitions of war, army, 
naval or air stores, or any articles deemed capable of being converted thereinto or made 
useful in the production thereof;  
• to implement an action taken under the Agricultural Marketing Programs Act or the 
Canadian Da iry Commission Act, with the object or effect of supporting the price of the 
article;  
• to implement an intergovernmental arrangement or commitment; or  
• to prevent the frustration or circumvention of the Agreement on Textiles and Clothing in 
Annex 1A of the W orld Trade Organization Agreement by the importation of goods that 
are like or directly competitive with goods to which the Agreement on Textiles and Clothing 
applies.  
For further information, please refer to the Import Control List : (https://laws -
lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/regulations/C.R.C.,_c._604/index.html ) and section 5 of the Export and 
Import Permits Act ( https://laws -lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/acts/E -19/). WT/TPR/M/389/Add.1  
 
- 188 - 
 
  3.1.3.4 WTO bindings, paragraph 3.42, page 60  
Question  
What is the current status of Canada 's transposition of tariff concessions?  
Reply  
Canada 's HS2012 transposition of tariff concessions is in the final process. It is now being reviewed 
by other WTO members. Canada will begin working on its HS2017 transposition of tariff concessions 
once the HS2012 transposition has been certified. Canada 's current applied tariff schedule is based 
on the HS2017 nome nclature.  
3.1.6 Anti -dumping, countervailing, and safeguard measures, 3.1.6.1 Anti -dumping and 
countervailing measures, paragraph 3.69, pages 74 -75 and 3.75, page 76  
Question  
What are the procedures for the conduct of anti -circumvention investigation? How does it differ from 
the scope proceeding discussed in para 3.75 (quoted below) of the report?  
Reply  
Anti-circumvention investigations are conducted under the Special Import Measures Act and are 
intended to address situations where, after the imposition of anti -dumping or countervailing duties, 
foreign producers may attempt to circumvent duties by making slight modifications to, or changing 
the pattern of production of, exported goods such that the good no longer falls within the scop e of 
goods to which duties apply. These investigations may be self -initiated by the CBSA or initiated on 
the basis of a complaint alleging that anti -dumping and countervailing duties are being 
circumvented. Where warranted, the measure may be modified to e xtend the scope of the duties to 
cover importations of goods that are circumventing existing duties.  
Scope proceedings, in contrast, are intended to clarify whether certain goods fall within the product 
description of an existing anti -dumping or countervai ling measure, including whether the good in 
question originates in a country subject to the duties. Scope rulings indicate whether goods are 
subject to the anti -dumping or countervailing measure, but unlike anti -circumvention investigations, 
do not result in a modification of the measure.  
The full text of the amendments implementing anti -circumvention investigations and scope 
proceedings it is available in Canada 's WTO notification: G/ADP/N/1/CAN/4/Suppl.2 –
G/SCM/N/1/CAN/4/Suppl.2 –G/SG/N/1/CAN/3/Suppl.1.  
Paragraph 3.81, page 78  
Question  
What parameters are considered in determining the existence of price distortion? What particular 
market situations lead to price distortions?  
Reply  
Subsection 16(2)(c) of the Special Import Measures Act (SIMA) provides that the Canadian Border 
Services Agency (CBSA) may determine normal values using an alternative methodology in 
situations where domestic prices in the exporting country are distorted due to a particular market 
situation. As per subsection 16(2.1), a parti cular market situation may be found to exist in respect 
of any goods of a particular exporter or of a particular country, as appropriate.  
 WT/TPR/M/389/Add.1  
 
- 189 - 
 
  In determining whether paragraph 16(2)(c) of SIMA is applicable, the CBSA will consider whether 
there are any circums tances in the market affecting the sales of like goods for use in the country of 
export, such that a proper comparison is not possible. In these cases, the CBSA will publish the 
factors examined in making this determination in the Statement of Reasons.  
Paragraph 3.89, page 81  
Question  
How does the number of AD measures specifically applied on steel products in 2018 compare with 
those of the past few years? Do AD measures applied on steel products regularly comprise a 
substantial majority (more than 2/3) of total AD measures? If not, what factors have contributed to 
the increase in the number of measures applied on steel products.  
Reply  
As of December 2018, there were 83 definitive anti -dumping measures in place, over two thirds of 
which applied to steel prod ucts. This is similar to the percentage of anti -dumping measures applied 
to steel products at the time of Canada 's last trade policy review (TPR). As of December 2014, 
53 definitive anti -dumping measures were in place, 60 % of which applied to steel products.  
Paragraph 3.91, page 81  
Question  
What parameters are considered in determining continuation or recurrence of dumping? Does the 
expiry review include recalculation of dumping margin and modification of the existing applied AD 
duty?  
Reply  
An expiry  review involves three phases: (1) an expiry proceeding conducted by the Canadian 
International Trade Tribunal (CITT) to decide whether to initiate an expiry review; (2) the Canadian 
Border Services Agency (CBSA) 's investigation into the likelihood of cont inued or resumed dumping 
and/or subsidizing; and (3) the CITT 's review into the likelihood of injury or retardation caused by 
the continuation or resumption of dumping and/or subsidizing.  
Subsection 37.2(1) of the Special Import Measure Regulations outline s the factors to be considered 
by the CBSA in making a determination as to whether the expiry of a measure is likely to result in 
the continuation or resumption of dumping or subsidizing of the goods:  
In making a determination under paragraph 76.03(7)(a) o f the Act, the President may consider:  
a) whether there has been dumping of goods while a finding or order in respect of the goods is 
in effect and, if applicable : 
i. the period during which the dumping occurred,  
ii. the volume and prices of the dumped and non -dumped goods,  
iii. the margin of dumping, and  
iv. for non -dumped goods, the amount by which the export prices exceed the normal values 
of the goods;  
b) whether there has been subsidizing of goods while a finding or order in respect of the goods 
is in effect and, if applicable : 
i.  the nature and duration of the foreign subsidy programme  in respect of the goods,  WT/TPR/M/389/Add.1  
 
- 190 - 
 
  ii. the period during which the subsidizing occurred,  
iii. the volume of the subsidized goods, and  
iv. the amount of subsidy;  
(b.1)  whether there has been a decision setting out a finding of circumvention in respect of the 
order or finding that is subject to the expiry review or in respect of similar goods to the goods 
to which that order or finding applies;  
(c)  the performance of t he exporters, foreign producers, brokers and traders including, where 
applicable, in respect of production, capacity utilization, costs, sales volumes, prices, 
inventories, market share, exports and profits;  
(d)  the likely future performance of the export ers, foreign producers, brokers and traders on the 
basis of factors, where applicable, such as production, capacity utilization, sales volumes, 
prices, inventories, market share, exports and profits;  
(e)  the potential for the foreign producers to produce the goods in facilities that are currently used 
to produce other goods;  
(f)  evidence of the imposition of anti -dumping or countervailing measures by the authorities of a 
country other than Canada in respect of goods of the same description or in respect o f similar 
goods;  
(g)  whether measures taken by the authorities of a country other than Canada are likely to cause 
a diversion of dumped or subsidized goods into Canada;  
(h)  any changes in market conditions domestically or internationally, including chang es in the 
supply of and demand for the goods, in sources of imports into Canada, and in prices, market 
share and inventories;  
(i)  the imposition of anti -dumping or countervailing measures by authorities of Canada in respect 
of similar goods while an order  or finding in respect of the goods was in effect; and  
(j)  any other factor pertaining to the current or likely behaviour or state of a foreign government 
or of the domestic or international economy, market for goods or industry as a whole or in 
relation to individual producers, exporters, brokers or traders.  
At the end of an expiry review, if both the CBSA and the CITT have made positive findings, the CITT 
may continue the order, with or without amendment.  
Question  
Does Canada extend the impositi on of AD duty by another five (5) years, or is the period of extension 
based on the results of the expiry review?  
Reply  
If the Canadian International Trade Tribunal (CITT) determines that the expiry of a finding or order 
is likely to result in injury to th e domestic industry, it may continue the finding or order for up to 
five years or until a request for an interim review is filed with the CITT. As per section 76.01 of the 
Special Import Measures Act, the CITT has the authority to conduct an interim review  in order to 
review a finding of injury, threat of injury or an order continuing such a finding pursuant to an expiry 
review, in whole or in part, at any time following the issuance of the finding or order and its expiry. 
At the conclusion of an interim re view, the CITT may continue the order or rescind any aspect of it.  WT/TPR/M/389/Add.1  
 
- 191 - 
 
  3.1.6.2 Safeguards, paragraph 3.102, page 86  
Question  
How does Canada treat importations of subject product by local producers (representing the 
domestic industry), for resale in the domestic market, in the determination of import surge?  
Reply  
Neither the Canadian International Trade Tribunal Act nor the Canadian International Trade Tribunal 
Regulations address how to treat importations of subject goods by the domestic industry for res ale 
in determining if there was an increase in imports. In Canada 's 2018 steel safeguard inquiry, the 
CITT included imports by domestic producers for resale in the determination of whether there was 
an increase in imports.  
3.1.7 Other measures affecting im ports, paragraph 3.107, page 87  
Question  
What impact, if any, did the U.S. tariffs on imports of certain steel and aluminum have on the number 
of AD measures applied on steel products by Canada in 2018?  
Reply  
Five definitive anti -dumping measures were imposed on imports of steel in 2018 and no 
anti-dumping measures were imposed on aluminum products during this period. The trade remedy 
investigations in question were initiated on the basis of properly documented complaints from the 
domestic industry demo nstrating evidence that dumped goods were causing them injury.  
3.3 Measures Affecting Production and Trade, 3.3.1 Incentives, 3.3.1.1 Incentives 
programmes, paragraph 3.130, page 92  
Question  
If Canada does not have "specific overarching legislation governi ng incentives and subsidies ", how 
would Canada legally regulate the mechanics, requisites, scopes and limits of giving incentives and  
subsidies to a product/service, or to a company, or to an industry, since these schemes would have 
discomforting competit ive effects to other non -subsidized players in a free market economy?  
Reply  
There is no overarching subsidy control system in Canada. The various federal, provincial and 
territorial governments are responsible for ensuring that any subsidies provided compl y with 
Canada 's international obligation and to assess their competition effects when relevant. The federal 
government has periodically provided information sessions for officials from provincial and territorial 
governments to share information on the prov isions of the Agreement on Subsidies and 
Countervailing Measures (ASCM). The federal government also engages in consultations with the 
provincial and territorial governments to ensure that sub -federal subsidy programs that meet the 
notification requirement s under Article 25 of the ASCM are notified.  
3.3.6 Government procurement, 3.3.6.2 Legal, institutional and policy framework, 
paragraph 3.228, pages  113-114 
Question  
What are the instances where Treasury Board approval is not required for contracting out project?  WT/TPR/M/389/Add.1  
 
- 192 - 
 
  Reply  
Treasury Board approval is required for procurements that exceed the relevant dollar value 
thresholds prescribed in the Treasury Board Contracting Policy. See Appendix C of the Contracts 
Directive for details: https://www.tbs -sct.gc.ca/pol/doc -eng.aspx?id=14494 . 
Question  
What are the bid evaluation criteria employed in government procurement in Canada?  
Reply  
Section 10 of the Treasury Board Contracting Policy sets out parameters on selecting a bid, 
establishing price, selecting a contractor, and receiving bids. For example, requirements should be 
defined, and specifications and estimates established before bid s are solicited and contracts 
awarded, so that all prospective contractors are treated equally. The bid evaluation criteria depend 
on what is being acquired. For further details, consult section 10 of the Contracting Policy: 
https://www.tbs -sct.gc.ca/pol/doc -eng.aspx?id=14494 . 
Paragraphs 3.234 -3.237, pages 115 -116 
Question  
Is there a complaint fee to be paid for the filing of any of the complaints mentioned above?  
Reply  
There is currently no fee to file a procurement complaint with the Canadian International Trade 
Tribunal.  
Question  
What happens to the procurement process pending the resolution of the complaint?  
Reply  
During the course of an inquiry, government actions related to a procurement process under inquiry 
may proceed, except in cases where the Canadian International Trade Tribunal (CITT) has exercised 
its power under the Canadian International Trade Tribunal Act and the Canadian International Trade 
Tribunal Procurement In quiry Regulations to postpone the award of a procurement contract that is 
the subject of an inquiry.  
The CITT can issue a stop -award order where a complainant requests it. However, as provided for 
in Canada 's trade agreements, the federal government institution to which the complaint is directed 
can override the stop -award order where it considers it impractical to delay the procurement until 
the CITT process is completed. Where a stop -award order is overridden and the CITT subsequently 
determines that the complainant was wrongly deprived of its opportunity to be awarded the contract 
in question, the CITT will order the federal government institution to compensate the complainant 
an amount equal to the profit the complainant could reasonably  have expected had the procurement 
been carried out in accordance with the trade agreements.  
Question  
For complaints within the monetary threshold of the CITT, no prior recourse to administrative 
proceeding is required? Complaints may be filed directly and  at the first instance with the CITT?  
Reply  
Complainants are not required to pursue recourse through administrative proceedings prior to filing 
a procurement complaint with the Canadian International Trade Tribunal (CITT).  WT/TPR/M/389/Add.1  
 
- 193 - 
 
  However, complainants do have the  option to object to the federal government institution 
responsible for the procurement prior to filing a complaint with the CITT. If the complainant chooses 
to do this, a complaint cannot be filed with the CITT unless relief is denied by that government 
institution.  
Question  
Does Canada have procurement -related criminal offenses other than bid rigging? If yes, what would 
be the penalty if found guilty?  
Reply  
There are several Criminal Code offences relevant to keeping procurement free from abuse. For 
examp le, the Government Contracts Regulations (GCRs) require as part of each government contract 
that contractors do not have convictions for several criminal offences, such as: 'frauds against the 
government, ' 'selling or purchasing office, ' or 'selling defect ive goods or services to the government. ' 
For further details, see the Deemed Terms of the GCRs : https://laws -
lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/regulations/sor -87-402/page -2.html#h -905917 , and subsection 750(3) of the 
Criminal Code : https://laws -lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/acts/c -46/page -199.html#h -132114 . 
Question  
Can you cite a specific case of bid -rigging and the penalties imposed by the CITT on the liable 
parties?  
Reply  
The Canadian International Trade Tribunal (CITT) recognizes that p rocuring entities have an 
obligation to exclude bids where there has been bid rigging and will uphold such an action where the 
entity has done so or order the entity to do so if it has not. The CITT otherwise plays no role. Where 
action beyond excluding bi ds is considered, it is handled by the Competition Bureau and may include 
criminal penalties. We do not have a specific case of bid rigging to cite.  
3.3.6.3 Interprovincial procurement arrangements, 3.3.6.3.1 Canadian Free Trade 
Agreement (CFTA), paragraph s 3.246 -3.249, pages 118 -119 
Question  
How do you apply preference for SMEs, and other preference that Canada may have when it comes 
to procurement?  
Reply  
Where Canada applies preferences to its procurements, it does so in a manner that is fully compliant 
with all of its international and internal trade obligations. For example, all of Canada 's trade 
agreements include an exemption for any measures adopted or maintained with respect to Aboriginal 
peoples, including Aboriginal businesses.  
Question  
How do you implement the policy of the Canadian government to protect Aboriginal Canadians vis-
à-vis the non -discrimination policy of the WTO -GPA? 
Reply  
Canada would direct you to Annex 7(3) of Canada 's Market Access Schedule in the revised WTO 
Agreement on Government Procurement, which states "This Agreement does not apply to any 
measure adopted or maintained with respect to Aboriginal peoples. It does not affect existing 
aboriginal or treaty rights of  any of the Aboriginal peoples of Canada under section 35 of the WT/TPR/M/389/Add.1  
 
- 194 - 
 
  Constitution Act, 1982. " As noted above, Canada has carved -out from all its trade agreements 
procurements done in support of Aboriginal peoples, including Aboriginal businesses.  
Question  
Outside WTO -GPA and other FTAs where Canada is a party, does Canada have laws, rules and 
regulations that allow foreign bidders to participate in its government procurement?  
Reply  
Canada has obligations with respect to sanctions against certain countries w hich prevent suppliers 
from those countries bidding on Canadian government contracts. Apart from countries under 
sanction, Canada does not have rules that explicitly prohibit suppliers from foreign countries in 
bidding on Canadian government contracts. How ever, suppliers of goods and services from countries 
that do not have government procurement commitments with Canada have no guaranteed access 
to the Canadian government procurement market and do not have access to the bid challenge 
procedures under the Ca nadian International Trade Tribunal.  
Question  
For Limited Tendering, can the Procuring Entity go directly to one supplier or there is a semblance 
of competition, i.e. invite at least three known suppliers?  
Reply  
Limited tendering does not always mean that a procurement is non -competitive. Whether or not a 
limited tendering is competitive depends on the reason that limited tendering is used. Some 
procurements where limited tendering is used may not be as amenable to competition. For example, 
in the Article X III (1) of the revised WTO Agreement on Government Procurement, competition is 
not appropriate in circumstances such as:  
(b)  where the goods or services can be supplied only by a particular supplier and no reasonable 
alternative or substitute goods or ser vices exist for any of the following reasons:  
i. the requirement is for a work of art;  
ii. the protection of patents, copyrights or other exclusive rights; or  
iii. due to an absence of competition for technical reasons;  
In addition, Canada 's Government Contracts Regulations have requirements for competition that are 
separate from those of Canada 's trade agreements, and which must be met regardless of the 
existence of valid reasons to use limited tendering under GPA Article XII(1).  
Question  
Is there a procurement modality in the Canadian procurement law where the Procuring Entity is 
allowed to negotiate directly with a supplier?  
Reply  
Negotiation is only used where permitted by domestic regulations and/or policies and, where covered 
by trade agr eements, in a manner that is fully compliant with the relevant trade agreement 
obligations. While many procurements do not use negotiation, it is permitted under Canada 's 
government procurement regime. For example, a bidder may be asked to provide price 
substantiation when only one valid bid has been received. If the information provided is not 
acceptable to the contracting authority, then price negotiation should take place.  WT/TPR/M/389/Add.1  
 
- 195 - 
 
  3.3.7 Intellectual property rights, paragraph 3.273, page s 123-124 
Question  
What are the main contributors to Canada 's declining Global Innovation index and IP protection 
rankings in the past few years? What are the major challenges faced by Canada in implementing its 
Intellectual Property (IP) Strategy, which was launche d in April 2018?  
Reply  
Given the methodology and the multitude and variety of factors that can impact on innovation, of 
which intellectual property (IP) is only one, it is difficult to identify any given factor as the main 
contributor.  
Canada continues to strive to ensure that we have marketplace frameworks that are conducive to 
and promote innovation. In this vein, the Government launched the Innovation and Skills Plan in 
2017 - an ambitious effort to make Canada a world -leading centre for inn ovation. Over the last two 
years, the Government announced new measures to continue building on its Innovation and Skills 
Plan, making Canada 's innovation programs easier to access and to use, and expanding support for 
Canadian companies that want to scale  up and take their innovations to markets around the world.  
This included the creation of a new IP strategy in 2018 to help Canadian companies better protect 
and access ideas to grow and succeed. Over the next five years, the Government of Canada will be 
making sure that Canadian businesses, creators, entrepreneurs and innovators have access to the 
best possible IP resources through IP awareness, education and advice; strategic IP tools for growth; 
and IP legislation.  
Chief among the goals of the Government  of Canada in launching its national IP strategy is to 
enhance the understanding of IP among Canadian businesses, creators, entrepreneurs and 
innovators, enabling them to better recognize the value of IP and build IP into their business and 
growth strategi es. As part of Canada 's comprehensive IP strategy, the Government of Canada will 
be conducting an IP awareness and use survey to identify how Canadians understand and use IP, 
including groups that have traditionally been less likely to use IP, such as wome n and Indigenous 
entrepreneurs. The results of the survey will help the Government of Canada better meet the needs 
of these groups.  
3.3.7.2 General institutional and regulatory framework, paragraph 3.282, page 127  
Question  
How are the IP provisions in CETA, the CUSMA, and the CPTPP agreements could likely disadvantage, 
if applicable, countries that are not a signatory of above -mentioned agreements in terms of trade 
and investment?  
Reply  
The intellectual property (IP) provisions of the CETA  and the CPTPP have been implemented in a 
manner fully consistent with Canada 's multilateral IP obligations, including the Most -Favoured -
Nations obligations of the WTO Agreement on Trade -Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights 
(TRIPS). The CUSMA ha s not yet been implemented; however, information regarding Canada 's 
implementation of its CUSMA obligations required upon entry into force of the Agreement may be 
found online under "An Act to implement the Agreement between Canada, the United States of 
America and the United Mexican States. " (https://www.parl.ca/DocumentViewer/en/42 -1/bill/C -
100/first -reading ). Intellectual property obligations that are subject to a transit ion period are not 
included in the bill outlined above.  WT/TPR/M/389/Add.1  
 
- 196 - 
 
  4 TRADE POLICIES BY SECTOR  
4.1 Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries, 4.1.3 Fisheries, 4.1.3.5 International 
arrangements, paragraph 4.95, page 164  
Question  
"Besides IUU fishing, on 3 October 2018, Canada and nine other countries signed an Agreement to 
Prevent Unregulated Commercial Fishing on the High Seas in the Central Arctic Ocean. This prohibits 
commercial fishing in the high seas of the Central Arctic Ocean for at least 16 years. As part of the  
Agreement, there will be a joint scientific research and monitoring programme, including data 
sharing, to improve understanding of the area 's ecosystems, and determine conservation and 
management measures for fish stocks. The Agreement will enter into for ce once all ten Parties have 
ratified it. Moreover, although they are non -binding agreements, Canada has signed several 
Memoranda of Understanding (MOUs) with other countries, including China, Norway, Portugal, the 
Russian Federation, and Spain, as well as  agreements for increased bilateral cooperation in the areas 
of fisheries management and science research conducive to better international fishery and ocean 
governance. " 
 
Are there prospects/possibilities of expanding the foregoing agreements to cover the  Pacific Ocean 
and South China Sea?  
Reply  
The Agreement to Prevent Unregulated High Seas Fisheries in the Central Arctic Ocean includes only 
the Arctic High Seas and by definition will not include the Pacific Ocean or the South China Sea. 
Canada has existi ng mechanisms for discussions on Pacific Ocean fisheries management issues with 
various countries through bilateral MOUs and agreements. Fisheries and Oceans Canada does not 
have any agreements that include the South China Sea and there are no current plan s to do so.  
4.4.3 Transport, 4.4.3.2 Maritime transport, paragraph 4.250, page 201  
Question  
What could be the reasons/factors for Canada 's non -U.S. maritime trade to be highly reliant on 
foreign flagged vessels and the services of the international market? Why specifically on "non-US 
Maritime Trade " solely?  
Reply  
Canada maintains an open international maritime transport services sector regi me which ensures 
non-discriminatory access to and use of ports. Canada encourages all of its trading partners to 
maintain the same level of openness. As such, international maritime trade is carried by the most 
competitive available transportation service provider, which is generally an internationally registered 
vessel operator. Given the geography of North America and the long land border between Canada 
and the United States, most cross border trade is carried by road and rail transportation. The 
distinct ion of "non-US" maritime trade allows Canada to better calculate the approximate value of 
international trade occurring onboard vessels.  
Question  
Why are there few national carriers providing international marine transportation services 
considering that Canada ranked 31 in ownership of the world fleet?  
Reply  
The ownership and operation of a Canadian registered vessel results in certain requirements that 
may render them less competitive vis-à-vis internationally registered vessels. As such, and based 
on Canada 's open inter national maritime transport services sector, these requirements may, among 
other factors, explain why lower cost internationally registered vessels are used more often for trade 
purposes.  WT/TPR/M/389/Add.1  
 
- 197 - 
 
  Question  
Are there chances of lightening the "shipping protection provisions " aside from the partial 
liberalization of targeted maritime services under the Coasting Trade Act?  
Reply  
Canada liberalized coasting trade in targeted areas as a result of certain provisions in the Canada -EU 
Comprehensive Economic and Trade Agreement (CETA ) and the Transportation Modernization Act. 
At present, there are no plans to further liberalize the Canadian cabotage regime.  
Report by Canada – WT/TPR/G/389  
1 CANADA IN THE GLOBAL TRADING SYSTEM  
Paragraph 1.2, page 4  
Question  
Will this commitment extend to emerging economies such as the Philippines in terms of honouring 
completed contracts?  
Reply  
Canada has prioritized a fair and predictable trading order, built on a rules -based multilateral trading 
system that works for all parties. This includes engaging with emerging economies at all levels on 
trade and cross -border investment. Recognizing this, Canada has worked constructively in forums 
such as the WTO, OECD and APEC to strengthen collaboration with emerging economies.  
2 TRADE AND ECONOMIC ENVIR ONMENT  
2.1 Economic Overview, paragraph 2.4, pages 4 -5 
Question  
How does Canada maintain its debt -to-GDP ratio at a consistently low level? What could be the 
contributing factors to this effect?  
Reply  
Maintaining Canada 's low -debt advantage is a key priori ty for the federal government. The 
Government has and will continue to maintain a low net debt -to-GDP level through prudent 
management of deficits.  
Ensuring Canada has a strong and improving budgetary position means that the Government can 
respond to unfor eseen developments, and that future generations are not burdened with debt.  
Question  
What policy instruments/policy reforms on this aspect would Canada suggest to other economies?  
Reply  
The government of Canada currently has no specific legislation on fiscal targets on debt or deficit. 
However, the Government maintains a clear public position to maintain debt on a low and declining 
track.  WT/TPR/M/389/Add.1  
 
- 198 - 
 
  3 TRADE POLICY DEVELOPMENTS 2015 -2019  
3.1 Multilateral Trade Policy, 3.1.1 Canada and the WTO, paragr aph 3.8, page 7  
Question  
What concrete actions or steps will Canada be supporting relevant to the strengthening and 
modernizing of the WTO?  
Reply  
In October 2018, the Honourable Jim Carr, Minister of International Trade Diversification convened 
the "Ottawa Group ", which is a small, representative group of WTO members committed to 
supporting and strengthening the multilateral trading system, tasked t o identify pragmatic ideas 
aimed at enhancing and improving the WTO over the short, medium and long term. In doing so, 
Canada is taking a ground -up approach that is designed to spark discussion and catalyse momentum 
on issues that would enjoy the broadest support by WTO members. The Group 's discussions are also 
intended to complement reform efforts by other WTO members. One outcome of the Group was the 
launch in January 2019 of a process, open to all WTO members, to improve the functioning of WTO 
committees. Four initial bodies were identified for review and each review is led by a volunteer 
member: Brazil (Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures Committee); Singapore (Technical Barriers to 
Trade Committee); Switzerland (Rules of Origin Committee); and  Australia (Council for Trade in 
Services).  
Among other efforts, Canada has also released two discussion papers on WTO reform (JOB/GC/201, 
JOB/GC/211). In addition, Canada has co -sponsored various proposals on reform issues, including 
on dispute settlement  (WT/GC/W/752/Rev.2, WT/GC/W/754/Rev.2), and transparency and 
notifications (JOB/GC/204/Rev.1 and JOB/CTG/14/Rev.1 [same document, two numbers]), as well 
as a paper on development (WT/GC/W/770/Rev.3).  
Moreover, Canada has been an active participant in vari ous related talks, including the General 
Council process to find solutions with respect to the Appellate Body impasse, fisheries subsidies 
negotiations, and e -commerce discussions. Canada has also been actively engaging on WTO reform 
discussions outside th e WTO such as in the context of the G20, with a view to seeking ways to try 
to enhance dialogue and advance consensus -building. Canada looks forward to continuing to work 
with other WTO members on these issues toward strengthening and modernizing of the WT O. 
3.1.3 Ongoing WTO Negotiations and Initiatives, paragraph 3.14, page 9  
Question  
Canada has taken a leading role in the implementation of the Buenos Aires Declaration, hosting the 
first workshop held under the auspices of the Declaration, on trade and ge nder-based analysis, in 
March 2018.  
What specific actions or programs/activities/projects have been undertaken or proposed to be 
undertaken by Canada after conducting the First Workshop?  
Reply  
Since hosting the first workshop under the Buenos Aires Declara tion, Canada has remained closely 
involved in supporting the development and organization of subsequent workshops (e.g. providing 
advice on speakers and content). Most recently, Canada provided several speakers at the 28 March  
2019 Workshop on Crafting Gender Responsive Trade Agreements and has supported UNCTAD 's 
work on key data required for gender responsive trade policy which emerged from that first 
workshop. Canada has also been looking at how to integrate gender considerations into the work  of 
WTO Committees. Looking ahead, Canada will continue to work with partners to deepen and enhance 
the understanding of the gender impacts of trade at the WTO.  WT/TPR/M/389/Add.1  
 
- 199 - 
 
  Question  
Where is Canada in terms of Ranking on Global Gender Gap under the World Economic Foru m? 
Please share your priorities on this issue and your domestic approach to policy -making on women 
in trade.  
Reply  
While Canada ranked 16th on Global Gender Gap under the World Economic Forum in 2018, we 
acknowledge that much more can be done, notably in r emoving barriers to women 's success as 
entrepreneurs. To this end, Canada has put together domestic programs and measures to address 
some of the barriers women looking to export are facing, such as:  
• The Business Women in Trade (BWIT) Program, which is part  of the Trade Commissioner 
Service (TCS), is the only national programme  that provides targeted products and 
services to help women entrepreneurs internationalize. The programme  assists export -
ready and export active businesses that are at least 51 % owned and/or controlled by 
women to help achieve their potential in international markets.  
• Another measure to encourage women 's economic empowerment is the Government of 
Canada 's Women 's Entrepreneurship Strategy. This strategy is assisting the Canadian 
governme nt in achieving its goal of doubling the number of majority women -owned 
businesses by 2025 to 32% of Canadian SMEs.  
• Canada also seeks Trade and Gender chapters in our ongoing free trade negotiations (FTA) 
such as with Pacific Alliance and Mercosur. We have  concluded Trade and Gender Chapters 
in our modernized FTAs with Chile and Israel and a Trade and Gender Recommendation 
under the Comprehensive Economic and Trade Agreement (CETA) with the EU. These co -
operation based instruments also aim to address barrie rs to women 's access to the 
opportunities and benefits of trade through co -operation activities between the parties.  
3.4 Other Bilateral Initiatives, 3.4.3 Air Transport Agreements, paragraph 3.41, page 14  
Question  
What are the primal foci and salient features of the 2006 Blue Sky Policy of Canada?  
Reply  
An overview of the Blue Sky Policy 's focus and features can be found online at : 
www.tc.gc.ca/bluesky . 
Question  
How effective is this policy in terms o f implementation performance?  
Reply  
Canada has concluded new or expanded Air Transport Agreements (ATAs) covering 106 countries 
under the Blue Sky Policy. This includes an ATA with the European Union 's 28 member States. The 
ATAs negotiated under the Blue Sky Policy are categorized into three types:  
• open skies-type agreements: 22  
• expanded agreements: 28  
• new first -time agreements: 30  
The ATAs concluded under the Blue Sky Policy cover 96% of Canada 's overall international passenger 
traffic and, of this, 70% is covered by an open agreement.  WT/TPR/M/389/Add.1  
 
- 200 - 
 
  Question  
This policy is more than a decade old, how would this policy be made responsive to changing times 
and changing needs?  
Reply  
The Blue Sky Policy 's objectives and principles were developed with the specific ities of the Canadian 
aviation system in mind and a desire to promote long -term, sustainable competition. A mandatory 
independent evaluation of the Blue Sky Policy was completed in 2012 that focused on the core issues 
of policy relevance and performance. I t was found that the Policy was still responsive to needs in 
the Canadian air transport sector and that the outcomes of the Policy were continuing to benefit 
Canadians as a whole.  
Question  
Are there chances for Canada to broaden/widen the scopes/coverage, to reformulate 
goals/objectives, and to re -direct the focus of this Blue Sky Policy in order to address the globally 
dynamic and competitive air transport system playing field?  
Reply  
The Blue Sky Policy already takes into account a broad r ange of considerations, to the benefit of 
passengers, shippers and the tourism and business sectors, which include trade objectives. Regular 
consultations with the industry and other government departments have continued to reconfirm the 
relevance of the P olicy. Therefore, Canada has no intention of broadening the Policy 's scope or 
objectives at this time.  
Paragraph 3.42, page 14  
Question  
What are the salient features and conditionalities of these Air Transport Agreements that Canada 
has signed?  
Reply  
Under  the Blue Sky Policy, Canada 's concluded Air Transport Agreements (ATAs) are categorized 
into three types: Open -Skies type agreements, expanded agreements and new first -time 
agreements.  
Though all three types are considered ATAs, they do not all have the s ame form and content. For 
example, Canada has a number of ATAs that are 'code-share only ' and do not provide for own -
aircraft traffic rights. Some of these variances are listed below:  
• 22 Open Skies -type ATAs;  
• 1 ATA with the European Union 's 28 member State s; 
• 24 ATAs are code -share only; and  
• The vast majority of Canada 's ATAs, including those that were negotiated before the Blue 
Sky Policy was adopted, include unused traffic rights, which would allow for the launch of 
new or expanded services without the need to renegotiate the treaty.  
Question  
Please share the status and implementation performance of some of these Air Transport 
Agreements?  WT/TPR/M/389/Add.1  
 
- 201 - 
 
  Reply  
As Canada 's Air Transport Agreements (ATAs) are treaties, the timeline between the conclusion of 
negotiations a nd the entry into force of an ATA can take time since the ratification process can vary 
greatly from State to State. That said, Canada and most of its partners can apply ATAs on an 
administrative basis pending entry into force. At this time, Canada has con cluded ATAs covering 
122 countries, including those negotiated before the Blue Sky Policy was adopted. Of these, 74 ATAs 
or subsequent amendments are being applied on an administrative basis pending entry into force.  
Canada 's ATAs and subsequent amendments  that have entered into force are available on the Treaty 
Section of Global Affairs Canada 's website, which can be accessed at : https://treaty -
accord.gc.ca/procedures.aspx?lang=eng . Canada 's Policy on the Tabling of Treaties in Parliament is 
also available on this website: https://treaty -accord.gc.ca/procedures.aspx?lang=eng . 
4 OTHER KEY GOVERNMENT INITIATIVES  
4.2 Intellectual Property (IP), paragraph 4.9, page 17  
Question  
We would like to request for further elaboration on the objectives of Canada 's Intellectual Property 
Strategy. Aside from the amendments to the law or regulation, what are the other initiatives an d 
programs of the government under this Strategy?  
Reply  
In April 2018, the Government of Canada launched its national intellectual property (IP) Strategy. 
Chief among its goals is to enhance the understanding of IP among Canadian businesses, creators, 
entrepreneurs and innovators, enabling them to better recognize the value of IP and build IP into 
their business and growth strategies.  
As part of the Government of Canada 's comprehensive IP Strategy, Canada is investing 
CAD 85.3 million over five years to help Canadian businesses, creators, entrepreneurs and 
innovators understand, protect and access IP through various initiatives. These include IP legal 
clinics, a pilot pat ent collective, and a new online portal: the IP Marketplace. The Canadian 
Intellectual Property Office 's (CIPO) IP Awareness and Education Program is a key component of the 
IP Strategy.  
In 2018 -2019, the programme  expanded its offerings and tailored produc ts to meet the needs of 
small and medium -sized enterprises (SMEs) in key growth sectors and underrepresented groups, to 
assist them in their understanding and acquisition of IP. Now in its full maturity, CIPO 's IP Awareness 
and Education Program consists o f the following three pillars: IP for Business, IP Academy and IP 
Hub. 
As part of Canada 's comprehensive IP Strategy, the Government of Canada will be conducting an IP 
awareness and use survey to identify how Canadians understand and use IP, including grou ps that 
have traditionally been less likely to use IP, such as women and Indigenous entrepreneurs. The 
results of the survey will help CIPO and the Government of Canada better meet the needs of these 
groups.  
Paragraph 4.11, page 17  
Question  
"Canada has ext ended the term of copyright protection for published sound recordings; x x x " 
How long is the current term of protection? Under the laws of Canada, how long is the term of 
protection in case of published image and sound recording?  WT/TPR/M/389/Add.1  
 
- 202 - 
 
  Reply  
In June 2015, Bill C-59, "An Act to implement certain provisions of the budget tabled in Parliament 
on 21 April 2015 and other measures ", amended the Copyright Act to provide sound recordings and 
performances fixed in sound recordings published before the copyright expires an additional 20 years 
of copyright protection, by extending the term of protection from 50 years to the earlier of the end 
of 70 years after the end of the calendar year in which the first such publication occurs, and the end 
of 100 years after th e end of the calendar year in which the first fixation of the performance or sound 
recording occurs. If the performance fixed in a sound recording or sound recording is not published 
before the copyright expires, the term of protection expires 50 years aft er the end of the calendar 
year in which the first fixation occurs.  
Regarding the general copyright term of protection, which applies to most works (including 
photographs), Canada currently provides a term of "life of the author, plus 50 years. " 
Question  
"Canada has also ratified and acceded to several important multilateral treaties such as the World 
Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) Marrakesh Treaty and the WIPO Hague Agreement, as 
well as implementing IP provisions in trade agreements, including CETA and CPTPP ". Does Canada 
have commitments under the IP Chapters of CETA and CPTPP that are more favourable than it 
presently accords to other WTO members?  
Reply  
The intellectual property provisions of the CETA and the CPTPP have been implemented in a m anner 
fully consistent with Canada 's multilateral IP obligations, including the Most -Favoured -Nations 
obligations of the WTO Agreement on Trade -Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS).  
4.3 Cabinet Directive on Regulation, paragraph 4.13, pa ge 17  
Question  
Please cite a directive that puts an obligation to a Canadian national to disclose the importing 
country, under pain of punishment, that the items being exported do not include hazardous or 
harmful particles.  
Reply  
Canada implements its obligations under the Basel Convention through the Canadian Environmental 
Protection Act, 1999 (CEPA1999) and its Export and Import of Hazardous Waste and Hazardous 
Recyclable Material Regulations.  
4.9 Countermeasures on U.S. Steel and Alumi nium Products, paragraph 4.22, page 19  
Question  
How are the U.S. -imposed tariffs and Canada 's countermeasures affecting trade flows between 
Canada and the U.S.? Which sectors are most heavily affected?  
Reply  
On 17 May 2019, the U.S. and Canada announced the lifting of U.S. section 232 tariffs on Canadian 
Steel and aluminum, as well as Canada 's countermeasures. As announced by the Minister of Finance 
on 20 May 2019, Canada 's countermeasures are no longer in effect. U.S. tariffs against Canada wer e 
also repealed on 20 May 2019.  WT/TPR/M/389/Add.1  
 
- 203 - 
 
  5 EXPORT DIVERSIFICATION AND TRADE PROMOTION  
Paragraph 5.1, page 20  
Question  
What is Canada 's policy and directions over multilateral FTAs?  
Reply  
Canada has been pursuing an ambitious agenda of bilateral and regional FTAs because we believe 
more cross -border commerce is essential for global economic growth. At the heart of Canada 's trade 
policy is a desire to protect and build global confidence in the benefits of liberalized trade and the 
multilateral system that suppo rts it – safeguarding the economic health of all trading nations.  
6 INCLUSIVE TRADE  
6.2 Advancing an Inclusive Approach in Trade Agreements, 6.2.2 Trade and Labour, 
paragraph 6.14, page  25 
Question  
How does Canada monitor and ensure the compliance of the l abour rights and its protection in its 
Bilateral Trade Agreements, when some of its trade partners are not signatories to the ILO 
Declaration on Fundamental Principles Rights at Work and its eight (8) core conventions?  
Reply  
International Labour Organization (ILO) member States, by virtue of their membership, are 
committed to respect the rights and principles as stated in the 1998 ILO Declaration on Fundamental 
Principles and Rights at Work.  
In the context of the Comprehensive  Economic and Trade Agreement (CETA), Canada and the EU 
member States have committed to making continued and sustained efforts to ratify the fundamental 
ILO Conventions, if they have not yet done so. Canada will continue to seek to include the 
commitment t o ratify the ILO Conventions in its labour chapters of free trade agreements.  
Labour provisions in free trade agreements provide an opportunity for Canada and its partners to 
work collaboratively to ensure that they comply with international labour standar ds. 
Canada deepens its relationships with trading partners on labour issues by engaging in constructive 
dialogue with Ministries of Labour and various labour stakeholders. Canada 's labour -related technical 
assistance is an important aspect of these relatio nships.  
6.2.3 Trade and Gender, paragraphs 6.18 -6.19, page 25  
Question  
How does gender relate in Canada 's trade? What is the profile of men over women and women over 
men when it comes to Trade in Canada?  
Reply  
Among majority female owned SMEs (SMEs in which ownership by women is at least 51%), 11.2% 
export. In contrast, 12.2% majority male owned SMEs export and 10.5% of SMEs owned in equal 
partnerships export. Reference: http://www.ic.gc.ca/eic/site/061.nsf/eng/03087.html . 
In addition, women -owned businesses tend to be smaller and grow more slowly than those owned 
by men, have more difficulty accessing financing, and are less likely to export. Re ference: 
https://www150.statcan.gc.ca/n1/daily -quotidien/180924/dq180924b -eng.htm . WT/TPR/M/389/Add.1  
 
- 204 - 
 
  Question  
By specific trading business in Canada, what is the Profile of Men versus W omen or Women versus 
Men? 
Reply  
Statistics Canada 's 2018 study, Economic Insight on Women -owned Enterprises in Canada : 
(https://www150.statcan.gc.ca/n1/pub/11 -626-x/11-626-x2018083 -eng.htm ), found that for all 
industries between 2005 and 2013, approximately 18% of companies in Canada were who lly women -
owned, with 15% equally owned, and 67% were owned by men. In general, despite the significant 
difference between the number of women - and men -owned enterprises, the number of women -
owned enterprises (+33%) and the employment in these enterprises (+20%) increased at a faster 
pace relative to men -owned and equally -owned (women and men) enterprises. In addition, women -
owned enterprises were more common in service industries. The educational services sector had the 
most women -owned and equally -owned c ompanies, with 35% being wholly women -owned, and 17% 
equally -owned. In terms of "trading " sectors, in the retail trade sector, 23% of businesses were 
wholly women -owned and 18% were equally owned. However, in the wholesale trade sector, only 
14% of compani es were owned by women, and 15% were equally owned.  
Question  
Noting that there is Trade and Gender Chapter, what are the specific steps that need to be done in 
order to translate the provisions of the chapters into concrete actions?  
Reply  
The inclusion of  a Trade and Gender chapter in the modernized Canada -Chile FTA and Canada -Israel 
FTA, as well as a Trade and Gender recommendation with the EU under the Comprehensive Economic 
Trade Agreement (CETA), are excellent examples of the principles governing Canad a's approach to 
trade and gender. These instruments acknowledge the importance of incorporating a gender 
perspective into economic and trade issues to ensure that economic growth benefits everyone; 
provide a framework for Canada and its trading partners to  undertake cooperation activities on 
issues related to trade and gender; and, establish a bilateral Committee or contact points to oversee 
these cooperation activities, reporting on them publicly.  
In terms of implementing Trade and Gender chapters, Canada recognizes that this is a key step in 
demonstrating that the Trade and Gender chapters add value and help achieve results in terms of 
advancing women 's economic empowerment and gender equality. Canada is gaining experience as 
we implement the chapter with Chile and the Recommendation with the EU. To date we have 
established detailed work plans with both the EU and Chile and are actively implementing activities 
informed by a set of guiding principles and key provisions in the Chapter such as the illustrative  list 
of co-operation activities. For example, with the EU, we are exchanging business women trade 
missions (Canada took a mission to the EU in November 2018 and the EU member States 
(Netherlands and Germany) are bringing women led missions to Canada in Ju ne and September 
2019), holding video conferences and workshops in Ottawa and Brussels, and much more work is 
planned over the next year. With Chile, Canada has supported our FTA partner in its presidency of 
APEC in 2019 and co -hosted a workshop on Women a nd Trade in March 2019 in Santiago during the 
Committee on Trade and Investment and also presented at the Advancing Women 's Economic 
Empowerment through Data Workshop in May in Vina Del Mar, Chile. The Trade and Gender 
implementation plans and activity rep orts will be published on the web shortly.  
General Question  
Considering that Canada has given recognition and importance to gender equality aspect of trade, 
does Canada also have policies with respect to Trade and Persons with Disabilities, which could fall 
under Canada 's Enhance Corporate Social Responsibility Strategy.  WT/TPR/M/389/Add.1  
 
- 205 - 
 
  Reply  
The current 2014 Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) Strategy does not address the issues of 
diversity and inclusion specifically, but this is implicit in the Government 's expectation that 
companies must act lawfully abroad, respecting human rights and operating in an environmentally 
and socially sustainable manner. Under the Strategy, Canada endorses, among other guidelines, the 
UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human R ights that recall in its 12th Principle that businesses 
should respect the human rights of individuals belonging to specific groups or populations that 
require special attention, where they may have adverse human rights impacts on them, including 
special r ights holders recognized by a UN Body Treaty such as persons with disabilities. The 2014 
CSR Strategy is under review which will serve to inform the next iteration of the Strategy 
(2020 -2024), where it is expected that there will be considerations for dive rsity and inclusion.  
6.2.4 Trade and SMEs , page 26  
Question  
Aside from the CPTPP, are there other FTAs of Canada wherein there are provisions on traditional 
knowledge in the context of IP? If there are such provisions in Canada 's FTAs, is the level of 
commitment the same with that under the CPTPP or higher?  
Reply  
No. The CPTPP is Canada 's only free trade agreement to date that includes provisions on traditional 
knowledge in its intellectual property chapter.  
General Question  
Canada 's Innovation Superclusters Initiative was not mentioned both in the TPR report by the 
Secretariat and Canada.  
The initiative was unveiled by Canada 's Federal Minister of Innovation, Science, and Economic 
Development in February 2018; aimed at creating techno logy superclusters in the areas of digital 
technology, protein industries, advanced manufacturing, SCALE AI, ocean and marine industry. The 
Canadian government will invest "up to CAD  950 million, which will be matched dollar for dollar by 
the private secto r." 
The Philippines would welcome information on how this initiative is progressing?  
Reply  
The Government of Canada created the Innovation Superclusters Initiative (ISI) to accelerate 
innovation and foster stronger connections between all players in a clus ter. 
As a collaborative initiative, the ISI brings together actors across sectors that would not have 
otherwise forged partnerships, including start -ups, large firms, post -secondary institutions, research 
organizations and the federal government. The super clusters are now operational, focusing on 
project selection and implementation as well as the forthcoming publication of their five -year 
strategies to support long -term growth.  
Canada 's superclusters represent innovative hubs of world -leading talent, cutti ng edge research and 
development, a competitive business environment, and innovative entrepreneurs. They represent 
strong links in global supply chains delivering high -quality Canadian products and solutions. The 
superclusters are now engaging internationa lly to identify partnerships that connect Canada 's 
strengths to the world.  
General Question  
How does Canada ensure that the government funds invested in the Superclusters initiative will not 
constitute a subsidy to the various superclusters especially to t hose firms that are not (or will be) 
exporting their goods and services overseas?  WT/TPR/M/389/Add.1  
 
- 206 - 
 
  Reply  
The Innovation Superclusters Initiative represents a Government of Canada co -investment with 
industry, where the Canadian private sector is matching federal government funds dollar for dollar 
in innovative projects across a broad range of economic sectors in a supercluster.  
Following a rigorous competitive assessment process, five industry -led consortia were selected as 
the supercluster entities that would sup port and strengthen large -scale collaboration among the 
private, public, and academic sectors across Canada. Funding is flowed through the supercluster 
entities, which are responsible for carrying out a transparent project selection process to determine 
how funds will ultimately be disbursed. As a programme  requirement, the consortia must include 
firms of all sizes, as well as academic and post -secondary institutions.  
Organizations from across Canada will have the opportunity to participate in supercluster activities, 
including collaborative projects, and access services. Firms from multiple sectors are participating in 
all the superclusters. Although the supercluster entities each have regional headquarters, any 
organization active and incorporated in Canad a—in any economic sector.  
 
  WT/TPR/M/389/Add.1  
 
- 207 - 
 
  RUSSIAN FEDERATION  
Report by the Secretariat – WT/TPR/S/389  
2 TRADE AND INVESTMENT REGIMES  
2.3 Trade Agreements and Arrangements, 2.3.2 Regional and preferential agreements, 
2.3.2.1 Reciprocal trade agreements, paragraph 2.19, page s 33-34 
Question  
A number of bilateral binding or non -binding side letters between Parties may change the rights and 
obligations of the Parties of the CPTPP. How do the WTO members get acquainted with these side 
letters and clarify thei r status, binding or non -binding?  
Reply  
Canada secured important outcomes through 18 binding side letters on a bilateral basis, including 
letters on culture and rules of origin for motor vehicles. Canada also signed 20 bilateral non -binding 
understandings in areas such as intellectual property, geographical indications (wines and spirits), 
e-commerce, and forestry products. The Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans -
Pacific Partnership (CPTPP) side letters are public information and they can be f ound here: 
https://www.international.gc.ca/trade -commerce/trade -agreements -accords -commerciaux/ agr-
acc/cptpp -ptpgp/text -texte/letters -lettres.aspx?lang=eng . 
Report by Canada – WT/TPR/G/389  
3 TRADE POLICY DEVELOPMENTS 2015 -2019  
3.1 Multilateral Trade Policy, 3.1.2 WTO Modernization, paragraph 3.9, page 7  
Question  
Is the "Ottawa Group " opened for participation to all interested WTO Members?  
Reply  
Members of the "Ottawa Group " are: Australia, Brazil, Canada, Chile, the European Union, Japan, 
Kenya, Mexico, New Zealand, Norway, Singapore, South Korea and Switzerland. The small but 
represe ntative group is meant to be a discussion starter form, as well as a catalyst to prompt 
meaningful reform and the basis for it. Starting small was intended to help focus the group 's work.  
The WTO is ultimately a consensus body but a small group, particular ly one diverse in geographical 
representation and levels of development, can help spur action. The Group can also serve as a 
sounding board for WTO Members on any reform proposals they may be considering, and its efforts 
are meant to be complementary to ot her WTO reform initiatives. Earlier this year, the group 
expanded its discussions through the launch of an informal review process, open to all interested 
WTO members, on how to improve and strengthen the ways WTO committees work. The Ottawa 
Group continue s to proceed transparently and ensure that all WTO members are aware of our work. 
This includes regular updates to the WTO membership during informal and formal plenary meetings. 
As well, other WTO members are encouraged to present ideals and proposals to the Group for 
feedback.  
3.3 Bilateral and Regional Free Trade Agreements, 3.3.1 New Trade Agreements, 
paragraph 3.20, page 11  
Question  
What is the mechanism of early engagement in the CETA chapter on regulatory cooperation? Does 
this mechanism of early eng agement apply to all WTO members or only to the EU?  WT/TPR/M/389/Add.1  
 
- 208 - 
 
  Reply  
Article 21.4 of the Comprehensive Economic and Trade Agreement (CETA) lists activities that the 
parties may undertake to fulfil the objections of regulatory cooperation. One of the activities is, "(b) 
consulting with each other, as appropriate, and exchang ing information throughout the regulatory 
development process. This consultation and exchange should begin as early as possible in that 
process ". Article 21.6, related to the CETA Regulatory Cooperation Forum, indicates that the Forum 
shall perform functio ns that include, "(c) review regulatory initiatives, whether in progress or 
anticipated, that a Party considers may provide potential for cooperation. The reviews, which will be 
carried out in consultation with regulatory departments and agencies, should s upport the 
implementation of this Chapter ". There is no specific CETA "mechanism " related to early consultation 
during the regulatory development process, but it is an activity that parties can pursue as an element 
of regulatory cooperation under the CETA.  Canada and the EU are in the process of exploring 
cooperation in a number of agreed regulatory cooperation areas (e.g., cybersecurity and the Internet 
of Things), some of which may include early consultation between parties in the regulatory 
development p rocess.  
The CETA Regulatory Cooperation chapter creates obligations for Canada to seek areas for regulatory 
cooperation with the EU, which do not extend to all WTO members. Canada 's Cabinet Directive on 
Regulations (CDR), however, sets out the Government o f Canada 's expectations and requirements 
in the development, management, and review of federal regulations, and requires Canadian 
regulators to assess opportunities for cooperation with other jurisdictions, domestically and 
internationally, on regulations and associated regulatory activities. This includes examining 
alignment of regulatory approaches and outcomes with key trading partners. In addition, the CDR 
specifies that during the development of a regulatory proposal, regulators are to meaningfully 
consult and engage stakeholders —including trading partners —that may be affected.  
Question  
What sectors does the CETA protocol on conformity assessment cover? Are the sectors covered by 
the CETA protocol on conformity assessment the same for Canadian and EU go ods? Has the protocol 
on conformity assessment entered into force?  
Reply  
The Comprehensive Economic and Trade Agreement (CETA) Protocol on the mutual acceptance of 
the results of conformity assessment includes a list of products covered (Annex 1) as well a s a list 
of product categories to be considered for inclusion in the future on a priority basis (Annex 2): 
https://international.gc.ca/trade -commerce/trade -agreements -accords -commerciaux/agr -
acc/ceta -aecg/text -texte/P2.aspx?lang=eng#1 . 
The list of products covered applies equally to Canada and to the EU. The Protocol entered into force 
(provisional application)  along with most of the rest of the agreement in September 2017.  
Paragraph 3.26, page 12  
Question  
CUFTA entered into force on 1 August 2017. Upon entry into force, Canada eliminated duties on 
99.9% of imports from Ukraine. Similarly, Ukraine immediately el iminated tariffs on approximately 
86% of Canada 's exports, with the balance of tariff concessions to be implemented over seven years. 
CUFTA also includes mechanisms to address a range of other non -tariff barriers to trade, such as 
sanitary and phytosanitar y measures and technical barriers to trade, thereby benefiting both 
Canadian and Ukrainian exporters and consumers. CUFTA reinforces Canada 's broader bilateral 
engagement in Ukraine, including the promotion of its sustainable economic growth. What 
mechanis ms does CUFTA provide to address a range of non -tariff barriers to trade?  
Reply  
The Canada -Ukraine Free Trade Agreement (CUFTA) provides several mechanisms to address 
non-tariff barriers to trade. Specifically, the sanitary and phytosanitary (SPS) chapter affirms the 
Parties ' rights and obligations under the WTO SPS Agreement, establishes Contact Points to facilitate WT/TPR/M/389/Add.1  
 
- 209 - 
 
  communication on SPS trade -related matters, and includes provisions requiring the Parties to work 
expeditiously to resolve SPS trade -related m atters. Together, these commitments will help ensure 
that market access gains for agriculture and agri -food, fish and seafood, and forestry products 
exporters are not undermined by unnecessary or overly trade restrictive SPS measures. As tariffs 
are reduce d, regulatory barriers can take on a greater importance for Canadian exporters. Modern 
trade agreements need to both eliminate tariffs on goods and address regulatory issues – such as 
product certification and technical standards – that can restrict trade.  The Technical Barriers to Trade 
(TBT) chapter will help ensure that technical regulations, conformity assessment procedures, and 
other standards related measures are not used as barriers to trade by being discriminatory or more 
trade restrictive than nece ssary. The chapter will help create a fair, transparent, predictable and 
open regulatory system. Building on the WTO TBT Agreement, the Canada -Ukraine TBT provisions 
help ensure that unnecessary or discriminatory regulatory requirements do not erode key ma rket 
access gains negotiated elsewhere in the agreement. These benefits will help to reduce costs and 
marketing delays for companies doing business in Ukraine, thereby improving Canadian 
manufacturers ' competitiveness.  
 
  WT/TPR/M/389/Add.1  
 
- 210 - 
 
  THE SEPARATE CUSTOMS TERRITORY OF TAIWAN,  PENGHU, KINMEN AND MATSU  
Report by the Secretariat – WT/TPR/S/389  
1 ECONOMIC ENVIRONMENT  
1.3 Developments in Trade and Investment, 1.33 Trends and patterns in foreign direct 
investment, paragraph 1.36, page 27  
Question  
During the revi ew period, growth rates of inward FDI to Canada remained modest. Inward FDI 
increased most in new sectors, such as real estate, rental and leasing, and information and cultural 
industries. The United States increased its share of Canadian inward FDI to 49%  of the total, whilst 
other regions generally recorded declines in market share. Europe, which is also a significant source 
of Canadian inward FDI, accounted for 35% of the inward stock in 2017 (Table 1.6). Does the 
government of Canada have any further pl ans to attract foreign investment to other new sectors, or 
to review periodically the FDI restrictions in place in sectors offering foreign investment incentives?  
Reply  
The Government of Canada supports increased and more diverse foreign investment from all major 
sectors. In Budget 2017, the Government of Canada announced a new vision for Canada 's economy 
as a global leader in innovation, anchored by the Innovation and Skills Plan. In this plan, the creation 
of the six Economic Strategy tables will support innovation in advanced manufacturing, agri -food, 
clean technology, digital industries, health/bio -sciences and resources of the future. Canada 's 
proactive FDI efforts will closely align with the six economic strategy tables whi le remaining reactive 
to the potential for investment from other sectors.  
The Government of Canada encourages foreign companies to invest in Canada and promotes an 
open, rules -based global investment regime. Canada 's foreign investment policy framework pro vides 
a welcoming environment that seeks to maximize the benefits of foreign direct investment in Canada 
while preserving other public policy interests. We periodically review our FDI landscape to maintain 
a competitive environment. For example, during the  fiscal year 2017 –18, a number of policy changes 
were introduced, reflecting Government commitments to encourage Canada as a destination of 
choice for investment. As part of Budget 2017, the Government implemented its commitment 
originally made in the 2016  Fall Economic Statement to increase the net benefit review threshold for 
private sector WTO investors to CAD 1 billion in Enterprise Value in 2017, two years ahead of 
schedule. The CAD 1 billion threshold came into force upon Royal Assent of Bill C -44, th e Budget 
Implementation Act, on 22 June 2017. As of 1 January 2019, this threshold will be adjusted annually 
to reflect changes in nominal gross domestic product according to a formula set out in the Act. As 
part of the Comprehensive Economic and Trade Agr eement (CETA), the net benefit review threshold 
for private sector CETA investors increased to CAD 1.5 billion in Enterprise Value. Private sector 
investors from other free trade agreement partners with relevant most -favoured nation provisions 
also receive d the same threshold. These are: Chile, Colombia, Honduras, Mexico, Panama, Peru, 
South Korea and the United States. Required legislative amendments were introduced in Bill C -30, 
CETA Implementation Act, which received Royal Assent on 16 May 2017, and asso ciated regulatory 
amendments were made. The new threshold came into force on 21 September 2017, the date agreed 
upon by Canada and the European Union for application of CETA.  
2 TRADE AND INVESTMENT REGIMES  
2.2 Trade Policy Formulation and Objectives, parag raph 2.9, page 31  
Question  
Canada is pursuing an inclusive approach to trade that seeks to ensure that more Canadians can 
take advantage of the opportunities that flow from trade and investment. This approach is informed 
by ongoing dialogue with a broad ra nge of Canadians, to align trade policy priorities with the interests 
of all Canadians. In its trade agreements, Canada is building on past achievements by improving 
labour and environment protections, and pursuing new chapters, focused on cooperation and 
information -sharing, designed to improve the capacity and conditions of underrepresented groups, 
in particular women, owners of SMEs and Indigenous peoples, to access and benefit from the WT/TPR/M/389/Add.1  
 
- 211 - 
 
  opportunities created by trade agreements. Information gaps often ex ist between governments and 
underrepresented groups. When amending trade policies, how does Canada manage to successfully 
engage in dialogue with these groups and communicate the various ways in which trade can be 
especially beneficial for them?  
Reply  
As noted under section 6.1 of the Government Report for Canada 's Trade Policy Review, Canada 
takes a broad -based approach to consultations and engagement in the development of its trade 
policy, including by actively eliciting the views of the general public and stakeholders. Canada makes 
a concerted effort to ensure that stakeholders that are traditionally underrepresented in international 
trade are also consulted and engaged on trade policy topics. For example, during FTA negotiations 
stakeholder debr iefs occur after each round in person at the chief negotiator level, on cross -country 
conference calls, and through questions responded to in writing. In 2018, the Government of Canada 
undertook formal consultations on how to modernize its FIPA model to ma ke its investment 
agreements more inclusive, employing an innovative civic engagement platform called PlaceSpeak, 
which generated over 350 submissions from Canadians. Additional PlaceSpeak consultations were 
held that focused on trade and gender. The Canad ian Minister of Trade Diversification also held 
roundtables with stakeholders in fall of 2018. While the Government of Canada has a long -standing 
practice of directly engaging with Indigenous peoples with regards to its trade policy and priorities, 
beginni ng in September 2017, Global Affairs Canada established a regular and ongoing dialogue with 
Indigenous peoples through a dedicated trade -focussed Indigenous Working Group. The Working 
Group is comprised of National Indigenous Organizations, Modern Treaty p artners, Indigenous 
groups and business associations, and certain legal and policy experts. This group meets before and 
after negotiation rounds, discussing a broad extent of issues which need not necessarily be FTA 
focussed. The collaborative efforts of t his group have been important in the development and 
advancement of Indigenous -related provisions in Canada 's trade and investment agreements, in 
particular the development of a dedicated Trade and Indigenous Peoples ' Chapter text. Throughout 
our consultat ion and engagement efforts, the Government of Canada attempts to provide 
information on the ways that trade benefits Canadians and informs Canadians on trade policy topics, 
as appropriate. In this way, more productive dialogue and discussions can be undert aken.  
Paragraph 2.11, page 31  
Question  
Trade and Gender chapters concluded to date focussed on cooperation activities and the sharing of 
best practices, in order to increase the participation of women in international trade, in addition to 
provisions relat ing to the sharing of methods and procedures for the collection of sex disaggregated 
data, the use of indicators, and the analysis of gender -focused statistics related to trade. Lastly, 
Canada has been very active in promoting its work on addressing gender -related issues 
internationally, including at the WTO. For example, it helped draft and promote the Joint Declaration 
on Trade and Women 's Economic Empowerment at the 11th WTO Ministerial Conference in December 
2017 and hosted the first seminar under this Declaration in March 2018 on Gender -Based Analysis 
and Trade. We understand that Canada has recently been actively pushing for the inclusion of 
provisions on gender equality in its trade agreements. Is there any existing legal or statutory 
authority for su ch provisions in Canada?  
Reply  
In 1995, the Government of Canada committed to using  Gender -based Analysis+ (GBA+)  to 
advance gender equality in Canada, as part of the ratification of the  United Nations ' Beijing Platform 
for Action. Gender equality is enshr ined in the  Charter of Rights and Freedoms, which is part of the 
Constitution of Canada. The Government recently renewed its commitment to  GBA+  and is working 
to strengthen its implementation across all federal departments. Global Affairs Canada efforts ar e 
underway to meet the Government 's objective to ensure that all policies, programs and initiatives 
are informed by GBA+. In fact, exchanging information on collecting gender -disaggregated data and 
conducting GBA are two of the cooperation activities that were specifically sought by Canada, and 
now identified in the new Canada -Chile FTA Trade and Gender chapter. More broadly this 
commitment to GBA+ means seeking to include more gender considerations in our FTAs including 
Trade and Gender Chapters.  WT/TPR/M/389/Add.1  
 
- 212 - 
 
  Question  
Trade and Gender chapters concluded to date focussed on cooperation activities and the sharing of 
best practices, in order to increase the participation of women in international trade, in addition to 
provisions relating to the sharing of methods and proce dures for the collection of sex disaggregated 
data, the use of indicators, and the analysis of gender -focused statistics related to trade. Lastly, 
Canada has been very active in promoting its work on addressing gender -related issues 
internationally, includ ing at the WTO. For example, it helped draft and promote the Joint Declaration 
on Trade and Women 's Economic Empowerment at the 11th WTO Ministerial Conference in December 
2017 and hosted the first seminar under this Declaration in March 2018 on Gender -Based Analysis 
and Trade. Could Canada please share with us the source of its domestic laws in this regard, and 
provide us with examples of cases in which it has cooperated with FTA partners to promote women 's 
participation in international trade?  
Reply 
The modernized Canada -Chile Free Trade Agreement (CCFTA) entered into force on 5 February 2019, 
marking Canada 's first chapter on Trade and Gender in an FTA. The chapter acknowledges the 
importance of incorporating a gender perspective into economic a nd trade issues to ensure that 
economic growth is inclusive.  It also provides a framework for Canada and Chile to undertake 
cooperation activities on issues related to gender and trade; and it establishes a bilateral Committee 
under the Canada -Chile FTA th at would oversee these cooperation activities.  Canada and Chile held 
their first Trade and Gender Committee meeting under the CCFTA Trade and Gender Chapter on 
26 April 2019, to review its progress and achievements to date which includes a series of bilate ral 
activities in Canada and Chile. A full report on activities implemented under the chapter during its 
first year of implementation will be published following the second meeting of the Committee and 
will include information on results achieved and lesso ns learned to date. In addition, the CCFTA 
Trade and Gender implementation plan will be published. Furthermore, in September 2018, at the 
first Comprehensive Economic and Trade Agreement (CETA) Joint Committee, Canada and the EU 
adopted a Trade and Gender recommendation which seeks to recognize the importance of making 
trade policies more gender -responsive to ensure that the benefits of CETA reach everyone. The 
Canada -EU Trade and Gender evergreen implementation plan will be available online, and annual 
reports on activities implemented and results achieved will be published.  
2.3 Trade Agreements and Arrangements, 2.3.2 Regional and preferential agreements, 
paragraph 2.16, page 32  
Question  
The 72 countries in fact are granted with more favourable conditions of export to Canada under the 
Canadian government 's preferential treatments, the Least Developed Country Tariff (LDCT) and 
Outward Processing Remission Order. Under the former, GPT countries using materials that originate 
in the 72 countries are entitled t o duty -free entry for processed products into Canada. The latter 
allows the 72 countries to export their goods made of Canada -origin materials to Canada, at a tariff 
rate which is lower than that of other WTO Members without GPT eligibility. Could Canada p lease 
clarify its reasons for granting these 72 countries benefits from the two rules? The latter allows the 
72 countries to export their goods made of Canada -origin materials to Canada, at a tariff rate which 
is lower than that of other WTO Members withou t GPT eligibility. Why are these specific rules of 
origin not applicable to other WTO Members? Could Canada please explain how these measures are 
not discriminatory against other WTO Members with similar circumstances?  
Reply  
On 1 January 2015, 72 higher -income and export -competitive countries were graduated from 
Canada 's General Preferential Tariff (GPT) to ensure that the programme  is appropriately aligned 
with the global economic landscape and targets benefits to countries most in need of this type of 
assistance. At the same time, Canada undertook modifications to its Least Developed Country Tariff 
(LDCT) regime to ensure that benefits for the world 's poorest countries were not affected by changes 
to the GPT. Specifically, the LDCT rules of origin regulati ons were amended so that products imported 
from least developed countries could continue to qualify for duty -free treatment under the LDCT, 
even when using inputs from previous GPT beneficiaries ( "grandfathering "). Canada 's outward WT/TPR/M/389/Add.1  
 
- 213 - 
 
  processing regime reduce s or eliminates duty payable on apparel produced in a GPT country when 
the apparel was made from Canadian textiles. The list of countries covered by this programme  was 
similarly grandfathered so that the benefits of the programme  for Canadian textile produ cers would 
not be affected by changes to the GPT.  
3 TRADE POLICIES AND PRACTICES BY MEASURE  
3.1 Measures Directly Affecting Imports, 3.1.4 Other charges affecting imports, 
3.1.4.2  Federal excise duties and taxes, paragraph 3.54, page 67  
Question  
The Federal Government levies excise duties and taxes on alcoholic beverages, tobacco products, 
certain petroleum products, and a few other items (e.g. automobile air conditioners and fuel -
inefficient vehicles). The tax rates are generally identical for import s and domestically -produced 
goods, but lower rates (or zero) apply to domestic brewers and to wine made entirely from Canadian -
grown agricultural input.  
Lower excise rates on beer apply to the first 75,000 hectolitres per calendar year for beer produced 
in Canada by a licensed brewer or anyone related to or associated with that brewer. How does 
Canada ensure that these taxes respect the WTO national treatment obligations?  
Reply  
Given the ongoing WTO dispute settlement process on elements of the a lcohol tax regimes in 
Canada, it would be inappropriate to comment further at this time.  
Question  
The Federal Government levies excise duties and taxes on alcoholic beverages, tobacco products, 
certain petroleum products, and a few other items (e.g. automo bile air conditioners and fuel -
inefficient vehicles). The tax rates are generally identical for imports and domestically -produced 
goods, but lower rates (or zero) apply to domestic brewers and to wine made entirely from Canadian -
grown agricultural input. C ould Canada give more details about these measures which might be 
considered inconsistent with Canada 's obligations under Article III (national treatment) of the GATT 
1994?  
Reply  
Given the ongoing WTO dispute settlement process on elements of the alcohol t ax regimes in 
Canada, it would be inappropriate to comment further at this time.  
3.1.6 Anti -dumping, countervailing, and safeguard measures, 3.1.6.2 Safeguards, 
paragraph 3.101, page 86  
Question  
The CITT is the body in charge of conducting global safeguard inquiries. In the case of a standard 
safeguard inquiry, the CITT has 180 days to conduct the investigation. However, that statutory 
deadline can be extended to 270 days in complex cases, after which it must submit a report to the 
Government setti ng out its determination. Where the Government orders that the CITT conduct an 
investigation, the time -frame is set in the Order. The Federal Government retains the ultimate power 
to make the final decision on the application of a safeguard measure, under the authority of Section 
55 of the Customs Tariff Act. Could Canada please share with us details of the usual time -frame set 
for the Government to decide whether to implement the final safeguard measures after the CITT 
submits a report to the Governor in C ouncil?  
Reply  
Global safeguard inquiries by the Canadian International Trade Tribunal (CITT) are conducted 
pursuant to the Canadian International Trade Tribunal Act while safeguard measures are pursued 
under the Customs Tariff. Neither the Canadian Interna tional Trade Tribunal Act nor the Customs WT/TPR/M/389/Add.1  
 
- 214 - 
 
  Tariff prescribes a timeframe for a decision to be taken by the Government on whether or not to 
impose final safeguard measures. In the recent inquiry by the CITT into whether final safeguards 
are warranted on impo rts of seven steel products, the Government announced a decision within one 
month of the submission of the CITT 's report.  
Paragraph 3.106, page 87  
Question  
On 11 October 2018, Canada announced preliminary safeguard measures on seven steel products 
to begin  on 25 October 2018 and to be in place for 200 days, pending an inquiry by the CITT into 
whether longer -lasting safeguards are necessary. In February 2019, Canada notified modifications 
to the provisional safeguards on imports of certain steel products res ulting from consultations with 
Mexico. Could Canada please update us on the latest developments concerning the possible 
safeguard measures on specific imported steel products?  
Reply  
Canada imposed 200 -day provisional global safeguard measures on 25 October  2018 on imports of 
seven streel products. Concurrently, the Canadian International Trade Tribunal (CITT) initiated a 
global safeguard investigation on imports of these products, to determine if final safeguards are 
warranted.  
 
The CITT issued its report a nd recommendations to the Government of Canada on 3 April 2019. The 
CITT found that heavy plate and stainless steel wire from the subject countries is being imported in 
such quantities and under such conditions as to be a principal cause of a threat of serious injury to 
the domestic industry and recommended a remedy in the form of a tariff rate quota. The CITT found 
that imports of the other steel products under investigation have not increase in such quantities and 
under such conditions as to be a princ ipal cause of a threat of serious injury to the domestic industry.  
As recommended by the CITT, Canada imposed final global safeguard measures in the form of a 
tariff-rate quota on imports of heavy plate and stainless steel wire, effective 13 May 2019. More  
information can be found in Canada 's notification to the Committee on Safeguards 
(G/SG/N/8/CAN/3/Suppl.1; G/SG/N/10/CAN/1; G/SG/N/11/CAN/1/Suppl.1)  
Question  
On 11 October 2018, Canada announced preliminary safeguard measures on seven steel products 
to beg in on 25 October 2018 and to be in place for 200 days, pending an inquiry by the CITT into 
whether longer -lasting safeguards are necessary. In February 2019, Canada notified modifications 
to the provisional safeguards on imports of certain steel products r esulting from consultations with 
Mexico. How does Canada ensure that the possible safeguard measures on specific imported steel 
products are consistent with its WTO obligations?  
Reply  
Canada recognizes that safeguards are unique among trade remedy measures  and that special 
consideration must be given to the rules governing their use when deciding to apply a safeguard or 
initiate a safeguard investigation. Canada 's provisional safeguard measure was taken with due 
consideration for Canada 's obligations under the Agreement on Safeguards.  
Concurrently with the imposition of provisional safeguards, the Government referred the matter to 
the CITT for inquiry in order to obtain the CITT 's independent advice on whether final safeguards 
are warranted. The CITT 's inqui ry was conducted in an independent and transparent manner, 
pursuant to the CITT Act and the CITT Regulations, which implement Canada 's obligations under the 
Agreement on Safeguards.  WT/TPR/M/389/Add.1  
 
- 215 - 
 
  3.3 Measures Affecting Production and Trade, 3.3.3 Sanitary and ph ytosanit ary 
requirements, paragraph 3.189, page 104  
Question  
Does Canada need to change or lower any levels of protection of animal and plant health or food 
safety in order to fulfil its commitments under the CUSMA?  
Reply  
The Canada -United States -Mexico Agreement (CUSMA) maintains Canada 's current level of sanitary 
and phytosanitary (SPS) protection. The Agreement 's SPS chapter reinforces and builds on 
provisions contained in the North America Free Trade Agreement and the World Trade Organiz ation 
(WTO) Agreement on the Application of Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures. The chapter maintains 
each party 's right to take the SPS measures necessary to protect human, animal or plant life or 
health and to establish their individual appropriate leve l of sanitary and phytosanitary protection, 
while also committing to avoid unnecessary barriers to trade.  
Question  
Has the SPS competent authority of Canada at any time needed to reform its organization or amend 
any SPS regulations in implementing the rule s of the CPTPP?  
Reply  
The Canadian Food Inspection Agency (CFIA) and Health Canada are Canada 's competent authority 
responsible for the application of sanitary and phytosanitary (SPS) measures.  
Canada meets the obligations of the Comprehensive and Progres sive Agreement for Trans -Pacific 
Partnership (CPTPP) SPS Chapter within its existing regulatory frameworks. No changes to Canadian 
SPS regulations or to the organizational structures of the CFIA or Health Canada were required for 
Canada to implement the CP TPP SPS Chapter.  
3.3.7 Intellectual property rights, 3.3.7.5 Trademarks, paragraph 3.308, page 132  
Question  
Parallel imports of trademarked goods are allowed, and the right -holder or their licensee may not 
restrict the importation of genuine trademarked goods into Canada through an assertion of 
trademark rights. Exceptions may apply where it can be shown that the mark used on the imported 
good is likely to cause consumer confusion, due to appreciable differences between the good 
distributed in  Canada and the imported good. The situation with patents is similar to that of 
trademarks. Could Canada please give examples of cases where exceptions may apply? For instance, 
would the repackaging of imported goods be included as a case in point?  
Reply  
The Trade -marks Act contains no specific provisions dealing with parallel imports. Case law has 
stated that parallel importation is not prohibited under the Trade -marks Act unless the goods are 
"different " enough to cause a likelihood of confusion. The lead ing case involved Heinz ketchup being 
imported from the U.S. The court found that the Canadian ketchup was different from the U.S. 
ketchup to suit Canadian tastes. This difference was enough for the court to halt the importation of 
the U.S. ketchup into Ca nada.  
Question  
Parallel imports of trademarked goods are allowed, and the right -holder or their licensee may not 
restrict the importation of genuine trademarked goods into Canada through an assertion of 
trademark rights. Exceptions may apply where it can b e shown that the mark used on the imported 
good is likely to cause consumer confusion, due to appreciable differences between the good 
distributed in Canada and the imported good. The situation with patents is similar to that of WT/TPR/M/389/Add.1  
 
- 216 - 
 
  trademarks. Could Canada pl ease also specify the meaning of "appreciable differences " as mentioned 
in the paragraph quoted above?  
Reply  
The Trade -marks Act contains no specific provisions dealing with parallel imports. Case law has 
stated that parallel importation is not prohibited under the Trade -marks Act unless the goods are 
"different " enough to cause a likelihood of confusion. The leading case where the court addressed 
appreciable differences involved Heinz ketchup being imported from the U.S. The court found that 
the Canadian k etchup was different from the U.S. ketchup to suit Canadian tastes. This difference 
was enough for the court to halt the importation of the U.S. ketchup into Canada.  
4 TRADE POLICIES BY SECTOR  
4.2 Mining and Energy, 4.2.3 Trade policy developments, paragra ph 4.111, page 169  
Question  
Government participation in the sector remains important. State owned Crown corporations with 
international trade activity are prevalent, mainly in the provincial electricity markets. Several 
provinces maintain price controls on fuel products. Local content policies (LCPs) are used in the 
sector. A recent case study of Canada by the OECD provides a comprehensive review of provincial 
and federal investment, employment, R&D, technological transfer, and other LCPs, includ ing a 
discussion of the benefit evaluation embodied therein. Could Canada please provide more details of 
the role of state -owned businesses in the Canadian electricity market and the specific regulations 
and measures regarding investment, price controls, L CPS, technological transfers, etc.?  
Reply  
Under the Canadian Constitution, provincial and territorial governments have jurisdiction over their 
electricity markets. Consequently, there is no single Canadian electricity system. Canada 's electricity 
industry is largely characterised by public, i.e. provincial or municipal, ownership in seven of ten 
provinces and its three territories. Three provinces (Alberta, Nova Scotia and Prince Edward Island) 
feature private ownership of their utility sector. Eight of ten  provinces maintain a single company 
with vertically integrated structures. Alberta and Ontario have opted for unbundling of generation 
and transmission/distribution since deregulation in the 1990s, including the creation of a competitive 
retail market for  all final consumers of electricity.  
Alberta is the only province to have established a fully competitive electricity wholesale market while 
Ontario retains a hybrid model with a regulated and partially open wholesale market structure. With 
the exception o f Alberta and Ontario, wholesale electricity prices are regulated in all provinces and 
territories by a quasi -judicial board or commission. However, Alberta, British Columbia, Manitoba, 
New Brunswick, Nova Scotia, Ontario, Quebec and Saskatchewan have esta blished open access to 
their wholesale electricity markets, an important requirement to meet the Federal Energy Regulatory 
Commission (FERC) rules of competitive and reliable electricity markets, with a view to facilitate 
power trade with the U.S. 
Addition al information can be found at:  https://webstore.iea.org/energy -policies -of-iea-countries -
canada -2015-review . 
Question  
Government participation in the sector remai ns important. State owned Crown corporations with 
international trade activity are prevalent, mainly in the provincial electricity markets. Several 
provinces maintain price controls on fuel products. Local content policies (LCPs) are used in the 
sector. A recent case study of Canada by the OECD provides a comprehensive review of provincial 
and federal investment, employment, R&D, technological transfer, and other LCPs, including a 
discussion of the benefit evaluation embodied therein. Would the aforemention ed restrictions 
constitute any discriminatory treatment between domestic and foreign entities?  
 WT/TPR/M/389/Add.1  
 
- 217 - 
 
  Reply  
Provinces have jurisdiction of their electricity system. Many provinces are connected to the bulk 
power system of the United States which allows for two-way flow of electricity. Many provinces allow 
the participation of Independent Power Producers and are examining how to incorporate new market 
entrants to manage increased demand from electrification of heat, transportation and industrial 
processes. Th ese new policies will respect international trade rules. Canada is committed to rules 
based international trade and is working with the provinces and territories to ensure we are adhering 
to our international obligations.  
Report by Canada – WT/TPR/G/389  
3 TRADE POLICY DEVELOPMENTS 2015 -2019  
3.1 Multilateral Trade Policy, 3.1.2 WTO Modernization, paragraphs 3.09 -3.11, page 7  
Question  
The Government of Canada has been deeply committed to WTO reform, and has convened a small 
group of likeminded and representative WTO members known as the "Ottawa Group ", to identify 
pragmatic ideas aimed at enhancing and improving the WTO. In January 2019, Canada sought to 
advance WTO reform discussions by hosting the second ministerial -level small group meeting o n the 
margins of the World Economic Forum Annual General Meeting in Davos, Switzerland, which also 
launched open -ended consultations with interested WTO members to identify ideas and proposals to 
improve the deliberative function of WTO. The Group is expec ted to meet again later in 2019. Could 
Canada please provide us with an update on the discussions and progress of the Ottawa Group 
meeting, and the expected outcomes?  
Reply  
Canada 's objectives were about WTO modernization, as the organization is 25 years old, and is in 
urgent need of modernization. Canada recognizes there are challenges on the road ahead for 
Canada 's small group initiative as well as for WTO reform more broadly. This includes finding a 
balance to address various more recent competing  interests, as well as long -standing concerns.  
The small group is meant to be a forum for discussion, a catalyst to prompt meaningful reform and 
the basis for it. Since the Ottawa Group first met in October (see link to Joint Communiqué of the 
Ottawa Minis terial on WTO Reform : https://www.canada.ca/en/global -affairs/news/2018/10/joint -
communique -of-the-ottawa -ministerial -on-wto-reform.html ), momentum continues to build around the 
need for WTO reform. Officials are developing ideas on how the deliberative function of the WTO 
could be enhanced and strengthened. In January 2019 and during their second meeting, the Group 
launched a p rocess, open to all WTO members, to improve the functioning of WTO committees. Four 
initial bodies were identified for review and each review is led by a volunteer country: Brazil leads 
the review of the Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures Committee; Singa pore that of the Technical 
Barriers to Trade Committee; Switzerland that of the Rules of Origin Committee; and Australia that 
of the Council for Trade in Services. Also see link to Joint Communiqué of the Ottawa Ministerial on 
WTO Reform group meeting in D avos.  
Canada is keen to enrich exchanges with additional ideas and new perspectives. Going forward, we 
will seek to sustain momentum on reform efforts within the group as well as continue to complement 
other efforts to reform the WTO. Ottawa Group members will continue their work in the first four 
WTO bodies to enhance the WTO 's deliberative function. The Group hopes that similar efforts will 
begin in other bodies in the coming months, the most recent of which include on the margins of the 
OECD ministerial in Paris on 23 May. Please see ministerial statement: 
https://www.canada.ca/en/global -affairs/news/2019/05/summary -of-ottawa -group -meeting -in-paris-
may-2019.html . There is broad agreement that the WTO plays a key role in regulating international 
commerce and that it must be safeguarded. Importantly, the purpose of this initiative is to have a 
conversation among WTO members on the futur e direction of the organization and it will ultimately 
be up to the WTO membership to decide how best to advance this work.  WT/TPR/M/389/Add.1  
 
- 218 - 
 
  3.1.3 Ongoing WTO Negotiations and Initiatives, paragraph 3.13, page 8  
Question  
On which environmental products does Canada propose to eliminate tariffs at the next EGA 
negotiation?  
Reply  
Canada remains committed to resuming negotiations towards an Environmental Goods Agreement 
(EGA) of mutual benefit to all participants when conditions are appropriate. The conclusion of an 
ambitious agreement could enhance access to a broad range of environmental goods, including in 
the areas of clean and renewable energy, resource efficiency, water treatment technologies, air 
pollution control, waste management, and environmental monitoring  and assessment. Canada will 
continue to seek an ambitious EGA that eliminates tariffs on a broad range of environmental goods 
that can achieve consensus among all participants.  
3.3 Bilateral and Regional Free Trade Agreements, 3.3.1 New Trade Agreements, 
paragraphs 3.24 -3.25, pages 11 -12  
Question  
Could Canada please provide more information on its expectations and plans for the accession of 
new members to the CPTPP?  
Reply  
The Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans -Pacific Partnership (CPTPP) is  designed 
for expansion through the accession of new economies to the agreement. At the inaugural CPTPP 
Commission Meeting on 19 January 2019, CPTPP members agreed to an accession process – which 
has since been made public – that provides guidelines, timef rames, and key steps for how CPTPP 
Parties will consider accession requests, as well as how they will negotiate and approve the terms of 
accession. Canada welcomes accession by economies that are prepared to meet the CPTPP 's high 
standard rules and ambitio us market access commitments.  
3.3.2 Modernized Free Trade Agreements, paragraphs 3.28 -3.31, page 12  
Question  
Would Canada please provide us with the timetable for its domestic ratification process? (CUSMA).  
Reply  
Canada tabled the treaty in the House of Commons on 12 December 2018. Canada introduced its 
implementing legislation in Parliament on 29 May. The bill will now be subject to usual parliamentary 
procedures.  
Question  
When is CUSMA expected to enter into force?  
Reply  
Since the signature of the Canada -United States -Mexico Agreement (CUSMA) on 30 November 2018, 
the Parties ' efforts have focused on domestic ratification procedures. Following the completion of 
domestic ratification procedures, each country wil l notify the other Parties of the completion of their 
domestic ratification procedures. Once all three Parties have provided their notifications, the 
Agreement would enter into force on the first day of the third month following the last notification.  WT/TPR/M/389/Add.1  
 
- 219 - 
 
  3.3.3 Ongoing Negotiations, paragraph 3.36, page 13  
Question  
Apart from the Canada -India Comprehensive Economic Partnership Agreement, does Canada have 
any future plans for FTAs with other Asian countries?  
Reply  
Canada 's trade diversification plan includes promoting trade and investment with Asian countries 
and other emerging markets. For example, Canada has been pursuing exploratory discussions with 
the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) for a potential Canada -ASEAN free trade 
agreement . Canada also conducted exploratory discussions with China from 2016 to 2017.  
3.4 Other Bilateral Initiatives, 3.4.1 Foreign Investment Protection and Promotion 
Agreements (FIPAs), paragraph 3.39, page 14  
Question  
After the review of the FIPA model is comp leted, does Canada have any priority partners with whom 
it expects to launch FIPAs negotiations? If so, could Canada please elaborate on the criteria used for 
selecting such potential partners?  
Reply  
The Government of Canada identifies foreign investment p romotion and protection agreement (FIPA) 
partners primarily on the basis of commercial factors. Countries are selected where Canadian 
investors would benefit most from the protections of a FIPA. To make this assessment, a series of 
criteria are considered.  The criteria include: commercial and economic interests, such as the current 
level of and future prospects for Canadian Direct Investment Abroad (CDIA); investment risks, such 
as application of the rule of law and regulatory quality; the likelihood of eng agement and of achieving 
an ambitious agreement; and trade policy or other foreign policy interests.  
Question  
It would be appreciated if Canada could please update us on the development of the FIPA model 
review, and its plans for future FIPA negotiations?  
Reply  
Canada launched a public consultation process in August 2018 toward a modernized and inclusive 
model foreign investment promotion and protection agreement (FIPA). The consultations sought 
ideas on how to update the treaty to reflect the  innovations of Canada 's large free trade agreement 
FTAs, while also seeking input on incorporating provisions to ensure that all Canadians, including 
women, Indigenous peoples and small and medium -sized enterprise owners, benefit more from 
Canada 's invest ment agreements. Canada is currently nearing the final stages of its FIPA model 
review.  
4 OTHER KEY GOVERNMENT INITIATIVES  
4.3 Cabinet Directive on Regulation, paragraph 4.13, page 17  
Question  
Besides the promotion of regulatory cooperation, are there any measures in the Cabinet Directive 
on Regulation aimed specifically at preventing or reducing barriers to trade?  
Reply  
The Cabinet Directive on Regulation sets out the Government of Canada 's expectations and 
requirements in the development, management, and review of federal regulations. The Directive WT/TPR/M/389/Add.1  
 
- 220 - 
 
  requires departments and agencies to pursue regulatory cooperation and alignment, where 
appropriate, during all stages of the regulatory life cycle. This includes examining alignment of 
regulatory approaches and  outcomes with key trading partners, in order to reduce the regulatory 
burden on Canadian business, while maintaining or improving the health, safety, security, social and 
economic well -being of Canadians, and protecting the environment.  
The Directive also  requires departments and agencies to coordinate regulatory efforts and consider 
domestic and international best practices in order to reduce regulatory duplication and the 
cumulative impacts of regulations on stakeholders. Furthermore, the Directive requi res departments 
and agencies to undertake a regular review of their existing regulations, with one of the key 
objectives being to mitigate unintended impacts, such as barriers to trade or innovation.  
Finally, the Directive requires departments and agencies  to consult for a minimum of 70 days on 
proposals for new and amended technical regulations that may have a significant effect on 
international trade.  
4.6 Sanitary and Phytosanitary Initiatives, paragraph 4.17(e), page 18 
Question  
Are the Comparative Risk Model and Establishment -based Risk Assessment (ERA) Model applicable 
to the importation of plant products and the border inspections of these products? It would be 
appreciated if Canada could please provide a case example to illustrate how  these Models are applied 
in practice.  
Reply  
The Comparative Risk Model (CRM) is an analytical tool which uses data from external and 
government sources to assess risks to food safety, animal health and plant health. The CRM results 
provide intelligence on  specific risks and mitigation measures for the development of risk profiles 
that support decision -making in the Canadian Food Inspection Agency (CFIA). For example, CRM 
intelligence is being used by CFIA 's senior management for greater precision in the wa y we design 
programs, prioritize oversight activities and allocate resources to manage food safety, plant health 
and animal health risks. This approach would encompass the importation of plant products and the 
border inspections of these products as per th e question.  
The Establishment -based Risk Assessment (ERA) Model is designed to assess the food safety risks 
of food establishments. More information is available at the following site:  
http://www.inspection.gc.ca/about -the-cfia/strategic -priorities/era -for 
food/eng/1551995065897/1551995066162 .  
An ERA model was also developed for hatcheries and another one is under development for f eed 
establishments. Plant products are currently not assessed by the ERA model.  
5 EXPORT DIVERSIFICATION AND TRADE PROMOTION  
5.5 Other Government of Canada Programmes and Strategies that Promote Exports, 5.5.3 
Innovation and Skills Plan, paragraph 5.14, pa ge 22  
Question  
The report mentions that the Innovation and Skills Plan will actively attract and retain world -class 
talent in order to provide sufficient manpower in the industry. Does the Plan provide visas, work, 
residence, or other relevant preferential treatment, such as the relaxation of certain relevant 
decrees? Further explanation and description of the expected content would be appreciated.  WT/TPR/M/389/Add.1  
 
- 221 - 
 
  Reply  
As part of the Innovation and Skills Plan, the Global Skills Strategy gives Canadian compani es a 
faster and more predictable route to bring top talent and new skills from around the world to Canada. 
The Strategy offers dedicated and expedited service delivery in the following areas:  
• Faster processing times for bringing highly skilled workers to C anada, in as little as 
14 days.  
• Work permit exemptions for short -duration work for highly skilled talent coming to Canada 
for 30 days or less, and for researchers coming for 120 days or less.  
• A new Dedicated Service Channel providing specialized and direct  immigration support and 
services to companies seeking to make a significant, job -creating investment in Canada.  
• A new Global Talent Stream under the Temporary Foreign Worker Program provides 
innovative Canadian firms expedited access to global talent. Eli gible employers seeking to 
hire unique and highly skilled foreign workers can get their applications processed in 
10 business days. In addition, eligible foreign workers with employer -approved 
applications through this Stream can receive work permits in tw o weeks. Employers 
benefiting from this Stream have come from a range of industries, such as information 
and communications technology, visual effects and animation, video -gaming and 
entertainment, advanced manufacturing, financial services, and clean tech nology.  
6 INCLUSIVE TRADE  
Paragraphs 6.1 -6.2, page 23  
Question  
Canada is actively promoting and pursuing an inclusive approach to trade as a core approach to 
address the concerns of a number of individuals that trade, and globalization do not benefit 
every one. Domestically, Canada is: seeking to put more Canadians at the heart of trade policy 
through broader consultations and transparency; and, expanding access for Canadians through 
inclusive content in trade agreements. In addition, Canada is advancing new  provisions and chapters 
in its FTAs designed to improve the capacity of and conditions for underrepresented groups, in 
particular women, owners of SMEs and Indigenous peoples, to access and benefit from the 
opportunities created by trade agreements. Altho ugh Canada 's promotion of inclusive trade is an act 
of goodwill, underrepresented groups may be less familiar with the terms of the trade agreement. 
How does Canada help turn their opinions into trade terms?  
Reply  
As noted under section 6.1 of the Government Report, Canada takes a broad -based approach to 
consultations and engagement in the development of its trade policy, including by actively eliciting 
the views of the general public and stakeholders. Canada makes a concerted effort to ensure that 
stakeholders that are traditionally underrepresented in international trade are also consulted and 
engaged on trade policy topics. For example, during free trade agreement (FTA) negotiations 
stakeholder debriefs occur after each round at the chief negotiat or level, on cross -country conference 
calls, and through questions responded to in writing. In 2018, the Government of Canada undertook 
formal consultations on how to modernize its foreign investment promotion and protection 
agreement (FIPA) model to make its investment agreements more inclusive, employing an 
innovative civic engagement platform called PlaceSpeak, which generated over 350 submissions 
from Canadians. Additional PlaceSpeak consultations were held that focused on trade and gender. 
The Canadian  Minister of International Trade Diversification also held roundtables with stakeholders 
in fall of 2018. An example of Canada 's approach to using the opinions of civil society to inform trade 
policy changes is the Indigenous Peoples ' Working Group. While the Government of Canada has a 
long-standing practice of directly engaging with Indigenous peoples with regards to its trade policy 
and priorities, beginning in September 2017, Global Affairs Canada established a regular and ongoing 
dialogue with Indigenou s peoples through a dedicated trade -focussed Indigenous Working Group. 
The Working Group is comprised of National Indigenous Organizations, Modern Treaty partners, 
Indigenous groups and business associations, and certain legal and policy experts. This grou p meets WT/TPR/M/389/Add.1  
 
- 222 - 
 
  before and after negotiation rounds, discussing a broad extent of issues which need not necessarily 
be FTA focussed. The collaborative efforts of this group have been important in the development 
and advancement of Indigenous -related provisions in Canada 's trade and investment agreements, 
in particular the development of a dedicated Trade and Indigenous Peoples Chapter text. Throughout 
our consultation and engagement efforts, the Government of Canada attempts to provide 
information on the ways that trade benefits Canadians and informs Canadians on trade policy topics, 
as appropriate. In this way, more productive dialogue and discussions can be undertaken.  
Question  
Canada is actively promoting and pursuing an inclusive approach to trade as a core appr oach to 
address the concerns of a number of individuals that trade, and globalization do not benefit 
everyone. Domestically, Canada is: seeking to put more Canadians at the heart of trade policy 
through broader consultations and transparency; and, expandin g access for Canadians through 
inclusive content in trade agreements. In addition, Canada is advancing new provisions and chapters 
in its FTAs designed to improve the capacity of and conditions for underrepresented groups, in 
particular women, owners of SM Es and Indigenous peoples, to access and benefit from the 
opportunities created by trade agreements. Have you ever encountered a situation in which major 
business owners and SMEs ' were involved in a conflict of interest? How did you deal with that?  
Reply  
The Government has been closely following public and political debates on trade and globalization 
at home and with our major trading partners. These debates reflect a range of public concern with 
trade agreements, such as a perceived lack of transparency in  the negotiating process; the 
perception of special rights and privileges accorded to corporations; negative and/or divergent 
effects of trade agreements on certain segments of the population (particularly the middle class and 
workers in traditional indust ries); and, perceived threats to the environment, health, safety, and 
consumer standards, and governments ' right to regulate. These concerns affect support for trade 
both internationally and domestically. If not acknowledged and responded to, further chall enges will 
emerge with respect to advancing trade negotiations and agreements in Canada and abroad. 
Informed by these developments, as well as input received from Canadians in the course of the 
Government 's consultations, the Government of Canada is advanc ing an inclusive approach to trade 
as part of its overall Trade Diversification Strategy. In regard to public consultations and opposing 
views between stakeholders, Canada developed our inclusive approach to trade because under -
represented groups felt thei r needs were not being accurately reflected in free trade agreements 
(FTAs) whereas the interests of corporations were over -represented. As such, Canada has tried to 
keep protections for corporations while increasing engagement of and opportunities for sma ll and 
medium -sized enterprises (SMEs) in our FTAs. An example of this approach is the creation of 
dedicated SME chapters in the Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans -Pacific 
Partnership (CPTPP) and the Canada -United States -Mexico Agreement (CU SMA) and an SME 
recommendation under the Comprehensive and Economic Trade Agreement (CETA), with provisions 
that increase SMEs ' access to information on the specific terms of the FTA which have been designed 
to benefit them in the form of evergreen website s tailored to their needs. It is Canada 's belief that 
all segments of society can and should take advantage of the opportunities that flow from trade and 
investment.  
6.1 Consultations and Transparency, paragraphs 6.4 -6.6, page 23  
Question  
Canada takes a broad -based approach to consultations in the development of its trade policy, 
including by actively eliciting the views of the general public and stakeholders. Canada makes a 
concerted effort to ensure that stakeholders that are traditionall y underrepresented in international 
trade are also consulted on trade policy topics. For example, in 2018, the Government of Canada 
undertook formal consultations on how to modernize its FIPA model to make its investment 
agreements more inclusive, employin g an innovative civic engagement platform called PlaceSpeak, 
which generated over 350 submissions from Canadians. The Government of Canada strives to create 
trade policy in close partnership with the governments of its provinces and territories, especially  as 
many areas of commerce (e.g., agricultural policy) are under provincial or shared federal -provincial 
jurisdiction. Communication with stakeholders and provincial and local governments during the WT/TPR/M/389/Add.1  
 
- 223 - 
 
  formulation of trade policies is emphasized. Has Canada e ver encountered inconsistencies in opinion 
between different provinces, or between the federal government and local government? If so, how 
does Canada deal with such differently held opinions?  
Reply  
As noted under section 6.1 of the Government Report, Canada takes a broad -based approach to 
consultations and engagement in the development of its trade policy, including by actively eliciting 
the views of the general public and stakeholders. The Government of Canada strives to create trade 
policy in  close partnership with the governments of its provinces and territories, especially as many 
areas of commerce (e.g., agricultural policy) are under provincial or shared federal -provincial 
jurisdiction. Throughout each of our consultation and engagement me chanisms, the Government of 
Canada attempts to provide information on the ways that trade benefits Canadians and informs 
Canadians on trade policy topics, as appropriate. In this way, more productive dialogue and 
discussions can be undertaken. Canada takes  into account all of the sensitivities of its provincial, 
territorial and municipal partners in regard to trade as it does with all of its stakeholders. If there 
are inconsistencies in priorities of various stakeholders, the Government of Canada attempts t o 
reconcile these differences and reach an outcome where the majority of Canadians can benefit. An 
example of the consultations process between different levels of government is the Committee on 
Trade (C -trade). Provinces and territories (P/T) bring signif icant resources to support their 
international work, often to the benefit of wider Canadian interest. To facilitate Federal -Provincial -
Territorial collaboration, the C -Trade was created to answer the growing interest among P/Ts to be 
engaged in internation al trade negotiations.  The C -Trade is an opportunity for federal, provincial, 
and territorial trade policy officers to meet on a quarterly basis and exchange views on shared 
economic and trade interests, and to discuss sensitive information.  
Question  
The G overnment Report states that "Canada has several mechanisms for outreach, including 
formal  and informal  consultations that are transparent, accessible and accountable. This includes 
engaging with traditionally underrepresented groups; improving transparenc y throughout the 
negotiation process; promoting and communicating the benefits of trade and investment to 
Canadians; and, enhancing links, where appropriate, between trade and domestic socio -economic 
policy objectives that support job creation and growth. " "The Government of Canada tables 
international treaties, including FTAs, in the House of Commons for a period of 21 sitting -days before 
taking  steps to bring these treaties into force. " Would Canada please verify whether the 
above -mentioned transparency m echanisms have been stipulated in Canadian laws and regulations?  
Reply  
As noted under section 6.1 of the Government Report, Canada takes a broad -based approach to 
consultations and engagement in the development of its trade policy, including by actively el iciting 
the views of the general public and stakeholders. The transparency mechanisms are generally not 
stipulated in Canadian law but are found in government policy.  For significant policy initiatives, 
Canada typically employs both formal and informal pro cesses. For trade negotiations, Canada 
typically conducts formal, structured consultations, initiated by a notice in the Canada Gazette, the 
official newspaper of the Government of Canada.  Canada also conducts a Strategic Environmental 
Assessment, which re quires public consultation, in accordance with the Cabinet Directive on the 
Environmental Assessment of Policy, Plan and Program Proposals and related Guidelines.  When it 
comes to implementation of trade agreements, Canada 's Cabinet Directive on Regulation s, a broad 
policy document applying to all regulatory activities, requires that Canadians be consulted on 
proposed regulatory activities and be given an opportunity to comment. The Canadian practice of 
tabling international treaties for a period of 21 sitt ing-days before taking  steps to bring these treaties 
into force is required by the Policy on Tabling Treaties in Parliament. The objective of this policy is 
to ensure that all instruments governed by public international law, between Canada and other state s 
or international organisations, are tabled in the House of Commons following their signature or 
adoption by other procedure and prior to Canada formally notifying that it is bound by the 
Instrument.  
 WT/TPR/M/389/Add.1  
 
- 224 - 
 
  6.2 Advancing an Inclusive Approach in Trade Agreement s, 6.2.5 Trade and Indigenous 
peoples, paragraph 6.25, page 26  
Question  
Where appropriate, in its current FTA negotiations, Canada is pursuing a dedicated Trade and 
Indigenous peoples chapter that seeks to acknowledge the importance of enhancing the ability of 
Indigenous peoples and Indigenous businesses to benefit from the opportunities that flow from trade 
and investment. The proposed chapter provides a framework for FTA partners to work together to 
identify and address the barriers that Indigenous peoples face in international trade. The proposition 
for including an Indigenous Peoples Chapter in Canada 's FAT negotiations is to seek to enhance the 
trade capability of indigenous businesses. Our questions concern some of the key operational factors 
in businesses and in trade, as follows: (a) Profit: How much extra GDP expected to be contributed 
by the participating parties? (b) Sales Channels: How many countries are expected to be destinations 
for such a trade agreement, and will this affect the willing ness of enterprises to invest? (c) Taxation: 
What tax reduction or exemption rates are offered to enterprises in the Indigenous Peoples Chapter? 
What are the future plans for taxation?  
Reply  
a) The National Aboriginal Economic Development Board initiated a st udy, entitled, 
Reconciliation: Moving Forward by CAD 27.7 billion, to conduct an analysis on the expected 
impact on the Canadian economy resulting from closing the gaps in economic outcomes 
between Indigenous peoples in Canada and the non -Indigenous popula tion. The results of this 
analysis show that raising the productivity of the Indigenous labour force and closing the 
significant opportunity gaps between Indigenous and non -Indigenous Canadians could boost 
Canada 's GDP by CAD 27.7 billion annually. The stu dy did not determine the extent that this 
would transfer to gains in trade by Indigenous -owned businesses but officials at Global Affairs 
Canada are undertaking work to better understand the level of involvement of Indigenous 
peoples in international trade  and specific barriers to trade to which they are confronted to 
improve existing programs supporting Indigenous Peoples and their businesses.  
  
b) Canada has started, where appropriate, pursuing a dedicated Trade and Indigenous peoples 
(T&IP) chapter in its F TAs. In the Canada -United States -Mexico Agreement (CUSMA), Canada 
achieved a number of outcomes to better take into account the rights of Indigenous peoples, 
such as a general exception that preserves the government 's flexibility to take action to 
protect the right of Indigenous people in Canada as enshrined in the Constitution and Modern 
Treaties, and also to by retaining flexibility to provide preferential treatment to Indigenous 
peoples and Indigenous -owned businesses in areas of service, investment, gov ernment 
procurement, environment and state -owned enterprises. The Government of Canada hopes 
that a Trade and Indigenous Peoples Chapter will positively affect the willingness of enterprises 
to invest in Canada and be a benefit to their potential investmen ts. 
  
c) There are no provisions related to tax reductions or exemption rates offered to Indigenous or 
other enterprises in the Trade and Indigenous Peoples Chapter. There are currently no plans 
to deal with taxation in the chapter.  
 
 
  WT/TPR/M/389/Add.1  
 
- 225 - 
 
  SINGAPORE  
Report by the Secretariat – WT/TPR/S/389  
2 TRADE AND INVESTMENT REGIMES  
2.4 Investment Regime, 2.4.1 Framework, paragraph 2.33, page 36  
Question  
Could Canada provide more information on: (i) Whether the net benefit review is applicable only to 
the non-Canadians ' acquisition of Canadian businesses, or is also applicable to other investments by 
non-Canadians;  
Reply  
The Investment Canada Act (ICA) net benefit provisions only apply to investments by non -Canadians 
to acquire control of an existing Canadi an business with the exception that a discretionary authority 
exists to permit the review of the establishment of a cultural business in Canada. The discretionary 
authority is based on a public interest test related to Canada 's cultural heritage and nation al identity.  
Question  
Could Canada provide more information on: (ii) How the various thresholds, e.g. as set out in Box  2.1 
at page 37, are calculated?  
Reply  
The original thresholds were set by legislation. The thresholds for (a) private sector investors f rom 
WTO members, (b) state -owned enterprises (SOEs) from WTO members, and (c) private -sector 
trade agreement investors are adjusted annually based on growth in nominal GDP in accordance 
with the legislation (i.e. the growth in nominal GDP at market prices multiplied by the threshold 
amount determined for the previous year). The thresholds for non -WTO members and investments 
in a cultural business (below CAD 5 million for direct acquisition and below CAD 50 million for indirect 
acquisitions) do not change.  
Question  
Could Canada provide more information on: (iii) Next steps for the non -Canadian investors if the 
outcome of the net benefit review is that such investments are not allowed.  
Reply  
The Investment Canada Act (ICA) provides a two -step process prior to an investment being rejected. 
If, after considering all of the information made available during the review, including any 
undertakings offered by the investor, the Minister is not satisfied that the investment is likely to be 
of net benefit to Ca nada, he or she must notify the investor of his or her determination. The investor 
then has a right to make representations and to submit undertakings as the investor sees fit within 
thirty (30) days from the date of the notice or within any further period  that may be agreed upon 
by the Minister and the investor. Only after considering the new representations and/or undertakings 
does the Minister make a final determination regarding the likely net benefit of an investment.  
2.4.2 Policy, paragraph 2.39, page  39 
Question  
We welcome the WTO Secretariat Report which notes that Canada will develop and implement a 
national strategy to attract foreign direct investment to Canada. Could Canada share more details 
on this national strategy?  
 WT/TPR/M/389/Add.1  
 
- 226 - 
 
  Reply  
Invest in Canada wor ks with all levels of government to promote Canada as a premier investment 
destination and accelerate global investment into Canada. Invest in Canada offers tailored and 
confidential services that make it easier for global companies to choose Canada for th eir next 
business expansion.  
As part of its mandate, Invest in Canada is developing a cohesive foreign direct investment strategy 
that aligns with the country 's overall economic growth strategy, works with partners to establish an 
investor support network and includes world -class investment aftercare, retention and reinvestment 
services. Work with federal, provincial and municipal partners is underway to ensure Invest in 
Canada 's efforts complement and enhance what is already being done, with emphas is on a 
data-driven strategy.  
Through consultations, partners have made recommendations in several areas that will be 
incorporated into the FDI strategy; including, priority sectors, the quality and dissemination of data, 
developing a network and tools to allow for information sharing on investment opportunities, as well 
as access to marketing materials and activities. Invest in Canada has identified seven priority 
sectors, which include agribusiness, advanced manufacturing, clean technologies, digital indu stries, 
life sciences, media and entertainment, and natural resources.  
Paragraph 2.41, page 39  
Question  
The WTO Secretariat Report notes that Canada launched a public consultation process in 2018, in 
order to modernise foreign investment promotion and prot ection agreements (FIPAs) and seek input 
on their content. Could Canada share updates on this process?  
Reply  
Canada launched a public consultation process in August 2018 toward a modernized and inclusive 
model Foreign Investment Promotion and Protection Agreement (FIPA). The consultations sought 
ideas on how to update the treaty to reflect the innovations of Canada 's large Free Trade 
Agreements, while also seeking input on incorporating provisions to ensure that all Canadians, 
including women, Indigenous peoples and small and medium -sized enterprise owners, benefit more 
from Canada 's investment agreements. Results of the consultations will be published in due course.  
2.4.3 Restrictions, paragraph 2.44, page 40  
Question  
We welcome the WTO Secretariat Report which notes that Canada made some improvements in 
liberalising the transport sector to foreign investment since the last Review. Could Canada share if 
it has plans to improve foreign investment in other sectors?  
Reply  
The Government of C anada has made no announcements to further liberalize market access 
restrictions for other sectors.  
2.4.4 Incentives and promotion, paragraph 2.48, page 41  
Question  
The WTO Secretariat Report notes that one of the government programmes to attract FDI is th e 
Invest Canada -Community Initiatives (ICCI) contribution programme, which provides funds to 
Canadian communities that wish to improve their capacity to attract, retain and expand FDI. Could 
Canada elaborate on the types of "Canadian communities " that have  applied for the ICCI so far?  WT/TPR/M/389/Add.1  
 
- 227 - 
 
  Reply  
Formerly known as the Invest Canada – Community Initiatives programme , the CanExport – 
Community Investments, the terms "Canadian communities " refer to Canadian municipal or regional 
organizations, such as investment pro motion agencies and non -profit locally based organizations.  
4 TRADE POLICIES BY SECTOR  
4.4 Services, 4.4.3 Transport, 4.4.3.2 Maritime transport, paragraph 4.252, page 201  
Question  
We note that the Canadian Coast Guard imposes fees on all ships in operation in Canada, and the 
fees vary by region, vessel size, and whether the vessel carries a Canadian or foreign flag. Does 
Canada impose fees at preferential rates on ships which carry foreign flags of specific nationalities? 
If so, under what circumst ances would these ships be given preferential rates?  
Reply  
No, Canada does not apply Canadian Coast Guard fees at preferential rates to ships which carry 
foreign flags of specific nationalities. All foreign vessels are subject to the same Canadian Coast 
Guard fee rates. For more information, please consult the Canadian Coast Guard 's website on marine 
services fees: http://www.ccg -gcc.gc.ca/marine -services -fees. 
4.4.5 E -commerce, paragraph 4.279, page 206  
Question  
We note that the E -Commerce legislations in all the provinces/territories, with the exception of 
Quebec, are similar to the 1996 UNCITRAL Model Law on Electronic Commerce. What are some of 
the differences between the E -Commerce legislation in Quebec and the UNCITRAL Model Law?  
Reply  
Quebec 's Act to Establish a Legal Framework for Information Technology (the Law) is influenced by 
the principles of the UNCITRAL Model Law on Electronic Commerce. The objectives of the Law are 
to ensu re: the legal security of documentary communications between persons, associations, 
partnerships and the State, regardless of the medium used; the coherence of legal rules and their 
application to documentary communications using media based on information  technology, whether 
electronic, magnetic, optical, wireless or other, or based on a combination of technologies; the 
functional equivalence and legal value of documents, regardless of the medium used, and the 
interchangeability of media and technologies; the linking of a person, an association, a partnership 
or the State with a technology -based document, by any means allowing them to be linked, such as 
a signature, or any means allowing them to be identified and, if need be, located, such as 
certification;  and concerted action for the harmonization of the technical systems, norms and 
standards involved in communications by means of technology -based documents and 
interoperability between different media and information technologies. The Law may be found at: 
http://legisquebec.gouv.qc.ca/en/ShowDoc/cs/C -1.1 
Report by Canada – WT/TPR/G/389  
5 EXPORT DIVERSIFICATION AND TRADE PROMOTION  
5.2 Trade Commissioner Service, paragraph 5.7, page 21  
Question  
What are some examples of services under the Trade Commissioner Services (TCS) which Canada 
plans to enhance, for businesses operating in the digital and e -commerce areas?  
 WT/TPR/M/389/Add.1  
 
- 228 - 
 
  Reply  
The Trade Commissioner Service (TCS) has been helping companies navigate international markets 
for more than 120 years. Canadian trade commissioners are located in more than 160 cities 
worldwide and provide TCS clients with key business insights and access  to an unbeatable network 
of international contacts. The Trade Commissioner Service provides its clients with information, 
market -entry advice, qualified connections to local service providers or foreign buyers, export -
related problem solving assistance, a nd it also inter alia  organizes trade missions, coordinates 
participation at trade shows.  
Information and communication technologies (ICT) is one of the TCS ' priority sectors of focus. 
Canadian ICT and digital industries companies sell their products and s ervices to a wide array of 
target sectors (or industry verticals) and as such require trade commissioners to understand both 
the technology that they develop and the reality of the target verticals to which they sell.  
As e-commerce is growing in importance  for Canadian businesses, The Trade Commissioner Service 
also supports Canadian companies looking to start doing business online with consumers in markets 
abroad, or for those who already have an online presence to explore best practices to diversify their  
sales to target consumers in some of the world 's largest markets.  
As part of its Export Diversification Strategy announced in November 2018 and to further support 
these objectives, the Government proposed to invest CAD 25.4 million over the next five year s to 
expand TCS advice and services in areas such as digital, e -commerce and intellectual property to 
help Canadian businesses take advantage of fast -growing opportunities in technology and services 
exports.  
 
 
  WT/TPR/M/389/Add.1  
 
- 229 - 
 
  SWITZERLAND  
Report by the Secretariat – WT/TPR/S/389  
2 TRADE AND INVESTMENT REGIMES  
2.3 Trade Agreements and Arrangements, 2.3.2.1 Reciprocal trade agreements, 
paragraph  2.21, page 34  
Question  
Can Canada give some information about the state of the ratification of the CUSMA?  
Reply  
Since the signature of the Canada -United States -Mexico Agreement (CUSMA) on 30 November 2018, 
the Parties ' efforts have focused on domestic ratification procedures. Canada tabled the treaty in the 
House of Commons on 12 December  2018. Canada introduced its  implementing legislation in 
Parliament on 29 May. The bill will now be subject to usual parliamentary procedures.  
3 TRADE POLICIES AND PRACTICES BY MEASURE  
3.1 Measures Directly Affecting Imports, 3.1.1 Customs procedures, valuation, and 
requirements, paragraph 3.2, page 43 and paragraph 3.7, pages 47  
Question  
In para 3.2 it is stated that importers may use a licensed customs brokers to transact with CBSA. 
What percentage of Canadian importers uses brokers to lodge their customs declaratio ns? Has this 
percentage evolved significantly since 2015 after the introduction of the Single Window Initiative 
(SWI), which allows importers to provide all regulatory import requirements through the Integrated 
Import Declaration (IID) platform? (para 3.7)  
Reply  
The Canadian Border Services Agency (CBSA) does not currently keep statistical information on the 
number of importers utilizing brokers. We are therefore unable to determine if the number of 
importers using brokers has changed as a result of the int roduction of Single Window Initiative 
(SWI).  
Paragraph 3.3, page 43  
Question  
For the release of imported merchandise, the importers can use either the full accounting of 
documents and the payment of duties for the release of the goods or they can opt for the electronic 
transmission of RMD (Release on Minimum Documentation). What percentage of the import releases 
are based on the paper based procedure and what percentage on the RMD/IID? Have these 
percentages also evolved since the introduction of the S WI? Has CBSA plans to suppress the paper 
based procedure and to turn to a full electronic environment?  
Reply  
Paper documentation for interim accounting amounts to less than 1% (220,000) of total release 
volumes (23 million) in the 2018/19 fiscal year. Pape r full accounting document B3 (C -type) volume 
totalled 250,000 in the same year. The majority of paper interim accounting release transactions 
are for goods regulated by Other Government Departments (OGDs). As the CBSA mandates the 
Integrated Import Declar ation (IID) for all regulated commodities, it is expected that paper interim 
account release processing will decrease. However, there will always be a need for paper to process 
exceptional circumstances, e.g., goods released at non -automated warehouses, sy stem outages. It WT/TPR/M/389/Add.1  
 
- 230 - 
 
  is expected that paper B3 C -type data will remain unchanged with the full implementation of the 
IID.  
3.1.3.4 WTO bindings, paragraph 3.44, page 61  
Question  
According to para graph 3.44 there are eight tariff lines for which the applied MFN rates are higher 
than the bound rates. For the majority of those lines the difference is due to rounding. Could Canada 
provide detailed information for the three remaining tariff lines?  
Reply  
For the three remaining tariff lines (1602.39.91, 19 05.90.39, 2309.90.20), the discrepancy between 
applied and bound rates is either the result of a concordance error or the calculation of ad valorem  
equivalent (AVE) rates by the WTO Secretariat. Canada is in the process of reviewing these issues 
and will u ndertake any necessary adjustments to its applied and/or bound tariff schedule once this 
review is complete.  
3.1.4.2 Federal excise duties and taxes, 3.1.4.3 Provincial product specific taxes, 
paragraphs 3.54 and 3.55, pages 67 -68 
Question  
Paragraph 3.54 s tates that "the tax rates are generally identical for imports and 
domestically -produced goods, but lower rates (or zero) apply to domestic brewers and to wine made 
entirely from Canadian -grown agricultural input. " The same system applies at the provincial level 
according to paragraph 3.55. As this system of tax exemption appears to contradict the basic 
principle of article III of the GATT 1994, how does Canada justify this more favourable tax treatment 
in favour of domestic producers?  
Reply  
Given the ongoin g WTO dispute settlement process on elements of the alcohol tax regimes in 
Canada, it would be inappropriate to comment further at this time.  
3.1.4.4 Other charges, paragraph 3.57, page 71  
Question  
According to paragraph 3.57 the Federal Government will implement a federal carbon polluting 
pricing system in 2019 that will also apply to provinces and territories that request it or do not have 
such a system. Could Canada provide more details on the date of implementation of this system as 
well as the functioning and rates of this system?  
Reply  
The federal pricing system for large industry, the Output -Based Pricing System (OBPS), took effect 
starting in January 2019, in Ontario, Manitoba, New Brunswick, Prince Edward Island, and partially 
in Saskatchewan. Saskatchewan has proposed a pricing system for some of its industries; the federal 
system will fill in the gaps in that province by covering the electricity and natural gas transmission 
pipeline sectors. The federal OBPS sets an emissions -intensity standard, or output -based standards 
(OBS), for each sector under the system. Facilities that emit less than their standard earn credit 
they can sell. Facilities with emissions above their standard have three options to comply: 1) Pay 
carbon pollution  price ( CAD 20/t in 2019, rising to CAD 50/t in 2022); 2) Submit surplus credits 
purchased from facilities that beat their limit; and/or; 3) submit eligible offset credit. The federal 
fuel charge took effect starting in April 2019, in Saskatchewan, Ontario , Manitoba, and 
New Brunswick, because those governments have not developed a system to price carbon pollution 
which meets the federal benchmark. The government of the Northwest Territories is planning to 
implement a system that meets the federal benchmark  on 1 July 2019. The federal carbon pollution 
pricing system will apply in Yukon and Nunavut. The federal system will start applying in the WT/TPR/M/389/Add.1  
 
- 231 - 
 
  territories on 1 July 2019, to ensure alignment across the territories. This is one of several solutions 
to address the unique circumstances of the territories. Other solutions include providing full relief on 
aviation fuel and diesel -fired electricity generation in remote communities.  
Further details are available at: https://www.canada.ca/en/environment -climate -
change/services/climate -change/pricing -pollution -how-it-will-work.html . 
3.1.5 Import prohibitions, restrictions, and licensing, p aragraph 3.60, page 71  
Question  
Concerning the Used Mattress Materials Regulations made under the Customs Tariff: According to 
paragraph 3.60 (of the Secretariat Report) the importation of second -hand mattresses and material 
therefrom are prohibited in Canada. Could Canada provide the rationale of this prohibition?  
Reply  
Canada restricts or prohibits the importation of certain goods, such as used or second -hand 
mattresses, for reasons of public safety, health, and the environment.  
While tar iff item No. 9897.00.00 in the schedule to Canada 's Customs Tariff generally prohibits the 
importation of used or second -hand mattresses into Canada, it also provides for the authorization 
to import cleaned and fumigated materials from used or second -hand mattresses when accompanied 
by a certificate showing they have been cleaned and fumigated.  
3.1.6 Anti -dumping, countervailing, and safeguard measures, 3.1.6.2 Safeguards, 
paragraph 3.106, page 87  
Question  
According to paragraph 3.106, on 11 October 2018, Canada announced preliminary safeguard 
measures on seven steel products. On 5 April 2019, Canada notified a finding of threat of serious 
injury for two steel products. The notification contains also the foreseen definitive safeguard 
measures in the f orm of a TRQ for three years. Could Canada indicate the date when the safeguard 
measure will enter into force? To which countries will it apply?  
Reply  
Canada announced the imposition of final safeguards on imports of heavy plate and stainless steel 
wire on  26 April 2019. The final safeguard measures took effect on 13 May 2019 and apply to imports 
from all sources, other than goods originating in the United States, Mexico, Chile, Israel, Korea,  
Panama, Peru, Colombia, Honduras and developing countries benefiting from the General 
Preferential Tariff in Canada under the Customs Tariff. More information can be found in Canada 's 
notification to the Committee on Safeguards (G/SG/N/8/CAN/3/Suppl.1; G/ SG/N/10/CAN/1; 
G/SG/N/11/CAN/1/Suppl.1)  
3.3.4 Competition policy and price controls, 3.3.4.1 Main regulatory and institutional 
framework, paragraph 3.192, page 105  
Question  
The Secretariat 's report mentions that the Tribunal deals with cases related to ref usals to supply by 
foreign suppliers. Could you give more details about these cases? Has the Tribunal sanctioned any 
foreign enterprises? What level of difficulty do you face in order to sanction companies based abroad?  
Reply  
Under section 84 of the Compet ition Act: "Where, on application by the Commissioner, the Tribunal 
finds that a supplier outside Canada has refused to supply a product or otherwise discriminated in 
the supply of a product to a person in Canada (the "first" person) at the instance of and  by reason WT/TPR/M/389/Add.1  
 
- 232 - 
 
  of the exertion of buying power outside Canada by another person, the Tribunal may order any 
person in Canada (the "second " person) by whom or on whose behalf or for whose benefit the buying 
power was exerted, (a) to sell any such product of the  supplier that the second person has obtained 
or obtains to the first person at the laid -down cost in Canada to the second person of the product 
and on the same terms and conditions as the second person obtained or obtains from the supplier; 
or (b) not to deal or to cease to deal, in Canada, in that product of the supplier. " 
The question of whether any civil provision under Part VIII of the Act can apply to conduct or an 
actor outside Canada and if so, which factors should be considered in assessing the Tri bunal 's 
jurisdiction, has never been judicially considered by the Tribunal. However, in "The Commissioner 
of Competition v HarperCollins Publishers LLC and HarperCollins Canada Limited (2017 Comp Trib . 
10)", HarperCollins sought to strike the Commissioner 's application on the basis that, according to 
HarperCollins, the Tribunal did not have jurisdiction over the conduct, which occurred in the U.S. 
The Tribunal rejected that argument and held that the "real and substantial connection " test could 
be applied t o allow the Tribunal to assert jurisdiction over conduct that occurs in a foreign 
jurisdiction. Since the case was subsequently resolved by mediation (and the Commissioner 
withdrew his application), the Tribunal did not issue an order with respect to the f oreign conduct.  
Question  
In light of the phenomenon of digitalisation some countries are discussing or have decided an 
adaptation of thresholds in the merger control (i.e. transaction values). Is it also a subject of 
discussion in Canada?  
Reply  
In Canada, Part IX of the Competition Act provides the statutory framework for the Competition 
Bureau 's (the "Bureau ") pre-notification, which requires the parties to certain proposed transactions 
to notify the Commissioner of Competition ( "Commissioner ") prior to co mpleting their transaction. 
Transactions that exceed both the party -size and transaction -size thresholds are subject to 
notification unless an exemption applies. A high -level overview of the thresholds is as follows:  
• Party-size: The parties to a transactio n, together with their affiliates, have assets in Canada 
or gross revenues from sales in, from or into Canada that exceed CAD 400 million; and  
• Transaction -size: The target of a transaction has assets in Canada or gross revenues from 
sales in or from Canada  that exceed CAD 96 million.  
While the party -size threshold is not subject to an annual inflation adjustment, the transaction -size 
threshold may be adjusted by the Minister. Since 2011 the inflation adjustment has been applied 
and, as a result, the transac tion-size threshold has increased annually. Notwithstanding the 
thresholds, the Commissioner has jurisdiction to review any transaction defined as a merger under 
the Competition Act, with a view to assessing whether it prevents or lessens, or is likely to prevent 
or lessen, competition substantially.  
In Q4 2018 -19, the Bureau 's Merger Intelligence and Notification Unit (the "MINU ") expanded its 
role to include a broader focus on intelligence gathering, including the detection, investigation and 
challenge of  mergers that are not notifiable but may be anticompetitive. Non -notifiable transactions 
involving the digital economy may be captured by the MINU 's market monitoring functions.  
3.3.5 State trading, state -owned enterprises, and privatization, paragraph 3.2 12, 
page  109 
Question  
Regarding regulation and SOEs, do public companies have to comply with the same rules as private 
companies (regarding competition, but also in general)? Is the issue of distortions of competition by 
public companies a political topic in Canada?  WT/TPR/M/389/Add.1  
 
- 233 - 
 
  Reply  
The Competition Act applies to commercial activities of Crown corporations (or state -owned 
enterprises) that are in actual or potential competition with other businesses in Canada to the same 
extent it would if the corporation were private . This obligation is outlined in section 2.1 of the 
Competition Act.  
4 TRADE POLICIES BY SECTOR  
4.1 Agriculture, Fo restry and Fisheries, 4.1.1.2 Border measures, paragraph 4.8, page 141  
Question  
In para. 4.8, the Secretariat 's report informs about Canada 's transfer of a TRQ share of 800 tons of 
cheese for imports from the EU at the expense of the other Members ' TRQ share. Members including 
Switzerland have questioned the compatibility of this transfer with WTO law and criticized in 
particular the la ck of timely consultation on this step. We ask Canada to provide to the Members the 
relevant import data that will allow Members to assess the conformity of this transfer with WTO law.  
Reply  
The import figures that were part of the consideration for the tr ansfer of 800,000 kilograms of 
Canada 's 20,411,866 kilograms WTO Tariff Rate Quota (TRQ) for cheese to the European Union (EU) 
to maintain the relative shares of supply due to new EU member State accessions were retrieved 
from Statistics Canada. For the co untries that joined the European Union in 2004, 2007 and 2013, 
the import figures that were considered were those prior to each individual country becoming a 
European Union member State.  
The specific import figures per new Member State of the EU can be fou nd on the website of Statistics 
Canada : https://www150.statcan.gc.ca/n1/en/subjects/international_trade . 
4.3.4 Steel, paragraph 4.167, page 183  
Question  
According to paragraph 4.167, the Canadian Government announced a support programme 
(Strategic Innovation Fund) that enable steel and aluminium producers to enhance their production 
capabilities, to better meet the product demand from end -users within Canada. Could Can ada specify 
the duration of this support programme? Which are the conditions to be eligible to this programme?  
Reply  
Duration: Eligible costs on approved projects can be supported by the Strategic Innovation Fund no 
later than 31 March 2020; i.e. costs nee d to be incurred by 31 March  2020.  
Eligibility Criteria: Canadian incorporated steel and aluminum producers can submit a proposal for 
targeted assistance for new equipment, production, and process technologies, as well as training 
and upskilling related to  these new technologies and processes. Applicants must be steel and 
aluminum producers with a minimum of 200 employees requesting a contribution of between 
CAD 10 million and CAD 50 million. Final contribution level will depend on a number of factors 
including project scope and level of interest in the programme . 
 
  WT/TPR/M/389/Add.1  
 
- 234 - 
 
  THAILAND  
Report by the Secretariat – WT/TPR/S/389  
SUMMARY  
Paragraph 19, page 12  
Question  
Regarding the application of sanitary and phytosanitary measures, the Safe Food for Canadians Act 
(SFCA) and the Safe Food for Canadians Regulations (SFCR) came into effect on 15 January 2019, 
representing the most important revision of food safety regulat ions in 25 years. The SFCA 
consolidates the authorities under other pertinent legislation and the food provisions of the 
Consumer Packaging and Labelling Act. The SFCR replaces 14 sets of regulations to reduce 
unnecessary administrative burdens on business es. No new STCs were raised regarding measures 
maintained by Canada in the WTO Committee on Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures since its last 
Review. Please identify the differences between the new revision of food safety regulations, and the 
former food safety regulations, particularly the food provisions of the Consumer Packaging and 
Labelling  Act. Please elaborate further the new practices, and related activities which might be 
affected all stakeholders due to such revision.  
Reply  
The Safe Food for Cana dians Regulations introduces new licensing, preventive control and 
traceability requirements to all food businesses that import or prepare food for export or to be sent 
across provincial or territorial boundaries. The regulatory requirements related to foo d that were 
formerly found in the Consumer Packaging and Labelling Regulations were included in the Safe Food 
for Canadians Regulations. These requirements continue to apply to food in the same manner.  
 
Please consult the Canadian Food Inspection Agency 's website for more information on the Safe 
Food for Canadians Act and Regulations ( http://inspection.gc.ca/food ) 
2 TRADE AND INVESTMENT REGIMES  
2.2 Trade Policy Formulation and Objectives, paragraph 2.11, page 31  
Question  
What is definition for Indigenous peoples that may fall within the scope under FTAs and how to 
identify such definition among FTA partners?  
Reply  
In Canada, the identification of Indigenous peoples is preferred to a formal definition. The Canadian 
Constitution recognizes three groups of Indigenous peoples: Indians (more commonly referred to as 
First Nations), Inuit and Métis. These are three distinct peoples with unique histories, languages, 
cultural practices and spiritual beliefs. Additio nally, we use census -data to identify Indigenous 
peoples which is collected based on individual 's self -identification as Indigenous. More than 
1.67 million people in Canada identify themselves as an Indigenous person, according to the 2016 
Census.  
This re cognition and self -identification would be the "definition " that Canada uses for Indigenous 
peoples that may fall under the scope of FTAs. As it concerns our FTA partners, we would not 
presume to tell them how to define Indigenous peoples within their terr itories or that may fall under 
the scope of their FTAs. However,  if they are looking for guidance, we would point to the practice by 
the United Nations as a good starting point. Considering the diversity of indigenous peoples, an 
official definition of "indigenous " has not been adopted by any UN -system body. Instead the system 
has developed a modern understanding of this term based on the following:  
• Self- identification as indigenous peoples at the individual level and accepted by the 
community as their member.  WT/TPR/M/389/Add.1  
 
- 235 - 
 
  • Historical continuity with pre -colonial and/or pre -settler societies.  
• Strong link to territories and surrounding natural resources.  
• Distinct social, economic or political systems.  
• Distinct language, culture and beliefs.  
• Form non -dominant grou ps of society.  
• Resolve to maintain and reproduce their ancestral environments and systems as distinctive 
peoples and communities.  
Question  
The promotion of gender equality is in line with ASEAN 's vision 2025 to enhance gender equality. 
Trade and Gender Cha pters in Canada 's FTA negotiations are focused on cooperation activities and 
the sharing of best practices. As this issue is new, what are the principles governing trade and gender 
and how can we prevent the use of trade and gender as disguised protectioni st measures in the 
future? What does Canada achieve in incorporating trade and gender chapters in the recent USMCS?  
Reply  
The Government of Canada is committed to advancing gender equality at home and abroad. 
Achieving gender equality and the empowerment o f women and girls is an effective way to promote 
Canada 's values and rights -based approach, as well as foster prosperity, create lasting peace, and 
achieve sustainable development. Evidence shows that investing in gender equality and the 
empowerment of wom en and girls acts as a force multiplier on all other international actions and 
programs. That is why Canada is pursuing a Feminist Foreign Policy and Feminist International 
Assistance Policy, informed by Agenda 2030 and sustainable Development Goal 5 on ac hieving 
gender equality.  
While gender equality and the avoidance of discrimination based on gender is one of many elements 
that Canada has pursued during trade negotiations in the past, notably via language regarding the 
elimination of employment discrimin ation in Labour chapters, more recently Canada has sought to 
include more gender considerations in its free trade agreements (FTAs).  
The inclusion of a Trade and Gender chapter in the modernized Canada -Chile FTA and Canada -Israel 
FTAs are excellent example s of the principles governing Canada 's approach to trade and gender. 
The chapter acknowledges the importance of incorporating a gender perspective into economic and 
trade issues to ensure that economic growth benefits everyone. It also provides a framework  for 
Canada and its trading partners to undertake cooperation activities on issues related to trade and 
gender; and it establishes a bilateral Committee to oversee these cooperation activities. In 
September 2018, at the first Comprehensive Economic and Tra de Agreement (CETA) Joint 
Committee, Canada and the EU adopted a Trade and Gender recommendation which seeks to 
recognize the importance of making trade policies more gender -responsive to ensure that the 
benefits of CETA reach everyone. In addition, the Co mprehensive and Progressive Agreement for 
Trans -Pacific Partnership (CPTPP), in its preamble, reaffirms the importance of promoting inclusive 
values, including gender equality. Canada will also continue its emphasis on incorporating gender 
and inclusive pr ovisions in future FTAs. For example, Canada is seeking the inclusion of a Trade and 
Gender chapter in its FTA negotiations with the Pacific Alliance and Mercosur.  
Canada believes that trade agreements should not erect barriers but rather remove barriers s o that 
more people, including women, can participate in and benefit from trade. Canada recognizes that 
sustainable and inclusive economic growth should not come at the expense of gender equality and 
women 's economic empowerment; and in fact, by fully engag ing women (and other 
under -represented groups) in the economy and trade, international trade and economic growth will 
be more sustainable to the benefit of our national economies. That is why Canada is seeking inclusive 
co-operation -based chapters on trade  and gender in FTAs. The implementation of these co -
operation -based chapters with FTA partners includes exchanges of information, best practices, and 
ideas on how best to not only advance women 's economic empowerment in our countries but also WT/TPR/M/389/Add.1  
 
- 236 - 
 
  to leverage i t for the benefit of the economic growth and prosperity for all our peoples. In this regard, 
Canada 's trade and gender chapters are fundamentally anti -protectionist, in that they seek to 
remove barriers and increase participation for women and other underr epresented groups in trade 
and investment. Participation in trade and investment is not finite; the more one group participates 
does not have to result in less participation for others.  
The Canada -United States -Mexico Agreement (CUSMA) includes trade and g ender provisions 
throughout the agreement. This includes labour obligations regarding the elimination of employment 
discrimination based on gender. Gender is also addressed in other chapters, including provisions 
related to corporate social responsibility,  and small and medium -sized enterprises. For more 
information on trade and gender provisions in CUSMA, please consult the following Web page on the 
Government of Canada 's website: https://international.gc.ca/trade -commerce/trade -agreements -
accords -commerciaux/agr -acc/cusma -aceum/gender_equality -egalite_sexes.aspx?lang=eng  
3 TRADE POLICIES AND PRACTICES BY MEASURE  
3.1 Measures Directly Affecting Imports, 3.1.4 Other charges affecting imports, 3.1.4.2 
Federal excise duties and taxes, paragraph 3.54, page 67  
Question  
The Secretaria t Report indicates that "the Federal Government levies excise duties and taxes on 
alcoholic beverages, tobacco products, certain petroleum products, and a few other items (e.g. 
automobile air conditioners and fuel -inefficient vehicles). Excise duties are c harged either under the 
Excise Act or the Excise Act, 2001, whereas excise taxes are charged under the Excise Tax Act. The 
tax rates are generally identical for imports and domestically -produced goods, but lower rates (or 
zero) apply to domestic brewers an d to wine made entirely from Canadian -grown agricultural input. 
The federal excise tax on certain petroleum products ranges from CAD 0.04 to CAD 0.11 per litre; 
on certain fuel -inefficient passenger vehicles, from CAD 1,000 to CAD 4,000 per unit; and on 
automobile air conditioners, it amounts to CAD 100. For alcohol and tobacco goods, the current rates 
are enumerated in Table 3.13. " According to the paragraph 3.54, the excise tax is being levied 
differently on domestic brewers and wine made entirely from Ca nadian -grown agriculture in 
comparable to imported products. Could you please further clarify what principle and rationale 
behind such measure?  
Reply  
Given the ongoing WTO dispute settlement process on elements of the alcohol tax regimes in 
Canada, it would be inappropriate to comment further at this time.  
3.1.4.3 Provincial product -specific taxes, paragraph 3.56, pages 70 -71 
Question  
Please explain in greater detail Canada 's policy on cross -border trade in cannabis and its related 
products. For example, are there any restrictions on imports and exports? How can the cannabis 
industry in foreign countries collaborate with Canadian cannabis industry to explore more 
opportunities for cannabis trading?  
Reply  
The Cannabis Act and its supporting Regulat ions came into force on 17 October 2018. As per the 
Cannabis Act and its regulations, and consistent with Canada 's international obligations, Health 
Canada maintains strict control over the international movement of cannabis for medical and 
scientific purp oses, or in respect of industrial hemp, strictly limiting international trade for these 
purposes, and authorizing permits and exemptions on a case -by-case basis. Exports and imports for 
any other purpose are prohibited under Canadian law, and the illegal m ovement of cannabis and 
cannabis products across international borders is a serious criminal offence.  
Before issuing an import or export permit, Health Canada considers the following:  
 WT/TPR/M/389/Add.1  
 
- 237 - 
 
  • Canada 's obligations under international treaties;  
• Whether the applica tion is consistent with relevant provisions in the Cannabis Act and its 
regulations (Access to Cannabis for Medical Purposes Regulations or the Narcotic Control 
Regulations);  
• Whether the import or export will be used solely for medical or scientific purpos es; 
• In the case of export, whether the country of final destination has issued an import permit; 
and 
• Risks to public safety and security including the risks of diversion.  
Under the Cannabis Act, importation and exportation is permitted under very limited c ircumstances, 
such as, importing starting materials for a new Licensed Producer or exporting a unique cannabis 
strain for scientific investigation in a foreign laboratory, which requires a permit from Health Canada. 
A foreign company or individual interest ed in exporting cannabis to Canada, or importing cannabis 
from Canada, would need to work with a Canadian licen ce holder, as only the latter can apply for an 
import/export permit under the Cannabis Act. The import and export provisions operate in the 
conte xt of Canada 's international drug treaty obligations.  
3.3 Measures Affecting Production and Trade, 3.3.4 Competition policy and price controls, 
paragraph 3.210, page 109  
Question  
The Secretariat Report mentions that Canada 's Patented Medicine Prices Review Board (PMPRB) 
oversees the maximum prices of patented medicines and can hold public hearings to determine 
whether the price of a patented medicine is excessive, and if so, order price reductions and/or the 
offset of excess  revenues. This overseeing affects only any medicine to which a patent 'pertains. ' In 
the meantime, the provincial governments affect the prices of medicines through their drug 
reimbursement programmes. We would appreciate it if Canada could provide furthe r information on 
how to implement policies and measures regarding regulating prices of medicines, e.g. the procedure 
in regulating patented drugs, detail of the drug reimbursement programs.  
Reply  
In Canada, reimbursement is provided by a mix of public and private insurers. The private insurers 
are large insurance companies and are funded by the premiums paid by their members.  Each 
insurance company sets its own formulary and reimbursement plans.  The Canadian Life and Health 
Insurance Association is the main  industry association. The public insurers consist of drug benefit 
plans operated by the provincial and territorial governments.  They are all different and maintain 
separate formularies and reimbursement policies. More information at : 
https://www.canada.ca/en/health -canada/services/health -care-system/pharm aceuticals/access -
insurance -coverage -prescription -medicines/provincial -territorial -public -drug-benefit -programs.html .  
The federal government also provides prescription drugs for about one million Canadians who are 
members of eligible groups.  These are des cribed at : https://www.canada.ca/en/health -
canada/services/health -care-system/pharmaceuticals/access -insurance -coverage -prescription -
medicines/federal -public -drug-benefit -programs.html .  
Each plan develops and implements its own pricing and reimbursement policy. Other bodies that are 
indirectly involved in formulary policy are Health Canada which approves medicines for marketing in 
Canada based on their safety, efficacy and quality; and the Common Drug Review and pan -Canadian 
Oncology Drug Review, administered by the Canadian Agency for Drugs and Technologie s in Health, 
which recommends medicines that should qualify for reimbursement by participating public drug 
plans. Both private and public insurers negotiate separately with drug companies with regard to 
pricing and reimbursement criteria, and confidential Private Listing Agreements (PLAs) are becoming 
increasingly common. In this regard, on August 2010, the pan -Canadian Pharmaceutical Alliance 
(pCPA) was established to conduct joint provincial/territorial/federal negotiations for brand name 
and generic drug s in Canada to achieve greater value for publicly funded drug programs and patients WT/TPR/M/389/Add.1  
 
- 238 - 
 
  through the use of the combined negotiating power of participating jurisdictions. The ceiling 
(maximum) price of all patented medicines is also subject to oversight at the national level from the 
Patented Medicine Prices Review Board (PMPRB). Under the Patent Act, all patentees of patented 
medicines are required to file price information with the PMPRB twice a year during the life of the 
patent. The PMPRB reviews this price information and, following a public hearing, can issue legally 
binding orders directing the patentee to lower the maximum price of the medicine to a "non-
excessive " ceiling level. The patentee can then charge whatever price it wants up to the ordered 
ceiling price. In order to assist patentees with pricing, the PMPRB also publishes non -binding and 
non-enforceable pricing Guidelines. The PMPRB also has a reporting mandate and publishes a series 
of reports on pharmaceutical pricing trends in Canada to provide  useful data to policy makers. The 
most recent PMPRB annual report can be found at: http://www.pmprb -
cepmb.gc.ca/en/reporting/annual -reports .  
Paragraph 3.3 .7 Intellectual property ri ghts, 3.3.7.5 Trademarks, paragraph 3.306, 
page  132 
Question  
As of June 2019, the definition of trademarks will include sounds, textures and smells. The 
application for the registration of a trademark consisting of a sound should: (a) state that the 
applic ation is for the registration of a sound mark; (b) contain a description of the sound; and (c) 
contain an electronic recording of the sound. Currently applications for sound marks may only be 
submitted by way of a paper application, and not through the CIP O's online filing system. The CIPO 
began accepting the registration of sounds as trademarks as of end -March 2012. Please elaborate 
on the filing procedure for the application of scent mark in Canada. What are the application 
requirements? Is there any onli ne filing system available for the application of scent mark?  
Reply  
As of 17 June 2019, applications for trademarks consisting of a scent can be filed online and must 
include a clear and concise description of the scent.  
3.3.7.8 Plant Variety Protection, paragraph 3.318, page 134  
Question  
The paragraph states that "Canada is a member of UPOV (1991). The Plant Breeders ' Rights Act, 
1990 (PBR Act) (amended) and the Plant Breeders ' Rights Regulations, 1991 (amended) are the 
main instruments granting plant variety protection. The Act was last amended by Bill C -18 
(27 February 2015). It allows for the protection of new varieties of plants, provided the varieties are 
new, distinct, uni form and stable. All plant species are eligible for protection. Algae, bacteria and 
fungi are not protected. Applicants must be citizens of, residents of, or have a resident office in, 
Canada, a UPOV member State, or a WTO Member State ". 
a) Please provide inf ormation regarding Canada 's internal procedures/methods for the 
amendment of the previous Plant Breeders ' Rights Act so as to be in conformity with the UPOV 
1991?  
  
b) To proceed with such amendment, are there any negative impacts on Canadian farmers?  
  
c) Please elaborate more on how the Canadian government addresses such adverse impacts.  
Reply  
a) In order to become an International Union for the Protection of New Varieties of Plants (UPOV) 
member, a state or intergovernmental organization must develop a plant variety protection 
law in conformity with the articles of the UPOV Convention. Canada first enacted a domestic 
Plant Breeders ' Rights (PBR) Act on 19 June 1990. Subsequently, Canada became a member 
of UPOV on 4 March 1991, one month ( 4 February  1991) after  the Canadian Minister of Foreign 
Affairs deposited the instrument of ratification of the 1978 Act of the International Convention 
for the Protection of New Varieties of Plants (UPOV '78) with the UPOV Secretary General. After WT/TPR/M/389/Add.1  
 
- 239 - 
 
  extensive consultation with th e stakeholder community, Canada amended its PBR Act on 27 
February 2015, aligning our domestic law with the articles of UPOV '91. On 19 June 2015, the 
Government of Canada deposited our instrument of ratification with UPOV Secretary General, 
becoming bound by the 1991 Act of the UPOV Convention one month later on 19 July 2015.  
 
The UPOV Office provides excellent guidance on the steps required for 
states/intergovernmental organizations to become a member of UPOV:  
https://www.upov.int/members/en/upov_membership.html . 
  
b) There are no known negative impacts on Canadian farmers. Canadian farmers are highly 
dependent on the ongoing release of new and improved varieties into the marketplace in order 
to remain competitive internationally. In a recent survey (2018), the Canadian  Seed Trade 
Association observed a 56% increase in private sector expenditures on variety research and 
development over a five year period (2012 = CAD 101 million , 2017 = CAD 171 million ), 
largely attributed to Canada 's ratification of UPOV '91. In the hort iculture sector, Canadian 
farmers are highly dependent on accessing foreign bred varieties from other countries. Since 
ratification of UPOV '91, stronger intellectual protection has incentivized more foreign breeders 
to release their new varieties into Cana da. Since UPOV '91 ratification, the Canadian PBR Office 
observed 68% increase in the number of potato applications, and a 138% increase in the 
number of fruit and vegetable applications.  
 
c) Many Canadian farmers are strongly supportive of retaining the abili ty to save and reuse seed 
of PBR protected agricultural crop kinds. As such, the Canadian government opted to include 
the optional "farmers ' exemption ", UPOV '91 Article 15 (2), as part of the recent legislation 
amendments to the PBR Act. However, the Gover nment of Canada is also consulting with 
stakeholders on possible mechanisms for farmers to pay a royalty each time seed of a PBR 
protected cereal variety is saved and reused.  
4 TRADE POLICIES BY SECTOR  
4.1 Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries, 4.1 Agriculture, 4.1.1.3 Domestic programmes, 
paragraph 4.14, pages 141 -142 
Question  
The Secretariat Report refers to the "AgriMarketing Program which provides matching contribution 
to support industry -led market development activities to expand and diversify exports of agriculture 
and agri -food products " and the "AgriCompetitiveness Program, which aims to assist industry -led 
efforts to provide producers with information needed to build capacity and support development. " 
Please provide additional info rmation on how these two programs are implemented, e.g. do they 
aim to provide "matching " both for domestic and international trade? Please also explain about the 
working procedure and relevant government agencies. We would appreciate the detail as an exam ple 
in this type of promotion work.  
Reply  
The primary focus of the AgriMarketing programme  is to assist national not -for-profit sector 
organizations that undertake generic commodity -based  market development activities aimed at 
increasing the awareness and demand for that commodity both domestically and internationally. For 
example, the promotion of canola for production of cooking oil. The programme  is widely available 
to all national sector organizations, and if a project is approved, provides matching con tributions 
(50/50). The programme  is delivered by Agriculture and Agri -Food Canada (AAFC). Other 
government departments have limited involvement, beyond helping AAFC review project 
applications that may benefit from their expertise (e.g., Global Affairs Ca nada's Trade Commissioner 
service might review a project to help AAFC identify potential risks, such as those related to market 
regulations or technical barriers).  
The AgriCompetitiveness programme  provides matching contributions (generally 50/50) to natio nal 
not-for-profit organizations that undertake projects to help the agricultural sector to benefit from 
expert advice and farm research, build on existing capacity, increase agricultural awareness, and 
share best practices. While small, the programme  is widely available, and supports important 
agricultural organizations such as 4 -H Canada, which helps young Canadians learn about and 
participate in the agricultural sector. It also supports important work by the Canadian Agricultural WT/TPR/M/389/Add.1  
 
- 240 - 
 
  Safety Association aimed  at helping to promote farm safety by working to educate Canadian farmers 
on best practices to avoid potential injuries.  
4.3 Manufacturing, 4.3.2 Automotive industry, paragraph 4.154, page 179  
Question  
Please provide more information on how the Canadian government encourages consumers to shift 
from the use  of internal -combustion engine (ICE) vehicles to electric vehicles (EVs)/Fuel Cells and 
the ensuing difficulties. What incentives or other measures are in place such as subsidies for both 
car-owners or manufactures in order to create a bigger market for the EVs/Fuel Cells.  
Reply  
The Government of Canada is committed to reducing greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions from all 
sectors, including the transportation sector, which accounts for a quarter of al l emissions in Canada. 
This is why the federal government has set ambitious zero -emission vehicle (ZEV) targets of having 
10% of all light -duty vehicle sales be ZEVs by 2025, 30% by 2030, and 100% by 2040.  
In support of these targets, the Government of Can ada recently announced several initiatives aimed 
at supporting ZEV adoption, including CAD 300 million for a new federal purchase incentive 
programme  for Canadians; an accelerated tax write -off for businesses that purchase qualifying ZEVs; 
and CAD 130 mill ion for investments to provide ZEV charging and hydrogen refuelling infrastructure 
where Canadians live, work and play. The CAD 130 million in investment is in addition to 
CAD 180 million already provided by the Government to build a coast -to-coast network  of electric 
vehicle (EV) fast -chargers and natural gas/hydrogen refuelling stations; to demonstrate next 
generation innovative EV charging technologies in urban environments, at workplaces, as well as for 
public transit; and to develop and align codes/sta ndards with the United States and address 
regulatory barriers.  
To ensure that vehicle supply meets increased demand, CAD 5 million over five years (beginning in 
2019-20) is earmarked for Transport Canada to collaborate with auto manufacturers to secure 
voluntary ZEV sales targets. The federal government is also using digital technologies to increase 
consumer awareness.  
In addition to these ZEV -related initiatives, the Government of Canada is setting emissions standards 
and improving the energy efficiency of  conventional on -road vehicles via regulatory tools. The 
Government is putting a price on GHG emissions and mandating the use of cleaner fuels —including 
in the transportation sector —via carbon pricing and the development of the Clean Fuel Standard.  
4.4.3 T ransport, 4.4.3.1 Air transport and airports, 4.4.3.1.1 Air transport, paragraph 
4.240, page  199 
Question  
Considering Canada 's Non -conforming measure lists in the air transport sector under the CPTPP, we 
noted that the reservations are confined only in specialty air services, including measures relating 
to selling and marketing of air transportation services. Therefore, we would like to seek clarification 
whether the above -mentioned measures (para 4.240) shall be applied to a services supplier of the 
CPTPP members. In addition, would there be any other FTAs that Canada offers such market access 
liberalisation?  
Reply  
The measures described in para 4.240 (air investment changes) were autonomously liberalized by 
Canada for air transport services (not special ty air services) and apply automatically to 
Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans -Pacific Partnership (CPTPP) parties through 
Canada 's Annex I Investment non -conforming measures (NCM) for Air Transport, which is subject 
to standstill and ratche t. This autonomous liberalization applies to all countries but is only bound by 
Canada in its bilateral and plurilateral free trade agreements FTAs, and the GATS.  WT/TPR/M/389/Add.1  
 
- 241 - 
 
  4.4.3.2 Maritime transport, paragraph 4.250, page 201  
Question  
Are there any restrictions on allowing the foreign operators to invest in the port operation as well as 
auction of port operator in Canada?  
Reply  
Foreign port terminal operators can invest in and  operate port terminal facilities at ports governed 
by Canada Port Authorities; however, th ey cannot operate whole ports, as port operation and 
management is reserved to Canada Port Authorities, which are non -share capital, letters patent 
corporations. The Government of Canada does not control the day -to-day operations of Canada Port 
Authoritie s.  
Under the Competition Act mergers of all sizes and in all sectors of the economy are subject to 
review by the Commissioner of Competition. The Act requires that companies notify the 
Commissioner if proposed mergers, acquisitions and other proposed busi ness transactions meet the 
following thresholds:  
1. The target 's assets in Canada or revenues from sales in or from Canada generated from 
those assets exceed CAD 96 million, and when  
 
2. The combined Canadian assets or revenues of the parties and their respective affiliates 
in, from or into Canada exceed CAD 400 million.  
Every person who is required to notify the Commissioner of Competition of a proposed transaction 
that involves a transpo rtation undertaking must also give notice of the proposed transaction to the 
Minister of Transport.  
Should Transport Canada be notified of such a transaction, the Minister of Transport would assess 
whether it raises issues with respect to the public intere st as it relates to national transportation.  
4.4.5 E -commerce, paragraph 4.276, page 206  
Question  
Please provide and update on Canada 's policy of De Minimis Threshold (DMT) which is related to 
goods/products imported to Canada through on -line purchases. Cu rrently, Canada 's DMT is set to 
CAD 20. As Canada has agreed to increase DMT threshold under USMCA, does Canada have plan to 
unilaterally increase DMT to accommodate the popularity/the surge of global e -commerce or will it 
be a part of bilateral/regional F ree Trade Agreements negotiations?  
Reply  
While the Government of Canada is supportive of streamlining customs processing and importation 
requirements, proposals to waive duties and taxes must be carefully considered in the context of 
impacts on Canadians a nd Canadian businesses, as well as economic, fiscal and administrative 
considerations. Under Canada 's current de minimis threshold, importations of goods valued at 
CAD 20 or less and sent to a person by mail or courier are not subject to customs duties or sales 
taxes. The threshold is set at a level intended to reduce the administrative burden for customs 
officials without creating competitive inequity for Canadian retailers, who must pay all applicable 
customs duties and taxes on goods they import for sale  and collect federal and provincial sales taxes 
on the products they sell in Canada, regardless of value.  
Indeed, the OECD has identified the non -collection of sales taxes on low -value imports as a concern 
in its Base Erosion and Profit Shifting (BEPS) ini tiative. The 2015 BEPS Action 1 Report suggested 
that countries should review their de minimis thresholds for sales taxes and considers removing or 
lowering them in order to ensure they remain effective in balancing revenue collection objectives 
and compli ance costs in the context of the digital economy.  WT/TPR/M/389/Add.1  
 
- 242 - 
 
  As part of the overall balance of concessions in the CUSMA, Canada agreed to maintain a de minimis 
threshold for express shipments from the United States and Mexico of at least C AD 150 for customs 
duties, and C AD 40 for taxes, at the time or point of importation. In due course, Canada intends to 
amend its domestic framework to reflect the negotiated outcome of the agreement.  
Report by Canada – WT/TPR/G/389  
4 OTHER KEY GOVERNMENT INITIATIVES  
4.1 Can adian Free Trade Agreement (CFTA), paragraphs 4.1 -4.2, page 16  
Question  
Thailand wishes to learn more about how the CFTA helps create the right conditions to attract foreign 
direct investments to Canada and how the measures in place can help facilitate exi sting businesses 
in and future foreign direct investments to Canada.  
Reply  
The Canadian Free Trade Agreement (CFTA) aims to reduce barriers to trade, investment, and 
worker mobility within Canada. The Agreement includes obligations on investment (Part C of  Chapter 
Three) that apply to all CFTA Parties (i.e. Canada 's federal, provincial and territorial governments). 
These obligations aim to facilitate investment within Canada, ensure non -discriminatory treatment 
of investments, and remove barriers to investm ent in Canada. For more information on how Canada 
attracts foreign direct investment, including facilitating businesses who wish to invest in Canada, 
please visit the Invest in Canada website: https://www.invest canada.ca/ . 
4.2 Intellectual Property (IP), paragraph 4.11, page 17  
Question  
Canada has extended the term of copyright protection for published sound recordings; granted IP 
agents a statutory privilege for confidential communications with clients; introduced supplementary 
protection for patents relating to pharmaceutical products ; and expanded its open, transparent and 
effective regime for the protection of geographical indications to include certain agricultural products 
and food products. Taking into account the fact that Canada as a member of CPTPP is obligated to 
Article 18.53 o f TPP (Measures Relating to the Marketing of Certain Pharmaceutical Products), 
together with the fact that Canada introduced supplementary protection for patents relating to 
pharmaceutical products as indicated in paragraph 4.11, we would like to seek clar ification on 
Canada 's scheme of the linkage between patent and drug registrations in relation to marketing 
approval.  
Reply  
In Canada, the Patented Medicines (Notice of Compliance) Regulations (PM(NOC)) Regulations) 
create a linkage regime. The PM(NOC) Regu lations provide a means of addressing relevant patents 
and Certificates of Supplementary Protection that could possibly be infringed as a result of marketing 
approval of new generic and biosimilar medicines. Canada 's patent linkage regime is also consisten t 
with its Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans -Pacific Partnership (CPTPP) obligation 
under Article 15.53 (Measures Relating to the Marketing Approval of Certain Pharmaceutical 
Products).  
4.6 Sanitary and Phytosanitary Initiatives, paragraph 4.17, page 18  
Question  
Thailand wishes to learn more about how the Safe Food for Canadians Act and Regulations as well 
as the modernization of Canada 's regulatory framework under the Food and Drugs Act will affect 
sanitation and other requirements on impor tation of agricultural and food products into Canada.  WT/TPR/M/389/Add.1  
 
- 243 - 
 
  Reply  
The Safe Food for Canadians Act and Regulations introduces consistent requirements for all food 
importers, including the requirement to be licensed, maintain traceability records and, in most cases, 
a written preventive control plan (PCP). One of the key components of an importer PCP is to ensure 
that food being imported into Canada was prepared under the same level of food safety controls as 
food prepared in Canada. Please consult the Canadian  Food Inspection Agency 's website for more 
information on the Safe Food for Canadians Act and Regulations and other regulatory modernization 
initiatives : www.inspection.gc.ca . 
The Government of Canada 's efforts to modernize the food regulatory framework under the Food 
and Drugs Act will focus on using more modern regulatory tools to continue to protect health and 
safety while being more responsive to advances in technology, changing science and consumer 
preferences. For example, by leveraging modern regulatory tools, Canada will be able to efficiently 
permit the use of more advanced and sensitive scientific methodologies to demonstrate compliance 
for food safety.  
In some cases, this is about redesigning ho w the regulations function, such as using Incorporation 
by reference, so that there is greater clarity and predictability. The Government will also be 
developing new regulations that will facilitate market access to safe and innovative food products, 
including supplemented foods, for example.  
Canada will advance these priorities in consultation with all stakeholders. It will also provide 
interested parties an opportunity to comment on the proposed regulatory amendments through 
various consultation mechanism s, including the WTO Notification process consistent with our 
international transparency obligations.  
For more information on this initiative, please visit:  
https://www.canada.ca/en/treasury -board -secretariat/services/federal -regulatory -
management/targeted -reg-review.html   
4.9 Countermeasures on U.S. Steel and Aluminium Products, page 19  
Question  
The report by Canada shows tha t "On 31 May 2018, the U.S. announced tariffs on imports of certain 
steel (25%) and aluminum (10%) products from Canada, known as a Section 232 measure. In 
response, on 1 July 2018, Canada imposed countermeasures against CAD 16.6 billion in imports of 
steel, aluminum, and other products from the U.S., representing the value of 2017 Canadian exports 
affected by the U.S. tariffs. These countermeasures will be immediately removed once the U.S. 
eliminates trade -restrictive measures against Canadian steel and al uminum products. " Please 
elaborate more on criteria for the determination of Canada 's imposition of countermeasures against 
the U.S. tariffs.  
Reply  
When the U.S. imposed tariffs on Canadian steel and aluminum, Canada imposed reciprocal, dollar -
for-dollar countermeasures against imports of steel, aluminum, and other products from the U.S., 
to encourage the full removal of the U.S. tariffs. On 17 May 2019, the U.S. a nd Canada announced 
the lifting of U.S. section 232 tariffs on Canadian Steel and aluminum, as well as Canada 's 
countermeasures. As announced by the Minister of Finance on 20 May 2019, Canada 's 
countermeasures are no longer in effect.  WT/TPR/M/389/Add.1  
 
- 244 - 
 
  6 INCLUSIVE TRADE  
6.2 Advancing an Inclusive Approach in Trade Agreements, 6.2.3 Trade and Gender, 
paragraph 6.19, page 25  
Question  
The report by Canada indicates that "Recently, Canada has sought to include gender considerations 
throughout its FTAs, notably through the inclus ion of dedicated Trade and Gender chapters, where 
possible. Trade and Gender chapters acknowledge that trade is not gender neutral and that more 
can be done to advance women 's economic empowerment and participation in international trade 
and investment. Th e chapter provisions provide a framework for Canada and its partners to work 
together on important issues like women 's entrepreneurship and the development of gender -focused 
indicators and analysis. Successes to date include Canada 's modernized FTAs with C hile and Israel, 
both of which include a Trade and Gender chapter. " Thailand commends Canada 's concerted efforts 
in pursuing a trade policy that is inclusive in its approach to promoting trade and gender equality by 
incorporating trade and gender chapters in its new or revised FTAs. Thailand wishes to be informed 
in more detail of such approach and specific measures in Canada 's existing FTAs for the purpose of 
preparation for future FTA negotiations.  
Reply  
The Government of Canada is committed to advancing gender equality at home and abroad. 
Achieving gender equality and the empowerment of women and girls is an effective way to promote 
Canada 's values and rights -based approach, as well as foster prosperity, create lasting peace, and 
achieve sustainable devel opment. Evidence shows that investing in gender equality and the 
empowerment of women and girls acts as a force multiplier on all other international actions and 
programs. While gender equality and the avoidance of discrimination based on gender is one of 
many elements that Canada has pursued during trade negotiations in the past, notably via language 
regarding the elimination of employment discrimination in Labour chapters, more recently Canada 
has sought to include more gender considerations in Canada 's free trade agreements (FTAs).  To 
date, it has been a positive experience to seek out trade and gender chapters in FTAs. Other 
countries are also seeking the inclusion of such chapters in their FTAs, showing that the time is ripe 
for such a change. One of th e most recent examples is the inclusion of a Trade and Gender chapter 
in the modernized Canada -Chile Free Trade Agreement. The chapter acknowledges the importance 
of incorporating a gender perspective into economic and trade issues to ensure that economic growth 
benefits everyone.  It also provides a framework for Canada and Chile to undertake cooperation 
activities on issues related to trade and gender; and it establishes a bilateral Committee to oversee 
these cooperation activities.  The recently modernized  Canada -Israel FTA also contains a dedicated 
Trade and Gender chapter in line with the one in the Canada -Chile FTA. In September 2018, at the 
first Comprehensive and Economic Trade Agreement (CETA) Joint Committee, Canada and the EU 
adopted a Trade and Gen der recommendation which seeks to recognize the importance of making 
trade policies more gender -responsive to ensure that the benefits of CETA reach everyone. In 
addition, the Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans -Pacific Partnership (CPTPP) 
member States have introduced a new preamble that reaffirms the importance of promoting 
inclusive values, including gender equality. Canada will continue its emphasis on incorporating 
gender provisions in future FTAs. For example, Canada is seeking the inclu sion of a Trade and Gender 
chapter in the Pacific Alliance and Mercosur FTA negotiations.  
6.2.5 Trade and Indigenous peoples, paragraphs 6.23 -6.25, page 26  
Question  
The report by Canada states that "The Government of Canada is committed to a renewed relationship 
with Indigenous peoples in Canada, based on recognition of rights, respect, cooperation, and 
partnership. Canada seeks to increase the opportunities of Indigenous peoples and Indigenous -
owned businesses to further benefit from international tr ade and investment, while ensuring that 
constitutionally protected rights are respected through Indigenous -specific exceptions and 
reservations in FTAs designed to maintain policy flexibility " and "Where appropriate, in its current 
FTA negotiations Canada is pursuing a dedicated Trade and Indigenous peoples chapter that seeks 
to acknowledge the importance of enhancing the ability of Indigenous peoples and Indigenous 
businesses to benefit from the opportunities that flow from trade and investment. The propos ed WT/TPR/M/389/Add.1  
 
- 245 - 
 
  chapter provides a framework for FTA partners to work together to identify and address the barriers 
that Indigenous peoples face in international trade. " Please elaborate what policy, activity, provision 
or measure that the Government of Canada will und ertake for increasing the opportunities of 
Indigenous peoples and Indigenous -owned businesses to further benefit from international trade 
and investment?  
Reply  
Over the last two years, in an effort to make the benefits of trade more inclusive, including Ca nada's 
renewed relationship with Indigenous peoples, the Government of Canada has engaged with a wide 
range of Canadians regarding its trade policy approach. To that end, Canada has started, where 
appropriate, pursuing a dedicated Trade and Indigenous peop les chapter in its free trade agreements 
(FTAs). In the Canada -United States -Mexico Agreement (CUSMA), Canada achieved a number of 
outcomes to better take into account the rights of Indigenous peoples, such as a general exception 
that preserves the governm ent's flexibility to take action to protect the right of Indigenous people 
in Canada as enshrined in the Constitution and Modern Treaties, and also by retaining flexibility to 
provide preferential treatment to Indigenous peoples and Indigenous -owned busine sses in areas of 
service, investment, government procurement, environment and state -owned enterprises. 
Additionally, on environment, there are also provisions that acknowledge the important role of 
Indigenous peoples, including in the conservation of biodi versity. The objectives of a Trade and 
Indigenous peoples Chapter are to acknowledge the importance of enhancing the ability of 
Indigenous peoples and Indigenous businesses to benefit from the opportunities created by FTAs, to 
seek to reaffirm a number of existing Indigenous -specific international instruments, such as UNDRIP, 
to establish a Committee on Trade and Indigenous peoples which would facilitate the sharing of best 
practices, identify ways to remove barriers faced by Indigenous peoples in internati onal trade and 
investment, and identifying, organizing, and facilitating joint cooperation activities. These activities 
include exchanging best practices on promoting Indigenous businesses, promoting Indigenous 
women -owned businesses, facilitating trading relationships between Indigenous peoples, and more. 
The Government of Canada hopes that a Trade and Indigenous Peoples Chapter will positively affect 
the willingness of enterprises to invest in Canada and be a benefit to their potential investments. 
Canada  will continue its ongoing engagement with Indigenous peoples, including the National 
Indigenous Organizations, Modern Treaty partners, and Indigenous business associations, with 
respect to how it advances Indigenous -related issues in FTAs.  
 
           
 
 
  WT/TPR/M/389/Add.1  
 
- 246 - 
 
  TURKEY  
Report by the Secretariat – WT/TPR/S/389  
1 ECONOMIC ENVIRONMENT  
1.2 Recent Economic Developments, 1.2.1 Real sector, paragraph 1.8, page 18  
Question  
Could Canada provide detailed information about its 2019 and 2020 GDP forecasts?  
Reply  
In its late st projection, the Bank of Canada has revised down its outlook for Canadian economic 
growth. Compared with the projection in the January Report, the outlook for growth in 2019 has 
been revised down and is largely unchanged for 2020. The pace of economic ac tivity is now projected 
to slow from 1.8 % in 2018 to 1.2 % in 2019, before increasing to 2.1 % in 2020 (see the April 2019 
Monetary Policy Report for details:  https://www.bankofcanada.ca/2019/04/mpr -2019-04-24/). 
The Bank of Canada projects that the economy will gradually strengthen through 2019 and will grow 
slightly above potential in 2020. The dampening effects on growth of low oil prices, changes to 
housing policies and the 2017 –18 increases in borrowing rates should dissipate over 2019. 
Improvements in financial conditions since the beginning of 2019, continuing strong immigration 
and the sust ained global expansion are expected to support growth over the projection horizon. 
Business investment outside the oil and gas sector should expand gradually, driven by capacity 
constraints, elevated business profits, favourable financing costs and federal  and provincial 
governments ' investment incentives.  
Question  
What are the assumptions about the effect of US -Mexico -Canada Agreement on GDP growth?  
Reply  
Business investment in Canada would be stronger without elevated uncertainty surrounding global 
trade policy. Since April 2017, the Bank of Canada 's base -case scenarios have incorporated some 
negative judgement on investment and export growth to account for the effects of uncertainty 
around trade policy. Elevated trade policy uncertainty is expected to reduce the level of business 
investment by about 2.5 % by the end of 2021 and to reduce the level of exports by about 1.2 % by 
the end of 2021. Uncertainty surrounding the NAFTA renegotiations contributed to a significant 
degree to this markdown of the outlook.  
The signing of the Canada -United States -Mexico Agreement (CUSMA) in September 2018 is positive 
for the Canadian economy. However, the Bank does not make assumptions about the actual impact 
on GDP for Canada before the deal actually comes in to force. In the meantime, it is a positive 
development that likely reduces uncertainty around trade policy. As a result, the Bank revised down 
its judgment about the negative effects of trade policy uncertainty on investment in October 2018 
(see the Octob er 2018 Monetary Policy Report: https://www.bankofcanada.ca/2018/10/mpr -2018-
10-24/). However, the Bank did not entirely remove this markdown, given the uncertainty looming 
from other poss ible trade policy actions and the fact that the CUSMA had not been ratified. It is 
worth noting that, since then, the evolution of global trade tensions and related uncertainty led the 
Bank to revise back up, in April 2019, its estimate of the total negati ve impact of uncertainty on the 
level of investment and exports over the projection horizon.  WT/TPR/M/389/Add.1  
 
- 247 - 
 
  3 TRADE POLICIES AND PRACTICES BY MEASURE  
3.1 Measures Directly Affecting Imports, 3.1.3 Tariffs, 3.1.3.5 Tariff exemptions and 
reductions, Table 3.11, pages 62 -63 
Question  
Could Canada provide information about the rules of home market inputs usage within the duty 
drawback programme  and how the maximum period for export and import operations is determined?  
Reply  
The Drawback Program reimburses customs duties paid on imported goods that have been exported 
from Canada, meeting certain conditions. In most cases, a claim for drawback must be filed within 
four years from the time the goods arrive in Canada.  
The section of the Secretariat Report quoted in the question relates to how Canada 's duty drawback 
regime operates, not how duty drawback measures are treated in a countervailing duty investigation.  
Canada does not have specific provisions regarding home market usage within a duty drawback 
programme  for the  purposes of a countervailing duty investigation; however, the Canada Border 
Services Agency does take into account paragraph (i) of Annex I of the ASCM, which provides that 
a firm may use a quantity of home market inputs equal to, and having the same qual ity and 
characteristics as, the imported inputs as a substitution for them in order to benefit from paragraph 
(i) if the import and the corresponding export operations both occur within a reasonable time period, 
not to exceed two years.  
3.1.6 Anti -dumping,  countervailing, and safeguard measures, 3.1.6.1 Anti -dumping and 
countervailing measures, paragraph 3.67/footnote 97, page 74  
Question  
Could Canada confirm whether CBSA excludes an exporter from an investigation and/or 
re-investigation when the margin of dumping of the goods is de minimis prior to 2018? If not, how 
does Canada justify this implementation with respect to Article 5.8 of the ADA?  
Reply  
On 25 January 2017, the Dispute Settlement Body (DSB) adopted recommendations and rulings in 
the dispute Canada – Anti-dumping Measures on Imports of Certain Carbon Steel Welded Pipe from 
the Separate Customs Territory of Taiwan, Penghu, Kinmen and Matsu (DS482). Canada informed 
the DSB in February 2017 that it intended to implement the DSB 's recommen dations and rulings in 
this dispute.  
Subsequently, the Government of Canada amended the Special Import Measures Act (SIMA) in 
respect of exporters found to have a de minimis margin of dumping. As well, the Canada Border 
Services Agency and the Canadian Int ernational Trade Tribunal initiated reviews of their 
determinations and findings, pursuant to a request by the Minister of Finance under section 76.1 of 
SIMA. This resulted in the termination of anti -dumping measures on two Chinese Taipei exporters 
found t o have a de minimis margin of dumping.  
On 12 January 2018, Canada notified the DSB that following the legislative amendments and 
amendments to the measure at issue, Canada considers that it has fully implemented the DSB 's 
recommendations and rulings in DS4 82. 
With respect to exporters that were subject to trade remedy measures prior to the SIMA 
amendments, any review of such measures would similarly need to be undertaken pursuant to a 
request by the Minister of Finance under Section 76.1 of SIMA.  WT/TPR/M/389/Add.1  
 
- 248 - 
 
  Paragraph 3.81, page 78  
Question  
Could Canada provide detailed information on how "particular market situation " is evaluated in 
dumping investigations?  
Reply  
In determining whether paragraph 16(2)(c) of SIMA is applicable, the Canada Border Services 
Agency (CBSA) will consider whether there are any circumstances in the market affecting the sales 
of like goods for use in the country of export, such that a proper comparison is not possible. In these 
cases, the CBSA will publish the factors examined in making t his determination in the Statement of 
Reasons.  
Paragraph 3.96/Footnotes 129 and 130, page 85  
Question  
Considering there are some inconsistencies in frequencies of re -investigations which appear to 
coincide with price increases, could Canada kindly explain whether the process of initiating 
re-investigations is in line with Article 11.2 of the ADA, which specifies that upon request by any 
interested party which submits positive information substantiating the need for a review, the 
authorities shall review the  need for the continued imposition of the duty, where warranted, on their 
own initiative or, provided that a reasonable period of time has elapsed since the imposition of the 
definitive anti -dumping duty? In addition, considering that normal review is cond ucted with a single 
exporter, unlike re -investigation where more than one company can participate, what is the rationale 
for CBSA 's tendency to recourse to normal reviews?  
Reply  
Under the Special Import Measures Act, a finding ordinarily expires at the end  of five years, unless 
the Canadian International Trade Tribunal (CITT) initiates an expiry review. Expiry reviews are 
conducted by both the CBSA and the CITT and consider whether the expiry of a measure is likely to 
result in the continuation or resumptio n of dumping and/or subsidizing and whether the expiry is 
likely to result in injury to the domestic industry. Alternatively, at any time, a party may request 
that the CITT conduct an interim review of the measure, to determine whether, as a result of new 
facts or changes in circumstances since the finding or order, it should be rescinded or continued, 
with or without amendment.  
Re-investigations are a process to update normal values, export prices or amounts of subsidy and 
to establish values for new expor ters or new models. They are conducted periodically to ensure that 
the values in place accurately reflect current market conditions.  
The CBSA began conducting normal value review proceedings in June 2018. Normal value reviews 
are procedurally similar to re -investigations but are conducted with respect to a single exporter 
rather than all exporters. The CBSA applies these new administrative proceedings where 
circumstances warrant their use, including the following:  
• Where a significant volume of imports are s old by a single exporter and there is no need 
to conduct a re -investigation for all exporters;  
• Where there are new models and they are limited to a particular exporter or limited 
number of exporters;  
• Where there are a limited number of new exporters in the market who have requested to 
be part of the next re -investigation;  
• Where there are factors impacting export prices that are limited to a particular exporter 
or a limited number of exporters; and,  WT/TPR/M/389/Add.1  
 
- 249 - 
 
  • Where representations are made in respect o f a particular exporter or the issue raised 
impacts a limited number of exporters.  
4 TRADE POLICIES BY SECTOR  
4.3 Manufacturing, 4.3.4 Steel, paragraph 4.168, page 183  
Question  
Following the decision to impose safeguard measures on "heavy plate " and "stainless steel wire " 
within the context of the safeguard investigation conducted by the Canadian International Trade 
Tribunal on imports of certain steel products, Canada determined  a specific quota allocation method 
where the duration of the measure is divided into three phases and a different quota allocation 
method appears to be adopted in each phase. Following this, could Canada explain why duration of 
each quota period is determ ined differently from each other and why the quota allocation 
methodology for the third quota period has not yet been determined especially when taking into 
account quotas that are already used in the provisional stage?  
Reply  
Final safeguards on imports of  heavy plate and stainless steel wire were imposed in the form of 
tariff-rate quotas (TRQs). The TRQs are administered through a combination of importer -specific 
allocations (for eligible importers), and first -come, first -served approach for importers with out an 
allocation. This approach is intended to further minimize the impact on importers and downstream 
users of heavy plate and stainless steel wire.  
The administration of the TRQ is divided into three phases:  
• 13 May 2019 to 2 June 2019: The TRQ was administered on a first -come, first -served 
basis. The volume of goods that may be imported under the TRQ during this period is 
based on the prorated TRQ for the period of final safeguards.  
During this period, importers were invited to apply for an allocati on with Global Affairs Canada 
pursuant to the Export and Import Permits Act. The duration of this period is intended to facilitate a 
quick transition to an allocated TRQ system in order to minimize impacts on businesses.  
• 3 June 2019 to 31 January  2020: The  TRQ is administered through two pools: an allocation 
pool that allow importers who have been issued an allocation to import goods on a surtax -
free basis up to the volume of their allocation; and a residual pool for importers who were 
not issued an allocat ion that is available on a first -come, first -served basis. The TRQ during 
this period is based on the prorated TRQ for the period of final safeguards.  
During this period, the Government of Canada intends to launch public consultations seeking 
stakeholder i nput on the allocation and administration of the steel safeguard TRQs. The consultation 
would inform Canada 's approach to administering the TRQ after 31 January 2020.  
• 1 February 2020 to 24 October 2021: The allocation methodology for this period has not 
yet been determined as it would be informed by the stakeholder consultations that are 
planned for summer 2019.  
Additional details on Canada 's administration of the final safeguards imposed on heavy plate and 
stainless steel wire can be found in Global Affair s Canada 's Notice to Importer No. 945 
(https://international.gc.ca/trade -commerce/contro ls-controles/notices -
avis/945.aspx?lang=eng&_ga=2.71763795.1748001078.1560367334 -1656373301.1513364992 ). WT/TPR/M/389/Add.1  
 
- 250 - 
 
  Report by Canada – WT/TPR/G/389  
5 EXPORT DIVERSIFICATION AND TRADE PROMOTION  
5.2 Trade Commissioner Service, paragraph 5.7, page 21  
Question  
Could Canada provide details on e -commerce initiatives given under the Export Diversification 
Strategy and TCS services for businesses in areas such as digital, e -commerce, and intellectual 
property?  
Reply  
To help Canadian companies successfully leverage m arket opportunities offered by e -commerce, the 
Trade Commissioner Service (TCS):  
1. leverages expertise across Canada and abroad to ensure that e -commerce is better 
understood by Canada 's trade commissioners and more strategically used as an integral part 
of client export strategy through the development of targeted tools and training.  
 
2. provides support to trade commissioners by developing (i) checklists to help Canadian 
companies develop their e -export strategy, (ii) comprehensive guides describing opportu nities 
created by e -commerce in major foreign markets, and (iii) a landing webpage including links 
to resources available for Canadian companies, such as a list of e -marketplaces around the 
world.  
 
3. develops partnerships to ensure that key players are mobil ised and engaged by: 
(i) establishing a working group with various Canadian federal departments to discuss 
e-commerce initiatives, (ii) ensuring that the TCS is present in major events around the world 
in order to engage with key players in the sector, and  (iii) facilitating the connection between 
Canadian businesses and major international platforms.  
6 INCLUSIVE TRADE  
6.2 Advancing an Inclusive Approach in Trade Agreements, 6.2.4 Trade and SMEs, 
paragraph 6.22, page 26  
Question  
Could Canada elaborate on SM E-related provisions in FTA negotiations concerning e -commerce?  
Reply  
Canada 's commitments on electronic commerce in its free trade agreements (FTAs) ensure that 
companies, including SMEs, will be able to take advantage of expanding online commercial 
opportunities, while also seeking to ensure an online environment that builds consumer confidence 
and trust. Many of the barriers to online trade that Canada seeks to address in its FTAs, such as 
customs duties or data localization measures, oft en have a disproportionate effect on SMEs, which 
typically have less capacity to effectively manage these barriers than large, multi -national 
corporations. Furthermore, Canada seeks cooperation commitments in its FTAs to cooperate with its 
trade partners t o work together to assist SMEs to overcome obstacles to their use of electronic 
commerce as a means of trade.  
 
 
  WT/TPR/M/389/Add.1  
 
- 251 - 
 
  UKRAINE  
Report by the Secretariat – WT/TPR/S/389  
3 TRADE POLICIES AND PRACTICES BY MEASURE  
3.1 Measures Directly Affecting Imports, 3.1.1 Cus toms procedures, valuation, and 
requirements, 3.1.1.1 Trade facilitation, paragraph 3.13, page 50  
Question  
Could Canada kindly provide some more information on the general procedure of the BCCCs 
functioning, its membership, main tasks of established working groups in the field of trade 
facilitation, etc.?  
Reply  
The CBSA is committed to engaging with Canadian commercial stakeholders on its strategies, 
policies, operational programs and administrative procedures that govern and affect Canada 's 
commercial trade. The purpose of this engagement is to promote and strengthen collaboration on 
border matters between the CBSA and the Canadian commercial trade community, for the benefit 
of Canada, the Canadian economy and Canada 's trade sector. The Bo rder Commercial Consultative 
Committees strives to achieve a balanced membership, seeking equal representation from industry 
partners and regions, and applying equity principles by embracing diversity and inclusion. All three 
committees establish working g roups to advance key elements of annual priorities. The goal is to 
consult stakeholders on proposed program mes, policies and projects to inform decision making.  
Question  
What are Canada 's plans related to establishment of a National Committee on Trade Faci litation, as 
stipulated by Article 23.2 of the TFA?  
Reply  
Article 23.2 of the TFA requires Members to establish and/or maintain a national committee on trade 
facilitation or to designate an existing mechanism to facilitate both domestic coordination and 
implementation of the provisions of the TFA. The Government of Canada uses well -functioning 
interdepartmental networks already in place to undertake the necessary strategic planning and to 
coordinate trade facilitation domestically, both between Global Affai rs Canada, the Canada Border 
Services Agency and other departments and agencies responsible for the application of import, 
export and transit requirements at the border, as well as existing mechanisms for consultations with 
stakeholders. These mechanisms i nclude the Border Commercial Consultative Committees, which 
provide officials and commercial stakeholders with a forum to discuss border -related policies and 
programs, as well as technical and operational issues that govern and affect Canada 's trade.  
3.1.3  Tariffs, 3.1.3.2 Tariff Structure, paragraph 3.35, page 56  
Question  
According to the Report "Some 96.3% of all tariff lines carry ad valorem  duties, but Canada continues 
to maintain 252 tariff lines, equivalent to 3.7% of total tariff lines, subject to non -ad valorem  duties; 
these mainly consist of mixed or specific duties. Unlike ad valorem tariffs, the level of protection by 
means of specifi c duties is not evident; estimating the ad valorem  equivalents (AVEs) allows the 
actual protection of specific duties to be assessed. The AVEs used in this Section were calculated by 
the Secretariat as the ratio of specific duties to import unit values, es timated using the ratio of 
import values to import quantities in 2017 (at the eight -digit level): the estimated AVEs ranged from 
0.2% to 532.2%, with more than one quarter of total non -ad valorem  tariff lines above 100%. In 
2019, non -ad valorem  rates were mainly concentrated in sectors such as dairy products (HS 04), 
beverages and spirits (HS 22), edible vegetables (HS 07), preparations of cereals (HS 19), and meat 
(HS 02). " Could Canada, please, provide its reasoning for maintaining non -ad valorem  rates ma inly 
on agricultural products?  WT/TPR/M/389/Add.1  
 
- 252 - 
 
  Reply  
Only a small percentage of tariff lines (3.7%) are expressed using non -ad valorem  rates for products. 
The reason why a non -ad valorem  rate is used varies by tariff item as it depends on specific factors 
related to the p roducts covered by the tariff item. For example, in the case of certain wheat products, 
a non -ad valorem  rate can help provide stability and predictability when there are market price 
fluctuations.  
3.1.3.5 Tariff exemptions and reductions, paragraph 3.45, page 61  
Question  
The Report points out that "Canada 's regulations under the Customs Tariff provide for a variety of 
duty and tax concessions in the form of different schemes, such as tariff remission under the 
Customs Tariff, duty drawback,  temporary admission, and duty -free warehouses (Table 3.11). 
During the period under review, there were no major changes with respect to procedures and 
policies. " Ukraine would appreciate Canada 's elaboration on its duty and tax concessions regarding, 
if any, the top imported agricultural products, which are further exported, and the amount of the 
refund of duties, taxes or other fees gathered at importation under the duty and tax concessions 
regime during the period under review.  
Reply  
Under Canada 's legis lative duty and tax concessions, the Duties Relief Program (DRP) is one of the 
main programs used to relieve duties at the time of importation for agriculture products that will be 
subsequently exported. In the 2018 calendar year, the DRP relieved approxim ately CAD 180 million 
at time of importation for various chicken and dairy products that were subsequently exported as 
required by the programme . 
3.1.5 Import prohibitions, restrictions, and licensing, paragraph 3.63, page 73  
Question  
Under the Report, "Updated regulations to ban asbestos, and products containing it, came into force 
on 30 December 2018, and the Government repealed its previous control measures. The Prohibition 
of Asbestos and Products Containing Asbestos Regulations issued under the Canad ian Environmental 
Protection Act, 1999 (CEPA), were finalized in October 2018. Their coming into force led to the repeal 
of the Asbestos Products Regulations, which had been issued under the Canada Consumer Product 
Safety Act. The new Regulations ban the i mport, sale and use of the substance and products 
containing it, with several limited exceptions. These include a time -limited exemption for the chlor-
alkali industry until the end of 2029. The changes come under Canada`s comprehensive strategy to 
manage a sbestos, announced in December 2016.  Would Canada kindly inform on the feedback from 
stakeholders (Canadian businesses that used asbestos) during the public consultation process before 
adoption of regulations on prohibition of asbestos and products contain ing asbestos?  
Reply  
Consultations prior to the publication of the proposed Regulations and proposed Export of 
Substances on the Export Control List Regulations (ESECLR) Amendments in the Canada Gazette, 
Part I began on 17 December 2016, and concluded on 4 June 2017. The consultations were 
conducted in two stages. In December 2016, a Notice of Intent was issued indicating the initiation 
of the development of the proposed Regulations under CEPA. This was followed by a 30 -day 
consultation period. In April 2017 , a consultation document on the regulatory approach to prohibit 
asbestos was published with the objective to inform stakeholders of the proposed regulatory 
approach and request additional comments. Throughout the preliminary consultation period, 
Environme nt and Climate Change Canada (ECCC) organized public consultations on the proposed 
regulatory approach. This included 2 webinars held in French and English and attended by a total of 
79 participants. The CEPA National Advisory Committee was also informed o f the proposed 
regulatory approach. Efforts were made to ensure all stakeholders potentially impacted were 
informed and given the opportunity to participate in the consultation process.  WT/TPR/M/389/Add.1  
 
- 253 - 
 
  The preliminary consultation period concluded in June 2017. In total, 70 written submissions were 
received from 58 stakeholders including municipal and regional representatives; industry and 
industry associations (chlor -alkali, automotive, cement, construction/trades, and others); non -
governmental and labour organizations; p rovincial ministries; crown corporations; and individuals. 
Stakeholders were largely supportive of the proposed Regulations and the proposed ESECLR 
Amendments. The comments received helped identify areas that required clarification as well as 
areas of conc ern. After analysing these comments, ECCC and Health Canada (HC) modified the 
proposed Regulations and proposed ESECLR Amendments. A summary of the key comments were 
included in the Regulatory Impact Analysis Statement (RIAS) that was published with the pr oposed 
Regulations in the Canada Gazette, Part I.  
Further consultation was conducted following the publication of the proposed Regulations and 
proposed ESECLR Amendments in the Canada Gazette, Part I, on 6 January 2018, which initiated a 
75-day public comm ent period where interested parties were invited to submit their written 
comments. The proposed Regulations were posted on ECCC 's CEPA Environmental Registry website 
to make them broadly available to interested parties. The ECCC emailed interested parties to inform 
them of the public comment period. The ECCC also sent a letter to the CEPA National Advisory 
Committee members to inform them of the publication of the proposed Regulations and of the 
opportunity to advise and submit written comments.  
During the comment period, the ECCC received 56 written submissions from a range of stakeholders 
including municipal and regional representatives; industry and industry associations (chlor -alkali, 
cement, construction/trades, and others); non -governmental and labour organizations; health and 
safety institutes; provincial ministries and agencies; crown corporations; one international agency; 
and individuals. Interested parties generally supported the proposed Regulations and proposed 
ESECLR Amendments.  
Various stakehol ders requested modifications to the regulatory text to improve clarity. As well, some 
stakeholders requested clarifications regarding the regulatory text and its applicability. The ECCC 
and HC have considered and addressed these concerns by providing expla nations or by making 
modifications to the regulatory text. The RIAS summarizes the main issues raised by interested 
parties with respect to the proposed Regulations and proposed ESECLR Amendments published in 
the Canada Gazette, Part I, and ECCC and HC 's consideration of these issues leading to the 
finalization of the Regulations and ESECLR Amendments.  For more details please refer to the RIAS, 
available at: http://gazet te.gc.ca/rp -pr/p2/2018/2018 -10-17/html/sor -dors196 -eng.html . 
Question  
Under the Report, "Updated regulations to ban asbestos, and products containing it, came into force 
on 30 December 2018, and the Government repealed its previous control measures. The Prohibition 
of Asbestos and Products Containing Asbestos Regulations issued under the Canadian Environmental 
Protection Act, 1999 (CEPA), were finalized in October 2018. Their coming into force led to the repeal 
of the Asbestos Products Regul ations, which had been issued under the Canada Consumer Product 
Safety Act. The new Regulations ban the import, sale and use of the substance and products 
containing it, with several limited exceptions. These include a time -limited exemption for the chlor -
alkali industry until the end of 2029. The changes come under Canada`s comprehensive strategy to 
manage asbestos, announced in December 2016. What were the grounds for decision to exclude the 
chlor-alkali industry from such prohibition until the end of 202 9? 
Reply  
"Asbestos is used in the chlor -alkali industry as part of the diaphragm cell technology, which acts as 
a filter in the manufacturing of chlorine and caustic soda. The final products do not contain asbestos. 
The use of asbestos in the chlor -alkali sector in Canada is very limited. The risk of exposure for 
facility workers who handle the asbestos is expected to also be limited given information provided 
on the health and safety practices that are in place. While the risk of asbestos exposure is expec ted 
to be low at chlor -alkali facilities, a full exclusion would not align with the Government 's objectives 
of a prohibition on asbestos use. Furthermore, alternatives to the asbestos -based process in the 
chlor-alkali industry exist and have been implement ed by other facilities. The European Chemicals 
Agency (ECHA) has banned the use of asbestos and provided the European chlor -alkali industry with 
a ten-year time -limited exclusion until 2025 to phase out asbestos use. Therefore, the Regulations WT/TPR/M/389/Add.1  
 
- 254 - 
 
  will also pr ovide a time -limited exclusion for chlor -alkali facilities that use asbestos. This time -limited 
exclusion also allows Canada to position itself as a global partner in phasing -out trade of asbestos.  
After the publication of the proposed Regulations in the C anada Gazette, Part I, consideration was 
given to extending the exclusion beyond the previously proposed date of 2025 to provide sufficient 
lead time to safely adopt asbestos -free technology. As a result, the chlor -alkali sector will have until 
31 December  2029, to comply with the Regulations.  
Question  
Under the Report, "Updated regulations to ban asbestos, and products containing it, came into force 
on 30 December 2018, and the Government repealed its previous control measures. The Prohibition 
of Asbestos and Products Containing Asbestos Regulations issued under the Canadian Environmental 
Protection Act, 1999 (CEPA), were finalized in October 2018. Their coming into force led to the repeal 
of the Asbestos Products Regulations, which had been issued under th e Canada Consumer Product 
Safety Act. The new Regulations ban the import, sale and use of the substance and products 
containing it, with several limited exceptions. These include a time -limited exemption for the chlor -
alkali industry until the end of 2029.  The changes come under Canada`s comprehensive strategy to 
manage asbestos, announced in December 2016. How has Canada assessed the effects of these 
regulations on industry, construction and commercial sectors, which previously used asbestos, since 
its ent ry into force?  
Reply  
The regulations came into force on Dec 30, 2018. The Government of Canada has not assessed the 
effects of these regulations on industry, construction and commercial sectors, which previously used 
asbestos, since its entry into force.  
Question  
Under the Report, "Updated regulations to ban asbestos, and products containing it, came into force 
on 30 December 2018, and the Government repealed its previous control measures. The Prohibition 
of Asbestos and Products Containing Asbestos Regulat ions issued under the Canadian Environmental 
Protection Act, 1999 (CEPA), were finalized in October 2018. Their coming into force led to the repeal 
of the Asbestos Products Regulations, which had been issued under the Canada Consumer Product 
Safety Act. Th e new Regulations ban the import, sale and use of the substance and products 
containing it, with several limited exceptions. These include a time -limited exemption for the 
chlor-alkali industry until the end of 2029. The changes come under Canada 's comprehensive 
strategy to manage asbestos, announced in December 2016. Has Canada implemented any 
measures to ensure possibilities for using alternatives to asbestos and, if so, what?  
Reply  
Publicly available information indicates that technically and eco nomically feasible asbestos -free 
alternatives exist for most known uses across industries. The Government of Canada does not 
endorse or suggest alternatives and has not implemented any measures to ensure possibilities for 
using alternatives to asbestos. So me text from RIAS available at: http://gazette.gc.ca/rp -
pr/p2/2018/2018 -10-17/html/sor -dors196 -eng.html  
3.3 Measures Affecting Production and Trade, 3.3.3 Sanitary and phytosanitary 
requirements, paragraph 3.183 /Box 3.4 , page s 102-103 
Question  
Box 3.4 describes key features of the Safe Food for Canadians Regulations, including particularities 
of recognition of foreign systems. It notes, "The Regulations maintain existing  equivalence 
requirements for meat products and shellfish. In addition, they allow for the recognition of equivalent 
food inspection systems. " Is information concerning recognized equivalence of appropriate sanitary 
and phytosanitary measures of Canada 's trade partners publicly available? Please, kindly provide 
the web -link, where it can be found.  WT/TPR/M/389/Add.1  
 
- 255 - 
 
  Reply  
Information on recognition of foreign food safety systems can be found on the Canadian Food 
Inspection Agency 's website at the following link:  http://www.inspection.gc.ca/food/imports/foreign -
systems/eng/1526656892179/1526656892413 .  
This link includes information on recognition of foreign syste ms for meat products and live or raw 
shellfish, as well as information on the food safety systems recognition arrangement Canada has 
with the United States Food and Drug Administration.  
Paragraph 3.184, page 103  
Question  
The Report notes, "Health Canada es tablishes standards and policies governing the safety and 
nutrition quality of all food sold in Canada. It also mandates and conducts food -related health risk 
assessments; approves and regulates pest control products, setting maximum residue limits (MRLs) 
for pesticides that may remain in food; and evaluates the safety of veterinary drugs used in food -
producing animals, establishing the corresponding MRLs. " Could Canada kindly elaborate on its 
approach towards applying zero or near -zero default tolerances f or MRLs?  
Reply  
Health Canada establishes pesticide -specific, food -specific maximum residue limits (MRLs), using 
scientific evidence submitted by applicants. These specific MRLs result in a more accurate 
representation of the actual residues. However, in the absence of the scientific evidence required to 
set specific MRLs for each pesticide/crop combination in Health Canada 's List of MRLs Regulated 
under the Pest Control Products Act : (https://www.canada.ca/en/health -canada/services/consumer -
product -safety/pesticides -pest-management/publ ic/protecting -your-health -environment/pesticides -
food/maximum -residue -limits -pesticides.html ), existing regulation under section B.15.002(1) of the 
Food and Drug Regulations : (https://laws.justice.gc.ca/eng/regulations/c.r.c.,_c._870/page -73.html#h -
573261 ), provides for a general maximum residue limit (GMRL) of 0.1 ppm for residues of pesticides, 
on domestically grown and imported food.  
Paragraph 3.189, page  104 
Question  
Together with information on revision of Canadian food safety regulations the Report tells, that all 
revised or new FTAs, concluded by Canada since its last Review, contain SPS chapters. In accordance 
with the Report a consistent feature of C anada`s SPS chapters has been provisions aimed at avoiding 
and resolving trade -related SPS issues among the parties, such as the establishment of SPS 
Committees and/or contact points, and provisions to facilitate communications and strengthen 
cooperation. Would Canada kindly inform whether its revised legislation on food safety provides for 
simplification of the certification process for imports of food and agricultural products, including 
possibility of offering faster tracks of certification to the partie s of FTAs, which contain SPS chapters?  
Reply  
The Safe Food for Canadians Regulations do not provide preferential or simplified certification 
requirements to countries that are parties to a free trade agreement with Canada.  
4 TRADE POLICIES BY SECTOR  
4.1 Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries, 4.1.1 Agriculture, 4.1.1.2 Border measures, 
paragraph 4.8, page 141  
Question  
Could Canada explain which specific provisions of the GATT 1994 or its WTO commitments Canada 
was guided by to split the WTO cheese TRQ into t he two reserves and to transfer 800 tonnes of 
cheese from the non -EU reserve to the EU reserve?  WT/TPR/M/389/Add.1  
 
- 256 - 
 
  Reply  
The transfer of 800,000 kilograms of Canada 's 20,411,866 kilogram WTO TRQ for cheese to the 
European Union was done in accordance with GATT Article XIII: 2 to maintain the relative shares of 
supply due to new EU member State accessions (13 new member States since 2004). Canada 's WTO 
TRQ for cheese applies to all imports of cheese from all WTO Members and is therefore consistent 
with GATT Article I.  
4.1.1.5 Evolution of support and protection, paragraph 4.28, page 145  
Question  
The Report states, that reflecting a significant decline in agricultural support in the mid -1990s, 
Canada 's amber box support is currently well within AMS limit (bound at CAD 4.3 billio n per year). 
According to footnote 12 Canada eliminated market price support to its grains industry in 1995. 
Could Canada share the most important outcomes of such policy for the domestic grains industry as 
well as for Canadian and foreign consumers of gra ins and grain products?  
Reply  
The noted reduction in amber box support for grain was the result of the elimination of a number of 
programs to support grains at the end of the 1980s and the 1990s. While the elimination of the 
market price support for wheat and durum in 1988 significantly reduced Canada amber box support, 
most of the reduction was due to the elimination of many direct payments for grains, including the 
elimination of price stabilization payments under the Agricultural Stabilization Act in 199 5. 
It is difficult to fully assess the outcome of these policies on the grain industry. Production of major 
grains in Canada, such as barley and wheat, has varied considerably over the years. The reduction 
in support for grains is only one of the factors that could have influenced variability in the production 
of grains in Canada. Other factors include international market prices, weather conditions and the 
introduction of new crops in the crop rotation of farmers such as pulses and canola.  
4.4 Ser vices, 4.4.1 Financial services, 4.4.1.1 Overview, pages 183-186 
Question  
Could Canada, please, describe the procedure for assessment of the ownership structure, business 
reputation and financial condition of a bank by the Office of the Superintendent of F inancial 
Institutions (OSFI): requirements to transfer of significant ownership/control in the regulated 
entities, indicators of non -transparency of the ownership structure?  
Reply  
The Office of the Superintendent of Financial Institutions (OSFI) has posted  its change in ownership 
application requirements on its website. Information can be found here:  http://www.osfi -
bsif.gc.ca/Eng/fi -if/app/aag -gad/ti -io/tind a-iona/Pages/rpto23.aspx . 
The review of the proposed new owner 's application is intended to help form a view, among other 
things, on the financial strength of the proposed new owner(s) ( "the Applicant "), and its ability to 
provide ongoing financial, operational and managerial support to the bank it intends on purchasing.  
  
OSFI requires audited consolidated financial statements of the applicant for the last three years, a 
copy of the most recent report on the Applicant issued by a recognize d credit rating agency, and an 
acknowledgment of the Support Principle. More information can be found here:  http://www.osfi -
bsif.gc.ca/Eng/fi -if/app/aag -gad/Pages/guidfe00 .aspx . 
The Applicant is required to provide a current organization chart, with percentages owned, of the 
Applicant 's corporate group, including entities in which the Applicant beneficially owns 10% or more 
of the voting rights. In addition, OSFI requires a  revised organization chart showing the effect of the 
proposed transaction and depicting the amount(s) (with percentages owned) of all ownership 
interests in the Bank. OSFI also requires details regarding any voting agreement or other similar WT/TPR/M/389/Add.1  
 
- 257 - 
 
  arrangements that involve persons exercising direct or indirect control over the Applicant, as well as 
the names of all persons owning more than 10% of any class of shares or ownership interest in the 
Applicant.  
  
OSFI requires the Applicant to provide a summary of th e financial services and other key activities 
carried on by the Applicant and its affiliates, including a list of jurisdictions in which they operate 
and the nature and degree of regulatory oversight applicable to the financial services activities. If 
the Applicant is a foreign -owned financial institution, OSFI requests the following:  
• the name and contact information of an individual from the Applicant 's home regulator 
that is familiar with the Applicant 's activities ; 
• confirmation that the Applicant 's home regulator is aware of the Applicant 's intention to 
acquire or increase a significant interest in, and/or acquire control of, a Canadian bank, 
details regarding whether the Applicant requires regulatory approval from its home 
regulator to do so, and if so, confirmation that any such approval has been obtained ; 
• information on whether, and in what manner, the Applicant is subject to comprehensive 
consolidated supervision and regulation by its home regulator ; and 
• a report of the examination in respect of the Ap plicant, issued by its home regulator, if 
available, or confirmation from the Applicant 's home regulator that it reports favourably 
on the Applicant.  
Question  
What are the requirements for authorization of non -banking financial institutions in Canada: types 
of activities, key requirements to applicants, approval procedure, verifying sources of funds for the 
formation of capital?  
Reply  
The Office of the Superintendent of Financial Institutions (OSFI) only regulates banks, federally 
regulated insu rance companies, trust and loan companies, foreign bank branches and branches of 
foreign insurers in Canada.  
The key requirements for a trust and loan company, an insurance company, and branches of foreign 
insurers are publicly available on OSFI 's website:  
Guide for Incorporating Banks and Federally Regulated Trust and Loan Companies: http://www.osfi -
bsif.gc.ca/Eng/fi -if/app/aag -gad/Pages/instguide.aspx ; 
Guide for Incorpor ating Federally Regulated Insurance Companies: http://www.osfi -
bsif.gc.ca/Eng/fi -if/app/aag -gad/Pages/insguide.aspx ; 
Establishment of Branch by Foreign Insurer (Order to I nsure in Canada Risks):  http://www.osfi -
bsif.gc.ca/Eng/fi -if/app/aag -gad/ti -io/tinda -iona/Pages/rpto04.aspx . 
While a trust and loan company can, generally, perform the same activities as a bank, they can also 
perform fiduciary activities that a bank cannot perform. Foreign insurance branches in Canada are 
limited to underwriting the same classes of insurance that the home office is authorized to underwrite 
in its home jurisdiction.  
As part of the application process, the applicant must provide, among other things, the applicant 's 
audited financial statements, as well as pro forma financial statements of the proposed new OSFI 
regulated entity or branch. Furthermore, prior to the commencement of business, the applicant must 
demonstrate they have injected the appropriate amount and type of capital, as well as articulating 
their capital management policy, and their internal capital target(s).  
Both foreign an d domestic investors may also apply to incorporate a non -bank financial institution 
under relevant provincial law. Application requirements and procedures will vary by jurisdiction.  WT/TPR/M/389/Add.1  
 
- 258 - 
 
  Question  
What are specific features of regulation and supervision of finte ch companies?  
Reply  
In Canada, the financial sector operates under shared federal (national) and provincial (sub -national) 
jurisdiction. Fintech firms can apply to be a federally or provincially regulated entity and are also 
subject to other federal financ ial sector policy regimes (e.g., Anti -Money Laundering and Terrorist 
Financing) and face other laws of general application at either the provincial or federal level. In 
Budget 2018, Canada provided greater flexibility for federally regulated financial inst itutions to 
undertake and leverage fintech activities.  
The Government has also announced a review into the merits of open banking.  
More information can be found here: https://www.fin.gc.ca/activty/consult/2019/ob -bo/obbo -
report -rapport -eng.asp . 
Through the Canadian Securities Administrators (CSA), provincial and territorial governments are 
also collaborating on the CSA Regulatory Sandbox. This initiative supports F inTech businesses 
seeking to offer innovative products, services and applications in Canada. It allows firms to register 
and/or obtain exemptive relief from securities laws requirements, under a faster and more flexible 
process than through a standard appl ication, in order to test their products, services and applications 
throughout the Canadian market on a time limited basis. More information can be found here:  
https:/ /www.securities -administrators.ca/industry_resources.aspx?id=1588 . 
The Ontario Securities Commission 's (OSC) 'LaunchPad ' initiative also engages with FinTech 
businesses, assists them in navigating regulatory requirements and strives to keep regulation in 
step with digital innovation. More specifically, the OSC LaunchPad aids FinTechs to comply with 
securities regulatory requirements and accelerate time -to-market, all while fulfilling the agency 's 
mandate to provide protections to investors and promote confi dence in the province 's capital 
markets. More information can be found here: https://www.osc.gov.on.ca/en/osclaunchpad.htm . 
Question  
Are there any differences in prudential regulation (requirements to corporate governance) of publicly 
and privately owned banks?  
Reply  
The Office of the Superintendent of Financial Institutions (OSFI) 's Corporate Governance 
requirements are principles -based and apply to all federally -regulated financial in stitutions, 
irrespective of ownership status. More information can be found here:  http://www.osfi -
bsif.gc.ca/eng/fi -if/rg-ro/gdn -ort/gl -ld/pages/cg_guideline.a spx 
Question  
What are principles of information sharing, stipulated in the agreements between the OSFI and 
foreign supervisory authorities?  
Reply  
To support its prudential mandate, OSFI may decide to enter into information sharing agreements 
with foreign s upervisory authorities, if those authorities have a mandate that is comparable to OSFI. 
Discussions will be entered into based on needs and consider whether both authorities could benefit 
from the establishment of an agreement in cases where cross -border e ntities are operating in at 
least one of the jurisdictions (in Canada regulated by OSFI or in the counterpart 's jurisdiction 
regulated by the foreign regulator – e.g. Foreign bank or branch operations).  WT/TPR/M/389/Add.1  
 
- 259 - 
 
  OSFI has a legal responsibility to protect the inform ation it obtains from the institutions it regulates. 
As such, a key consideration in establishing an information sharing agreement will be that a foreign 
supervisory authority meets OSFI 's legal due diligence requirements that are aimed at confirming 
they can adequately protect confidential information that would be shared pursuant to a 
Memorandum of Understanding.  
Report by Canada – WT/TPR/G/389  
3 TRADE POLICY DEVELOPMENTS 2015 -2019  
3.1 Multilateral Trade Policy, 3.1.3 Ongoing WTO Negotiations and Initiatives, paragraph 
3.13, page 8  
Question  
Ukraine would appreciate if Canada could share its view concerning possible outcome of the future 
negotiation on electronic commerce in the WTO? Will it be in the form of a multilateral agreement, 
plurilateral agreement, etc.?  
Reply  
Canada is a strong supporter of multilateral efforts to advance WTO work in the area of e -commerce, 
including through the WTO JSI on E -Commerce for which Canada has been an active participant 
since its launch at the 11th  Ministerial Conference (MC11) in Buenos Aires in December 2017. Canada 
is strongly supportive of continuing to work with all participants to advance and intensify work under 
this initiative as negotiations on e -commerce have recently commenced. A critical  component of this 
process will be to determine the legal architecture of a potential future WTO agreement on e -
commerce. Canada is seeking an outcome that would help create a more open, transparent and 
predictable global digital trading environment for co nsumers and business.  
Question  
What are the priorities of Canada within participation in the WTO Informal Dialogue on Investment 
Facilitation for Development?  
Reply  
Facilitating investment will be essential for achieving the UN Sustainable Development Goal s (SDGs). 
The UNCTAD World Investment Report 2014 estimated that developing countries faced an annual 
gap of CAD 2.5 trillion in SDG -relevant sectors. A framework that improves the transparency of 
investment measures and the efficiency of administrative pr ocedures could help create the 
conditions for more and better investments in these sectors. It would also foster more inclusive 
economic growth, in particular by enabling more investment by micro, small, and medium -sized 
enterprises.  
As a signatory of the Joint Ministerial Statement on Investment Facilitation for Development issued 
at the WTO 's 11th Ministerial Conference (MC11), Canada has actively participated in the Structured 
Discussion on Investment Facilitation for Development. To date, Canada has sub mitted textual 
examples, based on its existing treaties, in the areas of transparency, administrative procedures 
and corporate social responsibility. Provisions in each of these areas can contribute to building an 
environment that promotes sustainable and inclusive investment.  
4 OTHER KEY GOVERNMENT INITIATIVES  
4.2 Intellectual Property (IP), paragraph 4.9, page 17  
Question  
Under the Report, "Most recently, a number of legislative amendments were passed by Canada 's 
Parliament to advance the Government 's Intellectual Property Strategy, including amendments that 
improve efficiency, clarify acceptable practices and prevent misuses of IP rights. " Would Canada 
kindly advise how these legislative amendments might affect the implementation of its existing free 
trade agreements, which include chapters on intellectual property?  WT/TPR/M/389/Add.1  
 
- 260 - 
 
  Reply  
Canada 's Intellectual Property Strategy (IP Strategy) and the obligations undertaken in Canada 's 
free trade agreements are complementary. The legislative amendments under Canada 's IP Stra tegy 
do not affect the implementation or administration of Canada 's free trade agreements, including 
those agreements with chapters on intellectual property.  
4.9 Countermeasures on U.S. Steel and Aluminium Products, paragraph 4.22, page 19  
Question  
The Report notes, "On 31 May 2018, the U.S. announced tariffs on imports of certain steel (25%) 
and aluminum (10%) products from Canada, known as a Section 232 measure. In response, on 
1 July 2018, Canada imposed countermeasures against CAD 16.6 billion in  imports of steel, 
aluminum, and other products from the U.S., representing the value of 2017 Canadian exports 
affected by the U.S. tariffs. These countermeasures will be immediately removed once the U.S. 
eliminates trade -restrictive measures against Canad ian steel and aluminum products. " Amid the 
latest developments in Canada regarding the support of local steel and aluminium producers - is 
there any possibility in imposing additional tariffs on foreign steel and/or aluminium.  
Reply  
Canada imposed 200 -day provisional global safeguard measures on 25 October 2018 on imports of 
seven steel products. Concurrently, the Canadian International Trade Tribunal (CITT) initiated a 
global safeguard investigation on imports of these products, to determine if final safeg uards are 
warranted.  
The CITT issued its report and recommendations to the Government of Canada on 3 April 2019. The 
CITT found that heavy plate and stainless steel wire from the subject countries is being imported in 
such quantities and under such conditi ons as to be a principal cause of a threat of serious injury to 
the domestic industry and recommended a remedy in the form of a tariff rate quota.  
As recommended by the CITT, Canada imposed final global safeguard measures in the form of a 
tariff-rate quota  on imports of heavy plate and stainless steel wire, effective 13 May 2019. More 
information can be found in Canada 's notification to the Committee on Safeguards 
(G/SG/N/8/CAN/3/Suppl.1; G/SG/N/10/CAN/1; G/SG/N/11/CAN/1/Suppl.1)  
5 EXPORT DIVERSIFICATION AN D TRADE PROMOTION  
5.3 Investment Promotion, paragraph 5.10, page 21  
Question  
The Report notes, that during the review period, Canada created Invest in Canada, a new 
government agency that aims to increase Canada`s ability to attract and facilitate high -impact 
foreign direct investment and the jobs that come with it. Could Canada elaborate more on the 
activities of this recently launched agency?  
Reply  
The Invest in Canada 2019 -20 Departmental Plan is available on www.investcanada.ca website : 
(https://www.investcanada.ca/2019 -20-departmental -plan). This report provides details on Invest 
in Canada 's priorities.  
5.5 Other Government of Canada Progra mmes and Strategies that Promote Exports, 
5.5.3  Innovation and Skills Plan, paragraph 5.14, page 22  
Question  
Could Canada elaborate more comprehensively on the implementation of its Innovation and Skills 
Plan in practice?  WT/TPR/M/389/Add.1  
 
- 261 - 
 
  Reply  
Launched in 2017, the Government 's Innovation and Skills Plan is helping Canadian businesses to 
start up, scale up, and become globally competitive. The Plan is an ambitious effort to help create 
good well -paying jobs by making Canada a world leader in innovation —and it is alre ady delivering 
results:  
• Five industry -led innovation superclusters in Canada 's digital technologies, food 
production, advanced manufacturing, artificial intelligence in supply chain management, 
and ocean industries are now up and running.  
• The Strategic Inn ovation Fund is a new approach to supporting business innovation, and 
investments across the country and in all economic sectors. In the last two years, the Fund 
has proven successful in attracting and supporting high -quality and innovative business 
invest ment in Canada. As of January 2019, the Fund had secured 31 investment 
agreements from leading researchers and manufacturers, worth a total of CAD 8.1 billion.  
• Innovative Solutions Canada was launched in December 2017 and provides a novel 
procurement appro ach to allow the Government of Canada to partner with Canadian 
entrepreneurs in the development of early stage, pre -commercial innovation. Twenty 
participating federal departments and agencies issue challenges, designed around desired 
outcomes, seeking nov el technologies, products and process solutions, in order to address 
federal government needs.  
• Recognizing the importance of ideas in the knowledge economy, the Government put 
forward the first Canadian National Intellectual Property Strategy in 2018.  
• In 2018, Canada announced the largest ever increase in fundamental research to support 
the next generation of Canadian research and researchers.  
• For a full report on the Innovation and Skills Plan, please visit: www.Canada.ca/innovation . 
 
 
  WT/TPR/M/389/Add.1  
 
- 262 - 
 
  UNITED STATES OF AME RICA  
Report by the Secretariat – WT/TPR/S/389  
2 TRADE AND INVESTMENT REGIMES  
2.3 Trade Agreements and Arrangements, 2.3.2 Regional and Preferential Agreements, 
2.3.2.1 Reciprocal Trade Agreements, paragraph 2.20, page 34  
Question  
The report states that "[t]he modernized Canada -Chile FTA entered into force on 5 February 2019. " 
Has Canada notified these changes to the WTO Committee on Regional Trade Agreements?  
Reply  
Canada and Chile have notified the WTO Committee on Regional Trade Agreements of the recent 
coming into force of the "Agreement to amend, in respect of investment a nd trade and gender, the 
Free Trade Agreement between the Government of Canada and the Government of the Republic of 
Chile, done at Santiago on 5 December 1996 " and the "Agreement to amend the Free Trade 
Agreement between the Government of Canada and the G overnment of the Republic of Chile, done 
at Santiago on 5 December 1996 " in respect to technical barriers to trade, sanitary and phytosanitary 
measures and government procurement, modernizing the Canada -Chile FTA.  
2.4 Investment Regime, 2.4.2 Investment Po licy, paragraph 2.39, page 39  
Question  
The Secretariat report notes that Canada has worked to create an open, rules -based investment 
regime that facilitates FDI in Canada. The Province of British Columbia enacted a series of housing 
initiatives in 2016 that included a 15 % property transfer tax on residential property purchased by 
foreign buyers in metropolitan Vancouver. The tax was increased to 20 % for property registered 
after 20 February 2018. The foreign -buyer tax enacted by the Province of British C olumbia raises 
questions regarding consistency with Canada 's treaty obligations regarding investment and national 
treatment. Does Canada consider this measure to be consistent with its treaty obligations regarding 
investment and national treatment?  
Reply  
Similar to many other jurisdictions, British Colombia has adopted a transfer tax intended to address 
escalating residential property prices and diminished residential housing affordability. These 
measures apply to residential housing only, do not affect inv estors or foreign direct investment 
generally, and are considered to be consistent with Canada 's WTO obligations.  
3 TRADE POLICIES AND PRACTICES BY MEASURE  
3.1 Measures Directly Affecting Imports, 3.1.3 Tariffs, 3.1.3.2 Tariff Structure, 
paragraph  3.33, pa ge 55  
Question  
Understanding that the WTO tariff profile analysis used Canada 's 2017 tariff schedule instead of the 
2019 version, the United States would like to know what else might be causing this large variance 
between both documents (as both schedules use HS 2017 nomenclature)?  
Reply  
Effective 1 January 2019, Canada made several structural simplifications (e.g., mergers of tariff 
items with the same duty rate) and other technical amendments to ease administrative burden and 
reduce red tape and  compliance costs for Canadian business and government. The structural 
simplification reduced the overall number of tariff items in the applied tariff schedule by just over 
6% (i.e., from 7,304 tariff items (at the 8 -digit level) in chapters 1 -97 in 2018 t o 6,986 tariff items 
in 2019). Applied rates were unchanged as a result of these amendments.  WT/TPR/M/389/Add.1  
 
- 263 - 
 
  3.1.4 Other charges affecting imports, 3.1.4.3 Provincial product -specific taxes, 
Table  3.16, page s 69-70 
Question  
"Selected provincial and territorial taxes and m ark-ups on alcoholic beverages, December 2018. " 
Are the same mark -ups applied to alcoholic beverages produced in and outside of the province?  
Reply  
All provinces apply the same mark -up for products originating in -province or out-of-province. 
However, certain provinces will apply a cost of service differential on foreign products to recover the 
extra cost associated to their marketing.  
Question  
"Selected provincial and territorial taxes and mark -ups on alcoholic beverages, Dece mber 2018. " If 
not, what are the mark -ups for alcoholic beverages produced within the province and mark -ups for 
alcoholic beverages produced outside of the province for each category (i.e., spirits, wine, and beer) 
for each province?  
Reply  
Mark-up and Cost  of service differential information can be found on the websites of the province 's 
liquor boards. Please refer to the following webpages for some examples:  
Manitoba: 
https://www.mbllpartners.ca/sites/mbll_b2b/files/pdf_pamphlets/Pricing%20Information%20Manu
al%202019.pdf  
Quebec: https://www.saq -
b2b.com/wx/en/MEMBERSZONE.PRESENTATION.STATIC_PAGES_DISPLAY_PREP/POLICY_STANDARD   
under the "Price change " tab  
Ontario: 
https://hellolcbo.com/ci/fattach/get/128170/0/filename/Pricing+Examples+2019_COSD+dynamic
+April+2019.pdf  
Question  
"Selected provincial an d territorial taxes and mark -ups on alcoholic beverages, December 2018. " 
When there are differences in mark -ups, how does Canada ensure that mark -ups are commensurate 
with services provided and do not discriminate against imports?  
Reply  
Cost of services di fferentials are applied on a cost recovery basis where the fee is directly link to 
extra operations and expensed incurred by the liquor boards applying the fee. These are fixed 
amounts (not ad valorem ) based off auditing mechanisms and are reviewed periodically to ensure 
accuracy.  
Follow -up question  
According to Canada 's STE notification (G/STR/N/16/CAN), Nova Scotia applies mark -ups to 
commercial wines that have been bottled in the province differently than commercial wines that 
have been bottled ou tside the province.  Specifically, commercial wines that are bottled in Nova 
Scotia are afforded a mark -up reduction of 20 percentage points (from 140% to 120%). How does 
this difference in mark -up for commercial wines that have been bottled in the province  and mark -up WT/TPR/M/389/Add.1  
 
- 264 - 
 
  for commercial wines that have been bottled outside the province reflect recovery of extra cost 
associated with marketing commercial wines that have been bottled outside the province?  
Reply  
The measure is origin -neutral as it allows wine from any region to qualify for the reduced mark -up. 
3.2 Measures Directly Affecting Exports, 3.2.5 Export finance, insurance, and guarantees, 
paragraph 3.128, page 91  
Question  
The Secretariat reports that EDC is financially self -sustained, but it is the underst anding of the 
United  States that EDC operates a separate Canada Account that may not be self -financing. See:  
https://www.edc.ca/content/dam/edc/en/corporate/corporate -reports/canada -account/canada -
account -2016-2017.pdf .  
In addition, the Sec retariat report notes that "EDC normally funds itself in global capital markets but 
may also, if need be, seek loans from the Ministry of Finance. " Are activities undertaken through the 
Canada Account financially self -sustained?  
Reply  
The Government effect ively assumes the associated financial risks for Canada Account transactions 
by providing all monies required for any transaction from the Consolidated Revenue Fund ( "CRF"). 
Question  
According to the Canada Account Annual Report 2016 -2017, section 24 of th e Act allows Canada 
Account to have up to an aggregate of CAD 20 billion in contingent liabilities (i.e., insurance policies, 
guarantees and other contingent arrangements), outstanding loan commitments to borrowers and 
outstanding principal amounts of obligations owed to the Corporation. The position against this lim it 
at 31 March 2017 was CAD 3.02 billion (March 2016 – CAD 3.2 billion and 2015 – CAD 3.5 billion). 
Could Canada provide a breakdown of the positions against the statutory limit under the Canada 
Account by sector (including Food and Agriculture) for 2015, 2016, and 2017?  
Reply  
CAD Million  
Canada Account  
 FY 31 March 2015  FY 31 March 2016  FY 31 March 2017  
Extractive  33.87  34.09  30.86  
Info & Comm. Tech.  218.88  212.94  207.04  
Infrastructure  565.88  523.25  465.10  
Light Manufacturing  13.5 13.30  13.07  
Agri-food 159.59  156.07  130.45  
Resources  62 60.57  69.07  
Transportation  2,365.02  2,242.76  2,104.84  
Total  3,418.74  3,242.98  3,020.43  
 
Question  
According to the Canada Account Annual Report 2016 -2017, section 24 of the Act allows Canada 
Account to have up to an aggregate of CAD 20 billion in contingent liabilities (i.e., insurance policies, 
guarantees and other contingent arrangements), outstandin g loan commitments to borrowers and 
outstanding principal amounts of obligations owed to the Corporation. The position against this limit 
at 31 March 2017 was CAD 3.02 billion (March 2016 – CAD 3.2 billion and 2015 – CAD 3.5 billion). 
Could Canada provide a breakdown of sovereign and commercial exposures, by country, for 
2015-2017?  
 WT/TPR/M/389/Add.1  
 
- 265 - 
 
  Reply  
CAD Million  
Canada Account  
 31 March 2015  31 March 2016  31 March 2017  
Commercial Total  2,224.37  2,106.88  1,969.76  
Antigua and Barbuda  0.04 0.04 0.04 
Bahamas  11.31  12.33  9.98 
Sweden  33.2 29.52  12.7 
United States  2,179.82  2,064.99  1,947.04  
Sovereign Total  1,194.37  1,136.10  1,050.67  
Algeria  1.79 1.23 0.66 
Egypt  26.82  14.25  7.29 
Argentina  141.65  135.38  111.25  
China  440 428.93  416.08  
Gabon  8.01 7.9 7.92 
India 46.4 45.91  45.31  
Indonesia  2.16 0.44 0.38 
Iraq 140.63  133.10  124.94  
Jamaica  5.45 5.35 5.23 
Kenya  5.96 5.73 5.43 
Morocco  77.03  75.65  74.05  
Pakistan  7.24 23.38  22.49  
Romania  163.90  142.05  120.19  
Sudan  11.76  12.06  12.35  
Turkey  95 93.87  92.50  
United States  0.27 0.27 0.28 
Venezuela  20.3 10.6 4.32 
Grand Total  3,418.74  3,242.98  3,020.43  
Question  
According to the Canada Account Annual Report 2015 -2016, "Canada Account assumed three loans 
on behalf of the Canadian Wheat Board (CWB), as requested by the Government of Canada. In the 
fiscal year 2014 -2015, a total of CAD 165 million was received from the Consolidated Revenue Fund 
(CRF) and subsequently disbur sed to the CWB with respect to the first two loans. The remaining 
loan, with the Government of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan (USD 14 million), was disbursed to 
the CWB in the first quarter of 2015 -2016. " Has this agricultural export financing support be en 
reported by Canada in the WTO Export Competition Questionnaire (ECQ)? If so, was it reported as 
activity under EDC 's account or under the CWB?  
Reply  
These transactions were reported in Canada 's 2014 -2015 WTO Export Competition Questionnaire.  
Question  
According to the Canada Account Annual Report 2015 -2016, "Canada Account assumed three loans 
on behalf of the Canadian Wheat Board (CWB), as requested by the Government of Canada. In the 
fiscal year 2014 -2015, a total of CAD 165 million was received from the  Consolidated Revenue Fund 
(CRF) and subsequently disbursed to the CWB with respect to the first two loans. The remaining 
loan, with the Government of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan (USD 14 million), was disbursed to 
the CWB in the first quarter of 2015 -2016. ". Are these loans currently performing?  
Reply  
Yes, loans are performing.  
Question  
According to the Canada Account Annual Report 2015 -2016, "Canada Account assumed three loans 
on behalf of the Canadian Wheat Board (CWB), as requested by the Government of Canada. In the 
fiscal year 2014 -2015, a total of CAD 165 million was received from the Consolidated Revenue Fund 
(CRF) and subsequently disbur sed to the CWB with respect to the first two loans. The remaining WT/TPR/M/389/Add.1  
 
- 266 - 
 
  loan, with the Government of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan (USD 14 million), was disbursed to 
the CWB in the first quarter of 2015 -2016. ". As CWB received financial support under the Cana da 
Account, has EDC provided, directly or indirectly, financial support (i.e., financing, guarantees, or 
insurance) to other Canadian agricultural and food companies on domestic and/or exporting 
transactions in 2015 -2016, 2016 -2017, or 2017 -2018?  
Reply  
EDC has not provided any new financial support to other Canadian agricultural and food companies 
under Canada Account in 2015 -2016, 2016 -2017 or 2017 -2018.  
Question  
According to the Canada Account Annual Report 2015 -2016, "Canada Account assumed three loans 
on behalf of the Canadian Wheat Board (CWB), as requested by the Government of Canada. In the 
fiscal year 2014 -2015, a total of CAD 165 million was received from the Consolidated Revenue Fund 
(CRF) and subsequently disbursed to the CWB with respect to the first two loans. The remaining 
loan, with the Government of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan (USD 14 million), was disbursed to 
the CWB in the first quarter of 2015 -2016. " If so, could Canada provide the total amount of financing 
support for all entities i n the Canadian agricultural and food industry for 2015 -2017 and whether 
this data will be reported in Canada 's 2019 ECQ?  
Reply  
See answers to questions 8 and 9 from the United States for total amounts of support for the 
agricultural and food industry under Canada Account for 2015 -2017 period; for FY 2018, Canada 
Account exposure in the Agri -Food Sector was CAD 124.09 million. Canada will report the required 
data relating to these transactions in its 2019 ECQ.  
3.3 Measures Affecting Production and Trade, 3.3.1 Incentives, page 92  
Question  
The U .S. notes that Canada did not include in this section incentive programs called the Pull Strategy 
offered by EDC. See: https://www.edc.ca/EN/About -Us/Corporate -Reports/Documents/2018 -Leg-
Review -Submission.pdf  and https://www.edc.ca/EN/Trade -Commissioners/Documents/ pull-strategy -
tcs.pdf . According to EDC 's 2018 Legislative Review Submission, EDC helps create opportunities for 
Canadian exporters, and its most well -known and widely  used tool for trade creation is the "pull" 
financing programme . How does the EDC 's Pull Strategy programme  work for foreign buyers, and 
does it also cover buyers of food and agricultural products? How does a "pull facility " create an 
opportunity for EDC to influence the foreign buyer 's future procurement decisions and "pull" exports 
from Cana da without not being tied to a specific contract?  
Reply  
EDC's most well -known and widely  used tool for trade creation is the "pull" financing programme . A 
pull facility is an untied financing commitment made to an international buyer, which is leveraged 
by EDC to influence that buyer to begin or augment its procurement from Canadian suppliers. Pulls 
are most often concluded with large international buyers that are industry leaders and have 
expansive global or regional footprints. Pull facilities  are only considered where EDC has a well -
developed understanding of the buyer 's procurement needs and the ability of Canadian exporters to 
meet those needs. Prior to closing the financing facility, a written (though non -legally binding) 
commitment is made  by the buyer to consider Canadian procurement and to work with EDC to better 
understand Canadian capabilities. For example, the buyer will commit to helping EDC to develop 
opportunities for Canadian exporters by providing access to their procurement perso nnel, regular 
participation in matchmaking events with EDC and Canadian exporters, and via in -bound road shows 
to meet potential Canadian suppliers. Every successful pull relationship relies upon a trusted 
partnership between EDC and the international buye r. The programme  has evolved over several 
generations into a key trade creation tool today. EDC 's pull facilities are not limited to specific 
industries and can be put in place with buyers of food and agricultural products.  WT/TPR/M/389/Add.1  
 
- 267 - 
 
  Question  
The U .S. notes that Can ada did not include in this section incentive programs called the Pull Strategy 
offered by EDC. See: https://www.edc.ca/EN/About -Us/Corporate -Reports/ Documents/2018 -Leg-
Review -Submission.pdf  and https://www.edc.ca/EN/Trade -Commissioners/Documents/pull -strategy -
tcs.pdf . According to EDC 's 2018 Legislative Review Submission, EDC helps create opportunities for 
Canadian exporters, and its most well -known and widely  used tool for trade creation is the "pull" 
financing programme . Is EDC 's Trade Creation and Pull Strategy Pillar consistent with OECD 
Arrangement o n Officially Supported Export Credits and the Nairobi Decision on Export Competition 
for agricultural products? If so, how? If the programme  finances food or agricultural products, how 
does EDC report these facilities under the ECQ as required by the Nairo bi Decision on Export 
Competition?  
Reply  
Transactions concluded under EDC 's Trade Creation and Pull Strategy Pillar are not tied to specific, 
identified export contracts and therefore are not export credits governed by the OECD Arrangement 
on Officially Su pported Export Credits, or the Nairobi Decision on Export Competition.  
3.3.2 Standards and Other Technical Requirements, 3.3.2.2 Technical Regulations, 
paragraph 3.164, page 99  
Question  
The Secretariat 's report states that departments and agencies must conduct a Regulatory Impact 
Analysis (RIA) on all regulatory proposals. The RIA must identify and assess the potential positive 
and negative effects and implications of a regulatory proposal and demonstrat e that the benefits to 
Canadians outweigh the costs.  Regarding a proposed repeal and replacement of a safety standard 
(CAN/CSA -Z600 "Safety of Corded Window Covering Products ") on corded window coverings, what 
determinations were made regarding the potenti al positive and negative effects and the analysis of 
the benefits and costs of the proposed regulation?  
Reply  
Canada 's Corded Window Coverings Regulations (SOR/2019 -97), were approved on 15 April 2019 
and come into force on 1 May 2021. The Regulatory Impact Analysis Statement (RIAS) indicates 
that, in 2014, Health Canada 's risk assessment determined that corded window coverings (CWC) 
with accessible cords posed an unreasonable risk of injury or death to young children. Over the past 
nine yea rs, Health Canada is aware of nine child strangulation fatalities from CWCs, in Canada, for 
an average fatality rate of 1.0 child per year. In order to help eliminate the risk of strangulation, the 
new Corded Window Coverings Regulations restrict the lengt h of reachable cords and the size of 
loops that can be created by a cord.  
For further details of the results of the impact analysis, please see the Canada Gazette notification 
(Canada Gazette, Part II, Volume 153, Number 9) (Registration SOR/2019 -97 15 April 2019 CANADA 
CONSUMER PRODUCT SAFETY ACT, P.C. 2019 -322 12 April 2019) at: http://gazette.gc.ca/rp -
pr/p2/2019/2019 -05-01/html/sor -dors97 -eng.html , which contains the r elevant Regulatory Impact 
Analysis Statement.  
3.3.5 State trading, state -owned enterprises, and privatization, paragraph 3.212, 
page  109 
Question  
In discussing wholly -owned federal or provincial organizations (Crown Corporations), the 
Secretariat 's Report notes that many such enterprises serve vast, sparsely -populated areas that 
profit -making, private sector companies would have difficulties catering to. In addition, they were 
primarily created to meet public policy and commercial objectives.  
For those Crow n Corporations that are established for commercial objectives in markets that already 
have private commercial enterprises, could Canada specify what processes are used to identify the WT/TPR/M/389/Add.1  
 
- 268 - 
 
  need for a Crown Corporation, what analysis goes into it, and what consi deration is given to private 
commercial enterprises already operating in that space?  
Reply  
Federal crown corporations are established when the Parliament of Canada passes legislation to 
establish them as such. The sponsoring cabinet Minister will propose legislation for parliament 's 
consideration after a comprehensive Memorandum to Cabinet (MC) process that requires the 
minister to first convince cabinet of the need for a crown corporation. The MC provides Cabinet with 
an extensive analysis that wi ll consider a range of elements, inter alia , the presence of market 
failures, the role of the federal government, costs to the taxpayer, and Canada 's international trade 
obligations. The MC will be discussed by the appropriate Cabinet committee, where it m ay be 
challenged by other ministers ' considerations, including analysis of commercial entities already 
operating in the space, before it is discussed by the full Cabinet. In addition to the Cabinet process, 
the Prime Minister also has a say in the creation  of a new Crown Corporation. There are three main 
rationales for why the Privy Council Office 's Machinery of Government would recommend to the 
Prime Minister that a Crown Corporation be created:  To allow for managerial flexibility (e.g. functions 
that requ ire engagement with customers, suppliers and/or competitors in commercial or quasi -
commercial contexts that require more flexibility than can be provided for in a centralized 
departmental financial and administrative control regime); The need for independe nce (particularly 
where substantive and administrative decision -making are closely intertwined); and, Political 
distance from operational and transactional decisions (to ensure that day -to-day decision -making of 
these organizations in their dealings with c ustomers, suppliers and competitors is conducted on a 
commercial basis and does not involve the application of political judgement). In terms of 
considerations related to pre -existing private commercial enterprises, Crown Corporations are 
created when ther e is a clear public interest in the space. Although Crown Corporations have more 
autonomy than other types of government entities, they remain government organizations and 
instruments of government policy for which Ministers are ultimately accountable. The refore, 
although they are removed from day -to-day operations, Ministers retain important levers and control 
to ensure that the overall direction and performance of these organizations align with the policies 
for which the Government creates and maintains t hem. Once Cabinet has granted policy cover, and 
the Prime Minister has agreed with the approach, the sponsoring Minister may proceed to drafting 
proposed legislation for consideration by Parliament. On the point in respect of conducting analyses 
to identif y market failures that need to be addressed, the last comprehensive review of federal Crown 
Corporation governance was conducted in 2004 -05, the findings of which are summarized in a 
Treasury Board Submission document called "Meeting the Expectations of Ca nadians: Review of the 
Governance Framework for Canada 's Crown Corporations ". (https://www.tbs -sct.gc.ca/report/rev -
exa/gfcc -cgse-eng.pdf ). 
Question  
Once established, what safeguard s are in place to ensure private entities in the market have a fair 
opportunity to compete?  
Reply  
The Competition Act applies to commercial activities of Crown corporations (or state -owned 
enterprises) that are in actual or potential competition with other businesses in Canada to the same 
extent it would if the corporation were private. This obligation is outlined in section 2.1 of the 
Competition Act.  
3.3.6 Government Procurement, 3.3.6.2 Legal, institutional and policy framework, 
paragraph 3.229, pag e 114  
Question  
The Secretariat Report notes that Canada is of the view that its procurement activities should be 
supportive of its procurement objectives and of national objectives such as industrial and regional 
development, aboriginal economic developmen t, the environment, and other socioeconomic 
objectives. What comprises "other socioeconomic objectives? " WT/TPR/M/389/Add.1  
 
- 269 - 
 
  Reply  
The Government of Canada is modernizing the procurement process, with a particular focus on 
getting more value from our procurement dollars and s eeking to advance green, social, economic, 
or innovation goals. This includes diversifying the supplier base to include underrepresented groups 
who are not traditional suppliers in Canadian federal procurement and improving socio -economic 
development oppor tunities for socially or economically disadvantaged people.  
Question  
The Secretariat Report notes that Canada is of the view that its procurement activities should be 
supportive of its procurement objectives and of national objectives such as industrial an d regional 
development, aboriginal economic development, the environment, and other socioeconomic 
objectives. How do Canada 's procurement activities support its "industrial and regional development " 
objectives and are these activities consistent with Canad a's international trade obligations?  
Reply  
Canada is fully compliant with its international trade obligations when carrying out its industrial and 
regional development objectives. Canada uses procurement to support industrial and regional 
development through a variety of policy instruments for procurements that are not subject to any 
of Canada 's international trade obligations.  
Question  
On 26 October 2018, Canada released a draft Request for Proposal (RFP) for its Future Fighter 
Capability Project to eligible suppliers. As part of the RFP, an Economic Impact Assessment annex is 
included that penalizes companies from countries that initiate trade -related actions relating to a 
good manufactured in Canada, including anti -dumping and countervail ing duty cases. What are 
Canada 's views on the Economic Impact Assessment regarding potential use and discrimination in 
other countries ' procurement policies?  
Reply  
In December 2017, the Government of Canada committed to creating a new tool to assess bidders ' 
impact on Canada 's economic interests and announced that it would apply to the competition to 
replace Canada 's fleet of fighter jets – the Future Fighter Capability Project (FFCP). The new tool 
was included in the draft Request for Proposal for FF CP that was released in October 2018 and has 
been part of engagement with members of the Suppliers ' list since that time. Canada expects to 
issue the RFP for FFCP in July 2019. More details on the tool 's broader application to major defence 
and Canadian Co ast Guard procurements are forthcoming.  
3.3.6.3 Interprovincial procurement arrangements, 3.3.6.3.1 Canadian Free Trade 
Agreement (CFTA), paragraph 3.249, pages 118 -119 
Question  
The Secretariat Report notes that the CFTA allows for CFTA Parties to maintain  a preference for 
Canadian goods and services (so long as such preference does not conflict with Canada 's 
international obligations). The Report further provides the definition of origin for Canadian goods 
and services. Is this preference only allowed at t he provincial/territorial level, or does the CFTA allow 
the national government to apply a similar preference?  
Reply  
The Canadian Free Trade Agreement (CFTA) contains obligations with respect to government 
procurement that apply to all CFTA Parties (i.e. Canada 's federal, provincial and territorial 
governments). Under Article 503.4, a federal procuring entity may accord a preference for Canadian 
value -added for procurement covered by the CFTA; however, this preference would not be accorded 
if that pr ocurement were also covered by one of Canada 's international free trade agreements.  WT/TPR/M/389/Add.1  
 
- 270 - 
 
  3.3.7 Intellectual property rights, 3.3.7.1 Overview, paragraph 3.274, page 124  
Question  
The Secretariat 's Report notes several initiatives that the Government of Canada ha s launched to 
promote IP protection and enforcement. What are Canada 's efforts to address the interests of right 
holders who lodged complaints about inadequacies they have identified in the notice -and-notice 
system?  
Reply  
Canada 's Notice and Notice regime codifies a pre -existing voluntary industry practice and was 
implemented as part of a larger copyright reform package in 2012 that included new rights and 
protections for rights holders in the digital environment, and new remedies that targeted those who 
"enable " copyright infringement online.  
Soon after the regime entered into force in January 2015, controversy arose over the practice of 
some copyright owners (or their agents) of including settlement demands within their notices, a 
practice that could lead to abuses. Many of the participants in the regime, including organizations 
representing the movie, music, and videogame industries, indicated that they do not support the 
use of settlement demands and were concerned about complaints over fraudulent notices . In 2018, 
Canada made targeted changes to the regime in order to address this problem.  
Canada has seen a number of copyright enforcement success stories in recent years that speak to 
the effectiveness of the new "enabler " remedy. For example, in October 2 015, six member 
companies of the Motion Picture Association of America obtained a court order in Canada, relying in 
part on the enabler remedy, to shut down a BitTorrent site that was the primary source of illegal 
movie content on "Popcorn Time ". In June 2 016, in the context of on -going litigation and relying in 
part on the "enabler " remedy, Internet Service Providers Bell, Rogers, and Vidéotron were able to 
obtain an injunction against providers of pre -loaded android boxes that are used to access pirated 
content – in March 2017, Canada 's Federal Court of Appeal upheld the injunction. Then, in July 2016, 
relying in part on the "enabler " remedy, a consortium of music labels, including Sony, Warner, and 
Universal, settled its litigation against "IsoHunt " by obtaining a court "consent " order finding that 
the Internet service was liable for CAD 55 million in damages and CAD 10 million in pun itive, 
exemplary, and aggravated damages.  
Paragraph 3.275, page 124  
Question  
The Secretariat 's Report notes the creation of a "patent collective " under Canada 's new IP Strategy. 
Could Canada provide more detail on how the patent collective will operate, wh at it will include, who 
will administer it, when it is expected to begin, and is it being developed/administered by CIPO or 
another branch of the Canadian government? Is the patent collective envisioned to include a patent 
licensing component (e.g., member s grant each other licenses on patents they own in selected 
technologies)?  
Reply  
The Government has solicited proposals for services to be provided by the patent collective. Those 
proposals are currently being evaluated. Detailed information on the patent collective is available 
at: https://www.ic.gc.ca/eic/site/135.nsf/eng/00001.html  
3.3.7.6 Geographical Indications, paragraph 3.311, pages 132 -133 
Question  
The Secretariat 's Report notes that geographical indications (GIs) are protected in Canada under 
trademark legislation, and that once placed on a list of protected GIs, there is no term of protection. 
Could Canada explain why there is no term of protection for GIs?  WT/TPR/M/389/Add.1  
 
- 271 - 
 
  Reply  
This stan dard is consistent with internationally recognized approaches to GIs and has been in place 
under the domestic legal framework since Canada 's implementation of the WTO TRIPS Agreement.  
Question  
The Secretariat 's Report notes that geographical indications (G Is) are protected in Canada under 
trademark legislation, and that once placed on a list of protected GIs, there is no term of protection. 
Is this also true when the GI is protected as a certification mark?  
Reply  
Certification marks are subject to renewal w ithin a period of fifteen years from the day of registration 
or last renewal. This period will change to 10 years once Canada 's amendments to the Trade -marks 
Act and the new Trade -marks Regulations come into force on 17 June 2019, which will allow Canada 
to accede to the Singapore Treaty, the Madrid Protocol and the Nice Agreement.  
Question  
The Secretariat 's Report notes that geographical indications (GIs) are protected in Canada under 
trademark legislation, and that once placed on a list of protected GIs, there is no term of protection. 
Does it apply to agricultural and food products, as well as wines and spirits?  
Reply  
Yes. 
Paragraph 3.312, page 133  
Question  
The Secretariat 's Report notes that one GI not on the list has been granted protecti on and a second 
one is under consideration. Could Canada provide that updated information?  
Reply  
Canada decided to expand its GI system for wines and spirits to also allow applications for 
agricultural products and foods. As a result, interested applicants  from any country can now directly 
request that their agricultural product and food GIs be protected as GIs in Canada. To date one 
foreign food GI, for the Italian product "Prosciutto di Carpegna ", and one domestic food GI, for the 
Canadian product "Maïs sucré de Neuville ", have been granted protection under Canada 's open GI 
regime.  
Question  
The Secretariat 's Report notes that one GI not on the list has been granted protection and a second 
one is u nder consideration. Are there any additions since February 2019 that have been granted or 
are under consideration?  
Reply  
Since February 2019, there has been one addition to Canada 's List of Protected Geographical 
Indications for the Canadian product "Maïs sucré de Neuville " (granted protection on 18 April 2019) 
under Canada 's expanded open GI regime.  WT/TPR/M/389/Add.1  
 
- 272 - 
 
  3.3.7.9 Copyright, paragraph 3.22, page 134  
Question  
The Secretariat 's Report notes that the Copyright Modernization Act clarifies the copyright exceptions 
framework for the benefit of educational institutions, including by allowing certain uses of Internet 
content and telecommunication technologies in learning contexts, subject to safeguards. In light of 
recent case law (e.g., Copibec v. Laval University) and i n light of the submissions the government 
has received from stakeholders, especially educational publishers, regarding the exception 's 
over-breadth, does Canada have any plans to remedy the exception 's reach?  
Reply  
The Copyright Modernization Act included a provision for Parliament to review the Act every 5 years. 
This review has been underway since early 2018 by the Parliamentary Standing Committees on 
Industry, Science and Technology and Canadian Heritage. In October 2018, the federal ministers 
responsible for copyright policy (i.e., the Minister of Innovation, Science and Economic Development 
and the Minister of Canadian Heritage) wrote to the committees studying the Act requesting 
recommendations on educational copying and publishing. The govern ment will study the results of 
their review and consider next steps in due course.  
Paragraph 3.323, pages 134 -135 
Question  
The Secretariat 's Report notes that if the ISP fails to perform its obligations under the regime, it 
may be liable for statutory dama ges of CAD 5,000 to 10,000. What guidelines are used to determine 
whether an ISP has failed to meet this obligation?  
Reply  
The Notice and Notice provisions in Canada 's Copyright Act (i.e., s. 41.25 and s. 41.26) set out 
expressly the requirements for notic es and the obligations on Internet Service Providers. Canada 's 
national IP legislation can be reviewed via page 237 of the Secretariat Report.  
Question  
The Secretariat 's Report notes that if the ISP fails to perform its obligations under the regime, it 
may be liable for statutory damages of CAD 5,000 to 10,000. What entity/body exercises the 
authority to make the determination that an ISP has failed to perform its obligations?  
Reply  
A determination as to whether an ISP has failed to perform its obligations under the Notice and 
Notice regime, and whether the copyright owner in question is entitled to statutory damages 
pursuant to s. 41.26(3), would be made by a Canadian court in the context of a legal proceeding 
initiated by the copyright owner.  
Question  
The Secretariat 's Report notes that if the ISP fails to perform its obligations under the regime, it 
may be liable for statutory damages of CAD 5,000 to 10,000. Has any ISP been held liable under 
this regime since enacted?  
Reply  
To our knowledge, n o ISP has been held liable for failure to perform its obligations under this regime 
since it was enacted.  WT/TPR/M/389/Add.1  
 
- 273 - 
 
  Paragraph 3.329, page 135  
Question  
The Secretariat notes the Standing Committee on Industry, Science and Technology began the 
quinquennial review of the Copyright Act in March 2018. What is the current stage of this review? Is 
there a timeframe for culmination of the review?  
Reply  
The hearings for the review by the Standing Committee on Industry, Science and Technology and 
Standing Committee on Canadian Heritage have been concluded. The Standing Committee on 
Canadian Heritage tabled its report and recommendations on 14 May 2019. The report of the 
Standing Committee on Industry, Science and Technology is expected to follow shortly.  
4 TRADE POLI CIES BY SECTOR  
4.1 Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries, 4.1.1 Agriculture, 4.1.1.4 Export measures, 
paragraph 4.27, page 144  
Question  
This paragraph describes Canada 's food assistance. Canada did not report new information on its 
food aid programme  in its 2017 export competition questionnaire as required by the Nairobi Decision. 
Why was this information omitted?  
Reply  
Canada provided information on food assistance in its 2017 export competition questionnaire. In 
that questionnaire, Canada indicated that it provided CAD 331.5 million in food assistance for the 
year 2015. This support was provided on an untied cash basis, fully in grant form.  
4.1.1.5 Evolution of Support and Protection, Table 4.4, page 145  
Question  
Canada 's market price support (as not ified to the WTO Committee on Agriculture) is listed in 
Table  4.4 Canada 's domestic support, 2012 -2014. What is the level of production eligible to receive 
the support price and how is the level of production calculated?  
Reply  
In 2012, 2013, and 2014, the level of production eligible to receive the support price for butter was 
respectively 85,057 tonnes, 76,948 tonnes, and 71,645 tonnes. For the same years the level of 
production eligible to receive the support price for skim milk powder was respectively 20 ,919 tonnes, 
4,905 tonnes, and 26,157 tonnes.  Information regarding eligible production can be found in 
Supporting Table DS:5 of Canada 's annual domestic support notifications.  
As set out in footnote 1 of Supporting Table DS:5 of G/AG/N/CAN/122, eligible production for butter 
is equal to total production, less product sales for further processing in Classes 5 a, b and c, less 
total exports, plus the portion of exports that had received the support price.  
For skim milk powder (see F ootnote 2, in Supporting Table DS:5 in G/AG/N/CAN/122), eligible 
Production equals total production, less product sales for further processing and animal feed under 
Special Classes 5 a, b and c and 4m, less total exports, plus the portion of exports that h ad received 
the support price.  WT/TPR/M/389/Add.1  
 
- 274 - 
 
  4.1.1.6 Commodities subject to supply management , 4.1.1.6.1 Institutional framework, 
paragraph 4.32, page 146  
Question  
Is the "National Milk Marketing Plan " publicly available? If yes, could Canada provide the location? 
If no, please explain why this is not publicly available.  
Reply  
The National Milk Marketing Plan is a federal/provincial agreement. It is currently not available on 
the Canadian Dairy Commissi on's public website. Canada does publish all relevant and publicly 
available information on the Canadian Dairy Information Centre : (www.dairyinfo.gc.ca ). All 
information published is done in compliance with Canada 's trade obligations.  
4.1.1.6.2 Milk and dairy, paragraph 4.39, pages 148 -149 
Question  
Why was the support price changed on 1 September 2018, as well as the process for determining 
changes in support prices?  
Reply  
The Commissioners of the Canadian Da iry Commission continue to base support prices for butter on 
the following elements: the cost of production study, input from various Canadian stakeholders, the 
processors ' margin and economic indicators such as the consumer price index.  
Question  
How is th e cost of producing milk, which is used in the annual adjustment calculation, calculated?  
Reply  
Each year, the Canadian Dairy Commission (CDC) undertakes a study of the cost of producing (COP) 
one hectolitre of milk. The study involves randomly selecting d airy producers to measure the COP. 
The sample is selected to be representative of the dairy farm population at the federal level. COP 
formulas include variable input costs (feed, labour, administration costs, etc.), fixed input costs 
(depreciation, plant a nd administration, overhead, etc.), and a return on labour and investment 
(excluding quota).  
Paragraphs 4.40 -4.41, page 149  
Question  
Could Canada provide monthly milk component (i.e., butterfat, proteins, other solids) prices and 
monthly volumes of milk components utilized (for Class 7 and total utilization for all classes), 
specifically at the provincial levels? If this information is still not available, could Canada provide an 
update on when and where this information will become available?  
Reply  
There is no new timeline to provide for the release of any data related to milk class prices, utilization 
and sales. Several verifications to ensure accuracy of the data are required. Once completed, 
information will be provided.  WT/TPR/M/389/Add.1  
 
- 275 - 
 
  Follow -up question  
The Uni ted States notes that Canada has not published this information since April 2017 and the 
United States believes this information is essential for Members to be assured of Canada 's 
compliance with its WTO commitments.  
Reply  
Canada has consistently been tran sparent and forthcoming in responding to questions from the 
United States and other Members either in this forum and at the regular meetings of the Committee 
on Agriculture and in sharing information, when available, pertaining to dairy supply management 
in Canada. The United States can rest assured that Canada takes its international obligations very 
seriously, and designs and implements its domestic policies to ensure consistency with its WTO 
commitments. Canada is fully committed to enhancing transparenc y in the monitoring of the 
implementation of the WTO Agreement on Agriculture.  
This is why Canada co -sponsored, alongside the United States and other Members, a proposal to 
enhance and strengthen transparency and notification requirements (JOB/GC/204/Rev. 1). Canada 
has also continually responded to questions, both in the General Council and the Committee of 
Agriculture, related to the issue of milk pricing.  
In the context of bilateral discussions with the United States, both countries have agreed to new 
commitments to share and publish information related to milk pricing. Canada fully intends to 
continue being in compliance with all of its international trade obligations.  
As previously stated to Members, certain information previously published on the Can adian Dairy 
Information Centre website was inaccurate and not comparable to past data. To correct this, Canada 
has been working towards updating the reporting system in order to be as transparent as possible. 
Canada is committed to ensuring that any inform ation published accurately reflects the data that 
has been entrusted to the federal government by industry.  
Question  
Could Canada provide a full list of eligible Class 7 products and other eligibility conditions for Class 
7 pricing to inform Members ' understanding of Class 7 and ensure Canada is complying with its WTO 
commitments regarding the implementation of this government measure?  
Reply  
The information requested belongs to industry. Canada does publish all relevant and publicly 
available informat ion on the Canadian Dairy Information Centre : (www.dairyinfo.gc.ca ). All 
information published is done in compliance with Canada 's trade obligations.  
Follow -up question  
Does Canada 's federal government have legisl ative authorities to require provincial milk marketing 
boards to provide information, such as which products are eligible for a class price? If so, please 
describe the authority.  
Reply  
In Canada, agriculture is an area of concurrent powers between federal and provincial governments, 
meaning that the federal government works in partnership with provincial governments to advance 
the interests of Canada 's agriculture and agri -food sector. Making a determination that a matter is 
of federal jurisdiction needs to be viewed through the lens of these concurrent powers and how these 
powers have previously been exercised (i.e., constitutional convention). Federal authority over this 
type of information from provincial milk marketing boards has not been deemed necessary.  WT/TPR/M/389/Add.1  
 
- 276 - 
 
  Paragraph 4.44, page 149  
Question  
Could Canada provide information as to how the two working groups have been working with the 
Government of Canada to develop mitigation strategies to help dairy farmers and processors adjust 
to the short -term im pacts, while ensuring the elimination of milk classes 6 and 7?  In addition, could 
Canada make the final mitigation strategies public, including for public comment, prior to finalizing?  
Reply  
Following the conclusion of the Canada -United States -Mexico Agree ment (CUSMA) negotiations, the 
federal government announced the creation of working groups to help its efforts to fully and fairly 
support farmers and processors.  
Two working groups, one focused on the dairy sector and one focused on the poultry and egg se ctor 
(SM4), were designed to assess and discuss potential mitigation measures. Furthermore, the federal 
government has also been working with industry to develop strategies to ensure the long -term 
prosperity of the sectors.  
As part of the Agreement 's imple mentation process, the Government of Canada is currently working 
with Canadian industry and provincial governments to comply with the terms of the Agreement, 
which includes the elimination of milk classes 6 and 7 by industry and provincial governments.  
4.1.1.7 Marketing agencies, paragraph 4.57, page 153  
Question  
Concerning Canada 's promotion and research agencies. Could Canada provide an explanation of the 
process for evaluating and potentially establishing PRAs for pork, hemp, and barley?  
Reply  
The process for evaluating the potential for establishing PRAs is as follows:  
a) A producer group submits a written proposal to the Farm Products Council of Canada 
(FPCC), requesting to establish a promotion and research agency for a specific farm product 
or prod ucts. 
b) Upon receipt of a complete application, the FPCC, through a public hearing process, inquiries 
into the merit of establishing the promotion and research agency and the powers to be 
vested in the agency.  
c) FPCC prepares a summary report and makes a recom mendation to the Minister of 
Agriculture and Agri -Food.  
d) The Minister decides whether to proceed with the regulatory steps to establish an agency.  
e) A proposed proclamation to establish the promotion and research agency is developed.  
f) The proposed proclamation to establish the promotion and research agency is published in 
the Canada Gazette, Part I. Interested parties may submit comments concerning the 
proposed proclamation.  
g) Once the comments have been addressed, the proclamation is submitted to the  Governor in 
Council for approval.  
h) If approved, the proclamation is published in the Canada Gazette, Part II.  
i) The promotion and research agency is established and begins operations.  
Follow -up question  
Where in the process described by Canada is the evaluat ion and/or potential establishment of PRAs 
for pork, hemp, and barley?  WT/TPR/M/389/Add.1  
 
- 277 - 
 
  Reply  
Following the process steps presented in Canada 's initial response above:  
• For pork, activities up to step (c) have been completed.  
• For hemp, activities up to step (b) have been completed, step (c) is ongoing.  
For barley, only step (a) has been completed.  
Question  
Concerning Canada 's promotion and research agencies. Could Canada confirm that no other PRAs 
are currently being considered?  
Reply  
The Farm Products Council of Cana da has only received applications for pork, hemp and barley.  
4.3 Manufacturing, 4.3.4 Steel, paragraph 4.167, page 183  
Question  
The Secretariat 's Report notes that the Canadian Government has made available support of up to 
CAD 2 billion to Canadian steel and aluminum producers, including CAD 250 million through the 
Strategic Innovation Fund (SIF). It further notes that funding for two steel producers has already 
been announced under the SIF, for a total contribution of CAD 80 million. What i s the nature of the 
funding that Canada has provided under the SIF to the two steel producers referred to in 
paragraph  4.167 of the Secretariat 's Report?  
Reply  
As announced in June 2018, and in response to additional tariffs imposed by the United States, the 
Government of Canada provided up to CAD 250 million in support through the Strategic Innovation 
Fund (SIF) to help bolster the competitiveness of Canadian ma nufacturers and better integrate the 
Canadian supply chain of steel and aluminum.  
SIF funding is in the form of contributions. It is project -based where a portion of eligible costs is 
reimbursed after the submission of claims. Costs would be eligible to b e reimbursed after the 
establishment of an eligibility date.  
The programme  contains flexibilities to reflect the different needs and realities of a variety of 
companies and other stakeholders. Contribution to recipients are repayable but may also be 
non-repayable under certain circumstances including where the benefits to Canada would be 
significant.  
Question  
The Secretariat 's Report notes that the Canadian Government has made available support of up to 
CAD 2 billion to Canadian steel and aluminum producers, including CAD 250 million through the 
Strategic Innovation Fund (SIF). It further notes that funding for two steel producers has already 
been announced under the SIF, for a total contribution of CAD 80 million. For what specific projects 
will th ese producers be permitted to use these funds?  
Reply  
The two steel Strategic Innovation Fund projects will support the firms ' undertaking of non -capacity -
increasing capital expenditure. Both projects will support the modernization of company -specific 
facilities and assets, which will help increase the efficiency and sustainability of the companies ' 
operations.  WT/TPR/M/389/Add.1  
 
- 278 - 
 
  Question  
The Secretariat 's Report notes that the Canadian Government has made available support of up to 
CAD 2 billion to Canadian steel and aluminum  producers, including CAD 250 million through the 
Strategic Innovation Fund (SIF). It further notes that funding for two steel producers has already 
been announced under the SIF, for a total contribution of CAD 80 million. Will the funds be 
repayable?  
Reply 
As announced on 29 June 2018, and in response to additional tariffs imposed by the United States, 
the Government of Canada offered up to CAD 250 million in new support through the Strategic 
Innovation Fund to help bolster the competitiveness of Canadian manufacturers and better integrate 
the Canadian supply chain of steel and aluminum.  
The programme  contains flexibilities to reflect the different needs and realities of a variety of 
companies and other stakeholders. Contributions to recipients are repayabl e but may also be 
non-repayable under certain circumstances including where the benefits to Canada would be 
significant.  
Question  
The Secretariat 's Report notes that the Canadian Government has made available support of up to 
CAD 2 billion to Canadian steel and aluminum producers, including CAD 250 million through the 
Strategic Innovation Fund (SIF). It further notes that funding for two steel producers has already 
been announced under the SIF, for a total contribution of CAD 80 million. Does C anada anticipate 
that either of these firms will increase either their steel production or capacity to produce steel as a 
consequence of the SIF funding being provided?  
Reply  
The support to the steel producers is for project activities to improve the effic iency of their operations 
and their capabilities to better serve the needs of the Canadian market.  
The two steel Strategic Innovation Fund projects will allow the steel producers to make investments 
in innovation and undertake non -capacity -increasing capit al expenditure. The investments will help 
support the two steel companies in modernizing their facilities and production assets while 
decreasing greenhouse gas emissions.  
Question  
Information published by the Government of Canada indicates that it intends to make available 
financing of up to CAD 2 billion to Canadian steel and aluminum producers through the Business 
Development Bank of Canada (BDC) and Export Development Canada (EDC). Has Canada provided 
any financing or other support to its steel or alumin um producers pursuant to these announced BDC 
and EDC programs, to date?   
Reply  
Given ongoing trade remedy investigations concerning fabricated structural steel, it would be 
inappropriate to comment at this time.  
Question  
If so, for what specific project or  operational purpose was the relevant support provided, and was 
any financing provided on market terms?  WT/TPR/M/389/Add.1  
 
- 279 - 
 
  Reply  
Given ongoing trade remedy investigations concerning fabricated structural steel, it would be 
inappropriate to comment at this time.  
4.4 Services,  4.4.1.2.3 Insurance services, page 190  
Question  
The Office of Superintendent of Financial Institutions (OSFI) is considering changes to its policies 
relating to reinsurance, as outlined in a paper issued in June 2018. In its review, what considerations 
is OSFI taking into account?  
Reply  
The Office of the Superintendent of Financial Institutions (OSFI) 's mandate is to protect depositors, 
policyholders and other creditors by: developing guidance on risk management and mitigation, 
assessing t he safety and soundness of financial institutions, and intervening promptly when 
corrective actions need to be taken. OSFI recognizes the importance of allowing financial institutions 
to compete and take reasonable risks, and it holds boards and senior man agement ultimately 
responsible for the viability of their institutions.  
OSFI's reinsurance review aligns with this mandate. The last comprehensive review of OSFI 's 
framework for the regulation and supervision of reinsurance occurred nearly a decade ago. Si nce 
that time, the insurance environment and reinsurance practices have changed significantly. For 
example, the average maximum policy limit written by federally regulated commercial insurers has 
increased significantly in recent years. Also, OSFI has obse rved that some federally regulated 
insurers have material reinsurance programs with a single or only a few reinsurers, or a few groups 
of related reinsurers, which raises the risk of an adverse impact on the financial position of the 
cedant federally insur er should one of its reinsurance counterparties encounter financial difficulty.  
OSFI recognizes the importance of reinsurance as a risk management tool. Through the use of 
reinsurance, an insurer can reduce its insurance risks, stabilize its solvency, bett er withstand 
catastrophic events, and increase its underwriting capacity. Insurers can also benefit from reinsurers ' 
knowledge and expertise when expanding into new lines of business. Moreover, reinsurance can 
indirectly benefit policyholders, by allowing direct insurance writers to offer coverage for a wider 
range of risks, and with higher policy limits. Reinsurance, however, exposes insurers to increased 
operational, counterparty and legal risks. Prudently managing these risks, and balancing them 
against the benefits of reinsurance, is complex. At the same time, failure to do so can materially 
affect an insurer 's financial soundness and reputation and can ultimately contribute to its failure. 
OSFI is considering how evolving business models and reinsurance  practices affect the risk profiles 
of federally regulated insurers, and is committed to ensuring continued policyholder protection, while 
maintaining a balanced and risk -based framework.  
Report by Canada – WT/TPR/G/389  
4 OTHER KEY GOVERNMENT INITIATIVES  
4.2 Intellectual Property (IP), paragraph 4.9, page 17  
Question  
What improvements has Canada seen in the functioning of the Copyright Board of Canada with the 
enactment of the reform amendments?  
Reply  
Reforms to the Copyright Board included an increase in financial resources by over 30%, new 
appointments, and new legislation in order to facilitate faster decision making.  The appointments 
were made in late 2018, while majority of the new legislation came into effect in April 2019 and 
additional funding was a llocated through the budgeting process.  In April, the Government also 
published draft regulations establishing time limits in relation to matters before the Board for WT/TPR/M/389/Add.1  
 
- 280 - 
 
  consultation. These changes to the Copyright Board are recent and the reform process is n ot yet 
complete, therefore the full impact of these changes will require more time to assess.  
5 EXPORT DIVERSIFICATION AND TRADE PROMOTION  
5.5 Other Government of Canada Programmes and Strategies that Promote Exports, 
5.5.2  Creative Export Strategy, paragr aph 5.13, page 22  
Question  
Could Canada elaborate on the "creative export " strategy? For example, what does it involve 
(e.g. subsidies), what is its timeline, and what industries or sectors might be affected?  
Reply  
The Creative Export Strategy is CAD 125 million investment over five years (2018 -2023).  The 
Strategy is divided into three pillars of activities: (1) Positioning creative industries for export and 
sales in foreign markets, by bolstering funds available through existing programs: Canada Arts 
Prese ntation Fund, Canada Book Fund, Canada Music Fund, Canada Periodical Fund, and Telefilm 
Canada ( CAD 5 million /year); (2) Increasing capacity at Canada 's embassies and consulates, 
particularly through Canada 's Trade Commissioner Service, to help Canadian creative industries 
succeed in key export markets; and (3) Establishing a new programme , Creative Export Canada, to 
grow Canadian creative industries by funding export ready projects ( CAD 7 million/ year) and b uilding 
the relationships needed to make business deals via trade missions, events and partnerships. The 
Creative Export Strategy covers industries such as: audiovisual, design (e.g., exhibit design, fashion 
design, product design, public art design, urban  design), interactive digital media, music, performing 
arts, publishing and visual art.  
 
__________